[conite]

Again you exaggerate and mislead with your points. They had a one time negative event with the release and gross overstock of Z10 devices.

Posted via CB10

Absolutely not.

They had massive returns due to lack of apps and OS learning curve. Combined with negligible uptake from big name apps, and it was done. Finished. Over. Good night. For sale.

They had two choices - gamble everything that was left on trying to turn devices around, or change direction while they still could. They knew the situation better than either of us, and they made a beeline for option 2.

[Nguyen1]

As purely an operating system, leave aside apps for now, what OS of the past ten years has been the best or shown most potential or versatility? Again, do not consider apps. Look at just the stock OS.

Bb7? Bb10? WebOS? Android? IOS? Cyanogen? Window 8? 8.1? 10? Anything else I'm forgetting?

I don't think there's a clear answer. If anything, I'd say android is the dullest because it is so dependent on apps and marketing that without these, it's like a blank wall that doesn't do much.

Add in apps, and it's a different ballgame....

The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.

[Troy Tiscareno]

People don't buy computing products for the OS itself (sure, a tiny few do, but I'm talking about the mass market) - they buy them for the things they can DO with those products.

If you need to run Photoshop, you don't buy a Linux machine, or a Chromebook; you buy Windows or Mac, because they run Photoshop. If you wanted to edit video professionally, you would buy Mac (previously, for Final Cut Pro) or Windows (AVID).

For most people, the OS is just an empty shell that lets you run apps and connect peripheral devices. Sure, they all have some differences, but at the end of the day, it's the APPS that DO STUFF.

You aren't going to use Notepad to write a book or a long paper with footnotes and table of contents. You aren't going to use Paint to do serious professional-level photo editing. You aren't going to use MS Works for corporate spreadsheets. You probably aren't going to use MySpace in 2017 to keep up with your social circles.

If you're a doctor, you can take a generic iPhone or Android, add some apps, and make it a powerful doctor's tool. If you're a restaurant owner, you can take an iPhone or Android - that by itself, is of limited usefulness, add an app, and have it run your entire restaurant, including taking orders from the table (which print out tickets at the bar, the kitchen, the salad station, etc.), handle inventory, manage staff scheduling, payroll, food orders, etc. If you're a pilot, you grab one of these "blank" devices and with a couple of apps, you can plan, log, and manage all of your flights, including keeping track of aircraft hours, maintenance, fuel, etc.

People do these things every day, in tens of thousands of occupations and hobbies. They have specialty apps for their occupations and interests, and even though YOU might never have any need for any of those tens or hundreds of thousands of apps, other people do - for other people, those apps are critical to their productivity.

It's fine to like whatever you like, and it's fine to prefer a phone loaded with stock first-party apps rather than more "generic" phones with minimal stock apps that are intended to be customized and optimized to fit more specific uses by the installation of apps - but the market has spoken, and the market clearly, by a massive, incredible margin, prefers apps. No amount of justifying BB not having them, and no amount of "setting aside the app issue" is going to change the fact that it is the single largest of BB10's many issues. And the tiny percentage of people who will buy a phone for the OS rather than the apps is so small that it has no hope of supporting BB - which BB has acknowledged by moving to Android themselves. Even MS acknowledged it by releasing Office for iOS and Android before WinPhone.

[markmall]

People don't buy computing products for the OS itself (sure, a tiny few do, but I'm talking about the mass market) - they buy them for the things they can DO with those products.

If you need to run Photoshop, you don't buy a Linux machine, or a Chromebook; you buy Windows or Mac, because they run Photoshop. If you wanted to edit video professionally, you would buy Mac (previously, for Final Cut Pro) or Windows (AVID).

For most people, the OS is just an empty shell that lets you run apps and connect peripheral devices. Sure, they all have some differences, but at the end of the day, it's the APPS that DO STUFF.

You aren't going to use Notepad to write a book or a long paper with footnotes and table of contents. You aren't going to use Paint to do serious professional-level photo editing. You aren't going to use MS Works for corporate spreadsheets. You probably aren't going to use MySpace in 2017 to keep up with your social circles.

If you're a doctor, you can take a generic iPhone or Android, add some apps, and make it a powerful doctor's tool. If you're a restaurant owner, you can take an iPhone or Android - that by itself, is of limited usefulness, add an app, and have it run your entire restaurant, including taking orders from the table (which print out tickets at the bar, the kitchen, the salad station, etc.), handle inventory, manage staff scheduling, payroll, food orders, etc. If you're a pilot, you grab one of these "blank" devices and with a couple of apps, you can plan, log, and manage all of your flights, including keeping track of aircraft hours, maintenance, fuel, etc.

People do these things every day, in tens of thousands of occupations and hobbies. They have specialty apps for their occupations and interests, and even though YOU might never have any need for any of those tens or hundreds of thousands of apps, other people do - for other people, those apps are critical to their productivity.

It's fine to like whatever you like, and it's fine to prefer a phone loaded with stock first-party apps rather than more "generic" phones with minimal stock apps that are intended to be customized and optimized to fit more specific uses by the installation of apps - but the market has spoken, and the market clearly, by a massive, incredible margin, prefers apps. No amount of justifying BB not having them, and no amount of "setting aside the app issue" is going to change the fact that it is the single largest of BB10's many issues. And the tiny percentage of people who will buy a phone for the OS rather than the apps is so small that it has no hope of supporting BB - which BB has acknowledged by moving to Android themselves. Even MS acknowledged it by releasing Office for iOS and Android before WinPhone.

Too long.

Posted via CB10

[Invictus0]

Every time one of these thread starts, someone claims that there was no marketing. Then, longtime CB members tell them that there was marketing. People actually bought the Z10. Then things went downhill rather quickly, due to the reasons that I already mentioned. It was a failure because the device hardware and software were malfunctioning, and the app store did not have the name apps.

Those people that bought the Z10 (and the PlayBook) felt tricked by BlackBerry and most of them will not buy anymore devices because they would not believe a good marketing campaign after having such poor first-hand experience.

This is a good point and we can include underwhelming BBOS devices as well. BlackBerry was aware of this.

https://www.cnet.com/news/how-blackb...-broken-brand/

Again you exaggerate and mislead with your points.

I should add that no one outside of Crackberry readers knew it existed

[red5gary]

Apps, apps, apps...always the apps doomed BB10 and little marketing. Most people thought BlackBerry was dying and lets face it, when the iPhone came out, that put BB on life support soon afterwards.

[Tre Lawrence]

As purely an operating system, leave aside apps for now, what OS of the past ten years has been the best or shown most potential or versatility? Again, do not consider apps. Look at just the stock OS.

Bb7? Bb10? WebOS? Android? IOS? Cyanogen? Window 8? 8.1? 10? Anything else I'm forgetting?

I don't think there's a clear answer. If anything, I'd say android is the dullest because it is so dependent on apps and marketing that without these, it's like a blank wall that doesn't do much.

Add in apps, and it's a different ballgame....

Exactly.

That's like saying air is only useful to humans because of the oxygen.

Seriously, apps make the OS. The only folks who wax poetic about glory of microkernels and the inherent sexiness of RTOS are fellow CBers, it seems.

Apps are arguably the most important metric. BB10 failed in that regard.

[markmall]

Absolutely not.

They had massive returns due to lack of apps and OS learning curve.

Right. The massive returns were due to a one time event.

I should add that ordinarily when a tech company releases a new product to the public that is a big departure, they season the public. For example, instead of showing ads on TV of people exploding into a powder dust, show an ad that shows how you navigate BB10.

These are all fixable things, though. Once BB ironed out BB10, people that bought them stopped returning them at high rates. It was people unprepared for the changes that returned them.

Yes, Blackberry should have gambled more after it had a winning OS and winning devices like the Passport. Maybe BB10 would not have been as big as they hoped at launch, but it could have been a healthy niche of "prosumers" as Chen once put it. This failed because Chen either didn't know how to do it or was not willing to spend what it took to do it. He was focused on his "transition" to a micro-software company that relies on the modest revenues of recent acquisitions.

[markmall]

Exactly.

That's like saying air is only useful to humans because of the oxygen.

Seriously, apps make the OS. The only folks who wax poetic about glory of microkernels and the inherent sexiness of RTOS are fellow CBers, it seems.

Apps are arguably the most important metric. BB10 failed in that regard.

This is your opinion. Amazing how people (on BB10 boards) that defend management's decision to kill the company's OS all state opinions as facts. Apps are all that matter? Really? Then why do some of us still use BB10? Some of us have Android devices to run apps we can't use on BB10 but rely on BB10 for productivity.

So don't state your personal opinion as unassailable fact.

[conite]

Then why do some of us still use BB10?

Enough to support an entire OS infrastructure?

[Tre Lawrence]

This is your opinion. Amazing how people (on BB10 boards) that defend management's decision to kill the company's OS all state opinions as facts. Apps are all that matter? Really? Then why do some of us still use BB10? Some of us have Android devices to run apps we can't use on BB10 but rely on BB10 for productivity.

So don't state your personal opinion as unassailable fact.

Okay.

[Tre Lawrence]

Enough to support an entire OS infrastructure?

Careful with the "opinion," good sir. You Chen supporter, you.

But seriously, BBRY just needed a few more people to find BB10 productive. Unfortunately, they were able to be productive elsewhere.

[Tre Lawrence]

Apps, apps, apps...always the apps doomed BB10 and little marketing. Most people thought BlackBerry was dying and lets face it, when the iPhone came out, that put BB on life support soon afterwards.

I suspect management quickly determined BB10 was tough to market.

But yes, I agree that iOS hastened the decline.

[anon(10065266)]

Too long.

Posted via CB10

Yeah, it's tough when facts get in the way of opinions.

[markmall]

Enough to support an entire OS infrastructure?

I'm not even arguing that point. My point is that this is a very subjective question by definition. Some people -- maybe a huge minority, but still some people -- have a different opinion. It's like me saying, "Green is a better color than blue. It just is. That is why all the forests are green."

From a business standpoint, the question as I see it is whether there are enough people out of the billions that use smartphones that would agree that the core functions of the OS matter most to them and how many of these people ever knew that BB10 or the Passport (or the Z30, etc.) ever existed.

[markmall]

I suspect management quickly determined BB10 was tough to market.

But yes, I agree that iOS hastened the decline.

Did they feel the same way about the Priv and DTEK 1, 2 and 3? They didn't market those so well, either. Try to find a random person on the street that ever heard of them. You could spend days, not hours.

[anon(6125289)]

How in the world could it have ever succeeded? It was a broken unfinished mess on release. I don't know if BB10 could have done well in 2011 no less 2013. Underwhelming launch hardware(Z10), lack of apps, two fully complete ecosystems to compete against, and a tone deaf advertising campaign. It was never one thing that doomed this OS. Every single decision made by Blackberry in the preceding years doomed it from the get go. This OS was dead in the water from the start. I don't know if there was ever room for 3 major players in the smartphone OS industry. If there was Microsoft would have been the third.... not Blackberry..

Posted via CB10

[Velocitymj]

As a business owner who was using Bold 9900, BB10 failed on it's release (for me) for several reasons.
1. because it was completely different from what I was used to using and the Z-10 was all touch screen.
2. Imo it was more of a media phone instead of a business phone with apps that I have no use for. Like Time Shift.
3. I'm a long time, die hard Apple user and upon release BB10 did not support Apple's iCal, it no longer had the Notes app and Contact Groups couldn't be synced (something that you still can't sync and is a sore point with me).
The iCal is critical to running my business.
4. When the Q10 was finally released with 10.1, editing was incredibly difficult, frustrating and time consuming.
It was a 1/2 baked, bare bones, buggy OS and for the life of me, I still don't understand why they released it like that.
I bought my Q10 when 10.2 came out, because it was huge improvement and even though calendar entries would get automatically deleted after 30 days and contact groups couldn't by synced, I was certain that BB would keep improving the software and the updates would come quickly.
None of that proved true.
And I still don't understand why BB quit advertising the phones early on.

[thurask]

And I still don't understand why BB quit advertising the phones early on.

You said it yourself:

It was a 1/2 baked, bare bones, buggy OS and for the life of me, I still don't understand why they released it like that.
I bought my Q10 when 10.2 came out, because it was huge improvement, even though calendar entries would get automatically deleted after 30 days and contact groups couldn't by synced, I was certain that BB would keep improving the software and the updates would come quickly.
None of that proved true.

By the time the software reached D- territory that ship had sailed.

[markmall]

You said it yourself:



By the time the software reached D- territory that ship had sailed.

I notice you cherry-picked his comments.



Posted via CB10

[markmall]

And I still don't understand why BB quit advertising the phones early on.

I agree with this. After the OS became lean and mean they were done trying to sell it.



Posted via CB10

[Soulstream]

I agree with this. After the OS became lean and mean they were done trying to sell it.

Posted via CB10

Because of the pricing of their phones due to OS development costs. They couldn't price them low enough to cover their costs.
Western markets are too app-centric right now and for developing markets the price of devices was too high.

You have to remember that BB10 finally became stable with 10.2.1. You also have to remember that for a lot of people here at CB the ability to sideload Android apps was seen as the end of the app gap. Sideloading apps is a non-marketable feature.

And as said by me and a lot of people here, if marketing would have solved or covered for the app gap then Windows phone would have been a much bigger success especially in Europe where the Nokia name still carried some weight. Microsoft pumped a lot of money into Windows marketing and they barely made a dent.

[markmall]

And as said by me and a lot of people here, if marketing would have solved or covered for the app gap then Windows phone would have been a much bigger success especially in Europe where the Nokia name still carried some weight. Microsoft pumped a lot of money into Windows marketing and they barely made a dent.

Oh, really? How much do you think Microsoft spent marketing Windows phone? What source or sources do you base that on? This claim only underscores how pro-Chen/BB10-must-die people make up facts to support their narrative. MSFT notoriously did not market or support its mobile effort. Listen to old Windows Weekly episodes with Leo Laporte. Paul Thurrott complained for YEARS that MSFT was not updating its mobile OS and was badly neglecting it thereby dooming it.

Secondly, I am not saying marketing a bad OS or a mediocre OS brings sales. My point is that a resplendent OS -- if people know about it -- can bring sales. Windows mobile is not an outstanding mobile OS. BB10 is in my opinion an outstanding OS (even without all the apps).

[Soulstream]

Oh, really? How much do you think Microsoft spent marketing Windows phone? What source or sources do you base that on? This claim only underscores how pro-Chen/BB10-must-die people make up facts to support their narrative. MSFT notoriously did not market or support its mobile effort. Listen to old Windows Weekly episodes with Leo Laporte. Paul Thurrott complained for YEARS that MSFT was not updating its mobile OS and was badly neglecting it thereby dooming it.

Secondly, I am not saying marketing a bad OS or a mediocre OS brings sales. My point is that a resplendent OS -- if people know about it -- can bring sales. Windows mobile is not an outstanding mobile OS. BB10 is in my opinion an outstanding OS (even without all the apps).

Samsung leads U.S. ad spending for smartphones, but Apple and others aren't far behind | VentureBeat | Mobile | by Michael Leibel

I don't think this is the original article I read a while back, but the figures were pretty close. The above article was for the US, but here in Europe I saw a lot of ads for Windows phone. Granted they were for low or middle end phone, but I they were present.

Also for future reference, I don't usually respond to intentionally spread misinformation. I read a lot about technology. I don't always save the tech articles I read, but most of the info I provide come from articles I have read in the past

[StephanieMaks]

I'm not even arguing that point. My point is that this is a very subjective question by definition. Some people -- maybe a huge minority, but still some people -- have a different opinion. It's like me saying, "Green is a better color than blue. It just is. That is why all the forests are green."

From a business standpoint, the question as I see it is whether there are enough people out of the billions that use smartphones that would agree that the core functions of the OS matter most to them and how many of these people ever knew that BB10 or the Passport (or the Z30, etc.) ever existed.

We already know the answer to this question. It is "No." out of the entire worldwide smartphone market, only about 0.1% were interested and that is not enough to sustain the OS.

Arguing that "if only they knew about BB10 things would be different" is missing the point. If BB10 was useful to more than a microscopic niche, then people would have known about it. Word of mouth. Friends. Family. It would have built momentum. For the vast majority of the world BB10 offered them nothing they didn't already have, and when they did hear about it, they just shrugged and promptly forgot about it.

It's harsh I know, but that's the cold hard reality. As far as 99% of the world is concerned, BB10 was an also-ran that wasn't worth their time or interest.

We can argue the ifs, buts, might-have-beens, till the cows come home but it was far too little, far too late, to be of any use to far too many people.

Sorry.

p.s. Purple is clearly the best colour.