[thurask]

Open source outside the hobbyist level really works when there's corporate developers propping up development, like it is with the Linux kernel. That way, the volunteers and hobbyists have some backup, and in the case of stuff like AMD graphics, no need to waste time reverse engineering a binary blob.

Something like OpenSSL, which is fundamentally important to the Internet but managed by a handful of volunteers, illustrates that just because something is open source doesn't mean fixes will magically come. We all remember Heartbleed. There are initiatives to give some well needed support to fundamental technologies like OpenSSL, but those need time. Audits, patches, refactoring, the level of those needed for the building blocks of the Internet can't all be done on goodwill alone.

And this is for something important, not some niche OS that sputtered and died in 2013.

[DrBoomBotz]

The problem with open source is that it exposes the code to its secrets related to security and encryption. Therefore, something of a non-starter. Yes, Android is open-source, and BlackBerry asserts that they've made it secure. But it's still not, and likely never will, be as secure as BB10 or the legacy BBOS is.

Posted via CB10, on a BlackBerry Passport

Security through obscurity is a bad thing.

[CBCListener]

Security through obscurity is a bad thing.

Sure, but that's not what I'm saying.

[DrBoomBotz]

Sure, but that's not what I'm saying.

Please explain.

[Guy Hollidge]

everyone who has seen my BB10 phones have said the same thing, "BlackBerry still makes phones?". It failed BB10 from the start

[early2bed]

All smartphone operating systems have multiple components that are licensed from other companies so you can't just open source the whole OS. HP had to strip out all sorts of stuff from webOS in order to open source it which is one of the reasons why nothing came of it.

[palewhiteninja]

If bb10 was open source it would be an even bigger mess than it is now, lol!

Posted via Nokia 3310

[Ronindan]

Open source outside the hobbyist level really works when there's corporate developers propping up development, like it is with the Linux kernel. That way, the volunteers and hobbyists have some backup, and in the case of stuff like AMD graphics, no need to waste time reverse engineering a binary blob.

Something like OpenSSL, which is fundamentally important to the Internet but managed by a handful of volunteers, illustrates that just because something is open source doesn't mean fixes will magically come. We all remember Heartbleed. There are initiatives to give some well needed support to fundamental technologies like OpenSSL, but those need time. Audits, patches, refactoring, the level of those needed for the building blocks of the Internet can't all be done on goodwill alone.

And this is for something important, not some niche OS that sputtered and died in 2013.

Spot on, people keep bringing up cyanogenmod when talking about having BB10 open sourced - but fail to factor in that the biggest contributor to the Android Open Source Project is still Google.

[thurask]

Spot on, people keep bringing up cyanogenmod when talking about having BB10 open sourced - but fail to factor in that the biggest contributor to the Android Open Source Project is still Google.

Like this info about the Linux kernel: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/26/linux_at_25/

“The top 10 contributors, including the groups 'unknown' and 'none'” make up nearly 54 percent of the total contributions to the kernel,” the report says, noting a slight decline from last year's report. “It is worth noting,” the report adds, “that, even if one assumes that all of the 'unknown' contributors are working on their own time, well over 80 percent of all kernel development is demonstrably done by developers who are being paid for their work.”

Just 7.7 per cent of contributions are now made by unpaid developers, a decline from 14.6 per cent in 2012 but one that the Linux Foundation thinks is an indicator of the extreme employability of proven kernel contributors rather than an indication of developer disengagement.

[Nguyen1]

If bb10 was open source it would be an even bigger mess than it is now, lol!

Posted via Nokia 3310

What????? Nokia 3310?

I want the updated one.

The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.

[Old_Mil]

1. Unwillingness to advertise the security advantages of the platform.
2. Unwillingness to focus on the ecosystem and make sure that a few dozen widely used apps were available at launch.
3. Poor battery life of the Z10.
4. The OS being half baked until 10.2
5. Depreciating blackberry world and signing the agreement to put the Amazon app store - which itself lacks a lot of Android apps - on BB10.
6. Chen.

[keiths31]

For me it was the app gap. I am by no means an app guy, but I needed a few for work and even with the Amazon App Store, I just couldn't get them. Tried side loading several times. So when the Priv came out I put my Passport in my drawer and made the leap to Android. Loved my Passport and BB10.

[DrBoomBotz]

1. Unwillingness to advertise the security advantages of the platform.

OpenBSD used to claim something like *"no remote holes in $x years" where $x incremented each year until one year that they had **$y remote holes.
The optics were not good.

*This is all from my lousy memory so the quote may not be verbatim.
**Also from my lousy memory I believe it was more than one.

[DonHB]

Security through obscurity is a bad thing.

It's not a bad thing. It is insufficient.

I just want to note that within a little more than a Month three people remarked to me about my Silver Passport in NYC:

A technician at a hospital: 'How old is that and are they are still making phones?'

A doctor: 'They failed because they were too late to market.' I said 'They chose the right OS, but the wrong SDK.' He may have actually understood what I was saying.

Guard at a security check at a community center: 'I thought the company was doing really badly.' When I answered that my phone model was about two years old.

There is a good argument for suggesting poor PR/marketing doomed BB10 to its present situation. I also believe that Android/Neutrino with Flow should have been the course Chen took putting all the non-Flow Android ports into the Amazon App Store. Later, making a Z30 like device with Passport guts that was somewhat smaller, but larger than the Z10 would have been a good idea also.

Remember that at the beginning of 2013 BB10 was introduced and later that year Android 4.4 with ART entered the market around the same time John Chen became CEO.

When Chen became CEO he could have instructed the company, newly focused on software, to port the ART runtime to the Flow UX using Cascades. He then should have waited to port Neugat to BB10 before giving up on BB10 development and going with Google Play Services and adopting a hardened Linux. Sticking with QNX to reinvest work done porting ART (i.e. use BB10 to run an Android Launcher after boot) would have allowed Flow to be an optional UX and enable a third party developer to mirror Cobalt's work--maintaining BB10 app compatibility.

[Tre Lawrence]

1. Unwillingness to advertise the security advantages of the platform.
2. Unwillingness to focus on the ecosystem and make sure that a few dozen widely used apps were available at launch.
3. Poor battery life of the Z10.
4. The OS being half baked until 10.2
5. Depreciating blackberry world and signing the agreement to put the Amazon app store - which itself lacks a lot of Android apps - on BB10.
6. Chen.

1) In the end, it really wasn't an advantage; thus, I think it can be inferred that said security is not marketable.

2) I wouldn't say they didn't focus on it. We could argue about the effectiveness of the methods BBRY tried to use to tackle the ecosystem problem, bu it did try, including paying ransoms. The ecosystem battle was too far gone. Plus, a "few dozen" wouldn't come close to fixing it. Half a million... and I don't think that's exaggerating.

[arkenoi]

7. Broken compatibility with Google Play Services.

[DonHB]

Are you saying RIM should have used Google Android instead? Otherwise Google would not have licensed Play Services to them.

[arkenoi]

No.
They should not have designed android player the way that prevents users from installing Play Services, that's it.

[conite]

No.
They should not have designed android player the way that prevents users from installing Play Services, that's it.

Which is not possible, because the Android VM had to communicate properly with BB10.

Cobalt had to reverse engineer Google Play Services to work properly in the BlackBerry framework.

[app_Developer]

No.
They should not have designed android player the way that prevents users from installing Play Services, that's it.

There is no magic solution to that problem. A lot of apps require Play services. Google owns those services. BB can't just install those libraries on their phones. So I don't know how BB could have "designed" themselves out of that tough corner.

Or are you saying they should made it impossible for users to install Play services themselves? If so, what would that have achieved?

[conite]

There is no magic solution to that problem. A lot of apps require Play services. Google owns those services. BB can't just install those libraries on their phones. So I don't know how BB could have "designed" themselves out of that tough corner.

Or are you saying they should made it impossible for users to install Play services themselves? If so, what would that have achieved?

I believe he's thinking more like Fire OS, where Google Play Services can be easily added after the original sale.

Of course, a pure Android device is very different from a VM.

[app_Developer]

I believe he's thinking more like Fire OS, where Google Play Services can be easily added after the original sale.

Of course, a pure Android device is very different from a VM.

Yes, plus BB target market (regulated enterprises) are not going to pirate Google Play support libraries.

[DrBoomBotz]

It's not a bad thing. It is insufficient.

Ok you got me.

[DonHB]

I believe he's thinking more like Fire OS, where Google Play Services can be easily added after the original sale.

I read somewhere that BlackBerry didn't actually do the port of the Dalvik Android runtime to BB10, but that they purchased it from a third party. This could explain why 4.3, that did not include ART, was the last Android supported on BB10.

Of course, a pure Android device is very different from a VM.

How so?

Google does not require that Linux be used as the OS for Android. BlackBerry could have used QNX Neutrino for their implementation of Android with GPS, but would have lost the advantage that SOC/chip manufactures produce Linux drivers. While I am not aware of any company that has licensed Google Play Services for their Android product that does not have Linux running underneath, you can get Android for Windows and there is a way to install GPS on it also.

It would be interesting to know if a native Cascades app that implements Android using ART could be set as the default app to open, precompile and run APKs. Now BB10 offers an option from the file manager to install the APK instead of prompting for what app to open it in. If BlackBerry is still committed to BB10 it would be great if they make Android support downloadable in 10.3.4 from BlackBerry App World instead of included by default, but it would have to function like any other app. Maybe there would be no issue with third parties selling ART implementations on BlackBerry App World.

.02

[conite]

How so?

Google does not require that Linux be used as the OS for Android. BlackBerry could have used QNX Neutrino used in BB10, for their Android with GPS, but would have lost the advantage that SOC/chip manufactures already produce Linux drivers. So, using a Linux distribution is the simplest and cheapest solution. While I am not aware of any company that has licensed Google Play Services for their Android product that does not have Linux running underneath, you can get Android for Windows and there is a way to install GPS on it.

It would be interesting to know if a native Cascades app that implements Android using ART could be set as the default app to open, precompile and run APKs. Now BB10 offers an option from the file manager to install the APK instead of prompting for what app to open it in. If BlackBerry is still committed to BB10 it would be great if they make Android support downloadable in 10.3.4 from BlackBerry App World instead of included by default, but it would have to function like any other app. Maybe there would be no issue with third parties selling ART implementations on BlackBerry App World.

.02

Unicorns and Leprechauns.

DTEK60 / Z30