1. ineedhelp1234's Avatar
    why does RIM make such poor apps. the facebook app, browser, and maps is terrible and not even close to today's standards. you would think rim would be able to make nice exclusive apps for their OWN phones...
    02-08-10 06:27 PM
  2. AZBBFAN's Avatar
    Many will agree, I am one of them. Looking forward to the new browser although I will not be holding my breath
    02-08-10 06:28 PM
  3. jmherndon's Avatar
    So true - the Android version of FB is far better! If RIM would put some of the things in their OS that third parties have to develop apps for they would make great gains! For example...wallpaper changing apps, Stop Turning, Battery/Usuage Meters, etc..
    02-08-10 06:55 PM
  4. Speedv1's Avatar
    I kind of agree - but at the same time they've always been more focused on the 'business' side - so security, call quality, etc. The apps that they seem to be concerned about are the ones that would criticize their 'professional' appeal - dunno about you, but I don't contact my employer via facebook :P.
    02-08-10 07:06 PM
  5. SkySoldier's Avatar
    So true Speed. I bought our BBs with business in mind and that i can have a little fun with my BB is a bonus. Thats just me and my business.
    02-08-10 07:16 PM
  6. flop's Avatar
    I disagree because quality can be measured in many competing ways.

    What runs on a BlackBerry is dependent on RIM's OS and I think that deserves focus. Some qualities of a good OS are speed, efficiency, reliability, scalability, security and interoperability.

    I would be very happy if the RIM OS on my BlackBerry hit each of those qualities, and provided only basic email, browser, etc.

    Essentially, we can swap and change end-user software within the bounds of market competitions. This can provide many email clients, many browsers, and we can pick whichever we prefer.

    However, we cannot pick the OS. The OS is pre-determined and it would be nice if RIM concentrated on delivering a really good one that makes developers want to produce software for it.
    02-08-10 07:18 PM
  7. Xopher's Avatar
    I have to agree, at least in part. Most of the apps that RIM has created are behind the times, at least in appearance. Anyone who has seen the Social Scope app can see how much the Facebook feeds can be improved upon. BBM has a much more modern look that hasn't made it into their bative IM apps yet, either.

    But, that being said, the native Facebook app doesn't drain the battery like Social Scope can, and the native IM apps take full advantage of RIM's push services. There could be a lot of UI improvements, and even some better use of Facebook API's. Hopefully as the newer versions of these apps roll out, they will bring in OS 5.0 features with a more modern flair.

    Posted from my BlackBerry using BerryBlab
    02-08-10 07:42 PM
  8. Radius's Avatar
    I disagree because quality can be measured in many competing ways.

    What runs on a BlackBerry is dependent on RIM's OS and I think that deserves focus. Some qualities of a good OS are speed, efficiency, reliability, scalability, security and interoperability.

    I would be very happy if the RIM OS on my BlackBerry hit each of those qualities, and provided only basic email, browser, etc.

    Essentially, we can swap and change end-user software within the bounds of market competitions. This can provide many email clients, many browsers, and we can pick whichever we prefer.

    However, we cannot pick the OS. The OS is pre-determined and it would be nice if RIM concentrated on delivering a really good one that makes developers want to produce software for it.
    I think you're missing the point of a BB, no other phone is as secure and that is what they play to in the market. If you want to swap OS's and play around that way then get a regular consumer phone. These are meant to be the answer to corporate concerns about security and not flashy internet browsers.
    02-08-10 08:34 PM
  9. flop's Avatar
    I suggest you reread my post because I don't recall undermining the revelance of security, in fact I upheld it. Furthermore, I did not mention swapping OSs. I don't think your post is responding to my words at all.

    In what way is a BlackBerry more secure for businesses?
    02-08-10 08:38 PM
  10. kjjb0204's Avatar
    I prefer using facebook's mobile site anyhow, so that's not an issue for me. BBM, email and security are my top three needs, and RIM has those perfected so they are afforded some leeway on the other stuff.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-08-10 08:41 PM
  11. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    I kind of agree - but at the same time they've always been more focused on the 'business' side - so security, call quality, etc. The apps that they seem to be concerned about are the ones that would criticize their 'professional' appeal - dunno about you, but I don't contact my employer via facebook :P.
    Call Quality? I seem to remember quite a few people with 8830s and S1s having pretty bad quality during calls.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-08-10 09:09 PM
  12. Radius's Avatar
    Call Quality? I seem to remember quite a few people with 8830s and S1s having pretty bad quality during calls.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    That's because they didn't have an 8900 with UMA.
    02-08-10 11:45 PM
  13. Radius's Avatar
    I suggest you reread my post because I don't recall undermining the revelance of security, in fact I upheld it. Furthermore, I did not mention swapping OSs. I don't think your post is responding to my words at all.

    In what way is a BlackBerry more secure for businesses?
    What? You said: However, we cannot pick the OS.

    So if you didn't mention swapping OS's then what is this about?

    As for how it is more secure for business, it comes down to BES. When you think of secure for business, don't think of it as "does this device have better encryption, bla bla bla" because that isn't what we mean my that.

    Think like a manager or business owner, BES gives you total, utter and complete control over the phone and a view into what your employee is doing. That is what is meant by secure for business. That's what a big company is about, time and resource management. They make the rules and you follow them or else you're flipping burgers and looking for a new higher paying job.
    02-08-10 11:48 PM
  14. Speedv1's Avatar
    Call Quality? I seem to remember quite a few people with 8830s and S1s having pretty bad quality during calls.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Ha sorry, I haven't been around for the whole blackberry scene - all of the bbs i've owned have had superb call quality, especially in comparison to rivalling smartphones. Sorry if I was that far from the truth..
    02-09-10 01:21 AM
  15. F0nage's Avatar
    Let RIM stay out of the application business and concentrate on the OS and core utilities. Let the aftermarket come up with apps, they are more agile and seem to be doing a good job.
    02-09-10 03:17 AM
  16. Masahiro's Avatar
    Let RIM stay out of the application business and concentrate on the OS and core utilities. Let the aftermarket come up with apps, they are more agile and seem to be doing a good job.
    I wouldn't want them to stay out of the application business completely. Official apps have big advantages, like push notifications and OS integration.
    02-09-10 04:14 AM
  17. F0nage's Avatar
    I don't know whether push and OS integration are limited to RIM, but there isn't any reason why they must be.

    Accuweather has push, did RIM write that?

    RIM should be in the business of publishing APIs that enable the aftermarket to write good solutions, like every major OS already does. It's obvious they don't consider applications a priority, so at least make it possible for other people to deliver.
    02-09-10 04:21 AM
  18. Masahiro's Avatar
    I don't know whether push and OS integration are limited to RIM, but there isn't any reason why they must be.
    They're limited in some ways. 3rd party applications don't have access to BIS. There's also some things that are beyond the control of any app. Imagine if RIM developed their own Quicklaunch app. I could imagine quite a few advantages. The flashlight command won't have to turn on the video camera. The bluetooth/wifi toggle functions won't have to emulate user input. It would be more integrated into the GUI. Now with that said, there's nothing wrong with Quicklaunch (it's a great app). It's just an example of the limitations of 3rd party apps.
    02-09-10 05:36 AM
  19. F0nage's Avatar
    I don't know any major hardware company that has been successful in covering the range from OS to end-user apps. It seems like there are always limits to how much a hardware vendor is willing to commit to apps, because it's a very different market than the OS which is their primary concern- and that's just so they can sell devices. The best combination seems to be when the OS guys stick with OS and core utilities and the aftermarket picks up the slack. At the end of the day, the device manufacturers are about selling devices, and they look at the OS as secondary. Apps beyond that are far down the list unless some bean counter can prove they're not going to sell devices because of it.

    I hear what you're saying about limitations with 3rd party software, but those limitations are just business decisions or poor design choices that RIM made. If they would get off the fence and accept the reality that aftermarket software companies can meet consumer needs and help them sell more devices I think they would also realize they need to provide APIs that enable tighter integration.

    There is a limit, since BIS is coupled to RIM's NOCs, I agree with you, certain things are probably never going to happen because of security and stability and maybe even load issues.

    In my view the way forward is a clearer separation of OS and core v. 3rd party code, and RIM adapting their API to enable as much flexibility and power for 3rd party apps as they can, and as much OS integration as they can, without sacrificing security and stability of the platform.

    RIM has good hardware, they don't cut corners like some other major manufacturers do. The device is capable of a lot more. Personally I'm satisfied with my device, I did a lot of research and asked some stupid questions and I got everything I wanted and more. But there's plenty more they could do, if they wanted.
    Last edited by F0nage; 02-09-10 at 06:26 AM.
    02-09-10 06:23 AM
  20. elvin1983's Avatar
    I don't know whether push and OS integration are limited to RIM, but there isn't any reason why they must be.

    Accuweather has push, did RIM write that?

    RIM should be in the business of publishing APIs that enable the aftermarket to write good solutions, like every major OS already does. It's obvious they don't consider applications a priority, so at least make it possible for other people to deliver.

    So I guess you must have missed all the coverage on the BlackBerry Developers Conference...
    BlackBerry® Developer Conference - BlackBerry Mobile Applications
    Press Release: Open GL ES Support, Java GUI Builder and Theme Studio to Help BB Developers Generate Dynamic User Experiences | CrackBerry.com
    BlackBerry Developer Conference 2009: Looking Back At Year II Through The Eyes of a Developer | CrackBerry.com
    I think it's fair to say that RIM is pretty dedicated to making things easier for 3rd party developers to make applications for their platform. They're not stupid.
    Last edited by elvin1983; 02-09-10 at 09:09 AM.
    02-09-10 09:07 AM
  21. F0nage's Avatar
    They could not have gotten to the state they are in today without at least a little stupid.

    By the time people are complaining, you could argue they're already pretty far behind. I don't get fooled by ra-ra stuff and developers conferences, I've been around too long.

    It looks like you're quoting me but responding to some other poster btw.
    02-09-10 10:01 AM
  22. xgm541's Avatar
    I like my blackberry apps. They're not as "fun" as iPhone apps but they're very useful in what I need them to do.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-09-10 11:06 AM
  23. TeleBEEM's Avatar
    I had a discussion about this with my wife the other day...

    The BlackBerry OS is in a place that the Windows OS is in... they both have to balance cutting edge features with legacy apps and other tools... what ends up happening is you get a bloated OS that just can't keep up with others with newer products. Maybe both Windows and BB need to completely reboot their OSes, just like Apple did 10 years ago, and how Palm did a couple of years ago. You have a whole new code base and apps incompatible with previous versions, but now you're caught up with current standards, and maybe even ahead.
    02-09-10 11:33 AM
  24. dragonsamus's Avatar
    Yeah, the FB app is pretty horrible. It just doesn't work. BB Maps however ugly it may be has worked for me. As long as it works I'll use it. FB has been unreliable for me.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-09-10 11:46 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD