01-18-12 07:45 PM
76 1234
tools
  1. graxyq's Avatar
    Strange the only time I read Mike Abramsky's name is when there is a negative news to be reported on RIM, looks like the guy is paid a lot of money or may be apples

    For those of you who think media will not take sides, watch this video.


    Though not related to technology, it does give you an idea on how MSM can make or break. And NYT finds honorable mention
    01-17-12 02:37 AM
  2. morph_ca's Avatar
    RIM went from pre-announcing the PlayBook 7 months before launch to telling users that things were "scheduled" for the 60 days following launch to "DevCon" to "February 2012." It's the scatterbrained behavior that leads to the argument that they're disorganized and uncommunicative.

    As for the Apple comparison, that they sell over a million iPads each week undermines your argument; if RIM were selling a million PlayBooks a week (or even a month), then there would be no story. But a million PlayBooks in 9 months after Jim B. claimed a huge amount of pre-launch interest? These aren't exactly the kind of results that suggest all is well at RIM.
    Knew someone would pull out sales figures. Classic case of Argumentum ad populum. If I had believed every word from every publication out there, my playbook should be turning into a turd at the stroke of midnight ever since I bought it - well I'm still waiting.

    And your argument doesn't even make sense. From the moment the PB was released, it was already trashed by the media including the NYTimes. So how's your finger pointing 'million playbooks in 9 months' made that into a story?

    I am not saying a product's faults shouldn't be highlighted and as an informed consumer, I expect that but this goes way beyond that and has been going on even before the first unit was sold.
    Last edited by morph_ca; 01-17-12 at 04:48 AM.
    01-17-12 04:10 AM
  3. JasW's Avatar
    biased article from a newspaper that's more and more like a tabloid every day. I don't see this as a credible article.
    Does anyone take the NYT seriously anymore? I mean really. My dog won't even take a pee on that rag. He has standards too.
    NYT has been more like a tabloid for years. They lost any credibility they may have had back when Reagan was campaigning in the Rep. presidential primaries.
    Give me a break. Its editorial board has a decidedly liberal bent, but the Times is still THE Newspaper of Record in this country. No other paper comes close to its standards and its journalistic reputation. Slamming the Times only betrays an ideological agenda. It is the equivalent of immediately resorting to an ad hominem attack instead of attempting to rebut the substance of the message. Which you three clearly cannot.

    They haven't seen the Crackberry video on the role that the NOC will play in PlayBook OS 2.0 and BB10....RIM's going down the route of ActiveSync, and I'm shocked that ActiveSync is not mentioned a single time in that article. Just to show how much those guys know...
    You need to read more closely:

    From what RIM previewed in Las Vegas last week, it appears that most PlayBooks will rely entirely on Microsoft Exchange Active Sync, the same technology found on phones or tablets that people use on the other common mobile operating systems Apples iOS, Android from Google and Microsofts Windows Phone.

    D'oh!

    I doubt that most of the posters in this thread are on BES. And functionality on BES is the crux of the problem. Before this article appeared, and from what I learned last week, I had pretty much given up hope that I was going to be able to use my PB on BES with OS 2.0. The following passage confirmed that for me:

    In an e-mail, Ms. Kennedy said corporate and government users who want highly encrypted BlackBerry service must update to the latest version of RIMs BlackBerry Enterprise Server software. They also must use BlackBerry Mobile Fusion, which will not be sold until late February. When it was announced last year, the Fusion software was described as allowing corporations to manage iPhones and Android phones through their BlackBerry servers.

    But several analysts said most corporations were not likely to upgrade to accommodate the PlayBook because in addition to cost, there is a potential for errors causing widespread disruption.

    This is not something many enterprises will do proactively unless they already have an active PlayBook deployment program,
    said Jan Dawson, an analyst with Ovum who also saw the software demonstrated last week.

    I haven't inquired, but I doubt my firm is going to upgrade its BES server just to accommodate people who have PBs.
    OMGitworks and conix67 like this.
    01-17-12 07:00 AM
  4. alnamvet68's Avatar
    RIM went from pre-announcing the PlayBook 7 months before launch to telling users that things were "scheduled" for the 60 days following launch to "DevCon" to "February 2012." It's the scatterbrained behavior that leads to the argument that they're disorganized and uncommunicative.

    As for the Apple comparison, that they sell over a million iPads each week undermines your argument; if RIM were selling a million PlayBooks a week (or even a month), then there would be no story. But a million PlayBooks in 9 months after Jim B. claimed a huge amount of pre-launch interest? These aren't exactly the kind of results that suggest all is well at RIM.
    How many of anything sold per day, week, month, or year is hardly an indicator of whether or not "all is well" with a corporation. Toyota sold nearly 2 million autos in the US alone last year, and Roll Royce sold less then 2000 vehicles worldwide last year. Both companies are hardly crying the financial blues.
    modine likes this.
    01-17-12 07:03 AM
  5. calles's Avatar
    Getting very tired of RIM 'bashing' articles ...Everyone has acknowledged the Playbook could have been better when it was first launched ...that said, I believe we are all looking forward to the OS2 enhancements and a bright future for the Playbook. I wonder how much Apple pays to have all these negative articles written ....
    01-17-12 07:22 AM
  6. OMGitworks's Avatar
    They haven't seen the Crackberry video on the role that the NOC will play in PlayBook OS 2.0 and BB10....RIM's going down the route of ActiveSync, and I'm shocked that ActiveSync is not mentioned a single time in that article. Just to show how much those guys know...
    "From what RIM previewed in Las Vegas last week, it appears that most PlayBooks will rely entirely on Microsoft Exchange Active Sync, the same technology found on phones or tablets that people use on the other common mobile operating systems Apples iOS, Android from Google and Microsofts Windows Phone.
    01-17-12 08:06 AM
  7. dagerlach's Avatar
    Ulterior motive driven article. They abound on what seems like an hourly basis to chase the sheep's money around the market. As you can tell, most of the time these authors have no educational background or work history on the topic and have failed to research any further than a couple internet articles that probably also are without merit. Bloggers at best. Charlatons for the sheep.
    Last edited by dagerlach; 01-17-12 at 08:24 AM.
    modine likes this.
    01-17-12 08:22 AM
  8. conix67's Avatar
    I don't understand people on this forum, anyone reading this article accurately before considering this RIM bashing? To me the article is quite accurate and valid, although his points don't concern me or many on this forum. It might be a small point, but it might matter to those corporate customers trying to adapt PB as business tool, which is a bigger market RIM is targeting.
    01-17-12 08:25 AM
  9. teknishun's Avatar
    How many of anything sold per day, week, month, or year is hardly an indicator of whether or not "all is well" with a corporation. Toyota sold nearly 2 million autos in the US alone last year, and Roll Royce sold less then 2000 vehicles worldwide last year. Both companies are hardly crying the financial blues.
    Dude, please stop with all of the Rolls Royce comparisons. I know Rolls Royce, and RIM is no Rolls Royce.
    01-17-12 08:31 AM
  10. Richdog-'s Avatar
    Dude, please stop with all of the Rolls Royce comparisons. I know Rolls Royce, and RIM is no Rolls Royce.
    Shhh stop trying to talk common sense.. you will upset the resident Delusional Crowd.
    01-17-12 08:34 AM
  11. brucep1's Avatar
    How many of anything sold per day, week, month, or year is hardly an indicator of whether or not "all is well" with a corporation.
    Quite the contrary. Usually, when companies have similar margins, Sales are often a very good indicator of whether or not "all is well" with a corporation.

    Now, I could pull two companies with completely different margins and compare them, such as Toyota and RR, but it really doesn't serve this discussion.
    01-17-12 08:41 AM
  12. alnamvet68's Avatar
    Dude, please stop with all of the Rolls Royce comparisons. I know Rolls Royce, and RIM is no Rolls Royce.
    OK Dude, I'll use something else....700,000 Rolex watches sold last year and 10-15 million Timex watches sold in the same time frame....both companies are financially stable.
    blue-b likes this.
    01-17-12 08:45 AM
  13. omniusovermind's Avatar
    Dude, please stop with all of the Rolls Royce comparisons. I know Rolls Royce, and RIM is no Rolls Royce.
    Why not? Is it any worse than the replies which praise the credibility of corporate media? When it comes to foolish articles like these, anything is fair game. As for those of you who posted in defense of the integrity of that newspaper and their like, you folks make great minions. In the pecking order of society, someone has to be the minion/lackey/henchman and I applaud you for taking on the responsibility. *slow clap*
    alnamvet68 and melb_me like this.
    01-17-12 08:47 AM
  14. Richdog-'s Avatar
    OK Dude, I'll use something else....700,000 Rolex watches sold last year and 10-15 million Timex watches sold in the same time frame....both companies are financially stable.
    The difference of course being that Timex watches cost $50 and Rolexes cost $10000. I can't remember the last time I saw RIM pushing tablets that cost 100-200x that of any other tablet producer. They cost 5x more than horrible Chinese brands, 2x more than lower-tier brands, and the same as high-tier brands. They are also not known for exclusive designs, prohibitive cost, or consistently world-beating craftsmanship.

    RIM are at best competetitive with other top-tier manufacturers, and that was mainly in their glory days before their recent decline.
    Last edited by Richdog-; 01-17-12 at 08:59 AM. Reason: spelling
    01-17-12 08:55 AM
  15. brucep1's Avatar
    The difference of course being that Timex watches cost $50 and Rolexes cost $10000. I can't remember the last time I saw RIM pushing tablets that cost 100-200x that of any other tablet producer. They cost 5x more than horrible Chinese brands, 2x more than lower-tier brands, and the same as high-tier brands. They are also not known for exclusive designs, prohibitive cost, or consistently world-beating craftsmanship.
    Someone with facts in the PlayBook forum? Get outta here
    01-17-12 08:57 AM
  16. conix67's Avatar
    The difference of course being that Timex watches cost $50 and Rolexes cost $10000. I can't remember the last time I saw RIM pushing tablets that cost 100-200x that of any other tablet producer. They cost 5x more than horrible Chinese brands, 2x more than lower-tier brands, and the same as high-tier brands. They are also not known for exclusive designs, prohibitive cost, or consistently world-beating craftsmanship.
    You can't argue with people who are willing to pay whatever $$$ on any RIM product regardless of what those are capable of.

    However, the comparison is quite accurate - those people who need something that works at the price point that make sense buy Timex, those who need something that does the basics and has to have the name plate (not sure if RIM belongs there yet) buy Rolex.
    01-17-12 09:00 AM
  17. Richdog-'s Avatar
    You can't argue with people who are willing to pay whatever $$$ on any RIM product regardless of what those are capable of.

    However, the comparison is quite accurate - those people who need something that works at the price point that make sense buy Timex, those who need something that does the basics and has to have the name plate (not sure if RIM belongs there yet) buy Rolex.
    The point was that it was not a relevant comparison to RIM, who do not provide products of a comparable quality and exclusivity (when of course taken in context in the electronics world) to Rolex.
    01-17-12 09:10 AM
  18. omniusovermind's Avatar
    c'mon guys, are we seriously not going to post that nerd fight image link here?!?
    01-17-12 09:16 AM
  19. Teeceman's Avatar
    Some of the arguments against this or any negative RIM article really makes some on this board appear like the speak no evil hear no evil see no evil crew.
    If some articles are negative towards RIM then RIM must work harder to turn this around, equally when articles are positive RIM should work as hard as they can to use that momentum and deliver better innovative products.

    Not every bit of negative RIM reporting is RIM bashing.
    Richdog- and sjfwhite like this.
    01-17-12 11:40 AM
  20. dandbj13's Avatar
    I just want to know one thing: which media outlet is NOT biased against RIM? We know that ALL US media is biased. Now, we are learning that much of Canadian media is also biased and clueless. Those who are so sensitive to this issue, please step up. Who can we trust?
    01-17-12 11:42 AM
  21. brucep1's Avatar
    I just want to know one thing: which media outlet is NOT biased against RIM? We know that ALL US media is biased. Now, we are learning that much of Canadian media is also biased and clueless. Those who are so sensitive to this issue, please step up. Who can we trust?
    www.crackberry.com
    omniusovermind likes this.
    01-17-12 12:28 PM
  22. melb_me's Avatar
    Did he even look at the email program integrating social networking and calendar. What a dumb @ss. What he wrote is almost comical it is so bad. Maybe they haven't shown BBM on the Playbook yet because it will blow everyone away just like the email program did when it comes out......good software takes time. Especially when you are writing it for a multi-tasking-modular-OS sharing (don't forget the modular OS sharing that was mentioned in the car clip) OS. RIM is the future baby!
    01-17-12 06:11 PM
  23. conix67's Avatar
    Did he even look at the email program integrating social networking and calendar. What a dumb @ss. What he wrote is almost comical it is so bad. Maybe they haven't shown BBM on the Playbook yet because it will blow everyone away just like the email program did when it comes out......good software takes time. Especially when you are writing it for a multi-tasking-modular-OS sharing (don't forget the modular OS sharing that was mentioned in the car clip) OS. RIM is the future baby!
    Tell me, what is so comical about the analyst's article? To me posts like this is what bothers me, and the big problem on this forum. Did you even read the article carefully?
    bluecougar likes this.
    01-17-12 08:08 PM
  24. NJPhilliesPhan's Avatar
    RIM is the future baby!
    I want to believe this since I own 3 RIM products. But can you please explain how RIMs current OS or products are the future?
    01-17-12 08:16 PM
  25. 3lionsbecks's Avatar
    Just because RIM is not able to have two devices working on BBM together doesn't mean that BB10 phones won't have BBM. That would be a single device working on BBM and I'm sure they have that down. I still don't get why people need BBM on a tablet this bad. Does anyone have BBM on their laptops??
    And anyway if you have a BB then you don't want both devices going off when you get a BBM. I would always pick up my BB to answer a BBM.

    And for those who don't have a BB but want BBM, well you can't. As simple as that. I don't have a mac product but I want FaceTime. How do I get it?
    last time i checked The Playbook IS a BB product?

    I can do facetime on my iMac, Macbook Pro, iPod Touch and iPhone. All separate Apple products. People want the same compatibility with BB products. BBM and Email should be on every mobile product they make. Especially if they are marketing that product to businesses.

    The fact that you can't is what people and analysts are upset about and it is killing RIM's sales.
    bluecougar likes this.
    01-17-12 09:04 PM
76 1234
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD