[blackburberry]

Maybe a reason for the delay of BB10 coming to Playbook can be found in the news that BBM is being developed for other platforms. I don't think BB would risk the roll out of OS10 for Playbook without assuring full BBM functionality on that platform. Maybe the current Playbook hardware doesn't have enough muscle for all the changes coming to BBM under OS10. Just a thought.

[mkelley65]

Maybe a reason for the delay of BB10 coming to Playbook can be found in the news that BBM is being developed for other platforms. I don't think BB would risk the roll out of OS10 for Playbook without assuring full BBM functionality on that platform. Maybe the current Playbook hardware doesn't have enough muscle for all the changes coming to BBM under OS10. Just a thought.

There is no delay. They never gave a definitive date for the release of BB10 on PlayBook.

[Dr_Acula]

Maybe a reason for the delay of BB10 coming to Playbook can be found in the news that BBM is being developed for other platforms. I don't think BB would risk the roll out of OS10 for Playbook without assuring full BBM functionality on that platform. Maybe the current Playbook hardware doesn't have enough muscle for all the changes coming to BBM under OS10. Just a thought.

I don't think u keep or self up to date.
bbm runs on playbook quite easily,
If u know of bb10 is which ran on playbook with partial functionality was able to run bbm quite good.
But for that u have to sacrifice some good apps.

[cdnynot]

From what I heard, the PlayBook and BB OS7 phones ran very well together in Bridge mode.
In bridged mode, the PlayBook ran BBM, text messages, surfing the net, got pop ups when calls arrived on phone, etc.
The PlayBook is powerful enough to run all these functions.
I believe BB doesn't want to spend too much money on a legacy tablet, the new OS10 has to be converted to not having a hub to save memory for other applications.

[Barracuda7772]

From what I heard, the PlayBook and BB OS7 phones ran very well together in Bridge mode.
In bridged mode, the PlayBook ran BBM, text messages, surfing the net, got pop ups when calls arrived on phone, etc.
The PlayBook is powerful enough to run all these functions.
I believe BB doesn't want to spend too much money on a legacy tablet, the new OS10 has to be converted to not having a hub to save memory for other applications.

the Playbook is not a legacy device as its still Blackberrys onlytablet and it is still supported by BBRY

[sad_old_man]

Maybe a reason for the delay of BB10 coming to Playbook can be found in the news that BBM is being developed for other platforms. I don't think BB would risk the roll out of OS10 for Playbook without assuring full BBM functionality on that platform. Maybe the current Playbook hardware doesn't have enough muscle for all the changes coming to BBM under OS10. Just a thought.

"I don't think BB would risk the roll out of OS10 for Playbook without assuring full BBM functionality on that platform"?

Why not they did with the Z10?

If you look at the core structure between the Z10 and the pb, then you might notice a striking similarity. The PB has been running bb10 minus the phone capabilities since its conception and the main reason for the dramatic change of plan, no bis, no bridge functionality has been brought about by RIM trying to please the carriers in an attempt to convince them to shift bigger numbers of the devices. It's not quantum physics?

[FF22]

"I don't think BB would risk the roll out of OS10 for Playbook without assuring full BBM functionality on that platform"?

Why not they did with the Z10?

If you look at the core structure between the Z10 and the pb, then you might notice a striking similarity. The PB has been running bb10 minus the phone capabilities since its conception and the main reason for the dramatic change of plan, no bis, no bridge functionality has been brought about by RIM trying to please the carriers in an attempt to convince them to shift bigger numbers of the devices. It's not quantum physics?

It is quantum profits!

[blueberrymerry]

It's mobile computing!

They want your Z10 to talk to your PB and your Bentley. Too bad they don't tell you how the Bentley would forget everything every 30 days or reboot itself at the worst time...

[ESCON]

I don't understand all this PB BB10 drama ? i Got few OS7 & 6 BB's and two PB they all run good. I got a Z10 for testing and i don't think that BB10 or Link is near to ready so why should Blackberry develop on two fronts ? i think f1rst they have to bring BB10 and Link on a close to perfect level and than they can bring it to the PB.

[sad_old_man]

I don't understand all this PB BB10 drama ? i Got few OS7 & 6 BB's and two PB they all run good. I got a Z10 for testing and i don't think that BB10 or Link is near to ready so why should Blackberry develop on two fronts ? i think f1rst they have to bring BB10 and Link on a close to perfect level and than they can bring it to the PB.

Are you for real? Sorry to have to ask that but maybe a small thought should be considered? The pb was released not ready to use, the Z10/Q10 has been released not ready to use, does this not indicate a trend with RIM.

At the end of the day let's not forget that RIM don't care about us. We are an odd bunch of techies and geeks on this forum that live just to delve into areas of devices that the normal majority of end users don't know and don't even care exists.

The majority of people I know who had to have the Z10 on the first day of release (and that number is way way up in double figures) returned them for the same reason, it's not a blackberry as they know a blackberry. All of them owned a bb already, some of them on their second bb handset but within a few hours of use they were on the phone to their respective carriers arranging their return. The bridging problem never occurred (and some of them have pb's) because they don't know what bridge is, or was. They don't want to know why the battery goes flat on the Z10 in less than a normal working day, they don't even know about BIS so how can they miss it?. Let's not confuse our view on technology with the view of the normal non parametric end user that wants completely different things. At present RIM are satisfying neither the techies or the end user.

[cdnynot]

the Playbook is not a legacy device as its still Blackberrys onlytablet and it is still supported by BBRY

The PlayBook is 2 years old and worked amazingly well with OS7, from what I've heard.
I still think that the PlayBook is better than most of the other tablets on the market today. That's why I bought one!
What I stated was the PlayBook IS powerful enough to run: BBM, texting, videos, surfing the net etc.
But there is no BB10 support yet.
I personally don't care if I never get BB10 on my PlayBook, just give me a great BlackBerry Bridge between my Z10 and PlayBook, like OS7.

Proudly posted via my Z10

[reschp]

I remember all of the talk of how BB failed by delivering the PB too soon with a half baked OS1.0. Now its "give us OS10 whether its ready or not". Should BB have also delayed the Z10 further until OS 10.1 was ready or the bridge was perfect? Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

[sad_old_man]

I remember all of the talk of how BB failed by delivering the PB too soon with a half baked OS1.0. Now its "give us OS10 whether its ready or not". Should BB have also delayed the Z10 further until OS 10.1 was ready or the bridge was perfect? Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Ask Skoda about that! Produce **** that doesn't work and force it on to the end user for long enough, you tend to adopt a bad name. Like Skoda now they are owned by another company and produce very good vehicles indeed, but they can't even give them away even though they are competitively priced, because of their reputation! Work it out yourself?

[blackburberry]

I don't think u keep or self up to date.
bbm runs on playbook quite easily,
If u know of bb10 is which ran on playbook with partial functionality was able to run bbm quite good.
But for that u have to sacrifice some good apps.

Sorry I don't quite understand what you're saying. Are you saying that the full vision of BBM is built in to playbook now supporting channels, voice and video chat and doesn't require bridge?

[BB_Bmore]

One would think so as its been running on Playbook internally before the Z10 was even launched. BlackBerry10 was born on the PlayBook and you can bet your a$$ that they have native BBM working fine on Playbook for many months.

Sorry I don't quite understand what you're saying. Are you saying that the full vision of BBM is built in to playbook now supporting channels, voice and video chat and doesn't require bridge?

[Zildjian71]

One would think so as its been running on Playbook internally before the Z10 was even launched. BlackBerry10 was born on the PlayBook and you can bet your a$$ that they have native BBM working fine on Playbook for many months.

Sorry dude, all that bug reporter pic proves is a provision for a possibility nothing more. But until its in beta or released in an update it realistically don't exist. Nice try n keep dreaming.

[BB_Bmore]

No "dude" I'm sorry that you fanbois just cannot except reality. No Dreams here just a little thing called reality that the "fanboi" cont comprehend.

Regaurds,

[Dr_Acula]

Sorry I don't quite understand what you're saying. Are you saying that the full vision of BBM is built in to playbook now supporting channels, voice and video chat and doesn't require bridge?

Take a look
http://m.youtube.com/watch?client=mv...ldescription=1

[Orange UK]

It's mobile computing!

They want your Z10 to talk to your PB and your Bentley. Too bad they don't tell you how the Bentley would forget everything every 30 days or reboot itself at the worst time...

Bentley you say? What a BISness to tie into, a cheap Z10 poor specs compared to the market, a PB circa �150 and a car you need to sell house to buy, call me dumb but budget/mediocre cars are Kia,Chevrolet and Fiat, Ford...NOW QNX in them might shift consumers to BB. BBB no doubt they have BBBQNX13 OS already - pretouch etc...


BerrySoft for all your QNX needs

[sad_old_man]

Sorry I don't quite understand what you're saying. Are you saying that the full vision of BBM is built in to playbook now supporting channels, voice and video chat and doesn't require bridge?

If you think about it, if you run BBM across bridge, is your handset just passing data to the BBM program running on the playbook, or has the handset become a server running both the BBM program and dealing with the data while the pb acts merely as a dumb terminal displaying the resulting data?

The pb has lots of functionality that already exists in the code, but hasn't been switched on!

[blueberrymerry]

Just like USB Host functionality has existed in the PBOS code since forever and presumably BB10 as well, but not turned on. BBRY value security so much, they would rather leave PlayBook users stuck with a half-assed tablet than let them extend the functionality on their own.

At least HP was decent enough to open-source WebOS and get the latest release on Touchpads. If (or when) BB10 tanks, will BBRY do the same?

[Zildjian71]

BBM on the PB is not native. When you bridge the PB is running a thin client ie. not full coding of the app. Think socket for the app to fit into while bridged, plus sand boxed to keep it away from nosey local apps. When bridge is off the data gets flushed on the PB but still resides on the phone.

As for client USB, well its a coin toss. Convenience. Vs Security has always been an unsolved argument. The more secure it is the harder it is to access. The more convenient it is the more vulnerable to attacks...and so it goes.

Security appeals to the corporate mind set and corporate buyers buy in quantity and don't like changes. Hobbiests like openness but don't buy much...and so that goes.

So who do you please, the corporate buyer who buys in mass plus invest in stock or the consumer hobbiests who smear you in every forum and blog they can?

[blueberrymerry]

What's the big deal about USB Host security? Right now native apps and Android apps have separate sandboxes, Wi-fi and USB filesharing expose a secured view of the filesystem, so why not allow USB Host? It's terribly ironic that an iPad - walled garden iTunes nonsense and all - can access camera cards through a USB dongle, but the PlayBook can't even though the hardware and software are there.

BBRY really needs to figure out who their target market really is. Corporations and government are more interested in Android and iOS for mass purchases, the average consumer couldn't care less about a "new" Blackberry, but BBRY can't survive as is by selling to a few loyal diehards alone.

[sad_old_man]

BBM on the PB is not native. When you bridge the PB is running a thin client ie. not full coding of the app. Think socket for the app to fit into while bridged, plus sand boxed to keep it away from nosey local apps. When bridge is off the data gets flushed on the PB but still resides on the phone.

As for client USB, well its a coin toss. Convenience. Vs Security has always been an unsolved argument. The more secure it is the harder it is to access. The more convenient it is the more vulnerable to attacks...and so it goes.

Security appeals to the corporate mind set and corporate buyers buy in quantity and don't like changes. Hobbiests like openness but don't buy much...and so that goes.

So who do you please, the corporate buyer who buys in mass plus invest in stock or the consumer hobbiests who smear you in every forum and blog they can?

So your first point tells me what I already know which is BBM fully exists on the pb already. The coders especially RIM's coders would find it too difficult and costly to write two completely different versions of the same application that do the same job. The version on the pb may not be fully functional but that is down to the coders to active the sub routines that they have disabled!

As for security, if that's the corporate issue why take BIS away from the Z10 and Q10?
Now you hit RIM's main issue. They don't earn enough from the corporate bulk buyers as you suggest to enable the company to achieve sustainable growth year by year and keep the shareholders happy, therefore they provide phones for the masses (us) to make up the revenue deficit. At the moment it seems that they are trying to please both customer bases at the same time and failing miserably at both.

Just my thoughts view.

[project_x]

They keep updating the bridge apps on the z10, in fact in 1880 there 5 unnamed bridge apps I hadn't seen before. ...

Posted via CB10