11-24-13 01:50 AM
42 12
tools
  1. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    Nice explanation. Exactly what I was looking for. As for the UI can it be rectified or do we have to get used to it ? The other tablets UI seems very nice, and given the framework is better why is RIM keeping it so dull. Looks sometimes do sell.

    My UI issues with the Playbook stem from lack of abilities to customize through themes, I very much do NOT want to see the UI of Android or Apple on my Playbook. so I hope they don't drastically change the UI, but instead open it up to theme developers like they did with the Blackberry's
    07-05-11 09:11 PM
  2. OniBerry's Avatar
    You will eventually be able to 'tweak' the PB's UI.

    http://i1229.photobucket.com/albums/...-interface.png

    The picture is from a touchscreen interface that is running off a HAN (Home Area Network), this one is just an illustration of what is possible for the PB.
    lnichols likes this.
    07-05-11 09:39 PM
  3. lnichols's Avatar
    You will eventually be able to 'tweak' the PB's UI.

    http://i1229.photobucket.com/albums/...-interface.png

    The picture is from a touchscreen interface that is running off a HAN (Home Area Network), this one is just an illustration of what is possible for the PB.
    That looks awesome for home automation. Damn I wish RIM would hurry up and get this stuff to Market. Home control, media boxes, tablet integration. They have all the pieces to blow the competition out of the water, but a management chain that can't get the company to focus and deliver! Frustrating.
    07-06-11 06:52 AM
  4. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    BUT what makes QNX the best OS is it's POSIX compliance, in addition to this it is also a true microkernel vs. monolithic kernel of Android, Apple, and Windows Mobile 7.

    This allows for better memory management, and smarter use of processing power.
    Actually, monolithic-kernels generally tend to be more efficient and leave a smaller footprint than their micro-kernel counterparts. QNX does stand out performance-wise compared to other micro-kernels though.

    Apple and Android are actually built on kernels that are monolithic/micro hybrids. They're basically monolithic-kernels with modular capabilities of micro-kernels (most *nix/BSD kernels are these days). They receive the advantages of both methods, but have issues of their own to contend with.
    07-06-11 08:25 AM
  5. ADGrant's Avatar
    Last I checked OSX was not running on tablets, I though iOS was which is not POSIX compliant
    iOS is derived from OS X and share the same OS kernel.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_(Apple)
    07-06-11 08:40 AM
  6. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    iOS is derived from OS X and share the same OS kernel.

    iOS (Apple) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It appears so according to the Wiki, the POSIX doesn't list iOS, just Mac OSX
    07-06-11 08:47 AM
  7. ADGrant's Avatar
    Actually, monolithic-kernels generally tend to be more efficient and leave a smaller footprint than their micro-kernel counterparts. QNX does stand out performance-wise compared to other micro-kernels though.

    Apple and Android are actually built on kernels that are monolithic/micro hybrids. They're basically monolithic-kernels with modular capabilities of micro-kernels (most *nix/BSD kernels are these days). They receive the advantages of both methods, but have issues of their own to contend with.
    You are correct that Apple's kernel is in fact a hybrid, not a true micro-kernel. However, Android (and WebOS) are based on linux which is a traditional monolithic kernel.
    07-06-11 08:49 AM
  8. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    It appears so according to the Wiki, the POSIX doesn't list iOS, just Mac OSX
    I would guess that since it's a *nix/BSD based kernel, it's at least 'mostly POSIX compliant'.

    POSIX mainly impacts developers, of which iOS definately doesn't need to expend too much effort to be fully POSIX compliant, as they have no issues with developer support.
    07-06-11 09:02 AM
  9. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    I would guess that since it's a *nix/BSD based kernel, it's at least 'mostly POSIX compliant'.

    POSIX mainly impacts developers, of which iOS definately doesn't need to expend too much effort to be fully POSIX compliant, as they have no issues with developer support.
    LOL!
    That is an understatement,
    07-06-11 09:07 AM
  10. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    You are correct that Apple's kernel is in fact a hybrid, not a true micro-kernel. However, Android (and WebOS) are based on linux which is a traditional monolithic kernel.
    The Linux kernel has since evolved and is considered a hybrid. You can compile it to be monolithic or modular.

    [edit]Though I will say, this debate has been discussed numerous times over by developers across the inter-webz. Geeks tend to disagree more than anybody else.
    Last edited by rmjones101; 07-06-11 at 09:12 AM.
    07-06-11 09:10 AM
  11. ADGrant's Avatar
    I would guess that since it's a *nix/BSD based kernel, it's at least 'mostly POSIX compliant'.

    POSIX mainly impacts developers, of which iOS definately doesn't need to expend too much effort to be fully POSIX compliant, as they have no issues with developer support.
    Since OS X is officially POSIX compliant and iOS is a derivative of OS X, it follows that iOS is POSIX compliant. That said, third part developers are restricted from access to some APIs so that may make iOS technically non-compliant.
    07-06-11 09:26 AM
  12. peter9477's Avatar
    Various pages on Wikipedia (microkernel, Mach, OS X architecture, and others) suggest that the history is that while Mach was a true microkernel architecture, and OSX is based on it, OSX left the microkernel architecture behind and is in effect a monolithic architecture. I'm not sure in what sense someone thinks it's a hybrid, but since the filesystem and networking support, among other things, run in kernel space, it's most definitely neither a microkernel nor a hybrid according to the Wikipedia descriptions.
    07-06-11 01:43 PM
  13. sf49ers's Avatar
    ok fine, the PB broswer fails at multitasking....is that better?
    it's not that PB browser can't multi-task, the initial built had this play all option but browser is a major memory hog causing memory break downs and hence they had to go with iPad like tabbed browsing and in essence it is same on webOS. Playbook doesn't load the page every time you change the tab but preserves the current state.
    07-06-11 02:59 PM
  14. sf49ers's Avatar
    Can anyone clarify why QNX is the best. All I hear it has a good framework, it has untapped potential..etc etc
    However I just tried he webOs and it seemed to surpass qnx at multitasking. As an example you can open multiple browser, where in qnx you can't. Though I had bae experience in terms of stability with xoom, but or the android 3.1 seems much better and as an example it was running an animated wall paper had widgets customization.
    QNX 'almost' seemed as dull as the current apple's ios when compared to these other os.
    In terms of apps I don't see anything that RIM is superb at running in qnx but if we look at it from the perspective of the other OSs they seemed to be doing way better, wireless printing from hp tab, or notifications that work in he android 3.0.
    Bridge seemed to be a good concept, unfortunately speed reminds me of the dial up 14.4 modems.
    Does it just come down to preferences of OS or is there something that I am missing as to why others here seems to appreciate it so much.
    what Playbook OS does is true multitasking, it has taken the mobile OS multitasking to the next level, webOS multi-tasking is nothing but a glorified pause-n-play mode as you switch between the apps. WebOS doesn't have SMP (symmetric multi processing ) and hence it lags, Android Honeycomb just added SMP for dual core processors, QNX had SMP and DMP since a decade ago. WebOS was in the making for the past 4 years but horribly lacks in performance when compared to other OSes, it's core technology for building apps is web technologies like HTML, Java Script etc but surprisingly Touchpad fared worse in sunspider tests even worse then 1st gen iPad, it scored some 4200 points vs the competition scores around 2200 points
    07-06-11 03:08 PM
  15. ADGrant's Avatar
    what Playbook OS does is true multitasking, it has taken the mobile OS multitasking to the next level, webOS multi-tasking is nothing but a glorified pause-n-play mode as you switch between the apps. WebOS doesn't have SMP (symmetric multi processing ) and hence it lags, Android Honeycomb just added SMP for dual core processors, QNX had SMP and DMP since a decade ago. WebOS was in the making for the past 4 years but horribly lacks in performance when compared to other OSes, it's core technology for building apps is web technologies like HTML, Java Script etc but surprisingly Touchpad fared worse in sunspider tests even worse then 1st gen iPad, it scored some 4200 points vs the competition scores around 2200 points
    WebOS does not lag because it lacks SMP and you don't need SMP for multi-tasking. The WebOS lag is probably due to all those javascript apps it is running.
    07-06-11 03:30 PM
  16. monotok's Avatar
    WebOS does not lag because it lacks SMP and you don't need SMP for multi-tasking. The WebOS lag is probably due to all those javascript apps it is running.
    I think the webOS lag is due to the fact it does not support hardware acceleration.
    01-06-12 11:30 AM
  17. donpepin's Avatar
    How?? BB Bridge + web, youll access your PC contain?
    please, more explanation or links to study .
    cheers
    11-24-13 01:50 AM
42 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD