[conite]

BB10, for those who may have forgotten, is based on QNX. QNX is in active development right now. Drivers are available for 64-bit applications. It would require some capital, as anything does, but to suggest BBL would have to start from scratch is ludicrous.


Posted via CB10

QNX represents less than 5% of the actual code. Everything else would essentially have to be developed from scratch by teams, know-how, and infrastructure that no longer exists in any meaningful way.

It cost BlackBerry about $6 billion to build BB10 over QNX the first time. I think $2 billion would be a lowball figure this time around.

[TrumpetTiger]

QNX represents less than 5% of the actual code. Everything else would essentially have to be developed from scratch by teams, know-how, and infrastructure that no longer exists in any meaningful way.

Judging by the file structure, the folder structure, permissions, and drivers, QNX and code based on it makes up quite a bit more than 5%. But as always, if you have any actual evidence, I am willing to look at it.

Posted via CB10

[conite]

Judging by the file structure, the folder structure, permissions, and drivers, QNX and code based on it makes up quite a bit more than 5%. But as always, if you have any actual evidence, I am willing to look at it.

Posted via CB10

The BB10 core OS is about 355MB versus the total package of 2GB (all equally compressed). So the starting point is 17%.

Easily, without even thinking about it, QNX makes up less than a third of the core OS (it's likely closer to a tenth). 5% is a high figure.

[TrumpetTiger]

The BB10 core OS is about 355MB versus the total package of 2GB (all equally compressed). So the starting point is 17%.

Easily, without even thinking about it, QNX makes up less than a third of the core OS (it's likely closer to a tenth). 5% is a high figure.

The core OS IS the code we're discussing. So your 355 MB figure, assuming it's accurate, would be 100%.

So far, I have only heard you make assertions without any actual evidence. I repeat: if you have actual evidence that QNX makes up 5% of the core OS code, I am willing to consider it.

Posted via CB10

[conite]

The core OS IS the code we're discussing.

Not at all. My goodness. Most of BB10 is contained in the "apps" portion. Everything from the HUB to device settings, etc. It ALL needs to be modernised - not just the core.

The QNX microkernel is exceptionally compact - that is one of its main claims to fame.

As our revered Chris Umiastowski used to say, "QNX is a just a foundation - a foundation for a skyscraper (BB10).

[TrumpetTiger]

Not at all. My goodness. Most of BB10 is contained in the "apps" portion. Everything from the HUB to device settings, etc. It ALL needs to be modernised - not just the core.

The QNX microkernel is exceptionally compact - that is one of its main claims to fame.

Conite, perhaps you're not aware of this...but the way an OS works is to provide a framework upon which apps can run. Therefore the "core OS" would be that underlying framework. To use a desktop analogy, you are essentially claiming that the core OS of Windows includes all its built-in apps, and that because those apps run in Windows they somehow should be considered part of Windows' source code.

Such a claim is, of course, false.

Posted via CB10

[conite]

Conite, perhaps you're not aware of this...but the way an OS works is to provide a framework upon which apps can run. Therefore the "core OS" would be that underlying framework. To use a desktop analogy, you are essentially claiming that the core OS of Windows includes all its built-in apps, and that because those apps run in Windows they somehow should be considered part of Windows' source code.

Such a claim is, of course, false.

Posted via CB10

No, no, no.

The microkernel makes up a very small part of the core - the rest of it is built using BB10-specific native code.

[TrumpetTiger]

No, no, no.

The microkernel makes up a very small part of the core - the rest of it is built using native code.

The microkernel is part of the core, yes. But if you examine QNX--or really any OS--you will see that there is more to the source code than simply the microkernel. However, that code all integrates and is part of "the source," making it all QNX-based in the case of BB10.

Posted via CB10

[conite]

The microkernel is part of the core, yes. But if you examine QNX--or really any OS--you will see that there is more to the source code than simply the microkernel. However, that code all integrates and is part of "the source," making it all QNX-based in the case of BB10.

Posted via CB10

That part only exists for BB10, so has nothing to do with the fact that QNX itself exists currently in 64-bit. It would all have to be re-written from scratch. You can split hairs on what you choose to call it, but it changes nothing.

[TrumpetTiger]

That part only exists for BB10, so has nothing to do with the fact that QNX itself exists currently in 64-bit. It would all have to be re-written from scratch.

Of course. Just as Windows, Mac OS, and Android were completely re-written from the ground up for 64-bit operation.

Oh wait....

Posted via CB10

[conite]

Of course. Just as Windows, Mac OS, and Android were completely re-written from the ground up for 64-bit operation.

Oh wait....

Posted via CB10

Wait, what?

No one says it's impossible - only that it's just ridiculously expensive.

BlackBerry doesn't have a business case to drop a couple of billion dollars on this. But that's pocket change and a no-brainer investment for the others.

[TrumpetTiger]

Wait, what?

No one says it's impossible - only that it's just ridiculously expensive.

Some, who are familiar with how OSes work, say it's unnecessary.

Posted via CB10

[app_Developer]

So I can’t believe I’m getting sucked into this conversation again but here are things to think about:

QNX runs on different SoC’s in cars than the SoC’s on phones. So there is still some work to do to port to phone SoC’s.

The UI layer of BB10 is built on an open source project and the version BB uses is long ago deprecated. So there is significant work to bring the UI framework up to 2020. That stuff is 8-9 years old now??

The BB dev tools are also based on open source projects that are 8-9 years old now. There is maybe work there to bring all that stuff back, but there may be overlap there with what they ship to car companies. So that one may not be too hard.

C++ is not a very common language among developers in 2019/2020 so to get any kind of developer mindshare now they would need to support some other popular language.

[Chuck Finley69]

BB10, for those who may have forgotten, is based on QNX. QNX is in active development right now. Drivers are available for 64-bit applications. It would require some capital, as anything does, but to suggest BBL would have to start from scratch is ludicrous.


Posted via CB10

How much capital do you estimate?

[danfrancisco]

So I can’t believe I’m getting sucked into this conversation again but here are things to think about:

QNX runs on different SoC’s in cars than the SoC’s on phones. So there is still some work to do to port to phone SoC’s.

The UI layer of BB10 is built on an open source project and the version BB uses is long ago deprecated. So there is significant work to bring the UI framework up to 2020. That stuff is 8-9 years old now??

The BB dev tools are also based on open source projects that are 8-9 years old now. There is maybe work there to bring all that stuff back, but there may be overlap there with what they ship to car companies. So that one may not be too hard.

C++ is not a very common language among developers in 2019/2020 so to get any kind of developer mindshare now they would need to support some other popular language.

Thanks for sharing this. Very interesting info. At least BB10 wasn’t coded on Turing or assembly language !

Posted via CB10

[app_Developer]

Thanks for sharing this. Very interesting info. At least BB10 wasn’t coded on Turing or assembly language !

Posted via CB10

well, to be clear, it totally make sense that much of the OS is written in C++. This was true of iOS last time I was in that code deeply (a few years ago).

But the challenge is when C++ is the way you want app developers to write apps. BB offered a configuration based way to get around writing a lot of C++, but that approach has its own limitations and frustration. The Android teams made a smart move, IMO, by choosing Java in the beginning because it made it easy for many, many, many developers to get started. Certainly easier than learning Obj-C in 2008/9.

I go to a great annual C++ conference, and I've gone for 20+ years, and I can tell you the crowd there gets smaller and smaller every year. There just aren't many C++ devs in the world.

[PantherBlitz]

Some, who are familiar with how OSes work, say it's unnecessary.

OK, let's say that they can port BB10 to run perfectly on today's hardware for zero cost. It still would make no difference.

[TrumpetTiger]

OK, let's say that they can port BB10 to run perfectly on today's hardware for zero cost. It still would make no difference.

And thanks for that Panther. That confirms that the discussion about costs really isn't the issue here--it's the belief some have that no matter what BB10 won't succeed. Some would call that bias.

Posted via CB10

[conite]

And thanks for that Panther. That confirms that the discussion about costs really isn't the issue here--it's the belief some have that no matter what BB10 won't succeed. Some would call that bias.

Posted via CB10

Or common sense.

Nevertheless, we are still $2 billion behind the starting line until we can even get to that point in the conversation.

[TgeekB]

Or common sense.

Nevertheless, we are still $2 billion behind the starting line until we can even get to that point.

Common sense. Some lack it.

[bb10adopter111]

BB10, for those who may have forgotten, is based on QNX. QNX is in active development right now. Drivers are available for 64-bit applications. It would require some capital, as anything does, but to suggest BBL would have to start from scratch is ludicrous.

Posted via CB10

You're right that some of the code could be reused. But that's not the primary cost. They would need to stand up a team that would cost a couple hundred million dollars a year and take at least 18 months to produce anything. And, perhaps more importantly, QNX drivers don't exist for current hardware components. So BlackBerry would have to pay for the component manufacturers to develop them. That is why BB10 was such a disaster. They had to commit billions of dollars in guaranteed volume purchases of components to get the component manufacturers to write the drivers.

The effort required to rebuild BB10 for modern hardware at a professional standard with BlackBerry's signature level of security is substantial, and unlikely to be as good an investment as putting money into their software business.

From the screen of my trusty Z10 using the exceptional BlackBerry VKB.

[Emaderton3]

Much more likely it is their brand of Android on a vkb.

[Thud Hardsmack]

Conite, perhaps you're not aware of this...but the way an OS works is to provide a framework upon which apps can run. Therefore the "core OS" would be that underlying framework. To use a desktop analogy, you are essentially claiming that the core OS of Windows includes all its built-in apps, and that because those apps run in Windows they somehow should be considered part of Windows' source code.

Such a claim is, of course, false.

Posted via CB10

QNX core OS fits on a 1.44MB floppy. Everything is built on top. Ergo, framework. Windows is a different monster entirely.

[Thud Hardsmack]

And thanks for that Panther. That confirms that the discussion about costs really isn't the issue here--it's the belief some have that no matter what BB10 won't succeed. Some would call that bias.

Posted via CB10

It's not bias. It's reality. BB10 would run into exactly the same issue as it did years ago, only now it'll be exacerbated because the users that had it have moved on.

[app_Developer]

QNX core OS fits on a 1.44MB floppy. Everything is built on top. Ergo, framework. Windows is a different monster entirely.

Another way to think about this:

Android is to Linux as BB10 is to QNX.

The android team started with Linux and then built a LOT of stuff on top.

Likewise, the BB10 team started with QNX and then built a LOT of stuff on top. That’s why it took years to get BB10 out the door.