[texazzpete]

Unfortunately the questions most consumers ask now is:

Does it look nice?
Is it fast?
Does it have all my favorite apps?
What's the 'cool' factor.

The average consumer doesn't give a rat's arse about 'micro-kernels'. They get good battery life, great screens and great stability on an iPhone or flagship Android...plus loads more apps than WP8 and BB10 can dream of.

For both WP8 and BB10, it will be a hard, tough battle.

[mikeo007]

No, I meant no compromises for this particular microkernal Mikeo was correct

So you're implying the current QNX microkernel is perfect...the perpetual motion machine of kernels.
Careful with that pedestal, it's a long fall from the top.

[Rickroller]

You can preach all you want about how good QNX may be, but like texxazpete said, it's going to come down to how it appeals to the consumer. Let's hope it fairs better than it's ugly cousin, the PlayBook.

[THBW]

Well, I agree. Given QNX, it is best that Apple and Google just give up now. Why deal with a compromised hybrid kernal when you can have the full meal deal.

[Dapper37]

http://i1203.photobucket.com/albums/...r1/SoapBox.png

You can preach all you want about how good QNX may be, but like texxazpete said, it's going to come down to how it appeals to the consumer. Let's hope it fairs better than it's ugly cousin, the PlayBook.

Looks as though preachers face both ways. Carry on!

[GTiLeo]

The playbook is a great device. The OS on it is very capable. It got a bad rep at the beginning which has stuck with it

[blackburberry]

Hey to all those contributing to this thread thank you for one of the better threads I've read in a long time here at CB. This type of constructive, informative dialogue just made my day and reinforces my will to wait for BB10.

[James Nieves]

Nothing is perfect. But when it comes to reliability QNX is unmatched, and that, is by design. When BB10 is here we'll come back to this discussion. I urge anyone interested in seeing an outside opinion to watch this video from BNN Machine to Machine is the future of Research in Motion, cell phones, tablets all fall under this broader--wider mobile computing umbrella.

[GTiLeo]

Nothing is perfect. But when it comes to reliability QNX is unmatched, and that, is by design. When BB10 is here we'll come back to this discussion. I urge anyone interested in seeing an outside opinion to watch this video from BNN Machine to Machine is the future of Research in Motion, cell phones, tablets all fall under this broader--wider mobile computing umbrella.

I agree with the reliability and with a mobile device reliability and stability should be the number once choice. As lng as the OS is fluid and smooth that's really all the speed it need.

[James Nieves]

Unfortunately the questions most consumers ask now is:

Does it look nice?
Is it fast?
Does it have all my favorite apps?
What's the 'cool' factor.

The average consumer doesn't give a rat's arse about 'micro-kernels'. They get good battery life, great screens and great stability on an iPhone or flagship Android...plus loads more apps than WP8 and BB10 can dream of.

For both WP8 and BB10, it will be a hard, tough battle.

Which is why BB10 has been designed with a new user paradigm. If they sell it effectively they can carve out a good portion of market share. Again I hate to sound like a broken record but Heins has said they are aiming BB10 at 'BlackBerry People' these people are hyperconnected and not the average consumer. With the introduction of their new paradigm entailing Flow, Connect, Extend, Peek and Hub they have a chance to expand their dominance and reclaim the majority of enterprise within the next few years. Samsung has been desperate to try and attack small business with it's tablets and phablets, and are doing a good job thus far. But they use Authentec for VPN Security on Android, and now that company is owned by Apple. Samsung does not want to write checks to Apple. Which will only make RIM and Mobile Fusion stand out more. Does no one remember that BES is better, and cheaper than other alternatives to implement? There's a reason RIM owns this sector.

[mikeo007]

Nothing is perfect. But when it comes to reliability QNX is unmatched, and that, is by design. When BB10 is here we'll come back to this discussion. I urge anyone interested in seeing an outside opinion to watch this video from BNN Machine to Machine is the future of Research in Motion, cell phones, tablets all fall under this broader--wider mobile computing umbrella.

I agree with you about reliability, I don't think there's anything more inherently reliable out there in the consumer space. But I don't agree with the earlier statement about no compromise. There is always compromise, and this stability comes at a cost.

[anon(4018671)]

I agree with you about reliability, I don't think there's anything more inherently reliable out there in the consumer space. But I don't agree with the earlier statement about no compromise. There is always compromise, and this stability comes at a cost.

What is the cost you mention?

[Dapper37]

Which is why BB10 has been designed with a new user paradigm. If they sell it effectively they can carve out a good portion of market share. Again I hate to sound like a broken record but Heins has said they are aiming BB10 at 'BlackBerry People' these people are hyperconnected and not the average consumer. With the introduction of their new paradigm entailing Flow, Connect, Extend, Peek and Hub they have a chance to expand their dominance and reclaim the majority of enterprise within the next few years. Samsung has been desperate to try and attack small business with it's tablets and phablets, and are doing a good job thus far. But they use Authentec for VPN Security on Android, and now that company is owned by Apple. Samsung does not want to write checks to Apple. Which will only make RIM and Mobile Fusion stand out more. Does no one remember that BES is better, and cheaper than other alternatives to implement? There's a reason RIM owns this sector.

Not your average customer, correct!!
It was the Wallstreet executive types that brought BB to its hights in 2007, It will be them again that switch back to BB10, them and all the rest of the corperate world. these people will have zero issues using BB10 and learning the jestures. These are the people that do that RIM has targeted! These are the people that will stand in fornt of news cameras everyday using BB10. The trickle down effect starts once again.

[mikeo007]

What is the cost you mention?

Do a Google search or a forum search for the pros and cons of QNX or microkernels.
Here's one result that's easy to read: Segin's Blog of Rantings And Ravings: Microkernels vs. Monolitic kernels - What's The Difference?

Keep in mind that monolithic kernels are not used much in practice anymore. Almost every commercially successful OS out there is now a hybrid kernel.

[anon(4018671)]

That's fine Mike but we aren't being general here we are talking about QNX Neutrino and we already know that they have essentially overcome the issues you point to. That's why they won so many awards, the architecture and implementation are such that what you mention don't relate to them in any meaningful way. Thats why I asked about the cost and I wasn't talking about joe microkernel I mean Neutrino in particular.

[mikeo007]

That's fine Mike but we aren't being general here we are talking about QNX Neutrino and we already know that they have essentially overcome the issues you point to. That's why they won so many awards, the architecture and implementation are such that what you mention don't relate to them in any meaningful way. Thats why I asked about the cost and I wasn't talking about joe microkernel I mean Neutrino in particular.

You know, i've seen this mentioned before (possibly by you), and I've still never seen practical evidence to support it. The simple mechanics behind the microkernel architecture have an inherent performance impact. QNX (Neutrino is an OS, not a kernel BTW) may have some enhancements that increase performance, but again, I've never seen anything to prove this. This has been discussed to death in many other forums as well and there's never been a consensus because as soon as QNX is brought up, nobody has any proof one way or the other.

Maybe BB10 will provide the proof you need, but for now there's just not enough evidence to back it up.

[aragone79]

Unfortunately the questions most consumers ask now is:

Does it look nice?
Is it fast?
Does it have all my favorite apps?
What's the 'cool' factor.

The average consumer doesn't give a rat's arse about 'micro-kernels'. They get good battery life, great screens and great stability on an iPhone or flagship Android...plus loads more apps than WP8 and BB10 can dream of.

For both WP8 and BB10, it will be a hard, tough battle.

Let me answer the questions from my point of view.
Does it look nice?
Hmm, It depends on what you see or user see the BB10. In what term do you want to see it nice.

Is it fast?
As far as I know, BB10 is fast. But I don't know for somebody else.

Does it have all my favorite apps?
In what term do you mean? native or android ported apps? Right now, we just can wait and possibly many devs apps from IOS and Androids are waiting to see BB10 comes out first. Then, they will decide if they will join BB10 or not. But for me, right now, I'm satisfy with what I can installed on BB10AD. Mostly apps I need, can be installed on BB10AD.

What's the 'cool' factor.
For me, BB10 is so simple. As Heinz said before, one touch one finger, That's you can get. Just swipe all the way and peek what's new for you.

Tons of apps will make big impact to BB10. But I hope apps coming to BB10 are truly functional and not a copycat from others (as we can see at IOS and androids). I wonder if IOS apps can be ported and installed at BB10. That will be a truly cool benefit you can get from BB10. An OS platform that can all apps. Still, Native will be the main concern.

[anon(4018671)]

Mike, I don't want people making wild claims either. I think that just based on experience with the PlayBook there really isn't any "cost" that I've noticed. Perhaps there is but I'm sure there would be something we could point to to say QNX is having a problem with this... and I just haven't experienced any area as being weak. Well actually there was one. When recording 1080p video the PB used to start recording but at some point it would stop recording for a few seconds. I think this has been fixed now but I can't say one way or another if thats a OS thing memory restriction or what.

I'm sure you are looking at benchmarks but like you say they don't seem to exist. I wish I could remember where I read everything but alas...the internet, so vast lol

[mikeo007]

Mike, I don't want people making wild claims either. I think that just based on experience with the PlayBook there really isn't any "cost" that I've noticed. Perhaps there is but I'm sure there would be something we could point to to say QNX is having a problem with this... and I just haven't experienced any area as being weak. Well actually there was one. When recording 1080p video the PB used to start recording but at some point it would stop recording for a few seconds. I think this has been fixed now but I can't say one way or another if thats a OS thing memory restriction or what.

I'm sure you are looking at benchmarks but like you say they don't seem to exist. I wish I could remember where I read everything but alas...the internet, so vast lol

I don't think I'm making any "wild claims", I'm only stating the information that is publicly available.

IMO the PB is a poor example of the stability of QNX as well though. I've experienced many more crashes/freezes on the PB than I have on other tablets. Performance like you said probably hasn't been measured anywhere since other devices aren't equivalent.

Regardless, even if BB10 has all of the advantages in the world compared to competitors (increased stability, equal performance, connectivity with peripherals) it still means nothing if the execution isn't there. The kernel is just such a small part of the OS, and this is the only part of BB10 is "proven" so far.

[GTiLeo]

I don't think I'm making any "wild claims", I'm only stating the information that is publicly available.

IMO the PB is a poor example of the stability of QNX as well though. I've experienced many more crashes/freezes on the PB than I have on other tablets. Performance like you said probably hasn't been measured anywhere since other devices aren't equivalent.

Regardless, even if BB10 has all of the advantages in the world compared to competitors (increased stability, equal performance, connectivity with peripherals) it still means nothing if the execution isn't there. The kernel is just such a small part of the OS, and this is the only part of BB10 is "proven" so far.

agreed on this, but where its happened the most is wit hthe browser. AIR tends to kill the browser, making it a memory hungry application, everything else seems fine, its mainly poorly constructed apps that tend to crash or else the OS itself is pretty stable.there is also a good example with the pop corny app built for iOS and playbook, running on an iPad2 and playbook built on sililar ARM A9 chips with equal clock speed and RAM and the playbook loads 30% faster, including the app loading animation. at this point i don't think there really is a speed limitation but agreed its been a con for many years with microkernels.

[hurds]

I don't think I'm making any "wild claims", I'm only stating the information that is publicly available.

IMO the PB is a poor example of the stability of QNX as well though. I've experienced many more crashes/freezes on the PB than I have on other tablets. Performance like you said probably hasn't been measured anywhere since other devices aren't equivalent.

Regardless, even if BB10 has all of the advantages in the world compared to competitors (increased stability, equal performance, connectivity with peripherals) it still means nothing if the execution isn't there. The kernel is just such a small part of the OS, and this is the only part of BB10 is "proven" so far.

I'm not a fan of the 'google it' defence. That wouldn't fly going the other way. BB10 hasn't "proven" itself but there is no doubt QNX has, google it.

[James Nieves]

Exactly, the Cascades framework is butter smooth. The native apps and all C++ apps written there of are going to amazing. Look at Scrapbook on Playbook or Pacemaker (albeit both are actually built with an older version of Cascades BlackBerry 10 is going to be orgasmic and the smartphone world will once again see who the real leader is.

[James Nieves]

What is the cost you mention?

Ha, the cost is we can't have infinite ram or hard-drive space and are only limited to 8 active frames. That's compromise
QNX is as powerful as the hardware underneath and we all are expecting pretty great specs at launch. Of course there's compromise, but not at the kernal level. They have taken the architecture places no other microkernal has gone before (star trek?) and lest we forget the big difference is in the caching mechanism. Not only is it a superior microkernal but it's also an RTOS. It's what makes Flow, Peek, Extend, Hub and all the other intrinsic gestures on the devices able to run in parallel, while managing battery life more efficiently than hybrid kernals do. As people create viruses for Windows 8 those viruses can now also affect WP8 and because they share kernals. QNX has never seen a virus in the more than 30 years it's been on this earth, "Gooogle it" Just kidding here's the link


Heins agrees, no compromises!
We can leave the compromises to Windows 8

We wanted to make one thing really really clear Matt. And this is this product has to be of the highest quality so there is no compromise on quality. Could we have rushed it out? Probably yes. But the point is, it's a new platform for the next 10 years. We want it to be stable. We want it to be reliable. We want it to be of high quality. And in light of this, I think a delay of two months is disappointing, and the whole team is disappointed, but they will continue working hard and get it out in the first quarter and we'll get it right.

[mikeo007]

I'm not a fan of the 'google it' defence. That wouldn't fly going the other way. BB10 hasn't "proven" itself but there is no doubt QNX has, google it.

I've tried. There's no publicly available 3rd party reports and I don't feel like combing through the QNX source code.

[GTiLeo]

i found this article on intels site that was written before RIM bought QNX

http://software.intel.com/en-us/arti...t-qnx-or-linux

it really give the merits of both OSes and some of the drawbacks of each. it also shows that QNX has always been developer friendly allowing apps from any OS to be able to run on it and shows that QNX has alot of tools to help developers code apps as well as forums and staff that is willing to help the developer. i guess the current statagy about woeing developers to the platform and makign it simple and easy for them to build apps for BB10 was a QNX Systems trait brought over when RIM bought the company, which is really a great thing, and i've always stated the buy out was the best thing for both companies and both fit together like the perfect couple