05-06-11 10:43 AM
51 123
tools
  1. Masahiro's Avatar
    Thanks Radius. That's the kind of answer I was looking for. What I normally end up hearing are answers like, "Because QNX is the future!", which is not a valid argument. Then there's the assumption (we still don't know for sure) that QNX for BBs will run Flash and Android apps. Those would be nice features, but not something I particularly care for. I know others are very excited for that though.
    05-03-11 06:01 PM
  2. Blacklac's Avatar
    You missed my point. A Playbook is not used in the same way as a phone is, with portability, battery life, and screen size bring limiting factors.
    Still not seeing your point then. I don't understand why it matters what device the OS is on, be it a Tablet or a future phone. Regardless, when I replied the first time, I did not fully understand the OP's question but he has further explained what he was looking for and my reply does not answer his question.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-03-11 06:06 PM
  3. berryaddictnoza's Avatar
    RIM showed today that the much maligned BB OS is surprisingly capable.

    It's interesting to compare BlackBerry 7 OS with Android. Which is more advanced? Google hasn't been able to work GPU acceleration into the Android UI, and RIM just did.

    QNX is cool and probably a good long term strategy, but what do you think QNX is going to bring to the BlackBerry now that can't be done with the current OS?

    Maybe the premise of BB OS being old, and therefore RIM is doomed, is actually wrong.
    As far as the perception that BBOS is outdated is because,I think, most people like the touchscreen AndroidOS and iOS for it's fast and simple basic functionality (getting to Facebook, ect with one touch). That being said, I think the upcoming full touchscreen BB's running 7 will appeal to the new smartphone users, with its quick navigation and especially now that it has a browser that measures up to the competition.
    If QNX truly is easier to develop apps for, I think that will be its advantage as smartphone apps are here to stay, for business and play.
    05-03-11 08:54 PM
  4. redk's Avatar
    I'm by no means an expert but from all i read so far on how the QNX operating system is build here is my take on it.

    1. QNX is a far more stable system running things in a sandbox environment witch it prevents the whole operating system from crashing if one application fails.

    2. From what we heard the current OS seems a nightmare to write apps for. QNX brings tools easier for developers to bring and port their apps over such as adobe air etc.( this is huge since blackberry seems to draw the short straw on apps.)

    3. QNX is made to function with multiple cores. The future of smartphones is heading in this direction and the current OS is just not made to fully utilize the multi cores.

    This are just some of the things i remember from different forum talks,podcast, reviews etc... i hope it helps to clarify what you are looking for.
    05-04-11 01:50 AM
  5. anon3396357's Avatar
    Hi D_March, right now not being able to store apps on the SD card is indeed a non-issue (at least for the newer devices) since most BB apps are pretty streamlined or otherwise just lackluster in the GUI department. With the new OS7 devices touting liquid graphics and a GPU to boot with, I feel that it's reasonable to expect more apps larger than a few mb coming our way. 768mb of RAM - 256mb dedicated to the GPU and 512mb to the OS + App storage basically means having the same space for app storage as the 9780.

    Also another issue is the downloading and installation of apps. While the phone does not become unusable, it becomes sluggish enough for me to put it away until it's done. I'm not an expert on this matter, but is this a BBOS limitation? Multi-tasking issue?

    Lastly, have you had certain apps forcing you to do a battery pull? Alt+RST doesn't work all the time. I was trying to use Bluetooth to connect to the DM just yesterday and my 9780 just froze at the white screen, what followed was of course the mandatory battery pull. Does this happen all the time? No. Do I want it to happen when I'm waiting for an important phone call? No. Again, maybe QNX's "sandbox" thingy will fix this, I don't know.

    I guess what I have to say is that if QNX brings more stability to the platform compared to BBOS, why settle for less? If BBOS is sufficient, why isn't the Playbook using it?
    Last edited by Derwent Graphite; 05-04-11 at 05:29 AM.
    grover5 likes this.
    05-04-11 05:26 AM
  6. Masahiro's Avatar
    If BBOS is sufficient, why isn't the Playbook using it?
    The BBOS is sufficient for a BlackBerry. The Playbook was not designed primarily as a phone or messaging device with a trackpad for navigation and hardware keyboard. It was designed as a multitasking, media-friendly, Flash enabled, full-touchscreen powerhouse with two massive batteries. It's an entirely different beast. Also, the size of the Playbook allows it to utilize a dual-core processor, something RIM has designated as a prerequisite for the QNX operating system to operate on. They also believed that a dual-core processor on a device the size of a standard smartphone wasn't feasible at the time.

    With that said, I'll be very thrilled when RIM releases QNX BlackBerrys sometime in the future (who really knows when...). However, the idea that BBOS is completely dead in the mean time, I don't agree with. I think BB7 will be more than worth the investment for the time being.
    Last edited by Masahiro; 05-04-11 at 05:46 AM.
    05-04-11 05:41 AM
  7. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    I have no need for qnx blackberry as I doubt it would work as well with a qwerty device, full touch yeah, maybe but not qwerty.
    Save it for the playbook.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-04-11 06:01 AM
  8. The_Engine's Avatar
    I have no need for qnx blackberry as I doubt it would work as well with a qwerty device, full touch yeah, maybe but not qwerty.
    Save it for the playbook.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    That is just the UI. QNX could could run under a UI like BB 4.1 or whatever you like.
    05-04-11 06:04 AM
  9. The_Engine's Avatar
    Radius gave a good explanation. Here is my thoughts on what QNX brings. Most of it is scalability.
    1. Better App development Options (Air, Flash, C, Java etc.) that BB doesn't support
    2. MultiCore Support - you can argue that you don't need multi cores, but with more complex Mobile computing, including Video Cals, which has real business implications, you will need more horse power. Doubt that BB OS could support SMP
    3. Stability - BB OS is subject to crashing and memory issues much more so that iOS, Android, or QNX. When it takes over 5 min to restart, you just can't have it crash. Yes with more memory, BBOS crashes less, but it still does lock up etc. Yes so does Android and iOS, but QNX is far superior to all in this regard


    I am sure I could list more given time, but QNX offers everything BBOS does plus far out performs it on the items above.

    Is it needed, maybe not 100%. But it adds scalability and future proofing against the mobile computing revolution that is occurring.
    Last edited by The_Engine; 05-04-11 at 06:12 AM. Reason: corrected my Engrish
    grover5 likes this.
    05-04-11 06:11 AM
  10. anon3396357's Avatar
    The BBOS is sufficient for a BlackBerry. The Playbook was not designed primarily as a phone or messaging device with a trackpad for navigation and hardware keyboard. It was designed as a multitasking, media-friendly, Flash enabled, full-touchscreen powerhouse with two massive batteries. It's an entirely different beast. Also, the size of the Playbook allows it to utilize a dual-core processor, something RIM has designated as a prerequisite for the QNX operating system to operate on. They also believed that a dual-core processor on a device the size of a standard smartphone wasn't feasible at the time.

    With that said, I'll be very thrilled when RIM releases QNX BlackBerrys sometime in the future (who really knows when...). However, the idea that BBOS is completely dead in the mean time, I don't agree with. I think BB7 will be more than worth the investment for the time being.
    If all I want in a BB is a phone/messaging device I believe Symbian is sufficient as well.

    I understand dual core CPUs as having two chips on a single die. Unless I'm wrong about smartphone processors I don't know how valid is "the size of the Playbook allows it to utilize a dual-core processor".

    When we talk about "needs" obviously it will differ from person to person. It's no less different when we talk about needing QNX on our handheld devices. If you only use your phone for phone/texting then no you don't need QNX. If you want your phone a "multitasking, media-friendly, Flash enabled, full-touchscreen powerhouse" then BBOS just doesn't cut it.

    And you basically discounted all the issues I've mentioned with the BBOS in my previous post, and you said that it is sufficient. I don't know, are you picking bones?

    Oh and btw, just because the Playbook runs QNX it does not mean it cannot be scaled to be used on a BlackBerry handheld. I suggest you do a little more reading up on QNX and its usage.
    Last edited by Derwent Graphite; 05-04-11 at 06:28 AM.
    05-04-11 06:19 AM
  11. Masahiro's Avatar
    And you basically discounted all the issues I've mentioned with the BBOS in my previous post, and you said that it is sufficient. I don't know, are you picking bones?

    Oh and btw, just because the Playbook runs QNX it does not mean it cannot be scaled to be used on a BlackBerry handheld. I suggest you do a little more reading up on QNX and its usage.
    I think you're under the impression that by "sufficient", I mean "flawless", which I don't. I know there are issues with the BBOS, like some of the things you mentioned. QNX, when implemented, will be better than the current BBOS, I'm sure. At the same time, I don't think the issues you mentioned are severe enough to label this OS as "dead" until QNX comes along. I still think it is being overhyped, given the negligible amount of information we have on it.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-04-11 06:43 AM
  12. anon3396357's Avatar
    I think you're under the impression that by "sufficient", I mean "flawless", which I don't. I know there are issues with the BBOS, like some of the things you mentioned. QNX, when implemented, will be better than the current BBOS, I'm sure. At the same time, I don't think the issues you mentioned are severe enough to label this OS as "dead" until QNX comes along. I still think it is being overhyped, given the negligible amount of information we have on it.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I don't mince my words and by sufficient I mean it in the truest sense of the word. BBOS is sufficient for BlackBerry devices to remain primarily as phone/messaging tools. Why isn't it flawless? For obvious reasons such as lock ups, spinning clocks, memory leaks, freezing screens. Can you use a BB as a phone/messaging tool when it freezes? Guess not.

    You're right to say that BBOS is not "dead". It certainly isn't and I believe I have not made any comment which implies that. Do I want QNX on it? Yes, not because I want a flashy UI or more games on it, but because I want a more reliable device. I guess that warrants a need for QNX for me.
    kbz1960 likes this.
    05-04-11 07:24 AM
  13. lnichols's Avatar
    I think it depends on what OS7 shows us. Many people, including myself, thought the reason the OS has sucked so bad compared to iOS and Android offerings, and the reason for using outdated hardware was because the OS just couldn't handle newer features and hardware. Well here comes OS7 with super hardware, great web, lots of memory and RAM, but still based on BBOS. So it would appear that RIM was just lazy with getting the BBOS updated. Anyway OS7 may still be a PITA to develop for, and if that is the case, then QNX is needed. Developers not wanting to support the platform and complaining of how difficult it is to develop for will not help the platform grow like it has for iOS and Android.
    05-04-11 09:43 AM
  14. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    BBOS users who are happy with BBOS don't need it, but RIM needs it so that their devices and software stack (OS, apps, developers tools, etc.) are more attractive to consumers these days.

    Consumer expectations have changed quite a bit in the past 4-5 years...

    Microsoft didn't need WP7, either. WM could do everything WP7 can do and more, but they had to make the same choice RIM is making now...

    RIM is trying to focus on gaining more customers, and becoming relevant in the high end consumer smartphone market. They know the people who like their products will buy them. They need to sell them to other people, too :P
    05-04-11 06:42 PM
  15. afdfirefighter77's Avatar
    I don't believe BBOS is dead. This being said, we didn't NEED OS7 or OS6, or 5....etc. I remember my 8330 being sufficient to do just about all I needed at the time and I couldn't begin to imagine what else I would need beyond that. Now I know better. The thing about life is that it is full of unknown unknowns. If you don't continue to evolve to into something more powerful, you will become stagnate and never innovate from beyond that point.

    Again...I am not saying that BBOS, particularly OS7, is dead, far from it. However QNX will put us on an exponential path rather than a liner one. I don't care about apps and all that, I have a PS3 for that. What matters is that I have a machine that will do what I want, communicate how I want, and be there for me at the end of the day. Really, the biggest thing I care about is to make the spinning clock of death to go away and never be seen again. QNX has more potential to do this faster than the current OS.
    05-05-11 07:46 PM
  16. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    We? You didn't no...

    But, the smartphone market growth is outpacing RIM's growth, so their marketshare is going down more and more as the overall market expands. In order for them to not shrink into oblivion/niche status they need to offer something compelling enough to draw in users that are going from dumb/feature phones to smartphones without those users going to Android/iOS/WebOS/WP7/whatever else.

    OS4.6 is definitely not sufficient in 2011 and even OS6 seems a bit old in the tooth compared to some other smartphone OSes. They need to innovate, and QNX is the best platform to do that.

    BBOS doesn't really have the best reputation (RIM's services is what holds them up, not the actual OS/Software on the devices), and decoupling them from BBOS by going to QNX gives them a way to draw in more users through curiosity and reinvent the blackberry user experience.

    There's nothing bad about what they're doing. They are taking a bit long to deliver, though... They keep letting competitors beat them out the gate...
    05-05-11 08:29 PM
  17. katesbb's Avatar
    Really, the biggest thing I care about is to make the spinning clock of death to go away...
    Is BBOS really that unstable for everyone?

    I've only had my 9650 for a few weeks, but I play with it constantly, including experimenting with dozens of apps, swapping from OS6 to OS5 and back... and back, lol. And the only spinning clock I see is for a few seconds when installing an app, which is to be expected. But I've never had to pull a battery, never had my BB freeze, no lag when clicking on things, never had any problems at all with BBOS really. Even my Storm2 from work has been wonderfully reliable. I really have no complaints, other than the OS6 interface being awkward on trackpad devices.
    05-05-11 08:34 PM
  18. Xopher's Avatar
    I don't think there is anything wrong with BBOS, for how quickly you can access things, and being message/communication based.

    But...

    There are things that could always be improved upon. Things like installing apps in other locations (besides internal memory) like the internal storage that currently can only hold media, and adding Flash support. It is expanding upon the limitations of the Java environment that would make the jump to QNX a good decision.

    Plus, when BBs go dual-core and LTE, that may also be out of the realm of what the current BBOS platform can handle. QNX has already shown it will handle dual-core, so it is definitely a step in the right direction for moving to newer technologies.
    05-05-11 11:46 PM
  19. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    I think Rim should build qnx devices in addition to OS6/7 devices, not replace them. Many old customers are set in their ways.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-06-11 06:30 AM
  20. howarmat's Avatar
    I think Rim should build qnx devices in addition to OS6/7 devices, not replace them. Many old customers are set in their ways.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    that is what leads to the fragmentation you have now.

    4.6-7
    5.0
    6.0
    7.0
    qnx

    RIM has to to keep people working on all of these OS still. the quicker you get everyone moving on to higher OS the more people you free up to get real work done instead of supporting people that live in the stoneage
    05-06-11 08:05 AM
  21. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    that is what leads to the fragmentation you have now.

    4.6-7
    5.0
    6.0
    7.0
    qnx

    RIM has to to keep people working on all of these OS still. the quicker you get everyone moving on to higher OS the more people you free up to get real work done instead of supporting people that live in the stoneage
    Yeah but eventually there will only be 2, BBOS and QNX

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-06-11 08:30 AM
  22. Mr One 2's Avatar
    Qnx does not mean they have to change the way we use our bb's. The way I see it, its like changing an engine in a car. You still push the gas to go and the brake to stop ect. But you have a faster more efficient motor under the hood.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-06-11 09:27 AM
  23. howarmat's Avatar
    Yeah but eventually there will only be 2, BBOS and QNX

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com


    Eventually yes but it will take awhile. The quicker you move forward the better

    Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt
    Last edited by howarmat; 05-06-11 at 10:01 AM.
    05-06-11 09:49 AM
  24. GreenKnight's Avatar
    RIM showed today that the much maligned BB OS is surprisingly capable.

    It's interesting to compare BlackBerry 7 OS with Android. Which is more advanced? Google hasn't been able to work GPU acceleration into the Android UI, and RIM just did.

    QNX is cool and probably a good long term strategy, but what do you think QNX is going to bring to the BlackBerry now that can't be done with the current OS?

    Maybe the premise of BB OS being old, and therefore RIM is doomed, is actually wrong.
    Besides how would QNX implementation look on bold form factor? QNX seems more touch screen oriented OS.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-06-11 10:24 AM
  25. anon3396357's Avatar
    Besides how would QNX implementation look on bold form factor? QNX seems more touch screen oriented OS.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    People need to start understanding that QNX is an OS, not just the UI. Having said that, it would look like how OS6 looks on Bold 9700/9780 compared to OS6 on 9800.
    05-06-11 10:42 AM
51 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD