1. Rooster99's Avatar
    I mean, isn't ease of change/modification supposed to be one of the key benefits of a microkernel architecture? Keep all the layers except those you absolutely need to change, in this case those dealing with direct chip communication.

    And in that case wouldn't deploying an OS using QNX as its basis (ex : BB10) one one chip, then porting it to another, be a relatively straightforward task? Not to belittle the porting effort of course. So at least in theory, releasing BB10 on current devices and moving it later to these dual core LTE chips should be (easier) than with a non-microkernel OS?

    If someone more technical than I am could let me know whether this makes sense or not I'd appreciate it. I could be completely wrong, or the chip-chip porting may still be an incredible task even with a microkernel architecture. But if I'm right, then that says the latest BB10 delay isn't caused by technical issues at all, it's purely a business decision.

    If it's purely a business decision, that's huge. It reinforces BGR's latest report that BB10 really isn't ready for prime time and the co-CEO's are lying.

    - R.
    12-22-11 01:38 PM
  2. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    It's possible that the whole LTE thing is kind of a rationalization. I'd take it with a grain of salt.

    There's a lot of good that comes from this delay, some technical, some business. In the long run, it gives BB7 a larger user-base and that isn't a bad thing.

    EDIT: And if LTE is at least PART of the rationale for the delay, then the CEOs aren't lying. Mischaracterizing a bit, maybe, but more along the lines of telling your boss your kids made you late for work when hitting the snooze button that one last time probably didn't help. There's likely a little face-saving going on here, but if there are benefits--and there are--what's the harm?
    Last edited by Thunderbuck; 12-22-11 at 01:49 PM.
    12-22-11 01:43 PM
  3. rollingrock1988's Avatar
    It's possible that the whole LTE thing is kind of a rationalization. I'd take it with a grain of salt.

    There's a lot of good that comes from this delay, some technical, some business. In the long run, it gives BB7 a larger user-base and that isn't a bad thing.
    Dude- a large user base would only be something to boast about if the phones were selling. They are not.
    12-22-11 01:48 PM
  4. chunt69's Avatar
    Dude- a large user base would only be something to boast about if the phones were selling. They are not.
    Yes they are, and will continue to do so imo- maybe not in massive numbers but enough as they they are good products.
    12-22-11 01:57 PM
  5. Rooster99's Avatar
    Sorry folks, but to get back on track, my question isn't about OS7 devices selling.

    I want to know if QNX' microkernel design would make delivering BB10 on currently available chips then porting it later to the LTE chips feasible, and how much difficulty there would be.

    Appreciate the comments, but lets keep this on track.

    Thanks - R.
    12-22-11 03:48 PM
  6. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    Sorry folks, but to get back on track, my question isn't about OS7 devices selling.

    I want to know if QNX' microkernel design would make delivering BB10 on currently available chips then porting it later to the LTE chips feasible, and how much difficulty there would be.

    Appreciate the comments, but lets keep this on track.

    Thanks - R.
    Short Answer YES, the QNX based OS would be far faster to port.

    Long Answer is Channel inventory, and ROI of development on sales of a Device made with todays tech, then in 6 months wanting to revamp it, seeing as RIM is waiting for the next generation technology, not just the next best chip, the 28nm process will probably be a 12-18 months before the next process, so they are jumping on the bandwagon at the start, WHICH is a first for them really and should be respected

    I'm sure there is more to it than JUST the chip but that is a good political answer to the delay, and a relevant one
    12-22-11 08:41 PM
  7. app_Developer's Avatar
    Short Answer YES, the QNX based OS would be far faster to port.
    "Far faster" than what? Linux has been running on ARM cores for years and has been running on Qualcomm chips in particular since there have been Qualcomm chipsets. That work has already been done by other companies.

    Of course with Linux, RIM would still have had to build the rest of the operating system like they have been doing on top of the QNX foundation. But unless the port of QNX took negative time, it's impossible for it to be faster than the zero time it takes to make Linux run on ARM.
    Last edited by app_Developer; 12-22-11 at 09:53 PM.
    12-22-11 09:49 PM
  8. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    "Far faster" than what? Linux has been running on ARM cores for years and has been running on Qualcomm chips in particular since there have been Qualcomm chipsets.
    than their previous generation core and JVM environment
    12-22-11 09:53 PM
  9. app_Developer's Avatar
    than their previous generation core and JVM environment
    I see. What was the kernel before? (or what is the kernel now I guess)
    12-22-11 10:06 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD