In my mind comparing RIM to other tech companies that are gone is one big FAIL

Comparing RIM to any company that has failed in the past simply makes no sense for one KEY reason.

RIM just like Apple has something that only few can brag about and many others can just dream about. Devoted [if not fanatic] user base that will stand by the brand no matter what.

This is what helped Apple to get through tough times and this is something that will help Rim to go through its tough times today.

RIM creates heated conversations on the internet, some hate it with passion, some love it to death.

So please stop comparing RIM to Word Perfect, Netscape and others because RIM is different. RIM is like Apple in a way and this is why Apple fanatics hate Blackberry so much :)

[by the way I just got BB 9300 for my wife] :D It was actually funny when i got the phone because I caught myself trying to slide the screen every other second. After playing with 9300 for an hour one thing that came to my mind is that OS7 with 9900 and 9810 is night and day comparing to previous generation BB phones.

What will happen to RIM is yet to be determined. However, I believe it has a good chance to succeed if its new products are as good as what we've seen from some of the leaked information/pictures.

However, I would not compare RIM to Apple during Apple's tough times. It really was not until Apple introduced the iPod that anyone became an Apple "fanatic". Prior to this, Macs were niche products; if Apple had not introduced the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, it still would be a company making niche products, since fewer Macs have been sold in their entire lifespan than iDevices.

Originally Posted by bitek

Comparing RIM to any company that has failed in the past simply makes no sense for one KEY reason.

RIM just like Apple has something that only few can brag about and many others can just dream about. Devoted [if not fanatic] user base that will stand by the brand no matter what.

This is what helped Apple to get through tough times and this is something that will help Rim to go through its tough times today.

RIM creates heated conversations on the internet, some hate it with passion, some love it to death.

So please stop comparing RIM to Word Perfect, Netscape and others because RIM is different. RIM is like Apple in a way and this is why Apple fanatics hate Blackberry so much :)

[by the way I just got BB 9300 for my wife] :D It was actually funny when i got the phone because I caught myself trying to slide the screen every other second. After playing with 9300 for an hour one thing that came to my mind is that OS7 with 9900 and 9810 is night and day comparing to previous generation BB phones.

Pretty much what RIMM has in common with WordPerfect, Amiga, Palm, Novell, Netscape, and all the others that have blazed this exact trail.

A fanatical fan base, to the point of rabidity.

Disregard for all evidence, acceptance of managements pronouncements, some future "It's gonna be so awesome when version ___ ships and everyone sees" event that never really materializes, and huge emotional investment by a core that keeps the company from taking the steps necessary to expand the market.

Every piece of bad information is characterized by some as part of the corrupt conspiracy, and by others as "good news" via untrackable leaps of logic.

If you've been around awhile, you see that this is precisely matching the pattern.

Originally Posted by lak611

What will happen to RIM is yet to be determined. However, I believe it has a good chance to succeed if its new products are as good as what we've seen from some of the leaked information/pictures.

However, I would not compare RIM to Apple during Apple's tough times. It really was not until Apple introduced the iPod that anyone became an Apple "fanatic". Prior to this, Macs were niche products; if Apple had not introduced the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, it still would be a company making niche products, since fewer Macs have been sold in their entire lifespan than iDevices.

this is plainly not true. Apple always had loyal if not fanatical user base.

This happened when Apple was about to go out of business.

[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY[/YT]

Netscape did not fail due to lagging behind or bad management. Netscape failed since Microsoft shipped Windows with IE preloaded.

Eventually this led to antitrust lawsuit in the EU, and now European users who install Windows for the first time have to choose their browser from a list. IE is included in the list, but it is not preinstalled.

Many of the developers from Netscape now are with Mozilla, which makes the Firefox browser and Thunderbird e-mail client.

Originally Posted by bitek

Comparing RIM to any company that has failed in the past simply makes no sense for one KEY reason.

RIM just like Apple has something that only few can brag about and many others can just dream about. Devoted [if not fanatic] user base that will stand by the brand no matter what.

This is what helped Apple to get through tough times and this is something that will help Rim to go through its tough times today.
.

Eh, no... Devoted user base doesn't matter. All they're good for, is to make noise on blogs and forums. (ironically thereby actually DAMAGING the brand and their image, and seriously pissing off everybody else)

Why? Cause even devoted fans only buy hardware every couple of years. (Hey, even if EVERY member of Crackberry bought a BB every year, as unrealistic as that sounds, the yearly sales would be only about a third of RIMs quarterly sales.)

So fans don't matter. A niche does. What got Apple through its tough times, we're their niche in education and graphic design/DTP. RIM used to have a niche in government and the enterprise, but that's where the comparison with Apple ends, since RIM is losing their niche rapidly. It's losing it fast in Government, and has already lost it in the corporate world. According to the latest figures from Gartner, the enterprise market is split in roughly three ways between Apple, Android and Blackberry.

According to other analysts, Apple has already surpassed RIM in enterprise adoption and use.

That's why RIM is no Apple, and is in a dangerous place right now.

(Besides the fact that Apple and RIM comparisons are usually pretty dumb and meaningless)

Originally Posted by lak611

Netscape did not fail due to lagging behind. Netscape failed since Microsoft shipped Windows with IE preloaded.

Eventually this led to antitrust lawsuit in the EU, and now European users who install Windows for the first time have to choose their browser from a list. IE is included in the list, but it is not preinstalled.

In reality, it was Microsoft that almost failed because Gates had dismissed the power of the WWW until it was almost too late. He then used the dominance of Windows on the corporate desktop to bundle IE and squeeze out Netscape Navigator. The U.S. and EU antitirust lawsuits proved that.

Another reason why the comparison just doesn't make sense, is because the market situations for Apple and for RIM are so different.

It's like comparing a scooter manufacturer with an auto company, and claiming makes perfect sense since both products involve an engine...

But the PC market in the 90ies were nowhere near as dynamic as the mobile market is today. There never was competition between 3-5 different CPU choices or as many serious manufacturers competing with each other, or as much choice in software and OS for that matter.

Back then it was just MS and Intel versus tiny Apple and a couple of clone CPU manufacturers.

There's just no comparison..,

Originally Posted by Notataloss

In reality, it was Microsoft that almost failed because Gates had dismissed the power of the WWW until it was almost too late. He then used the dominance of Windows on the corporate desktop to bundle IE and squeeze out Netscape Navigator. The U.S. and EU antitirust lawsuits proved that.

The OP also mentions Novell. Novell failed due to Microsoft Office and Windows NT Server.

There was just recently a lawsuit that ended in a mistrial. Novell sued Microsoft claiming that essential Windows 95 code was withheld after it had been promised, and then Novell could not get WordPerfect to run properly on Win95, thus leading to the big downhill decline.

Originally Posted by CrackedBarry

Eh, no... Devoted user base doesn't matter. All they're good for, is to make noise on blogs and forums. (ironically thereby actually DAMAGING the brand and their image, and seriously pissing off everybody else)

Why? Cause even devoted fans only buy hardware every couple of years. (Hey, even if EVERY member of Crackberry bought a BB every year, as unrealistic as that sounds, the yearly sales would be only about a third of RIMs quarterly sales.)

So fans don't matter. A niche does. What got Apple through its tough times, we're their niche in education and graphic design/DTP. RIM used to have a niche in government and the enterprise, but that's where the comparison with Apple ends, since RIM is losing their niche rapidly. It's losing it fast in Government, and has already lost it in the corporate world. According to the latest figures from Gartner, the enterprise market is split in roughly three ways between Apple, Android and Blackberry.

According to other analysts, Apple has already surpassed RIM in enterprise adoption and use.

That's why RIM is no Apple, and is in a dangerous place right now.

(Besides the fact that Apple and RIM comparisons are usually pretty dumb and meaningless)

One might suggest that, at its lowest, Apple was even losing its niche in education. Graphic design/desktop publising was Apple's firewall in the enterprise. Regardless of whether an enterprise was all Windows, Lotus Notes, Novell, etc, there were always a few MACs around to do the sales presentations and materials.

RIM's firewall in the enterprise appears to e-mail and security.

The only thing that RIM has in common with most other once successful organizations that failed (and many that have not) is the failure to recognize impending threats to their dominant market position. Some have failed, which are the ones constantly being compared to RIM; but there are many more that have survived. IBM is one that comes to mind. GM, for all we may loathe about how they did it, is back from death's doorstep. Successful organizations need to be looked at as much as the not-so-successful ones, as parallels can be drawn to both. RIM took a huge gamble embarking down the QNX path, and that's basically going to be what either saves them or sinks them. But the final chapter is far from written.

Originally Posted by bitek

this is plainly not true. Apple always had loyal if not fanatical user base.

This "fanatical user base" did not allow Apple to remain profitable in the late 90s.

Originally Posted by Notataloss

In reality, it was Microsoft that almost failed because Gates had dismissed the power of the WWW until it was almost too late. He then used the dominance of Windows on the corporate desktop to bundle IE and squeeze out Netscape Navigator. The U.S. and EU antitirust lawsuits proved that.

true to extent. microsoft was far, far away from going down.

Originally Posted by lak611

The OP also mentions Novell. Novell failed due to Microsoft Office and Windows NT Server.

There was just recently a lawsuit that ended in a mistrial. Novell sued Microsoft claiming that essential Windows 95 code was withheld after it had been promised, and then Novell could not get WordPerfect to run properly on Win95, thus leading to the big downhill decline.

The jury was 11-1 in favor of Novell. Even if Novell won, it gets less than $2BB. How much has Microsoft made from Office since the introduction of WIN95 and the effective marginalization of all competing software?

Originally Posted by Notataloss

In reality, it was Microsoft that almost failed because Gates had dismissed the power of the WWW until it was almost too late. He then used the dominance of Windows on the corporate desktop to bundle IE and squeeze out Netscape Navigator. The U.S. and EU antitirust lawsuits proved that.

Here's Gates' Internet Tidal Wave memo.

Originally Posted by Palmless

WordPerfect, Amiga, Palm, Novell, Netscape, and all the others that have blazed this exact trail.

1. Microsoft killed WordPerfect with money
2. Amiga [i had two Amigas] never introduced any significant improvement over Amiga 500. PC graphics and openness were leaps and bounds over Amiga.
3. Novel i am not sure what killed it to be honest
4. Netscape was killed by Microsoft and its illegal practices. Netscape had to charge money for its products. Microsoft was giving explorer away for free and it included the browser in its os.

RIM has way much more fighting spirit over any of above mentioned companies. RIM has improved its products [OS7 touch is so much nicer than OS6 or OS5], RIM works on totally new design that is not hold back by limitations of previous generation os.
This must be extremely difficult to do and it takes a lot, lot time. Just look at Microsoft and Windows. How long did it take Microsoft to truly get rid of DOS. Windows 3.1, 95, 98, 98 Se and finally Vista did it.

Originally Posted by bitek

Click to view quoted video

One thing that I can say about Steve Job. Love him or hate him but he was a great speaker.

Originally Posted by Notataloss

The jury was 11-1 in favor of Novell. Even if Novell won, it gets less than $2BB. How much has Microsoft made from Office since the introduction of WIN95 and the effective marginalization of all competing software?

That's true.

Novell also lost the server market.

From Wikipedia:

Strategic mistakes

Novell's strategy with NetWare 286 2.x and 3.x proved very successful; before the arrival of Windows NT Server, Novell claimed 90% of the market for PC based servers.

While the design of NetWare 3.x and later involved a DOS partition to load NetWare server files, this feature became a liability as new users preferred the Windows graphical interface to learning DOS commands necessary to build and control a NetWare server. Novell could have eliminated this technical liability by retaining the design of NetWare 286, which installed the server file into a Novell partition and allowed the server to boot from the Novell partition without creating a bootable DOS partition. Novell finally added support for this in a Support Pack for NetWare 6.5.

As Novell used IPX/SPX instead of TCP/IP, they were poorly positioned to take advantage of the Internet in 1995. This resulted in Novell servers being bypassed for routing and Internet access in favor of hardware routers, Unix-based operating systems such as FreeBSD, and SOCKS and HTTP Proxy Servers on Windows and other operating systems.

Originally Posted by bitek

Just look at Microsoft and Windows. How long did it take Microsoft to truly get rid of DOS. Windows 3.1, 95, 98, 98 Se and finally Vista did it.

DOS was gone in Windows 2000. All versions of Windows since 2000 are NT based.

Originally Posted by bitek

3. Novel i am not sure what killed it to be honest

Novell pulled an almost perfect RIMM. Niche market, scoffed at progress, geographic and mental isolation, "old guard" fanatics who fought against progress, mismanagement, missed out on market growth, bragged about unit sales not dollars, bragged about third-world as they lost the first-world, thought government and Fortune lock-in would save them, etc.

They didn't execute as badly as RIMM, and they didn't come CLOSE on delusional management statements, but otherwise... eerily similar.

Originally Posted by Palmless

Novell pulled an almost perfect RIMM. Niche market, scoffed at progress, geographic and mental isolation, "old guard" fanatics who fought against progress, mismanagement, missed out on market growth, bragged about unit sales not dollars, bragged about third-world as they lost the first-world, thought government and Fortune lock-in would save them, etc.

They didn't execute as badly as RIMM, and they didn't come CLOSE on delusional management statements, but otherwise... eerily similar.

Gates' memo also had a lot to do with Microsoft delivering in the server market. Novell failed to adapt, and Windows NT Server became predominant.

Originally Posted by Palmless

Novell pulled an almost perfect RIMM. Niche market, scoffed at progress, geographic and mental isolation, "old guard" fanatics who fought against progress, mismanagement, missed out on market growth, bragged about unit sales not dollars, bragged about third-world as they lost the first-world, thought government and Fortune lock-in would save them, etc.

They didn't execute as badly as RIMM, and they didn't come CLOSE on delusional management statements, but otherwise... eerily similar.

Yet RIM still lives and breathes. Where do you come up with such nonsense.

Originally Posted by sleepngbear

Yet RIM still lives and breathes. Where do you come up with such nonsense.

Golly, I didn't say it was OVER! Just that they are tracking perfectly with the path failed companies take.

For all we know, Thor was kidding when he made his "Stay the course!" speech and he's going to make radical changes.

Free thoughts ...
When you drive a company, and you want it to expand and live long-term, you have to make strategic choices that cannot be thrown within a year or two. When your strategic "vision" fails, you need a solid position. This position is about the cash you have in your pocket, and the capability to build a new one before you run out of it.

apple is an exception to that schema; its position was greatly improved by S.J himself, his power to convince (or destroy) the most vindicative opponent (see my signature), and keep the shareholders waiting for a bright future, with a clever and innovative overall perception of what devices would be. [this is "in very short", of course]

RIM position is there : a vision fail, cash still available, gaining consumers while loosing market shares and about to unveil what is today a "bit by bit" assembly and should turn into a fantastic vertical organization ("new vision"), from servers to pocket devices and more.

There are similitudes ... but similitudes only.

Originally Posted by lak611

Here's Gates' Internet Tidal Wave memo.

I excerpted here the basis for my statement that Netscape could have doomed MS.

A new competitor �born� on the Internet is Netscape. Their browser is dominant, with 70% usage share, allowing them to determine which network extensions will catch on. They are pursuing a multi-platform strategy where they move the key API into the client to commoditize the underlying operating system.

MS's flagship OS at the time, WIN 95, was still just DOS with a GUI. People at MS comforted themselves with the mantra "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run." If Netscape had succeeded in "commotiz[ing] the operating system" before Gates turned the ship on the Internet tidal wave, there might not have even been a Windows 98.

MS is still bedeviled with the challenge to the sale of its key software. What is Office 365 but the MS response to cloud computing?