[nomoredroid]

so....have we figured out what QNX will do over OS7??

[kbz1960]

It will bring RIM outta the sh_itter if they do it right. It's just a much better OS than the bbos. Not sure it will do things over bbos but it will do it better.

[ADGrant]

The point he is making is that QNX's GUI or GUI implementations are already touchscreen optimized/friendly. The code is easy to work with.

The PB is using a RIM developed GUI. It has nothing to do with any GUI running on any QNX based car Nav system.

[anon(1603170)]

The PB is using a RIM developed GUI. It has nothing to do with any GUI running on any QNX based car Nav system.

Mother of my f*cking god...

NOBODY gives a sh*t about anybody's car nav system, get it out of your mind already, its not the point, and has never been. You just decided to randomly poke at it and argument on it going off topic all the way.

QNX is already touchscreen intuitive, be it RIM's GUI, my GUI, your GUI, pepe's GUI, kevin's GUI. QNX works good on a car's nav system, basically, a GUI implementation of a phone, will also be good, because the OS is easy to develop on, so its easy to create a good UI.

Wanna keep going with the car nav system? or you actually want to grasp the point already?

Alright, substitute "car nav system" with "playbook".

The GUI works good on the playbook, therefore, it will be also good on a phone.

[katiepea]

Mother of my f*cking god...

NOBODY gives a sh*t about anybody's car nav system, get it out of your mind already, its not the point, and has never been. You just decided to randomly poke at it and argument on it going off topic all the way.

QNX is already touchscreen intuitive, be it RIM's GUI, my GUI, your GUI, pepe's GUI, kevin's GUI. QNX works good on a car's nav system, basically, a GUI implementation of a phone, will also be good, because the OS is easy to develop on, so its easy to create a good UI.

Wanna keep going with the car nav system? or you actually want to grasp the point already?

Alright, substitute "car nav system" with "playbook".

The GUI works good on the playbook, therefore, it will be also good on a phone.

i dunno about the OS being easy to develop for
You Win, RIM! (An Open Letter To RIM's Developer Relations)

[kris3kgt]

very insightful, good read

[anon(1603170)]

i dunno about the OS being easy to develop for
You Win, RIM! (An Open Letter To RIM's Developer Relations)

Sorry, developing apps and developing internal parts of the OS are two different things and require different tools. Not to mention that being unable to properly setup the developing tools for apps has nothing to do with the coding itself.

Either way, tools have nothing to do in here.

[anon(55900)]

I got to the top of the second page and got bored with non-answers to your question. Someone save me the boredom of reading babble, please tell me if there is a knowledgeable reply somewhere down along the thread please!

IMHO which is from complete ignorance and I admit it, a BB running on QNX could end up looking exactly like OS7. But with difference in code??

Perhaps QNX will run with less glitches but a poorly designed App will make QNX look like it is a poor OS, just like on OS5 or OS6 or OS7.

I would suppose a BB running the same operation in OS7 and QNX would run the same speed if running the same processor chip, there was a comment about a fast PB but duh, the processor chip is faster than any BB phone to date.

[ADGrant]

Mother of my f*cking god...

NOBODY gives a sh*t about anybody's car nav system, get it out of your mind already, its not the point, and has never been. You just decided to randomly poke at it and argument on it going off topic all the way.

QNX is already touchscreen intuitive, be it RIM's GUI, my GUI, your GUI, pepe's GUI, kevin's GUI. QNX works good on a car's nav system, basically, a GUI implementation of a phone, will also be good, because the OS is easy to develop on, so its easy to create a good UI.

Wanna keep going with the car nav system? or you actually want to grasp the point already?

Alright, substitute "car nav system" with "playbook".

The GUI works good on the playbook, therefore, it will be also good on a phone.

There is no point to grasp. I am not sure why anyone thought the fact that QNX is used in car nav systems was in anyway relevant to a BB phone but it is not.

As for the playbook. Yes, that is more relevant. However, we don't know what a native PIM and email client would look like yet.

[ADGrant]

I got to the top of the second page and got bored with non-answers to your question. Someone save me the boredom of reading babble, please tell me if there is a knowledgeable reply somewhere down along the thread please!

IMHO which is from complete ignorance and I admit it, a BB running on QNX could end up looking exactly like OS7. But with difference in code??

No one outside of RIM knows the answer, which is why you didn't find it in the thread.

[kbz1960]

I kind of look at it like windows 98 vs windows 7.

[Blacklatino]

I think RIM should hand out shirts that say "Our OS can run your OS"

After what's continually being posted.....about the company and the devices, ****, I would buy two.

[The_Engine]

I got to the top of the second page and got bored with non-answers to your question. Someone save me the boredom of reading babble, please tell me if there is a knowledgeable reply somewhere down along the thread please!

IMHO which is from complete ignorance and I admit it, a BB running on QNX could end up looking exactly like OS7. But with difference in code??

Perhaps QNX will run with less glitches but a poorly designed App will make QNX look like it is a poor OS, just like on OS5 or OS6 or OS7.

I would suppose a BB running the same operation in OS7 and QNX would run the same speed if running the same processor chip, there was a comment about a fast PB but duh, the processor chip is faster than any BB phone to date.

Try Post #56

As far as your question though, that may not be the case. If programmed for QNX the instruction or Server will tell QNX what Memory it needed, so the OS just executes. For BB7, the OS has to analyze the request and assign memory from what it has available. People estimate that as about 20% of CPU cycles. So the QNX method is more efficient and theoretically faster. I don't know if that would be perceivable to the end user. QNX won't deliver more speed, but a lot more stability and multi tasking ability.