[DrBoomBotz]

Tell TCL that's what you'd like. If TCL is rolling out PALM it is clear they know people might be willing to go outside the duopoly sandbox. Tell them you'll like to see them bring back BBOS10.

If tcl is rolling out palmos then I would be slightly less skeptical. Is it?

[Troy Tiscareno]

Tell TCL that's what you'd like. If TCL is rolling out PALM it is clear they know people might be willing to go outside the duopoly sandbox. Tell them you'll like to see them bring back BBOS10.

TCL has been talking about making a Palm-branded phone, but it wouldn't be running PalmOS or WebOS - it would be an Android phone with the Palm logo on it, not too different from current BB phones. Though, maybe it will come with a resistive B&W screen and a tiny stylus, and accept Graffiti input... Hahahaha.

[bobshine]

SAF funded the attention to detail and operational quality BB had baked into bbos UI and hardware. SAF that SOME of us would happily pay to this day and beyond... Just to continue experiencing the love baked into so many "little moments of delight". Time and effort that simply hasn't been invested into a handset platform to better effect since 9900, imo. No one can afford to without SAF paying the way. Which is why it was SOooo stupid to abandon the UI experience SAF had already paid for!!

UI experience that STILL lives! I'm typing this on my 7 year old 9930! Perfectly grateful for the opportunity! How many replies to this thread have been typed on 7 year old iOS or droids?

Looking at the selection of "modern", non-SAF funded handsets on my desk, 9900 is still the fastest, and most precise, typing appliance made since 2011. Where's the rationale for abandoning features I value most in exchange for features I value least?

As has been pointed out SO many times,.. Resurrecting bbos itself boarders on impossible. Learning countless UI "little moments of delight" from still living 9900 IS still possible. Till 1/1/20, at most...

Doing this on a 5 years old iPad Mini and it’s much much more evolved than the 9900. Plus the iPad mini is still supported and can run the latest suites from Office without any lag.

The 9900 was a great device. But BBOS was a dated OS with lots of restrictions. The proof is that it wasn’t able to evolve the OS to adapt to today’s need.

Your needs may be basic typing. Like some people just need a flip phone.

But today’s mobile workforce need a desktop in their hands that can run the latest CRM and edit the most complexe Word or Excel documents.

BB10 was supposed to be their answer, but unfortunately it failed.

[idssteve]

Doing this on a 5 years old iPad Mini and it’s much much more evolved than the 9900. Plus the iPad mini is still supported and can run the latest suites from Office without any lag.

The 9900 was a great device. But BBOS was a dated OS with lots of restrictions. The proof is that it wasn’t able to evolve the OS to adapt to today’s need.

Your needs may be basic typing. Like some people just need a flip phone.

But today’s mobile workforce need a desktop in their hands that can run the latest CRM and edit the most complexe Word or Excel documents.

BB10 was supposed to be their answer, but unfortunately it failed.

‎
Haha, if you are editing as many spreadsheets on your iPad slab as I did on my 9900 today (270+ cells), you have my dearest sympathies. And my deepest respect for your patience and finger articulation. Lol.

9900 happens to be a spreadsheet editing beast. Despite BBOS' processing and memory management handicaps. Simply by virtue of the refined UI. Too many confuse UI with OS. BBOS was a miserably limited OS. Its UI, however, enjoyed loving refinement in spite of those memory management, etc limitations. Possibly because of those limitations? ‎
‎
BBOS' supremely refined UI experience, collaboratively interfaced with superb hardware features like compactness, toolbelt, convenience keys, ... a most exquisite PKB !!... etc is what BB10 tragically abandoned. BB10 D2G can't even insert rows into spreadsheets! Sequestering BB10 devs from BBOS' already-paid-for UI experience represented catastrophic stupidity on Mike's part. Imo. Little surprise BB10 failed. imo.
‎
Congratulations on your 5 year old iPad. (it's still not 7, tho. Lol. ) No one is saying iPad or iPhone or even BB10 aren't impressively capable devices. The relevant question, imo, is how much better might those devices perform some essential tasks if fitted with an exquisite PKB & toolbelt interfaced with countless "little moments of delight" provided by truly refined UI... ??? Why did such powerful platforms abandon such simple "delights"? ?? $$ to dev?? Lol.
‎

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

If tcl is rolling out palmos then I would be slightly less skeptical. Is it?

The device in the FCC filings is running Android 8.1.... And TCL buying of the Palm brand didn't include WebOS as it had already been sold off to LG.

[DrBoomBotz]

The device in the FCC filings is running Android 8.1.... And TCL buying of the Palm brand didn't include WebOS as it had already been sold off to LG.

Much ado about nothing and my estimation of the claimant is adjusted accordingly.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Much ado about nothing and my estimation of the claimant is adjusted accordingly.

Palm revival... no. I kinda doubt a keyboard or much in the way of quality, if they dropped 5G WiFi what else will they drop? Might be something they or one of their MVNOs offers as only a prepaid option or disposable $50 phone.

But it would be cool if it were some sorta Palm Slider with good specs and a stylus (like the NOTE's). Along with a customized Launcher that used Palm's gestures and Cards.

[YesAndNo]

Is there any way they could go back to the Blackberry OS which is so much better than Android but still keep the Android Play Store?

Indeed the BB10 OS is the best and I wish it too...

[DrBoomBotz]

Bbos != bb10

[idssteve]

BBOS ≠ BB10 !!

BBOS UI > BB10 UI imo.

[bobshine]

Doing this on a 5 years old iPad Mini and it’s much much more evolved than the 9900. Plus the iPad mini is still supported and can run the latest suites from Office without any lag.

The 9900 was a great device. But BBOS was a dated OS with lots of restrictions. The proof is that it wasn’t able to evolve the OS to adapt to today’s need.

Your needs may be basic typing. Like some people just need a flip phone.

But today’s mobile workforce need a desktop in their hands that can run the latest CRM and edit the most complexe Word or Excel documents.

BB10 was supposed to be their answer, but unfortunately it failed.

Dont get me wrong: the tool belt does help a lot with editing texts and spreadsheet.

But for me, a good device is a balance of features such as good support over a reasonable period of time (I don’t want to buy devices every couple of years), ease of use, up to date features (yeah BBOS can edit spreadsheets but it’s a pain to collaborate), and fluidity.

And I understand your 9900 is still working today... my Motorola Star Tac still works today! But there’s a difference between working and fully functional with up to date features!

[bb10adopter111]

Buy a BB10 device. Then search endlessly for apps that will work on Android runtime 4.3 that won't crash when trying to use them on your BB10 device

Or...buy a BB10 device and use it for what it does really, really well, which is pretty much what BBOS did really, really well.

If one wants apps, it's better to buy an Android or iOS. Buy BB10 for email, calendar, SMS, voice, and for spraying downloaded (as opposed to streaming) media.

Posted with my trusty Z10

[Asvertus]

The EU is not the world.

And the USA isn't too.



Posted from my Z30 (10.3.2.2876) LoveBB10Apps - LoveBB10

[Chuck Finley69]

And the USA isn't too.



Posted from my Z30 (10.3.2.2876) LoveBB10Apps - LoveBB10

In the context of the entire quote, what does that have to do with anything? From an economic and business standpoint, USA is considered a larger nation market but that wasn’t point of Troy’s comment. EU countries at one time, had companies that were responsible for the largest share mobile OS from Nokia or Alcatel back in the day.

[idssteve]

Dont get me wrong: the tool belt does help a lot with editing texts and spreadsheet.
‎
But for me, a good device is a balance of features such as good support over a reasonable period of time (I don’t want to buy devices every couple of years), ease of use, up to date features (yeah BBOS can edit spreadsheets but it’s a pain to collaborate), and fluidity.
‎
And I understand your 9900 is still working today... my Motorola Star Tac still works today! But there’s a difference between working and fully functional with up to date features!

‎
‎
Well, good luck with typing, spreadsheet editing, email, etc on a Startac. Lol. Did that thing even have gps? Lol. ‎
‎‎
"Fully functional" is a matter of use case priorities. Some of us, including our clients, prioritize real time typing communications proficiency over CRM apps. Your use case obviously prefers CRM collaboration rather than real time contact. No two use cases are identical. Some of us might argue that loss of PKB, toolbelt, convenience keys, swappable batteries, etc, etc unacceptably crippled overall "functionality" for our use case. Daily throughput, and client satisfaction, suffers qualitatively each, and every, time we've attempted slabs, for example. What are we supposed to do? Simply "accept" loss of quantified functionality that we value in exchange for dysfunction that we don't value? Where's the rationality in that? Considering the power packed into "modern" handsets, why must ANY of us be forced to exchange features for "features"? Why must it be "either/or"? ‎ ‎
‎
My question, and possibly OP's "real" question, is what is there about compact form, toolbelt/trackpad, pkb, convenience keys, etc, all coordinated thru a maturely refined UI, that makes those features inherently incompatible with "CRM collaboration" and/or "up to date features"...?? What aspects of 9900's feature set preclude its modern relevance? ‎
‎
Should the fact that a spreadsheet cell content is selected by trackpad and edited by PKB alter that spreadsheet's compatibility in any way? ‎
‎
Yes, I get that BBOS was incapable of adequate memory support, etc, BUT, if its efficiently evolved UI experience worked so efficiently on pathetically incapable BBOS and associated hardware, WHY can't powerfully modern OS & hardware specs accommodate some of those features? Features that really were great ideas and could add so much to "modern" handset experience, imo. ??? ‎
‎
Thanks to rather unique SAF oriented business model, RIM pumped a LOT of "love" into their PKB/trackpad UI that simply wouldn't be justified under other models. "Love" that ‎MIGHT afford TCL/BBMo competitiv‎e niche differentiation, should they ‎a‎v‎ail themselves of an opportunity to peek into demonstrated experience for a glimpse of a potential future. ‎.

Again, it sounds like they have taken a peek. Problem is, Google hasn't. And has no interest in doing ANYthing that might reduce user screen time. Screen time is $$ in Google's business model... lol. Here we are. Lol.
‎

[Chuck Finley69]

‎
‎
Well, good luck with typing, spreadsheet editing, email, etc on a Startac. Lol. Did that thing even have gps? Lol. ‎
‎‎
"Fully functional" is a matter of use case priorities. Some of us, including our clients, prioritize real time typing communications proficiency over CRM apps. Your use case obviously prefers CRM collaboration rather than real time contact. No two use cases are identical. Some of us might argue that loss of PKB, toolbelt, convenience keys, swappable batteries, etc, etc unacceptably crippled overall "functionality" for our use case. Daily throughput, and client satisfaction, suffers qualitatively each, and every, time we've attempted slabs, for example. What are we supposed to do? Simply "accept" loss of quantified functionality that we value in exchange for dysfunction that we don't value? Where's the rationality in that? Considering the power packed into "modern" handsets, why must ANY of us be forced to exchange features for "features"? Why must it be "either/or"? ‎ ‎
‎
My question, and possibly OP's "real" question, is what is there about compact form, toolbelt/trackpad, pkb, convenience keys, etc, all coordinated thru a maturely refined UI, that makes those features inherently incompatible with "CRM collaboration" and/or "up to date features"...?? What aspects of 9900's feature set preclude its modern relevance? ‎
‎
Should the fact that a spreadsheet cell content is selected by trackpad and edited by PKB alter that spreadsheet's compatibility in any way? ‎
‎
Yes, I get that BBOS was incapable of adequate memory support, etc, BUT, if its efficiently evolved UI experience worked so efficiently on pathetically incapable BBOS and associated hardware, WHY can't powerfully modern OS & hardware specs accommodate some of those features? Features that really were great ideas and could add so much to "modern" handset experience, imo. ??? ‎
‎
Thanks to rather unique SAF oriented business model, RIM pumped a LOT of "love" into their PKB/trackpad UI that simply wouldn't be justified under other models. "Love" that ‎MIGHT afford TCL/BBMo competitiv‎e niche differentiation, should they ‎a‎v‎ail themselves of an opportunity to peek into demonstrated experience for a glimpse of a potential future. ‎.

Again, it sounds like they have taken a peek. Problem is, Google hasn't. And has no interest in doing ANYthing that might reduce user screen time. Screen time is $$ in Google's business model... lol. Here we are. Lol.
‎

SAF allowed BB to pump love into 9900 PKB devices within hardware limitations of time with user base of time. Problem is that your specific user base is just that niche. Your fellow users of 2003-2013 have been siphoned off and have reprioritized their device and usage preferences. I relied on BB device and laptop. Now it’s BBAndroid KEYone, iPad and laptop. Others have moved from device production to media consumption on single device.

The carriers are definitely targeting data consumption. Selling data is far more profitable than SAF and keeps profits in their sandbox. This current model discourages even current niche products like KEYone and Key2 since even they’re not designed as much for consumption and because lower selling prices mean lower profits on each device sold. Carriers know that average consumer only buys one device so maximize that selling price.

[idssteve]

SAF allowed BB to pump love into 9900 PKB devices within hardware limitations of time with user base of time. Problem is that your specific user base is just that niche. Your fellow users of 2003-2013 have been siphoned off and have reprioritized their device and usage preferences. I relied on BB device and laptop. Now it’s BBAndroid KEYone, iPad and laptop. Others have moved from device production to media consumption on single device.

The carriers are definitely targeting data consumption. Selling data is far more profitable than SAF and keeps profits in their sandbox. This current model discourages even current niche products like KEYone and Key2 since even they’re not designed as much for consumption and because lower selling prices mean lower profits on each device sold. Carriers know that average consumer only buys one device so maximize that selling price.

Spot on analysis, imo. Sitting here typing on 9900 while reading on D60 actually illustrates how little "technology" has truly advanced since 2011. Mostly re-prioritized, imo. Lol.

The engineer in me instinctively seeks to expand capability thru technology when ever possible. Win-win. Zero sum compromises represent failure to apply available technology, imo. The only thing old fashioned in my left hand is refusal to "accept" underachievement with pride. Lol.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

The carriers are definitely targeting data consumption. Selling data is far more profitable than SAF and keeps profits in their sandbox. This current model discourages even current niche products like KEYone and Key2 since even they’re not designed as much for consumption and because lower selling prices mean lower profits on each device sold. Carriers know that average consumer only buys one device so maximize that selling price.

Not sure I agree with all of that.... yes carriers sell data. But with most here in the US moving to some sort of unlimited plan (but yes still limited), not sure about their selling more data. But consumption is a big thing... in their plans to attract or keep customers. T-Mobile has been very successful with Netflix, Sprint just added Hulu and AT&T is clearly working Directv into their wireless business - Verizon is floundering in this area.

Pricing... I really don't know how much of a carrier's business is made on hardware. Is it a lot of their profits, or a lost leader for "Plans". Sure some customers do pay full price, but how many take advantage of BOGO offers or other discounts on the current flagships? And clearly all carrier's offer lower cost devices - today refurbished phones are even a regular part of the line up for most.

I think the unpopular form factor, poor KEYone sales (they have their own data), and BBMo not being a "player" had more to do with US Carrier's not picking up the KEY2 than the price point did.

But in the end... we are way off track again. Nothing is bringing back BB10.

[bobshine]

‎
‎
Well, good luck with typing, spreadsheet editing, email, etc on a Startac. Lol. Did that thing even have gps? Lol. ‎
‎‎
"Fully functional" is a matter of use case priorities. Some of us, including our clients, prioritize real time typing communications proficiency over CRM apps. Your use case obviously prefers CRM collaboration rather than real time contact. No two use cases are identical. Some of us might argue that loss of PKB, toolbelt, convenience keys, swappable batteries, etc, etc unacceptably crippled overall "functionality" for our use case. Daily throughput, and client satisfaction, suffers qualitatively each, and every, time we've attempted slabs, for example. What are we supposed to do? Simply "accept" loss of quantified functionality that we value in exchange for dysfunction that we don't value? Where's the rationality in that? Considering the power packed into "modern" handsets, why must ANY of us be forced to exchange features for "features"? Why must it be "either/or"? ‎ ‎
‎
My question, and possibly OP's "real" question, is what is there about compact form, toolbelt/trackpad, pkb, convenience keys, etc, all coordinated thru a maturely refined UI, that makes those features inherently incompatible with "CRM collaboration" and/or "up to date features"...?? What aspects of 9900's feature set preclude its modern relevance? ‎
‎
Should the fact that a spreadsheet cell content is selected by trackpad and edited by PKB alter that spreadsheet's compatibility in any way? ‎
‎
Yes, I get that BBOS was incapable of adequate memory support, etc, BUT, if its efficiently evolved UI experience worked so efficiently on pathetically incapable BBOS and associated hardware, WHY can't powerfully modern OS & hardware specs accommodate some of those features? Features that really were great ideas and could add so much to "modern" handset experience, imo. ??? ‎
‎
Thanks to rather unique SAF oriented business model, RIM pumped a LOT of "love" into their PKB/trackpad UI that simply wouldn't be justified under other models. "Love" that ‎MIGHT afford TCL/BBMo competitiv‎e niche differentiation, should they ‎a‎v‎ail themselves of an opportunity to peek into demonstrated experience for a glimpse of a potential future. ‎.

Again, it sounds like they have taken a peek. Problem is, Google hasn't. And has no interest in doing ANYthing that might reduce user screen time. Screen time is $$ in Google's business model... lol. Here we are. Lol.
‎

Well they did try to bring BBOS experience to BB10 but it was incomplete at best.

Lots of the stuff was missing, like BES and BIS, profiles, bedside mode, tool belt (should had launch alongside a true all screen device).

Lots of competitions, including my employer at that time were scratching their heads: need to install a new server alongside the old BBOS server? Overly complexe

And having a segregation on the phone between work and personal is interesting but people like integration.

[idssteve]

Well they did try to bring BBOS experience to BB10 but it was incomplete at best.

Lots of the stuff was missing, like BES and BIS, profiles, bedside mode, tool belt (should had launch alongside a true all screen device).

Lots of competitions, including my employer at that time were scratching their heads: need to install a new server alongside the old BBOS server? Overly complexe

And having a segregation on the phone between work and personal is interesting but people like integration.

Well, trusting fools like myself assumed they SHOULD "bring BBOS experience to BB10" but, calling the migration "incomplete" is extremely generous. Lol. My company's first week with Z10 left us double checking if we'd been provided some "slightly misspelled counterfeit" product. Other than the name, it was very difficult to say Z10 and 9900 were made by the same company... or even on the same planet! Lol. I'd lead the charge for my company into the Z. Foolishly confident BB had learned their lesson about half baked products with the Storm and taken the extra year+ delay to "make it right" this time !!! Ug!!!

The Q proved little better. In fact, after 9 months of suffering Z, I got a Q. Foolishly assuming RIM couldn't possibly screw up the 9900's successor. They SURELY knew how to do PKB and toolbelt! Imagine my utter shock to pick Q up the first time and find NO TOOLBELT!!!! UG!!!! Fool me twice, shame on ME!!! Lol.

And that was just the start of the long, long list of features RIM had forgotten! Coworkers, and I, openly questioned in these forums if the BB10 devs had ever heard of 9900? It was painfully obvious BB10 devs had never used a 9900.

Years later, we'd read "Losing the Signal" and learn that Mike had, indeed, sequestered BB10 devs from BBOS exposure. In pursuit of a "fresh start".?? Reportedly because of a silly book he'd read. Lol.

BB1.0 wasn't just a new OS that was built on next to no existing experience, it represented a new platform! Since when did tiny RIM ever enjoy resources to breath life into a completely new, and inexperienced, platform? They simply didn't. And here they are.

Many years of hard won, hands on, experience evolved into BBOS' countless UI "little moments of delight". Experience Mike tragically erased. Experience that simply can't be reassembled. Certainly not by resurrecting BBOS nor BB1.0. Sadly..

Those countless "little moments of delight" ARE, however, yet archived in still functioning 9900s. ANYONE considering marketing a PKB device would be smart to get their hands on one and let it demonstrate how efficiently compact PKB CAN be done! That's about as close as we'll ever get to resurrecting legacy features. Time is limited! That living archive dies 1/1/20... lol.

[tegar ramadhanu kariadinata]

im still on blackberry10 passport RED lovers

 Passport RED Edition 10.3.32163

[Digital_Islandboy]

Is PUNKT > http://www.PUNKT.CH/ < using? (or perhaps licensing?) BlackBerry 7? or BlackBerry 10????