[mathking606]

I wonder sometimes why QNX does not produce much revenue for BB and why it seems like the amount of revenue that they do produce has not increased very much since they were acquired by BB. I find this weird since all of these press releases about the QNX car platform have been released detailing their worldwide distribution partnerships. I feel that if they were selling the license for 2-5 dollars per car and the fact that they state their platform is already being used in 60 percent of cars on dealership lots today that they would easily be bringing in a few hundred million dollars for BB. As well the fact that BB and QNX just introduced the technology for OTA updates for cars running the QNX platform which could also be charged for.

Anyway it would be great if you could give your thoughts on this(maybe help clarify it for me)

[kfh227]

How many cars do you think sell each year?

Cars sold time 3.5 answers your own question.


Posted via CB10

[Rui Jorge]

I read this article Last time, he say that
QNX make about 6.8 billion dollars every years, but i dont understand, why this is not in BlackBerry s results...?!

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/04/...rols-your-car/

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

QNX isn't "the software in cars", it's the KERNEL that the software in cars is built on. It's the foundation, but it isn't the whole building. Foundations are important, no doubt about it, but the car companies have to add on all the features, the drivers for the specific hardware, and build a UI to allow the user to interact with it. Again, using a building metaphor, as important as a foundation is to a home, you can't just poor a slab of cement and start moving your stuff in; you still have to build walls, a roof, add electrical and plumbing, appliances, cabinets, paint and finish, and THEN you can move in and live there.

To put it another way, when you buy a version of Windows, you aren't just getting KERNEL.EXE, you are getting an entire OS, but QNX is just the kernel and probably some libraries, it isn't a finished product, because the end product needs to be customized for the task at hand.

So, I think the confusion comes from the fact that people are misunderstanding what QNX is and overestimating its value in comparison to the value of the entire vehicle OS/interface.

Before BB bought QNX, it's yearly revenues were about $40M a year. BB paid five times that, or $200M, to acquire QNX, but I doubt that revenues for it have gone up significantly, and $40M is a drop in the bucket for a company the size of BB.

[Troy Tiscareno]

I read this article Last time, he say that
QNX make about 6.8 billion dollars every years, but i dont understand, why this is not in BlackBerry s results...?!

QNX: The little-known company that controls your car - Fortune Tech

Posted via CB10

No, the article stated that car manufacturers have spent $6.8 B on car infotainment systems in 2013. That figure includes licensing QNX, but it also includes licensing lots and lots of other software and patents, development of the car's actual operating system and UI (which are NOT QNX; QNX is just the kernel for the OS), plus, most significantly, all of the hardware that's actually installed in the cars. QNX is a tiny percentage of that overall expense.

[mathking606]

So what about the new OTA feature BB just announced for car platforms. I'm guessing that they could charge a nice fee for that as it goes through the noc.

[Roo Zilla]

Before BB bought QNX, it's yearly revenues were about $40M a year. BB paid five times that, or $200M, to acquire QNX, but I doubt that revenues for it have gone up significantly, and $40M is a drop in the bucket for a company the size of BB.

Revenue should be significantly less than that for Blackberry. BBRY bought QNX from Harmann Int'l, which produces much of the infotainment systems used in cars and was the biggest user of QNX. As a condition of sale, Harmann gave themselves a sweetheart deal on licensing.

[Roo Zilla]

I still find it shocking that people think QNX is equivalent to something like OSX or Linux. The QNX equivalent for both OSX and Linux is Unix, and I don't see people thinking Unix is something that can compete with Windows. Go to the QNX site and download a copy and see what you get. I think some people are going to be rather disappointed. QNX is raw, you might as well download a copy of Unix or PC-DOS and play with those for a while. There's a reason it took over 2 years from buying QNX to building a usable modern OS out of it.

[Roo Zilla]

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention another reason QNX doesn't produce much revenue. It's free for non-commercial use. If you use it for commercial use it's like $50 for the first 1000 or something along those lines. Sell 1000 units of Windows and MS makes over half a million dollars.

[CrackedBarry]

UQ Also QNX is a real time OS for embedded applications. There are quite a few competitors in this field, and licensing fees are calculated in cents rather than dollars.

[FFR]

UQ Also QNX is a real time OS for embedded applications. There are quite a few competitors in this field, and licensing fees are calculated in cents rather than dollars.

Like Symbian.

[Andrew Brehm]

I still find it shocking that people think QNX is equivalent to something like OSX or Linux. The QNX equivalent for both OSX and Linux is Unix, and I don't see people thinking Unix is something that can compete with Windows. Go to the QNX site and download a copy and see what you get. I think some people are going to be rather disappointed. QNX is raw, you might as well download a copy of Unix or PC-DOS and play with those for a while. There's a reason it took over 2 years from buying QNX to building a usable modern OS out of it.

I downloaded QNX for fun a while ago.

QNX | DesertPenguin.org | Andrew J. Brehm

I actually found it quite usable, even though it (obviously) lacks all the applications most people are used to.

Incidentally, "Unix" is not usually used to describe a kernel but an OS distributed in several versions including AIX, Solaris and BSD. BSD and Solaris do offer lots of software normal people might need. (AIX does not.)

OS X uses components from Unix (but most prominently not the Unix kernel). Linux is a Unix clone and contains no Unix code whatsoever. (Android uses the Linux kernel.)

Unix does compete with Windows in the server market and, in the form of OS X and iOS, on the desktop and in the mobile market.

I am assuming QNX is, like Linux, Unix-compatible at the source level, i.e. I could take a Unix program and compile it on QNX and it would run. I remember the QNX Web site claims that QNX conforms to the POSIX standard, i.e. the Unix API.