1. brettmyster's Avatar
    What seems to blow my mind time and time again is the media and the companies that review phones. They just reviewed the z30 and they are like it's good but the os has bugs and blabla and the specs aren't extreme like other phones. People seem to forget that android has the glory of having the biggest companies develop phones for googles overrated os. The thing that I love the most is the fact of when android came out, how much a piece of poopoo it was. Constant freezing, security flaws and just it was crap compared to ios.

    People need to stop and realize yes android and google are ahead of bb10, but in terms of features in the os itself they definitely are not ahead by a mile. Qnx is infact in reality superior to android because of its better architecture. On qnx the sky is pretty much the limit, I mean look how strong bb10 is in its short run. I think mike l coming back and marketing the devices would help a lot, because that's where the problem lies. BlackBerry has started something special and the world needs to see that. The q10 is amazing and nothing beats a blackberry keyboard.
    The Aficionado and tmanthib like this.
    10-12-13 06:27 AM
  2. qbnkelt's Avatar
    What seems to blow my mind time and time again is the media and the companies that review phones. They just reviewed the z30 and they are like it's good but the os has bugs and blabla and the specs aren't extreme like other phones. People seem to forget that android has the glory of having the biggest companies develop phones for googles overrated os. The thing that I love the most is the fact of when android came out, how much a piece of poopoo it was. Constant freezing, security flaws and just it was crap compared to ios.

    People need to stop and realize yes android and google are ahead of bb10, but in terms of features in the os itself they definitely are not ahead by a mile. Qnx is infact in reality superior to android because of its better architecture. On qnx the sky is pretty much the limit, I mean look how strong bb10 is in its short run. I think mike l coming back and marketing the devices would help a lot, because that's where the problem lies. BlackBerry has started something special and the world needs to see that. The q10 is amazing and nothing beats a blackberry keyboard.
    I've got a Z10 and an SGIII. Each is a fantastic phone and each has its specific strengths. The keyboard is in fact amazing. But keep in mind that as a consumer, I don't care about the architecture. Tech geeks like us care about architecture.

    As far as constant freezing, I cannot say that I experience constant freezing on any device I've got, and I've got an SGIII, a Z10, and an iPhone 5. I also haven't had one single security incident on my Samsung Skyrocket or SGIII or any of my three iPhones.

    It is much better to expand of the attributes and the features of the phones we love without putting down others. Attempting to put down others to make ours look good invariably turn into a platform war which really, serves no purpose, since people choose the device that works best for them.
    10-12-13 06:37 AM
  3. badiyee's Avatar
    I agree with the sentiments that people should not shoot down other platforms just to make one platform look good.

    That said however, I think CB could do well to nurture a culture of "how to make things better", even if most of the persuasive posters may have to attempt to give feedback to the BBRY team in their own forums (its not like they don't read here, but obviously they would be looking at their own forums which have a lot of thrash comments and postings to sift through as well)

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk
    10-12-13 07:00 AM
  4. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    On qnx the sky is pretty much the limit,
    If the sky's the limit for QNX, what have they been doing for the last 30 years??? I mean, if it's so great, shouldn't it be even bigger than Windows by now? Maybe this is one of those Beta vs. VHS things. We all know how that worked out.
    richardat and jh07 like this.
    10-12-13 08:02 AM
  5. badiyee's Avatar
    If the sky's the limit for QNX, what have they been doing for the last 30 years??? I mean, if it's so great, shouldn't it be even bigger than Windows by now? Maybe this is one of those Beta vs. VHS things. We all know how that worked out.
    Not gonna joke, but you're insinuating that porn stars and the entire porn industry to pick up QNX. Or at least, that's how I think I interpret the BETA vs VHS war.
    10-12-13 08:16 AM
  6. Jerale Hoard's Avatar
    What seems to blow my mind time and time again is the media and the companies that review phones. They just reviewed the z30 and they are like it's good but the os has bugs and blabla and the specs aren't extreme like other phones. People seem to forget that android has the glory of having the biggest companies develop phones for googles overrated os. The thing that I love the most is the fact of when android came out, how much a piece of poopoo it was. Constant freezing, security flaws and just it was crap compared to ios.

    People need to stop and realize yes android and google are ahead of bb10, but in terms of features in the os itself they definitely are not ahead by a mile. Qnx is infact in reality superior to android because of its better architecture. On qnx the sky is pretty much the limit, I mean look how strong bb10 is in its short run. I think mike l coming back and marketing the devices would help a lot, because that's where the problem lies. BlackBerry has started something special and the world needs to see that. The q10 is amazing and nothing beats a blackberry keyboard.
    QNX is superior to Linux. It is not the software running on BlackBerry, BB10 is. QNX is just the software that supports BB10, it's the software in BB10s core. It's an embedded software system.

    Posted via CB10
    10-12-13 08:21 AM
  7. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    Not gonna joke, but you're insinuating that porn stars and the entire porn industry to pick up QNX. Or at least, that's how I think I interpret the BETA vs VHS war.
    Yes, please repeat the old catch phrase "Beta lost to VHS because of porn" again, even though it's been proven to have been only a minor factor. Perhaps the fact that VHS was significantly cheaper than Beta had something to do with VHS winning the battle. Also, VHS tapes went for 2 hours as opposed to Beta which went for one hour. If you wanted to record a movie or record a sporting event, which would you choose? No brainer really.
    10-12-13 08:33 AM
  8. CecilTsunami's Avatar
    Yes, please repeat the old catch phrase "Beta lost to VHS because of porn" again, even though it's been proven to have been only a minor factor. Perhaps the fact that VHS was significantly cheaper than Beta had something to do with VHS winning the battle. Also, VHS tapes went for 2 hours as opposed to Beta which went for one hour. If you wanted to record a movie or record a sporting event, which would you choose? No brainer really.
    Beta tapes recorded for longer than an hour. My sister used to record Saturday morning cartoons for me on them while she was at university and I was home in the boonies with no cable.

    There were several episodes of the Smurfs on those things. Even some Ghostbusters and Ninja Turtles.



    Posted via CB10
    10-12-13 10:20 AM
  9. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    Beta tapes recorded for longer than an hour. My sister used to record Saturday morning cartoons for me on them while she was at university and I was home in the boonies with no cable.

    There were several episodes of the Smurfs on those things. Even some Ghostbusters and Ninja Turtles.



    Posted via CB10
    Yes, later versions of Beta recorded for more than an hour at standard speed. Early versions though, were limited to 1 hour. By then, similar to BlackBerry, it was too little too late as people were already entrenched in the VHS system.
    JeepBB and richardat like this.
    10-12-13 10:27 AM
  10. badiyee's Avatar
    Yes, please repeat the old catch phrase "Beta lost to VHS because of porn" again, even though it's been proven to have been only a minor factor. Perhaps the fact that VHS was significantly cheaper than Beta had something to do with VHS winning the battle. Also, VHS tapes went for 2 hours as opposed to Beta which went for one hour. If you wanted to record a movie or record a sporting event, which would you choose? No brainer really.
    not gonna do VHS to Beta comparison here, since the original quote was using that analogy on QNX vs (insert other OS here), hence my opinion that it was to insinuate that popular demand > potential usability (or how in the case the popular usage of VHS on the porn industry, minute as it is) if QNX were to pick up pace earlier. To that, I think its safe to sum up in history that MS Windows / DOS back then leveraged its "tog dog" position with IBM pretty well, and got very popular.

    IF, and just IF, memory serves me right, QNX's supposed 'desktop OS' was launched as a proof of concept, and it was available generally on an open source format right before RIM (now BlackBerry) acquired QNX, and this was probably floating around 2007-2008. Its not like its not available, and its not like people aren't doing anything. But as far as non-Windows OS goes, the lack of development / slow speed of developing it isn't helping much for the consumers, and this was probably true when the general consumer's perception on non-Windows OSes were like "Li-what? ".

    Even after BlackBerry acquired QNX, we've seen at least 2 reiterations / complete makeovers of the GUI on top of the QNX based OS for the mobile platform which became BB10. That itself took some time, for a company to put all its resources into developing that. Imagine Dan Dodge alone doing that? I wouldn't be surprised for that number of years.
    10-12-13 10:32 AM
  11. CrackedBarry's Avatar
    QNX is superior to Linux. It is not the software running on BlackBerry, BB10 is. QNX is just the software that supports BB10, it's the software in BB10s core. It's an embedded software system.
    Nonsense. If QNX was that good, how come nobody bothered to buy it? Google, MS, Apple... All of them could have bought QNX from Harman and build a mobile on top of it.

    But they didn't, why? Cause they had better options available.

    RIM was the only company that didnt. They didnt want to go Android, and couldn't afford the time to develop a new OS completely by themselves, so they paid 200 million dollars for a 40 million dollar company and tried to get the best out of sub optimal situation.

    And what you see is what you get. BB10 is an alright phone OS, but has more bugs and far from as polished as Android, WP8 and iOS.

    It's a good first effort, but far from best in class.

    And it's a resource hog, compared to the competition.

    If you like BB10 that's great, but lets not kid ourselves. It's the best of a couple of bad options that RIM had,many it'll take years to reach the maturity of the competition.
    10-12-13 10:40 AM
  12. Bbnivende's Avatar
    There may be room for niche QWERTY handsets in the market place but I wonder if the market place would accept a niche operating system.
    10-12-13 10:49 AM
  13. brettmyster's Avatar
    You guys act like I'm bashing other os's, which means you can't read. I said when android first came out I'm talking about years ago and it took them years to make that os smooth. Basically all I'm saying is bb10 is quite good for such a new os versus other os's. I remember my first iphone used to freeze up, infact everyone's did and it took apple awhile to fix it. My point is bb10 is new and people are acting like it should be perfect when the competitions was never perfect from launch.
    tmanthib and chm985 like this.
    10-12-13 10:49 AM
  14. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    Beta couldn't displace VHS even though it was technologically superior, but DVD managed to do it. People can't seem to grasp the idea that in order to displace an incumbent in technology, you need something that is markedly superior, not something incrementally better. How was Beta better than VHS? It was smaller and offered slightly better resolution. How was DVD better than VHS? It weighed ounces compared to pounds. It was much more compact. It was visually superior. It didn't deteriorate. The list goes on and on. The Zune HD in many ways was better than an iPod Touch. It offered better resolution and had subscription music and radio. That's basically it. Yawn. MiniDisc didn't displace CD's, but MP3's are certainly doing that.

    How is BB10 going to displace iOS and Android? By offering Peek and Flow? The keyboard? Nice features, like the Zune's 720p output. Groundbreaking must have killer features for which people will abandon their iPhones and Samsungs by the millions? Sorry but no. BB10 is going the way of PalmOS, and that's if things go good for it and BlackBerry decides to open source it. If they leave it closed, development for it is over in a year.

    QNX? What does it do better than Windows or OS X? Or even Linux? I'll tell you what Windows does better. It can run millions of apps, and operate just about any peripheral that exists. Can QNX beat that? Until it can, it's no better than BEOS. Nice proof of concept, but in the end, a limited use OS that will probably lose significant ground to Linux in the near future. Yes millions of cars use it and so do nuclear power plants. Big deal. DoD still uses PC-DOS on some computers. I don't see people talking about how PC-DOS is going to take over the world because it can control nuclear missiles. Why will it lose to Linux? Two reasons. It's free and there's a huge development community for it now because of it's presence in enterprise.
    10-12-13 10:57 AM
  15. gfondeur's Avatar
    ........BB10 is an alright phone OS, but has more bugs and far from as polished as Android, WP8 and iOS.
    You F kidding right? Android polished? LOL
    This ridiculous comment make my day,
    10-12-13 11:09 AM
  16. ElGusta's Avatar
    Well if you want to talk about architecture WP8 is currently more efficient than whatever BlackBerry has done to QNX

    Now, who would you bet on to grow their product out as this point? Microsoft or BlackBerry?
    10-12-13 11:13 AM
  17. gogurt48's Avatar
    You guys act like I'm bashing other os's, which means you can't read. I said when android first came out I'm talking about years ago and it took them years to make that os smooth. Basically all I'm saying is bb10 is quite good for such a new os versus other os's. I remember my first iphone used to freeze up, infact everyone's did and it took apple awhile to fix it. My point is bb10 is new and people are acting like it should be perfect when the competitions was never perfect from launch.
    Everything you said is true, but unfortunately, BB10 isn't competing against iPhone OS 1 or Android 1.0. It's competing against iOS 7 and Android Jelly Bean (and Ice Cream Sandwich).

    iPhone OS 1 could afford to be imperfect because it had essentially no competition. Likewise, Android 1.0 could afford to be imperfect because it was essentially the only alternative to iOS, which a lot of people wanted but couldn't afford, and others didn't want, for one reason or another.

    Now that iOS and Android are mature and capable systems, it's much harder for a new system that is not yet mature to attract customers away from the other systems. Customers aren't interested in being "fair" to the new system, they just want the best system they can afford.
    10-12-13 11:34 AM
  18. bb4life21's Avatar
    What seems to blow my mind time and time again is the media and the companies that review phones. They just reviewed the z30 and they are like it's good but the os has bugs and blabla and the specs aren't extreme like other phones. People seem to forget that android has the glory of having the biggest companies develop phones for googles overrated os. The thing that I love the most is the fact of when android came out, how much a piece of poopoo it was. Constant freezing, security flaws and just it was crap compared to ios.

    People need to stop and realize yes android and google are ahead of bb10, but in terms of features in the os itself they definitely are not ahead by a mile. Qnx is infact in reality superior to android because of its better architecture. On qnx the sky is pretty much the limit, I mean look how strong bb10 is in its short run. I think mike l coming back and marketing the devices would help a lot, because that's where the problem lies. BlackBerry has started something special and the world needs to see that. The q10 is amazing and nothing beats a blackberry keyboard.
    Imo just sounds like a bunch of piled on excuses. You can either compete or you can't. This isn't the children science fair where everyone gets a shiny ribbon. And if you feel bb10 is in its growing phase why are bb10 phones priced at launch at the same or higher than premium phones in its class. Where is bbm 4 all? 10.2 update?? I've had my z10 since launch and there is no way I would recommend someone to buy a bb10 phone at this point.
    richardat and JeepBB like this.
    10-12-13 12:13 PM
  19. badiyee's Avatar
    Beta couldn't displace VHS even though it was technologically superior, but DVD managed to do it. People can't seem to grasp the idea that in order to displace an incumbent in technology, you need something that is markedly superior, not something incrementally better. How was Beta better than VHS? It was smaller and offered slightly better resolution. How was DVD better than VHS? It weighed ounces compared to pounds. It was much more compact. It was visually superior. It didn't deteriorate. The list goes on and on. The Zune HD in many ways was better than an iPod Touch. It offered better resolution and had subscription music and radio. That's basically it. Yawn. MiniDisc didn't displace CD's, but MP3's are certainly doing that.

    How is BB10 going to displace iOS and Android? By offering Peek and Flow? The keyboard? Nice features, like the Zune's 720p output. Groundbreaking must have killer features for which people will abandon their iPhones and Samsungs by the millions? Sorry but no. BB10 is going the way of PalmOS, and that's if things go good for it and BlackBerry decides to open source it. If they leave it closed, development for it is over in a year.

    QNX? What does it do better than Windows or OS X? Or even Linux? I'll tell you what Windows does better. It can run millions of apps, and operate just about any peripheral that exists. Can QNX beat that? Until it can, it's no better than BEOS. Nice proof of concept, but in the end, a limited use OS that will probably lose significant ground to Linux in the near future. Yes millions of cars use it and so do nuclear power plants. Big deal. DoD still uses PC-DOS on some computers. I don't see people talking about how PC-DOS is going to take over the world because it can control nuclear missiles. Why will it lose to Linux? Two reasons. It's free and there's a huge development community for it now because of it's presence in enterprise.
    I don't think the gist of the argument points to QNX being that superior to MSFT Windows? Though you got good points raised about BETA vs VHS, I don't think raising DVD vs any of the video tapes = fair comparison, after all they're both very different format. Perhaps that failed to be used massively enough tech from MSFT vs Sony's push in the Blue Ray section would be a fair comparison.

    So, looking back at the OP's post, when the poster was essentially talking about what QNX is capable of (no definite quantitative nor qualitative) being, and to be fair for a revision 1 / 2 (being the 10.1 and 10.2) it has done a lot to increase functionality. Just like another poster said, people today aren't going to be nice to a new system, unless its good enough to make them switch out of need, necessity or want. Then, you raised about the VHS to BETA comparison, hence I felt that you're insinuating that its going to take

    Though, in your argument about being superior, Zune wasn't that much of a fire in these parts of the region. However, MP3 and MP4 players, were. Then again, i'm not sure how the main tipping point was (in these parts of the world), Napster was still in its infancy, and people stuck them to PCs instead of real world adoption, just like how .3GP videos flooded the scene once Nokia (which had a good foothold here back then) introduced it in their phones here. That said, I'm still with the opinion that QNX took a while despite the company threw in heavy resources, and that took probably at least 2 years, 3 if you count to the latest iteration of BlackBerry 10 OS.
    10-13-13 03:21 AM
  20. badiyee's Avatar
    Imo just sounds like a bunch of piled on excuses. You can either compete or you can't. This isn't the children science fair where everyone gets a shiny ribbon. And if you feel bb10 is in its growing phase why are bb10 phones priced at launch at the same or higher than premium phones in its class. Where is bbm 4 all? 10.2 update?? I've had my z10 since launch and there is no way I would recommend someone to buy a bb10 phone at this point.
    Here's how I choose to look at it,

    a) if this is a competition, the point that interest me the most (really, a phone, is, a phone) is that BlackBerry has invested resources into making this a much better communication device. As a multimedia consumption device? Probably not. But as a communication device, its as good as it can get out of the box, without much customization. Hey, to each his / her own how he / she likes to communicate. I prefer Android tablets as the mean to consume media, and windows for productivity (I like their office suite, and the windows live writer). That said i'm not against Android, but I like what BlackBerry has to offer in a phone, bar the tablet.

    b) if this wasn't about competiton, its still is a better upgrade from a legacy BBOS. Unless there are situations that somehow would convince me that a legacy BBOS device would be better, but if I take my BB 9800 Torch as a yardstick for a benchmark, I think the newer BB10 devices are pretty good.
    gfondeur likes this.
    10-13-13 03:25 AM
  21. richardat's Avatar
    Everything you said is true, but unfortunately, BB10 isn't competing against iPhone OS 1 or Android 1.0. It's competing against iOS 7 and Android Jelly Bean (and Ice Cream Sandwich).

    iPhone OS 1 could afford to be imperfect because it had essentially no competition. Likewise, Android 1.0 could afford to be imperfect because it was essentially the only alternative to iOS, which a lot of people wanted but couldn't afford, and others didn't want, for one reason or another.

    Now that iOS and Android are mature and capable systems, it's much harder for a new system that is not yet mature to attract customers away from the other systems. Customers aren't interested in being "fair" to the new system, they just want the best system they can afford.
    Yeah, this has been explained here on the forum by many of us....I don't know how many times...some people will just never get it. I think you can see by the nonsensical reasoning in this thread alone why that is.

    " Why? why??? Why don't reviewers compare it to an iphone from 6 generations ago? Blows mY MIND! Media bias!!!"

    In terms of the QNX debate, I beg to differ, in that we aren't talking about "techies". My impression is that almost nobody here (with a few exeptions however!) are even, on a very....general level....familiar with technical details of OS's. Over and over you hear the same phrases repeated: QNX is RTOS!! QNX is lightweight!!! QNX is a microkernel!!! (just debunked a post using the last one not long ago)

    The problem is twofold: inability to explain how this is preferable, or how this translates into a future advantage (which of course is also dependent on BB's ability to continue and build at a rate surpassing the others). The second problem is that it is often clear that some of these posters use these phrases in the wrong context entirely, or with an implied reasoning which does not apply - revealing they don't actually understand, even at the level of a knowledgeable layman what these phrases mean.

    An under-informed layman is all I would consider myself. I have been around, and using OS's most of my life, from DOS, Apple DOS, to VAX Unix....and I've taken an OS university course, but that was long ago, and that is it! Other than bits picked up as a tech enthusiast I do not follow OS architecture in detail. I've only seen a couple of in-depth discussions on this here - and they were terrific. I am still waiting however, to see somebody outline how these characteristics will translate into a superior product in the future (even if we pretend BB had the resources and will to pursue it wholeheartedly). As of now, we have seen absolutely NO evidence of superiority or potential superiority - in fact, some have suggested (eg. resource hog) that it actually faces some serious obstacles.
    10-13-13 04:01 AM
  22. Brutal Efficiency's Avatar
    If the sky's the limit for QNX, what have they been doing for the last 30 years??? I mean, if it's so great, shouldn't it be even bigger than Windows by now? Maybe this is one of those Beta vs. VHS things. We all know how that worked out.
    The sky wasn't the limit for 30 years.

    They've been upgrading the architecture for 30 years and NOW the sky is the limit.

    BlackBerry Bold 9900; Q10; Z10 [BBM#6]
    Balti43 likes this.
    10-13-13 04:08 AM
  23. garnok's Avatar
    You guys act like I'm bashing other os's, which means you can't read. I said when android first came out I'm talking about years ago and it took them years to make that os smooth. Basically all I'm saying is bb10 is quite good for such a new os versus other os's. I remember my first iphone used to freeze up, infact everyone's did and it took apple awhile to fix it. My point is bb10 is new and people are acting like it should be perfect when the competitions was never perfect from launch.
    but when iOS comes out they are the first or at least start the trend for multi touch smartphone. while android are the first low cost multi touch smartphone that is why they can have ****ty OS but still get a passed and keep making it better

    right now when BB10 comes out most customers expecting their BB10 phone at least comparable with android and iOS .who want to spend $700 only to get a phone that still missing many thing other platform can do with same price..
    10-13-13 04:20 AM
  24. gfondeur's Avatar
    like what?
    tell one thing out the box BB10 can do compared to iOS or Android?
    (I'm don't come with the **** about app - OUT THE BOX)
    10-13-13 05:00 AM
  25. badiyee's Avatar
    Yeah, this has been explained here on the forum by many of us....I don't know how many times...some people will just never get it. I think you can see by the nonsensical reasoning in this thread alone why that is.

    " Why? why??? Why don't reviewers compare it to an iphone from 6 generations ago? Blows mY MIND! Media bias!!!"

    In terms of the QNX debate, I beg to differ, in that we aren't talking about "techies". My impression is that almost nobody here (with a few exeptions however!) are even, on a very....general level....familiar with technical details of OS's. Over and over you hear the same phrases repeated: QNX is RTOS!! QNX is lightweight!!! QNX is a microkernel!!! (just debunked a post using the last one not long ago)

    The problem is twofold: inability to explain how this is preferable, or how this translates into a future advantage (which of course is also dependent on BB's ability to continue and build at a rate surpassing the others). The second problem is that it is often clear that some of these posters use these phrases in the wrong context entirely, or with an implied reasoning which does not apply - revealing they don't actually understand, even at the level of a knowledgeable layman what these phrases mean.

    An under-informed layman is all I would consider myself. I have been around, and using OS's most of my life, from DOS, Apple DOS, to VAX Unix....and I've taken an OS university course, but that was long ago, and that is it! Other than bits picked up as a tech enthusiast I do not follow OS architecture in detail. I've only seen a couple of in-depth discussions on this here - and they were terrific. I am still waiting however, to see somebody outline how these characteristics will translate into a superior product in the future (even if we pretend BB had the resources and will to pursue it wholeheartedly). As of now, we have seen absolutely NO evidence of superiority or potential superiority - in fact, some have suggested (eg. resource hog) that it actually faces some serious obstacles.
    Just to add on, though not sure if you'll agree: I don't think that there's a phone with a far superior OS, per se. I think in the past the windows phone had I think a miniaturized Windows on the phone in the PDA format. Heck, it was really awesome to an extent (except you can't really play games that require high graphics / processing power, this was way back in 2003/2004) but at the same time I recall there was a device called Palm / Treo (not that I really know, because I didn't go with a Palm back then as they were exhorbitant) that was really good in certain ways, but they didn't have colour screens. Nokias back then didn't had the colors like today's, and to a certain extent Windows Mobile phones back then was like a "wow" factor to me. (BlackBerry devices were not brought in to where I live, yet). But I remember there were people that were harping that the best PDA-phones were made by Palm, and the Windows Machines that we had were crap. I was infuriated, because I felt Windows were far superior, because after all it completed what I needed and what I wanted, but there was a world I didn't know, and I think people that lived with Palms of that day would still swear today if Palm had not go under, they'll still stick with Palm until they die. At least I know some people who still swore that today.


    But then if you look at the OS considering it wasn't design for mobile usage, and the rate how it has grown, it really is worth comparing, even if the pace is slow paced / snail paced compared to the changes and advances of other OSes such as Android and iOS. In my opinion, it is only fair to hit at the OS, if the incremental upgrades (I don't think OS-es are that radically different, but we are used to the flow of updates if we were there since day 1, I know I am with since Windows 3.11, LOL, or even way back when to play a game I inserted few floppy disks to "install" and load. ) Hence I still think its fair to defend the OS in such, because it can show room to improve. The only thing I'll criticize is how BlackBerry chooses which to improve. which not to, and which ideas used, which ideas shelved. (like how OS6 cannot go OS7, for whatever reasons they say, to which I can understand why / how PlayBook owners are frustrated when BB10 wouldn't come their way, and moreover when they are promised it will come).
    richardat likes this.
    10-13-13 07:35 AM
60 123

Similar Threads

  1. UEFA app available on BB10
    By araskin in forum BlackBerry 10 Apps
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-30-14, 05:02 AM
  2. BB10 Playbook manager wont work plz help!
    By evandeeer in forum General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-17-13, 12:32 PM
  3. Reason for Expensive BB10 Phones?
    By cbvinh in forum Armchair CEO
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-12-13, 07:25 AM
  4. Will we ever have Word Mole on BB10?
    By ghz in forum BlackBerry 10 OS
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-11-13, 06:23 PM
  5. Are the IG, Vine etc BB10 apps compatible with the actual official versions?
    By eggman1987 in forum General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-11-13, 11:59 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD