Blackberry and the QNX team
- I wonder if they decided their was a need for an Android Runtime so early in development... why they didn't choose Linux?
No special QNX hardware drivers, no full runtime would have been required, many more developers out there with Linux experience.... Was it so hard to "secure" Linux back then? Or was it that BlackBerry didn't want their OS to be part of anything even close to "open"?
Also, Waterloo, for all its well-deserved laurels, is not Silicon Valley. The network effects of a business/education cluster are huge. RIM in Waterloo was somewhat like a K-Mart located in an obscure part of town while Wal-Mart, the mall, and everything else is thriving in a modern business district on the other end. It's tough to compete for good employees in that scenario.
Posted via CB1005-31-16 01:32 PMLike 0 - And, continuing that last thought, did ML prefer a local Canadian product--particularly one with U. Waterloo ties? I don't recall: Did Dodge and ML know each other at UW? They were there at the same time.
Also, Waterloo, for all its well-deserved laurels, is not Silicon Valley. The network effects of a business/education cluster are huge. RIM in Waterloo was somewhat like a K-Mart located in an obscure part of town while Wal-Mart, the mall, and everything else is thriving in a modern business district on the other end. It's tough to compete for good employees in that scenario.
Posted via CB10
Me... I still can't believe that there wasn't a "new" OS already being worked on somewhere in BlackBerry R&D in 2008, much less 2010.05-31-16 01:42 PMLike 0 - I wonder if they decided their was a need for an Android Runtime so early in development... why they didn't choose Linux?
No special QNX hardware drivers, no full runtime would have been required, many more developers out there with Linux experience.... Was it so hard to "secure" Linux back then? Or was it that BlackBerry didn't want their OS to be part of anything even close to "open"?
As for Open Source, don't think that was an issue. QNX had opened a bunch of its code years before the acquisition. RIM closed it again after the acquisition.
Honestly, I think the reason for the Linux runtime goes something like this (pure speculation on my part):
AS: "Hey, I just got back from meeting with all the major app services and developers. None of them want to jump on BB10, especially after the PlayBook fiasco."
ML: "Don't they know we're BlackBerry? What can we do to make them coming over easier?"
AS: "?????"
ML: "Why not run their Linux apps on BB10? They can't say no if they don't have to write a new app. It'll be a quick porting effort. Drop everything else and get a runtime going."
Add a 1+ year delay to launch and Bob's your uncle.Troy Tiscareno likes this.05-31-16 02:01 PMLike 1 - AS: "Hey, I just got back from meeting with all the major app services and developers. None of them want to jump on BB10, especially after the PlayBook fiasco."
ML: "Don't they know we're BlackBerry? What can we do to make them coming over easier?"
AS: "?????"
ML: "Why not run their Linux apps on BB10? They can't say no if they don't have to write a new app. It'll be a quick porting effort. Drop everything else and get a runtime going."05-31-16 02:18 PMLike 0 -
I still wish we had seen a pure QNX OS.... but in 2010 Android would have been the smarter play.05-31-16 03:43 PMLike 0 - He is aware of this fact and the short comings of the QNX system ( monetization) .He has started the focus on software.
Analyst interest have already been peaked at what this can do for Blackberrys ' bottom line.
The self driving race is just started and BlackBerry has joined in, the recent CES in Las Vegas premiered the Toyota Highlander with the QNX technology at its core.
This, on top of the use in other IOT leaves the potential for growth wide open.
Why would they want to "sell" this technology? I'm sorry to disagree with you on the point that they would even consider trying to "sell" it.
Again even Apple utilizes this technology if it's such a waste as you are implying there would be NO takers in this sphere.
BlackBerry isn't going to be number one at anything in the short to medium term, nor do they need to be. They just need to be profitable company.
My personal opinion would be to take the company private and let growth be had without the pressures of the markets and investors.
Time is what's needed to allow for re growth and rebirth. It will happen but not over night.
Posted via CB1005-31-16 04:38 PMLike 0 - Yeah, if you don't like being accountable to the public (which really means funds like Fairfax), then just wait until you've been taken "private" by PE. They would cut the phone business on day 1.05-31-16 05:46 PMLike 4
-
If I recall correctly, work on the Linux runtime didn't start until 2012. There were a bunch of news stories at the time about that particular engineering feat.
But I admit that I may be getting dates confused.05-31-16 08:09 PMLike 0 - Not during the launch. Thought Android was added during the 2.0 OS version (or was it 1.2?)
If I recall correctly, work on the Linux runtime didn't start until 2012. There were a bunch of news stories at the time about that particular engineering feat.
But I admit that I may be getting dates confused.
The Playbook OS was a test mule for BB10.
Things must have been smelling like Limburger for them to even consider the ART.
Also they were bound and determined that Adobe Air was going to be the way forward.
Cascades came to the fore only when they realized that Air wasn't gaining acceptance.05-31-16 08:21 PMLike 0 - But the PlayBook had the way runtime quite a while before the release of BB10.
The Playbook OS was a test mule for BB10.
Things were starting to smell like Limburger for them to even consider the ART.
Also they were bound and determined that Adobe Air was going to be the way forward.
Cascades came to the fore only when they realized that Air wasn't gaining acceptance.05-31-16 08:24 PMLike 0 -
- I don't know that this is scientific. iOS and Android users tend to use more apps, and iPhones in particular have tiny batteries compared to like the Z30 or the Passport.
What I've seen in my experience is that iPhones have more consistent battery life (fewer wild swings) and tend to run cooler.
That is not what RT even means. It has nothing to do with that.
BTW, if you write an app that freezes on iOS or Android, it is also killed by the OS watchdog. But that has absolutely nothing to do with an RT scheduler.DonHB likes this.06-01-16 06:25 AMLike 1 - I think that's exactly right. A modern smartphone is very different from the typical QNX applications. I think QNX is excellent for other applications, but a poor fit for phones.
If BB10 had been built on Linux, I think they would have launched much earlier, they would have reduced the cost of adopting the latest hardware, and they could have had more compelling low/mid end devices. I don't know if all of that would have been enough to save BB10, but I think building on QNX did put them at a serious disadvantage.06-01-16 06:35 AMLike 0 - It would also have been insecure as the Priv currently is and no Android manufacture is making any profits. BB10 and it's security set BlackBerry apart in the Enterprise space. And you can say things now about MM, but MM wasn't available when BB10 was released. Android at the time BlackBerry started creating BB10 from QNX was a mess in terms of design and functionality. That is a big point that those who say that BlackBerry should have gone Android miss when they make those statements. When BlackBerry was looking to replace BBOS, the only Android version available was 1.5. Are you telling me that Android 1.5 was what BlackBerry should have used for secure Enterprise phones?06-01-16 06:58 AMLike 0
-
- It would also have been insecure as the Priv currently is and no Android manufacture is making any profits. BB10 and it's security set BlackBerry apart in the Enterprise space. And you can say things now about MM, but MM wasn't available when BB10 was released. Android at the time BlackBerry started creating BB10 from QNX was a mess in terms of design and functionality. That is a big point that those who say that BlackBerry should have gone Android miss when they make those statements. When BlackBerry was looking to replace BBOS, the only Android version available was 1.5. Are you telling me that Android 1.5 was what BlackBerry should have used for secure Enterprise phones?
And the objective was profitability in the handset space, not forcing an enterprise solution for its own sake, regardless of profitability, like some religious act. We can see that given BB10's subsequent abysmal sales record, RIM need never have bothered. They would have been better off by (tens of?) billions of dollars merely by ceasing production, once they'd been caught off-guard when the market shifted.
Posted via CB10Troy Tiscareno and Jerry A like this.06-01-16 08:17 AMLike 2 - Well, surely there are *some* Android manufacturers making profits.
And the objective was profitability in the handset space, not forcing an enterprise solution for its own sake, regardless of profitability, like some religious act. We can see that given BB10's subsequent abysmal sales record, RIM need never have bothered. They would have been better off by (tens of?) billions of dollars merely by ceasing production, once they'd been caught off-guard when the market shifted.
Posted via CB10
Apple accounted for 91% of smartphone profits last year
Take a look at the chart for mobile profit market share and tell me that BlackBerry is going to do better with Android.
And they had to provide at the time an end to end solution which could only be accomplished by making a phone. The only space that they are still living is the enterprise space. They are and always have been a enterprise services company who's phones were the fad to the public.06-01-16 08:39 AMLike 0 - Don't know why you just focus on the RT scheduler when it is the RT OS that we are talking about.
BlackBerry made the decision for a few reasons. Take the time to read why BlackBerry choose QNX for security.
https://www.troopers.de/media/filer_...l-aint-one.pdf
https://labs.mwrinfosecurity.com/***...2016-03-14.pdf
Also because of the design, there are about 1/4 of the kernel calls needed to function the same with QNX which means less possible vulnerabilities.DonHB likes this.06-01-16 09:07 AMLike 1 -
It's what they should have done in 2005 that would have made any difference. If Mike and Jim has said "hey this pager OS has gone as far as it really can, where should we go now.".... Moving to a new OS built on any kernel in 2005, with a projected release in 2007/2008 would have made a difference.
Looking back to 2010.... Palm sold for only $1.2 Billion, seems pretty cheap compared to what has been spent on BB10 in money and more importantly in time.DrBoomBotz likes this.06-01-16 09:08 AMLike 1 -
- 06-01-16 11:57 AMLike 0
- Forum
- Popular at CrackBerry
- General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
Blackberry and the QNX team
Similar Threads
-
Which is the latest os for BlackBerry Z10
By samyag Shah in forum Ask a QuestionReplies: 6Last Post: 05-30-16, 03:48 AM -
Blackberry services battery drain since last update
By niccomar in forum BlackBerry PrivReplies: 2Last Post: 05-29-16, 04:01 PM -
Google Apps account in BlackBerry Calendar
By scouts36 in forum BlackBerry PrivReplies: 1Last Post: 05-29-16, 02:05 PM -
cant find the underscore (_) in the BlackBerry keyboard?
By Bart kouwenberg in forum Android AppsReplies: 1Last Post: 05-29-16, 01:12 PM -
Is the BlackBerry Classic sim tray available in India?
By BHAVESH ZAKHARIYA in forum BlackBerry ClassicReplies: 0Last Post: 05-29-16, 12:20 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD