09-09-16 02:05 PM
90 1234
tools
  1. conite's Avatar
    Or you could ask to borrow the car, or even better "rent" it.

    Posted via CB10
    You're cheating.

    This only speaks to how poorly constructed my analogy is. My point remains.

    PassportSQW100-4/10.3.2.2639
    09-19-15 07:56 AM
  2. RubenDM's Avatar
    What about Samsung? Is it possible that the Venice is a "Samsung" phone that's simply "Secured by BlackBerry"? Wouldn't that eliminate all these issues? I mean they are partners right?

    Posted via CB10
    The phone clearly states : BlackBerry
    Sammy might have helped them a bit but in no way it's a sammy device.

    Posted via CB10
    09-19-15 07:56 AM
  3. conite's Avatar
    What about Samsung? Is it possible that the Venice is a "Samsung" phone that's simply "Secured by BlackBerry"? Wouldn't that eliminate all these issues? I mean they are partners right?

    Posted via CB10
    The BlackBerry logo is full across the top of the device.

    PassportSQW100-4/10.3.2.2639
    Last edited by conite; 09-19-15 at 09:53 AM.
    09-19-15 07:57 AM
  4. Troy Tiscareno's Avatar
    What about Samsung? Is it possible that the Venice is a "Samsung" phone that's simply "Secured by BlackBerry"? Wouldn't that eliminate all these issues? I mean they are partners right?
    They are "partners" in that Samsung has licensed some SecuSmart tech for one of their devices (and possibly more in the future). They aren't partners in that they are building phones for each other. BB designed the Venice and is having it built by one of their OEM partners - Samsung has nothing to do with it, not even the screen (which is a flat screen, despite the curved glass on top).

    But even if Samsung had completely built the phone for BB, OHA and Google licensing rules still apply to Samsung - they are prohibited from building phones for companies who sell non-certified Android phones, for themselves or others. That's why BB had to use manufacturing partners who weren't OHA members (and there are only a handful).

    There has been nothing to indicate that Google is willing to make exceptions for OHA rules - they never have in the past - and there are numerous examples of them shutting down planned products by OHA members who would have violated the rules. The OHA is how Google controls Android among its 200+ manufacturing licensees, who by the way sell over 1 billion Android devices per year. Why would they risk all of that to break the rules for BB? To get some portion of a userbase that's only 10M at best? When statistically 80% of those users will end up on Android anyway? It makes zero sense.

    I do not work for Google, but I follow Google quite closely. My best guess of the situation is:

    • Venice is stock Android with Google Play Services, plus BB Experience Suite apps.
    • BB is an OHA member
    • Existing BB10 phones can keep the Android Runtime, but no future versions of BB10 can have it. Users who choose to upgrade will lose it.
    • No Android "upgrade" for any existing BB10 phones.
    • BB will make one or two BB10 phones (with no runtime) per year for a couple of years for government/big enterprise sales where security is the overriding concern. Without the runtime, there is no conflict with the OHA. They will be low-volume and expensive.
    • BB will make Android phones for consumers and the vast majority of businesses/enterprises - like the ones who use iOS and Android today.


    Again, this is just my opinion based on past history and everything I have read about the situation. I have no inside knowledge and this is purely my own speculation - but it's based on a solid, educated understanding of the mobile business.
    09-19-15 09:46 AM
  5. LuvULongTime's Avatar
    They are "partners" in that Samsung has licensed some SecuSmart tech for one of their devices (and possibly more in the future). They aren't partners in that they are building phones for each other. BB designed the Venice and is having it built by one of their OEM partners - Samsung has nothing to do with it, not even the screen (which is a flat screen, despite the curved glass on top).

    But even if Samsung had completely built the phone for BB, OHA and Google licensing rules still apply to Samsung - they are prohibited from building phones for companies who sell non-certified Android phones, for themselves or others. That's why BB had to use manufacturing partners who weren't OHA members (and there are only a handful).

    There has been nothing to indicate that Google is willing to make exceptions for OHA rules - they never have in the past - and there are numerous examples of them shutting down planned products by OHA members who would have violated the rules. The OHA is how Google controls Android among its 200+ manufacturing licensees, who by the way sell over 1 billion Android devices per year. Why would they risk all of that to break the rules for BB? To get some portion of a userbase that's only 10M at best? When statistically 80% of those users will end up on Android anyway? It makes zero sense.

    I do not work for Google, but I follow Google quite closely. My best guess of the situation is:

    • Venice is stock Android with Google Play Services, plus BB Experience Suite apps.
    • BB is an OHA member
    • Existing BB10 phones can keep the Android Runtime, but no future versions of BB10 can have it. Users who choose to upgrade will lose it.
    • No Android "upgrade" for any existing BB10 phones.
    • BB will make one or two BB10 phones (with no runtime) per year for a couple of years for government/big enterprise sales where security is the overriding concern. Without the runtime, there is no conflict with the OHA. They will be low-volume and expensive.
    • BB will make Android phones for consumers and the vast majority of businesses/enterprises - like the ones who use iOS and Android today.


    Again, this is just my opinion based on past history and everything I have read about the situation. I have no inside knowledge and this is purely my own speculation - but it's based on a solid, educated understanding of the mobile business.
    Bang on. Can't argue with this. Makes sense.

    I only hope they keep BB10 around in an R&D form at the very least should the mobile world change and they decide they want/need their own OS again.
    09-19-15 10:05 AM
  6. Riddymon's Avatar
    BB10 without android runtime is pretty much DOA for consumers...one of the major features of BB10 from its inception was that it would run android apps. Without that feature, unless they've found some magical way to get major developers onboard again, might as well should just pack bb10 in for the consumers...provide some obscure way for those consumers interested to still buy it them and just go full steam android.

    Most of us here use at least a few android apps on a daily basis. Without the option to have them..smh..what's the point. Unless you use your phone straight with the default features and are happy not having access to most of the apps out there...this will be a big blow to the case for hanging on to the phone.

    I was already disappointed when I found out I can't run Periscope. It's only a matter of time before other apps start going the way of the dodo as well.

    Pimp slappin iGeeks, Droinerds and Windufuses with my big white Z30
    09-19-15 10:23 AM
  7. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    There is no point even discussing this (again). The OHA police on this forum will shoot you down if you even start thinking something out of the box.

    Posted via CB10
    By OHA police you mean Troy and by "shoot down" you mean refute wishful thinking with reasoned arguments?

    Wishful thinking is fine but so is reason.
    09-19-15 10:28 AM
  8. ljfong's Avatar
    BB10 without android runtime is pretty much DOA for consumers...one of the major features of BB10 from its inception was that it would run android apps. Without that feature, unless they've found some magical way to get major developers onboard again, might as well should just pack bb10 in for the consumers...provide some obscure way for those consumers interested to still buy it them and just go full steam android.

    Most of us here use at least a few android apps on a daily basis. Without the option to have them..smh..what's the point. Unless you use your phone straight with the default features and are happy not having access to most of the apps out there...this will be a big blow to the case for hanging on to the phone.

    I was already disappointed when I found out I can't run Periscope. It's only a matter of time before other apps start going the way of the dodo as well.

    Pimp slappin iGeeks, Droinerds and Windufuses with my big white Z30
    BB10 had been DOA since its public release outside the scene of fans. So stripping its Android runtime only makes it more dead, still dead.
    09-19-15 10:34 AM
  9. yhamaie's Avatar
    An article dated two years ago . . .

    http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/...ans-necessary/

    Posted via CB10
    09-19-15 10:45 AM
  10. yhamaie's Avatar
    You may find http://www.benedelman.org/news/021314-1.html informative.

    Posted via CB10
    09-19-15 11:00 AM
  11. Deitzanova's Avatar
    By OHA police you mean Troy and by "shoot down" you mean refute wishful thinking with reasoned arguments?

    Wishful thinking is fine but so is reason.
    Erm... No.

    There is no wishful thinking here. It's about discussing the possibilities IF a precedent is set today for a certain manufacturer. It leads to some very interesting thoughts and ideas. The police I refer to, rehash the same book of rules again and again. Some even go to the lengths of ridiculing other people's opinions (ideas).

    As for the precedent that I mention, a precedent will be set. Maybe not today, maybe not for BlackBerry, but, it WILL be set at some point in the future for somebody.

    Posted via CB10
    09-19-15 11:01 AM
  12. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    As for the precedent that I mention, a precedent will be set. Maybe not today, maybe not for BlackBerry, but, it WILL be set at some point in the future for somebody.
    Not saying its impossible.
    It does sound to me like wishful thinking though.
    Actually I am not even sure what you are saying.
    09-19-15 11:36 AM
  13. TGR1's Avatar
    Erm... No.

    There is no wishful thinking here. It's about discussing the possibilities IF a precedent is set today for a certain manufacturer. It leads to some very interesting thoughts and ideas. The police I refer to, rehash the same book of rules again and again. Some even go to the lengths of ridiculing other people's opinions (ideas).

    As for the precedent that I mention, a precedent will be set. Maybe not today, maybe not for BlackBerry, but, it WILL be set at some point in the future for somebody.

    Posted via CB10

    What is it about the OHA that can be set aside? What sort of "precedent" do you envision?
    09-19-15 12:04 PM
  14. boody78's Avatar
    Everyone operates under the assumption that BlackBerry couldn't possibly have anything Google wants or needs. Don't forget the patents and the reputation for security. It's very possible that BlackBerry is sitting on a patent that Google really wants, and we all know Google would love to improve its reputation for security.

    Posted via CB10
    igor10000 likes this.
    09-19-15 12:35 PM
  15. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    What is it about the OHA that can be set aside? What sort of "precedent" do you envision?
    The next shoe to drop. What happens to the runtime?-sun_full.jpg
    09-19-15 12:39 PM
  16. cgk's Avatar
    Everyone operates under the assumption that BlackBerry couldn't possibly have anything Google wants or needs. Don't forget the patents and the reputation for security. It's very possible that BlackBerry is sitting on a patent that Google really wants, and we all know Google would love to improve its reputation for security.

    Posted via CB10
    Except when bbry was up for sale - all of the tyre-kickers had a good look at what they had and they all passed. Moreover Google has a well established 'take us to court if you dare' attitude to IP.
    Troy Tiscareno and jmr1015 like this.
    09-19-15 12:46 PM
  17. conite's Avatar
    Everyone operates under the assumption that BlackBerry couldn't possibly have anything Google wants or needs. Don't forget the patents and the reputation for security. It's very possible that BlackBerry is sitting on a patent that Google really wants, and we all know Google would love to improve its reputation for security.

    Posted via CB10
    They could buy all of BlackBerry for far less than the cost associated with blowing up the billion-devices-a-year OHA agreement.

    PassportSQW100-4/10.3.2.2639
    09-19-15 12:47 PM
  18. Deitzanova's Avatar
    Everyone operates under the assumption that BlackBerry couldn't possibly have anything Google wants or needs. Don't forget the patents and the reputation for security. It's very possible that BlackBerry is sitting on a patent that Google really wants, and we all know Google would love to improve its reputation for security.

    Posted via CB10
    Aaaaand...here they come. Good luck. Some will use statistics, some will throw random websites. Some will even act like they own Google. I'm outta here. Lol.
    miker476 likes this.
    09-19-15 12:58 PM
  19. igor10000's Avatar
    Except when bbry was up for sale - all of the tyre-kickers had a good look at what they had and they all passed. Moreover Google has a well established 'take us to court if you dare' attitude to IP.
    Yet still Samsung did not buy them, but started that Knox partnership with BlackBerry

    Posted via CB10
    09-19-15 01:03 PM
  20. chickenman18's Avatar
    True, Apple or Google could buy BlackBerry for a bucket of pucks. Except for one thing..

    The pesky fact that BlackBerry makes and secures devices for high levels of government.

    I know that some will scoff at this, but when it comes to government, throw all common sense out the window. Perhaps the reason BlackBerry never got bought was because governments required it to run as a stand alone business and not stripped down for parts. That would mean extra expense for duplication of services that buyers wouldn't want to risk.

    Again. This is speculation.

    Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android
    09-19-15 01:05 PM
  21. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    Aaaaand...here they come. Good luck. Some will use statistics, some will throw random websites. Some will even act like they own Google. I'm outta here. Lol.
    And some will get really mysterious to give the impression that if we only knew what they were talking about... it would make sense.
    09-19-15 01:07 PM
  22. Deitzanova's Avatar
    And some will get really mysterious to give the impression that if we only knew what they were talking about... it would make sense.
    Help. There is a dog after my Garfield. Lol.

    To be honest I have no clue what you couldn't understand from my posts. And I'm not being mysterious and not creating any impression.
    09-19-15 01:14 PM
  23. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    Help. There is a dog after my Garfield. Lol.

    To be honest I have no clue what you couldn't understand from my posts. And I'm not being mysterious and not creating any impression.
    I submit the following.

    Erm... No.

    There is no wishful thinking here. It's about discussing the possibilities IF a precedent is set today for a certain manufacturer. It leads to some very interesting thoughts and ideas. The police I refer to, rehash the same book of rules again and again. Some even go to the lengths of ridiculing other people's opinions (ideas).

    As for the precedent that I mention, a precedent will be set. Maybe not today, maybe not for BlackBerry, but, it WILL be set at some point in the future for somebody.
    Please explain what you are driving at here.
    09-19-15 01:19 PM
  24. Deitzanova's Avatar
    Please explain what you are driving at here.
    Sorry, I really do not understand what is there to explain. It is all there in plain words.
    09-19-15 01:32 PM
  25. crackbrry fan's Avatar
    True, Apple or Google could buy BlackBerry for a bucket of pucks. Except for one thing..

    The pesky fact that BlackBerry makes and secures devices for high levels of government.

    I know that some will scoff at this, but when it comes to government, throw all common sense out the window. Perhaps the reason BlackBerry never got bought was because governments required it to run as a stand alone business and not stripped down for parts. That would mean extra expense for duplication of services that buyers wouldn't want to risk.

    Again. This is speculation.

    Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android
    It not speculation any sale of BlackBerry would require that the Canadian government approve the buyer. Despite some who know or think they know it all comments about what Google can do and Not do with the runtime there are.bigger overriding issues that will not be cut and dry as they would like you to believe.

    Posted via CB10
    09-19-15 02:37 PM
90 1234

Similar Threads

  1. To those who complain about BB10 OS updates!
    By dbmalloy in forum General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 09-25-15, 10:14 AM
  2. The Slider looks like a great piece of hardware
    By Z50 in forum BlackBerry Priv
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 09-21-15, 02:56 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-19-15, 04:15 PM
  4. A Passport To Better Days
    By jconran in forum BlackBerry Passport
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-19-15, 09:21 AM
  5. What are the best call block applications for my Classic Blackberry?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum BlackBerry Classic
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-19-15, 03:55 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD