[TGR1]

Oh, ok, so who had the cookie jar or mounted fish again? I'm still confused on if that's Apple or BlackBerry you're talking about.

Neither specifically in this instance. Just a comment on features applicable to any industry. But if you want an example for both sides, I would say Bridge qualified (technically brilliant but poorly thought out for the practical implications) and skeumorphism in iOS (some elements slowed the UI in earlier revisions to a crawl).

[Oglon3r]

this^^^

To those that suggest BlackBerry should not have developed or touted the BB10 android virtual machine, can you explain why key apps have not been ported from Android to BB10? I mean, just the Android port, not ported to BB10 native.

It seems to me that if the Android VM was a strategic error, not doing it would have had some positive impact... like perhaps more vendors would have developed BB10 native apps if there was no Android VM?

How does it make sense that developers who couldn't be bothered to sign / build their Android apps for BB10 would be interested to build native BB10 apps?

The Android VM was presented by BlackBerry developer relations as a means to lower the cost for app developers to come on board with BB10, which is what it is. We all know the uptake with Android devs hasn't met expectations. Since BB10 launch, BlackBerry has done an end run around developers by bringing the Amazon App store (and it's catalog of apps that don't rely on Google services) on board.

Posted via CB10

I disagree. This is what they call a sinking ship strategy if you think about it.
They understood that development on OS10 was going to be unlikely, thus they facilitated it for developers to port to the Android VM.
This of course a move to satisfy the app hungry crowd and so far they've succeed.
How many of us don't run one or more Android apps?
It is without a doubt one of the main selling points for BlackBerry honestly;.
If we could get people to realize;
"You can run android apps without Google botnet, on an extra secure platform? " They would undoubtedly would want to sign in. This is the same reason why Google in its current position is fighting back with the continuous development of Google play services.
They are in a sense attempting to make android a closed ecosystem like iOS.
It is that simple.

Supporting the people's struggle worldwide via my STA 100-5, Z30.

[Bbnivende]

Thanks .. I had to look skeumorphism up and learned something.

[tuxedo323]

Man all I know is Chen better know what the *#&$ he's doing or he better start making a plan "B" or plan "C" because even BlackBerry users are starting to say "too little, too late" and that's just downright sad.

Even if thats just people's opinions (which it is) people are starting (some have been for a long time) to give up on BlackBerry all together or at least on the handset market.

Rant over*

Posted via CB10

There is a plan B. "If the right offer comes along" Chen has made it clear what his plans are. Stop the hemorrhage, stabilize, and offload is the boardroom gameplan I'm pretty sure.

Posted via CB10

[kfh227]

Just curious, what research could they have done to predict that smart phone ownership would go from celebrities and executives and people of moderate to high income (because of the monthly operating costs) to literally every kid from 10 years old and up, every grandmother and soccer mom and landscape worker, etc. etc? How could they have predicted that in just a few years this market would exist?

That is why you hire a futurist. Dual touch screen interfaces were demoed in the late 90s. Getting it on a touchscreen was the innovation that Apple leveraged. CPUs are miniaturized all the time (miniaturization started 50 years ago). We are not on 8" floppy disks anymore. Smaller means faster and with less heat and using less power. The Palm Pilot already existed as a proof of concept. People moved from desktops to laptops (miniaturization). This convergence was bound to happen. Anyone that is employed on staff as a futurist would actually know details/pricing data and have a vision for how to integrate things together. Even the old Blackberries had an LCD screen. Of course the screen tech would improve. Screens may not have gotten bigger but they would become higher resolution.

The Palm Treo was in 2003.
Treo 600 Specs & Latest News | Palm | The Verge

You think this would be what phones were going to look like in 2013?

Research though? Go to trade conventions for display technology? Go to CES? Go to trade shows for microichip manufacturers. Have a PoC at Intel and AMD and be kept up to date on their 3 year plan?

Did you know that even video game makers do this? Ya, crazy. The computers they start developing on are not the target hardware? They have to guess at what CPU power will be like in 3 years.

And today, it is totally conceivable to think that within 10 years everyone will have one device without a screen and you will use dumb terminals that use secure open protocols for communication. There are prototpyes of flexible transparent screens. Even this is not unimaginable (see Total Recall reboot):
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...d=0CB4QMygCMAI

[kfh227]

Association of Professional Futurists - What Is A Futurist?

[lnichols]

One thing Apple did and still does quite well is foster a fierce loyalty to the brand. The iPod generation became the iPod Touch generation. That segment graduated to the iPhone (and in many cases, iPad). RIM didn't cater to their core users, especially with the dramatic change in user experience from BBOS to BB10. Failure to migrate users to the new OS compounded the issue. They could have even kept users loyal to the brand if BBM cross platform was released five years ago. Now they have to figure out how to build up their following and user base again, especially when enterprise users are more content using iOS and Android.

I think their problem is that they never catered to the their core end user. They viewed their end user as the CIO of a company, not the people being forced to use their devices by the CIO, a captive audience. Strategy put them in a lot of hands until the CIO's had to give in to the screams of the end users who wanted all touch and apps, and the platforms were deemed secure enough for many enterprise users. I seriously don't believe for one second that if BlackBerry had released a Classic at BB10 launch, that it would have increased sales at all. They needed BES12 and 10.2.1 at launch to have any chance of the platform being successful, not a partially functioning BES10 that still required you to keep BES 5 and 10.0/10.1 rebooting software on phones. They should have learned with the PlayBook launch that releasing beta software and a two server management solution was a recipe for failure, but they were running behind and just wanted to get something out the door.

Posted via CB10

[Blacklatino]

One thing Apple did and still does quite well is foster a fierce loyalty to the brand. The iPod generation became the iPod Touch generation. That segment graduated to the iPhone (and in many cases, iPad). RIM didn't cater to their core users, especially with the dramatic change in user experience from BBOS to BB10. Failure to migrate users to the new OS compounded the issue. They could have even kept users loyal to the brand if BBM cross platform was released five years ago. Now they have to figure out how to build up their following and user base again, especially when enterprise users are more content using iOS and Android.

Yeah, the loyalty was also there for BlackBerry 6-7 years ago. I believe it's going to take more than Chen(or a plan B) to get it back. Actually, I thought Chen "was" BlackBerries' plan B. As far as the OPs' post, not everyone - whether new and a few older members may have fully understood that the RIM/BlackBerry decline was inevitable based on the paradigm put in place by RIM CEOs........long before Heins, Chen or the current BB10 era.

[Bbnivende]

For the most part, their customers for the years 2012 & 2013 were in Africa, India and Asia. They sold a lot of BBOS product on the basis of BIS and BBM. They did place themselves as dominant players in certain markets. Rather than consolidating their gains by offering better phones at cheaper prices they just milked these markets with high priced low spec Curves. There are still millions of legacy product out there in Jakarta, Mumbai and Liverpool and BlackBerry's only answer was the high priced Q5 and Z3. The emerging markets are being taken over by local product that is not even sold here in North America. BlackBerry should be licensing a version of BB10 as almost a free open source OS just to create a market for higher priced real BlackBerry phones to graduate to. Currently there is no real BlackBerry option for the millions of Curves still in use.

[lnichols]

For the most part, their customers for the years 2012 & 2013 were in Africa, India and Asia. They sold a lot of BBOS product on the basis of BIS and BBM. They did place themselves as dominant players in certain markets. Rather than consolidating their gains by offering better phones at cheaper prices they just milked these markets with high priced low spec Curves. There are still millions of legacy product out there in Jakarta, Mumbai and Liverpool and BlackBerry's only answer was the high priced Q5 and Z3. The emerging markets are being taken over by local product that is not even sold here in North America. BlackBerry should be licensing a version of BB10 as almost a free open source OS just to create a market for higher priced real BlackBerry phones to graduate to. Currently there is no real BlackBerry option for the millions of Curves still in use.

BlackBerry was losing money on that BBOS hardware for those markets. They only made up the money after the BIS fees for a certain amount of the time. Unsustainable business model as BIS is good for low bandwidth, high data cost markets, but every market is migrating to higher bandwidth technologies which decreases the cost of data. This is why their developing markets are flocking to cheap Android on the low end, and iOS for the high end. BIS provides zero value add in 3G, 4G, 4G/LTE markets, and few would pay extra for it in those markets.

Right now I have unlimited 4G LTE in the US, and I'm on a business trip now to Australia and have unlimited but heavily throttled 4G data in Australia for under $80 per month via T-Mobile. Wouldn't want BIS ever. $150 for five phones on the plan with limits.

Posted via CB10

[DrBoomBotz]

Just curious, what research could they have done to predict that smart phone ownership would go from celebrities and executives and people of moderate to high income (because of the monthly operating costs) to literally every kid from 10 years old and up, every grandmother and soccer mom and landscape worker, etc. etc? How could they have predicted that in just a few years this market would exist?

Around 2001/2002 some of my peers were excitedly talking about "4G".
I asked what "4G" meant in the context of that conversation and they explained that it was a newer faster cell phone technology.
When they explained how fast it would be I asked why anyone would need that amount of speed. They had a pretty good idea what was coming. Within the year those two guys had joined a BIG player in that technology space.

Around 2005/2006 at a new company one of my peers explained in hushed tones about a phone with an ARM processor and a touch screen interface. He would not tell me who was making it. I thought it was nonsense.
I thought it was absolute madness when he explained that it was coming RSN(real soon now). He had a VERY good idea of what was coming.

As someone has already mentioned the iPhone was an immediate success upon release.
At this point even I had a pretty good idea what was happening.

I was just a grunt in the trenches who didn't even have or want a cellphone at the time.

[Supa_Fly1]

I wasn't aware there was much argument about it.. or maybe I just realized it long ago so I don't pay much attention now. Mike and Jim were a blessing and a curse to BlackBerry. Thorsten was the fall guy, the clean up man and Chen was brought in to put the pieces back together. I dunno how anyone could really blame Thorsten or Chen with straight face. The insane quotes from Mike and Jim alone should be enough to squash most 'arguments' lol.

You're about to hear a resounding "WHAT" from me on this one.

Jim was a blessing and a curse to BlackBerry, the latter was his focus to buying an NHL team - wasted focus and $$ that simply didn't make sense. Also to add listening to his daughter in high school about creating a clamshell BlackBerry as she was a focus group? Yeah also some liked it is was a dirty stinking bomb in their entire lineup.

Jim and Mike made BlackBerry what it is and gave it legs to STILL be in business today!! A Networking, Security, and infrastructure company! If it wasn't for their efforts BlackBerry would NEVER be in existence today - meaning Fairfax and Chen would not have any foundation for the company to focus on at all!

^ don't ever forget that folks.

Heins, is not a fall guy! He was a baphoon all the way. Showing off leaked Z10 long before it was ready at Raptors games may have been his very best move save for working with Vivek to show off the key parts of BB10. Using stands for two smartphones on stage during BB10 launch (? The silence was palpable), bringing up Mercedes-Benz global R&D director (ahem Former at that time so no direct impact to MB at all) was senseless! Should never have been done unless an IoT deal was to be announced!!
There are other dumb moves he made such as approving over $1mil Canadian dollars (when those funds where worth 93 cents US) for a ridiculous AD that only mindlessly fans where excited about; common Elephant Feet, pong balls out of a truck - WTF this isn't Mr Rogers world or Pokadot Door this is consumer and enterprise business machine here! That is just to name a few - lest we forget hiring all his friends into executive leadership roles where only 1 produced any significant value laying the path of restructuring today - Chen's pills actually have real world experience and charitable goals exactly where the company is right now!

Mike at least had the vision and sense to rebuild their NOC, OS and future based on QNX as the core - HE and HE aline seeks out Mr Dodge for that deal and it's paying off huge dividends to Corporate usefulness.

Care to rebuttal that?

Posted via CB10

[Bbnivende]

BlackBerry was losing money on that BBOS hardware for those markets. They only made up the money after the BIS fees for a certain amount of the time. Unsustainable business model as BIS is good for low bandwidth, high data cost markets, but every market is migrating to higher bandwidth technologies which decreases the cost of data. This is why their developing markets are flocking to cheap Android on the low end, and iOS for the high end. BIS provides zero value add in 3G, 4G, 4G/LTE markets, and few would pay extra for it in those markets.

Right now I have unlimited 4G LTE in the US, and I'm on a business trip now to Australia and have unlimited but heavily throttled 4G data in Australia for under $80 per month via T-Mobile. Wouldn't want BIS ever. $150 for five phones on the plan with limits.

Posted via CB10

This is the reality of the Nigerian market.

The Power of Android, Articles | THISDAY LIVE

What is the experience of a USA based consumer with five phones may not be what is happening in other parts of the world. Shocking isn't it.

Still you may be correct, BlackBerry can't seem to compete anywhere.

[lnichols]

This is the reality of the Nigerian market.

The Power of Android, Articles | THISDAY LIVE

What is the experience of a USA based consumer with five phones may not be what is happening in other parts of the world. Shocking isn't it.

Still you may be correct, BlackBerry can't seem to compete anywhere.

Yes but at the rapid rate of wireless tech deployments, it won't be that long until Nigeria is same. If data costs were such a sticking point, cheap Android wouldn't be doing so well in these emerging markets.

Posted via CB10

[Bbnivende]

Nigeria has 184,782,512 mobile subscribers. You have to imagine far fewer sources of free data via Wifi, less opportunity for high speed and much lower incomes. This was an important market for BlackBerry. To walk away from your strongest markets for a slim hope for the sudden reappearance of the business phone seems to be a poor strategy.

BlackBerry must be viable on an International level to continue. They need to do something other than what they have been doing over the past year.

[LuvULongTime]

Nigeria has 184,782,512 mobile subscribers. You have to imagine far fewer sources of free data via Wifi, less opportunity for high speed and much lower incomes. This was an important market for BlackBerry. To walk away from your strongest markets for a slim hope for the sudden reappearance of the business phone seems to be a poor strategy.

BlackBerry must be viable on an International level to continue. They need to do something other than what they have been doing over the past year.

As big as markets like Indonesia and Nigeria are, they are low margin markets for any smartphone maker. BlackBerry was able to make money there and do quite well because of BIS, and the value proposition it offered. This no longer exists with BB10. No name, low cost Androids have taken over. Markets like this epitomize 'the race to the bottom'. I see where Chen is trying to go by focusing on enterprise, specifically highly security conscious US enterprise customers. I see it like this:

Focus on enterprise -> Win enterprise -> Get the new phones in people's hands via enterprise -> People realize they are actually pretty good -> Demand outside of enterprise materializes as people have grown exposed and accustomed to BB10 -> Marketshare slowly starts to increase -> Devs start to take notice -> More apps start to appear -> More apps help to gain more consumers 'looking for something different' -> Snowball of momentum continues.

I'm not suggesting world dominance. But 10% worldwide marketshare can be achieved for both BB10 (and Win Phone) if they are willing to hang in there and slowly build their ecosystems.

Windows phone did something similar, except they went the low cost phone route to get phones into peoples hands. The Lumia 520 was a great phone at a great price that helped get Win Phone exposure.

I believe the US market is at the epicenter of everything. Win mind share there, and it will ripple across the rest of the world. iOS essentially did this. Focus on the US, and reap the rewards worldwide. BlackBerry needs to do the same.

[birdman_38]

Focus on enterprise -> Win enterprise -> Get the new phones in people's hands via enterprise -> People realize they are actually pretty good -> Demand outside of enterprise materializes as people have grown exposed and accustomed to BB10 -> Marketshare slowly starts to increase -> Devs start to take notice -> More apps start to appear -> More apps help to gain more consumers 'looking for something different' -> Snowball of momentum continues.

I'm not suggesting world dominance. But 10% worldwide marketshare can be achieved for both BB10 (and Win Phone) if they are willing to hang in there and slowly build their ecosystems.

That kind of game plan (especially with BlackBerry's lack of ecosystem) would take a good 5 to 7 years. Microsoft holds the advantage with a full ecosystem with Windows 10. With the right marketing, Windows Phone could hit 10% in half the time BlackBerry would.

Without a strong ecosystem, BlackBerry will always be the 4th place player.

[birdman_38]

I'm curious to know what the current culture is like at BlackBerry. Does anybody here have an inside perspective?

[LuvULongTime]

That kind of game plan (especially with BlackBerry's lack of ecosystem) would take a good 5 to 7 years. Microsoft holds the advantage with a full ecosystem with Windows 10. With the right marketing, Windows Phone could hit 10% in half the time BlackBerry would.

Without a strong ecosystem, BlackBerry will always be the 4th place player.

Agreed that the strategy I outlined above would take time. However, if it could ever build in a positive direction then the ecosystem would slowly build along with it (the snowball effect). If 10m devices is the break even target then I could see them staying in the HW business for a while assuming they actually release new devices on a year over year basis at the same time (like Apple). As long as HW is not a drag on the company then it would be prudent for them to stay in that business. The long term benefits far outweigh the short term struggles they are experiencing today.

[Bbnivende]

Agreed that the strategy I outlined above would take time. However, if it could ever build in a positive direction then the ecosystem would slowly build along with it (the snowball effect). If 10m devices is the break even target then I could see them staying in the HW business for a while assuming they actually release new devices on a year over year basis at the same time (like Apple). As long as HW is not a drag on the company then it would be prudent for them to stay in that business. The long term benefits far outweigh the short term struggles they are experiencing today.

I am assuming that you are referring to Chen's strategy as the one you outlined. The problem with this strategy is two fold. They do not have the hardware that USA enterprise consumers want (high end all touch) and they do not have access to a credible app store. Enterprise users will not be using Snap nor Amazon

You refer to a slowly growing ecosystem. What would that be?

[LuvULongTime]

I am assuming that you are referring to Chen's strategy as the one you outlined. The problem with this strategy is two fold. They do not have the hardware that USA enterprise consumers want (high end all touch) and they do not have access to a credible app store. Enterprise users will not be using Snap nor Amazon

You refer to a slowly growing ecosystem. What would that be?

The HW issue can be fixed. Chen made the Classic because this is what his customers told him they wanted. If they want a touch, he will make it. However, it seems touch devices are still considered (rightly or wrongly) to be more consumer centric.

To answer your second question, please go back and look at the flow I laid out in my second last post.

[lnichols]

Nigeria has 184,782,512 mobile subscribers. You have to imagine far fewer sources of free data via Wifi, less opportunity for high speed and much lower incomes. This was an important market for BlackBerry. To walk away from your strongest markets for a slim hope for the sudden reappearance of the business phone seems to be a poor strategy.

BlackBerry must be viable on an International level to continue. They need to do something other than what they have been doing over the past year.

Yes but what cost does a phone need to be to be successful there? My guess is very low and probably cheaper than the Z3, and lower than BlackBerry can compete without the BIS revenues to offset losing money on the hardware. Unfortunately BlackBerry 10 is a horribly optimized OS, partially due to the Android runtime and hub. It can't run on 512 MB RAM devices like Android and Windows phone can. Eventually as technology cheapens some more they might be able to get a low enough cost device there.

Posted via CB10

[Bbnivende]

The HW issue can be fixed. Chen made the Classic because this is what his customers told him they wanted. If they want a touch, he will make it. However, it seems touch devices are still considered (rightly or wrongly) to be more consumer centric.

To answer your second question, please go back and look at the flow I laid out in my second last post.

I hope they fix the HW issue. They need budget and high end all touch phones. I have friends in business and Enterprise and their overwhelming preference is all touch after having employer supplied 9900's . I realize that this evidence is anecdotal.

The Classic is an excellent phone for communication but most users of all stripes are wanting a facsimile of the iPhone.

[birdman_38]

The HW issue can be fixed. Chen made the Classic because this is what his customers told him they wanted. If they want a touch, he will make it. However, it seems touch devices are still considered (rightly or wrongly) to be more consumer centric.

Based on the demand and market realities, it's reasonable to assume BlackBerry already has a high end touch prototype. The challenge is manufacturing one that has the same specs & performance as today's current high ends at a reasonable price. They don't move enough units to source low cost components. Then they need to convince carriers to order healthy amounts of stock. It would be difficult for them to offer a $900 BlackBerry touchscreen when there's such low demand for the line.

Management realizes this, and Chen himself has said they will not build a touchscreen unless it's distinctively different. That's why the only high end touch we'll likely see in the future is a Passport sequel with no keyboard.

[Bbnivende]

I thought that Foxconn has the where with all to build higher end phones at a reasonable price.