[anon(9721108)]

Not according to today's report...

How many users are on OS for total users again compared to new devices?

So yes, people like nostalgia, retro and it CAN be very profitable.

I have ALREADY covered the fact that hindsight is 20/20 and Blackberry has not always made perfect buisness decisions.

[world traveler and former ceo]

I would go for a new Bold 9900 for strictly communications as I carry a second phone (iphone 5) around also.

From my awesome Passport

Posted via CB10

[anon(9721108)]

If people are receptive to at least one of them, yes.

Not in BlackBerry's case.

Ok let's go in circles shall we. When the iPhone came around, Blackberry made some bad decisions. They tried with the Storm, but overall, there is always a bigger picture.

[anon(9721108)]

I would go for a new Bold 9900 for strictly communications as I carry a second phone (iphone 5) around also.

From my awesome Passport

Posted via CB10

Same, I use an iPhone 5C and a 9900, but I don't carry 2 devices, I just use one at a time. I have no issues using the 9900 for most everything as it can still handle a surprising amount of work.

[anon(9721108)]

I would go for a new Bold 9900 for strictly communications as I carry a second phone (iphone 5) around also.

From my awesome Passport

Posted via CB10

But we can bet it would be upgraded with a new processor, if it was released again today.

[thurask]

But we can bet it would be upgraded with a new processor, if it was released again today.

I wouldn't.

BBOS was a Jenga tower. Read the comments here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/black...jung-myeng-lee

[anon(9721108)]

I wouldn't.

BBOS was a Jenga tower. Read the comments here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/black...jung-myeng-lee

Ok so......they wouldn't learn from mistakes?

I still think they would upgrade the processor or board, it would have to keep up, but you can still have a smaller retro-styled 9900 with updated guts, I don't see why not.

If Ford makes ONE mistake in building the Pinto, do we condemn the entire company and boycott them and never buy any Ford product ever again?

A company has to learn from its mistakes and hopefully remain profitable, any company.

[thurask]

I still think they would upgrade the processor or board, it would have to keep up, but you can still have a smaller retro-styled 9900 with updated guts, I don't see why not.

The link was why that isn't feasible.

Components from this decade won't just magically work with an OS that hasn't been touched in the past four years. To do so would require BlackBerry to put developers they don't have to work repairing an OS that was outdated six years ago, bringing some mess of spaghetti with a 1998 pager OS at its core into the current day.

If reading isn't your strong suit, I'll quote the relevant parts:

The BlackBerry OS and Java were inefficient, and would only get worse with deeper pipelines of newer processor architectures that were already in the market with more coming (ARM v7, v7a - Cortex-A8, Cortex-A9, Cortex-A7/15...). Further, a multi-core architecture was clearly coming and the old BlackBerry OS and Java really was not designed for that. Sure, some limited load sharing could have been created, but really it was way, way past time for retirement. The Herculean efforts needed to get BB7 out was proof as well that something newer was needed.

The BlackBerry OS had both a public and private existence, what the public believed was the OS, was primarily the Java JVM, the public had very little exposure to or even knowledge of the existence of the actual OS that powered the JVM. So many of the issues and performance were from the JVM, and a strong reluctance from the JVM group to implement changes suggested and recommended by the OS group. Some of the big performance improvements in BB7 were a result of the JVM group *finally* implementing some of those suggestions. Those changed could have been done years before. The JVM consumed a huge amount of memory, with a large portion of that dedicated to how it managed it's internal file system. There was an internal project that introduced a native file system at the OS level, that would have reduced the memory footprint by the JVM significantly. The OS portion of the project was completed, and the native file system even supported a POSIX API. The code never made it into production, it was cancelled by the JVM team because it would have required significant changes to the JVM, and the group didn't have the resources for the job.
...
On a different front, the BBOS already supported multiple threads (the JVM didn't make use of them), and the OS team had started down the path of implementing multi-core SMP support. The team within the OS group doing this had started to prepare the rest of the OS group for what changes they would need to make to the existing code and drivers to make it work smoothly in a multi-core environment, and were about to start their SMP implementation. The timing was unfortunate, this was right when QNX was acquired, so the work was shelved since QNX already had extensive SMP support.

Expecting BlackBerry to pull a miracle out of its **** and turn this dumpster fire into something that won't have the stock market laugh them all the way to Chapter 11 is ludicrous.

[ohaiguise]

Why not? Bound to sell better than the ridiculously named and even more ridiculously priced Privvy

[anon(9721108)]

The link was why that isn't feasible.

Components from this decade won't just magically work with an OS that hasn't been touched in the past four years. To do so would require BlackBerry to put developers they don't have to work repairing an OS that was outdated six years ago, bringing some mess of spaghetti with a 1998 pager OS at its core into the current day.

If reading isn't your strong suit, I'll quote the relevant parts:





Expecting BlackBerry to pull a miracle out of its **** and turn this dumpster fire into something that won't have the stock market laugh them all the way to Chapter 11 is ludicrous.

zzzzzzzz you quote from a long winded software engineer who admits he made "bad decisions" and that was exactly my point when I said "not every Blackberry decision ever made was perfect" and that "hindsite is 20/20."

my POINT AGAIN is that RETRO SELLS (pay attention) and that they could make a 9900 styled RETRO device with whatever GUTS they want to put into it and it would sell. (think iphone SE here and apples philosophy).....RETRO styling (5S) and NEW Processor.

I dont give a **** if the processor comes from North Korea, they CAN make a newer model with a new processor. IF THEY WANTED TO. Retro sells.

perhaps you should learn to relax, sit on a beach, maybe you can come up with a way to save Blackberry all by yourself, use some logic, tweet John Chen, cheer up

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[Ronindan]

the point of the matter is that bb is not going all out with smartphones any more. the company is changing back to what it was; a enterprise software developer. The earnings report and
call today made that clear.

[thurask]

zzzzzzzz you quote from a long winded software engineer who admits he made "bad decisions" and that was exactly my point when I said "not every Blackberry decision ever made was perfect" and that "hindsite is 20/20."

I quote two former BB engineers saying that BBOS was a flaming pile of garbage by the time BB decided to get rid of it and move onto something from this millennium. Importantly, the "flaming pile of garbage" sentiment was shared by the majority of the public, as evidenced by the speed at which RIM/BB went from hero to zero.

my POINT AGAIN is that RETRO SELLS (pay attention) and that they could make a 9900 styled RETRO device with whatever GUTS they want to put into it and it would sell. (think iphone SE here and apples philosophy).....RETRO styling (5S) and NEW Processor.

So it's got the 9900 look but internals from this decade? You mean the Classic, which was an obvious sales success.

Retro only works with nostalgia, and the amount of people feeling nostalgic for BBOS dwindles daily. Enough people have good memories of some 1960s deathtrap for car companies to make a car with new guts and an old-style look such that they can squeeze some money out of them. Not enough people have good memories of BBOS, if any memory at all. The market has spoken, and most people on the lower end of the actuarial table have no desire to party like it's 1999.

As for your assertion that the iPhone 5S is retro, is 2013 really far enough to be considered "retro"?

[Bbnivende]

If you have the basic body design of a 9900 but running internals of a modern Android smartphone, it might sell if priced similar to an iPhone SE. Conversely, a modern but cheap Android slab phone that is BIS capable might sell really well in Nigeria and Indonesia , both very big markets.

A new BBOS phone would not sell very well even if it were technically feasible. You can buy BBOS phones for next to nothing and a new processor would probably make little difference for texting and emails.

[Jerry A]

There is ALWAYS a market for retro things, it does not mean the company overall made EVERY failed decision the correct way. There is always a bigger picture.

Retro things are great. But they're standalone items. Smartphones right now are on-ramps to their various ecosystems.

Using your bad car analogy above, how well would those vehicles sell to the general public if they couldn't drive to the:?supermarket, movie theater, school, etc?

[anon(9721108)]

the point of the matter is that bb is not going all out with smartphones any more. the company is changing back to what it was; a enterprise software developer. The earnings report and
call today made that clear.

and MY point was that Retro can and DOES sell, I more than proved that to you

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[TgeekB]

Dodge can faff about with retro-styled Challengers because they also have cars designed for 2016 that people can buy. BlackBerry doesn't have the luxury to push two failing device lines.

Furthermore, taking the VW Beetle as an example, I don't think a 2016 Beetle shares much in the way mechanically with a 1939 Beetle. It may have retro style, but it has modern amenities like a fuel gauge. On the other hand, given the state of BBOS, it's stone knives and bear skins compared to anything else on the market.

Exactly. The comparison isn't even close.

[TgeekB]

My god, do the right thing and sign the DNR. Nostalgia only works at Disney.

[anon(9721108)]

I quote two former BB engineers saying that BBOS was a flaming pile of garbage by the time BB decided to get rid of it and move onto something from this millennium. Importantly, the "flaming pile of garbage" sentiment was shared by the majority of the public, as evidenced by the speed at which RIM/BB went from hero to zero.



So it's got the 9900 look but internals from this decade? You mean the Classic, which was an obvious sales success.

Retro only works with nostalgia, and the amount of people feeling nostalgic for BBOS dwindles daily. Enough people have good memories of some 1960s deathtrap for car companies to make a car with new guts and an old-style look such that they can squeeze some money out of them. Not enough people have good memories of BBOS, if any memory at all. The market has spoken, and most people on the lower end of the actuarial table have no desire to party like it's 1999.

As for your assertion that the iPhone 5S is retro, is 2013 really far enough to be considered "retro"?

no I do NOT mean the Classic, I said the form factor of the 9900, and that means smaller, with improved guts. Its really quite a simple formula, and many in the 9900 forums and here have said they would "line up" to buy one.

yes, Retro is Nostalgia, and Millions have fond memories for things of old, even 2013 old. My 9900 works just epic, and I would rather take the word of millions who still use BBOS who LOVE IT than any failed software engineer who never uses one on a daily basis.

I do not go around dissing on your device, so don't go dissing on others in here who love their BBOS devices.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[anon(9721108)]

Retro things are great. But they're standalone items.

Using your bad car analogy above, how well would those vehicles sell to the general public if they couldn't drive to the:?supermarket, movie theater, school, etc?

stand alone items? they were the bread and butter of Blackberry for a long time, that has to be accepted first.

ah but the retro cars DO drive to the supermarket, movie theatre and school, and so much more

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[Jerry A]

stand alone items? they were the bread and butter of Blackberry for a long time, that has to be accepted first.

ah but the retro cars DO drive to the supermarket, movie theatre and school, and so much more

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

Being the "bread and butter" a decade ago and being relevant to the general buying public in today's market are two different things.

[anon(9721108)]

If you have the basic body design of a 9900 but running internals of a modern Android smartphone, it might sell if priced similar to an iPhone SE. Conversely, a modern but cheap Android slab phone that is BIS capable might sell really well in Nigeria and Indonesia , both very big markets.

A new BBOS phone would not sell very well even if it were technically feasible. You can buy BBOS phones for next to nothing and a new processor would probably make little difference for texting and emails.

He gets it! Exactly! But many will not entertain the possibility of this formula for a device even though others are doing it. Like when Galaxy had the S4 and they also offered a cheaper and smaller S4 MINI. I was actually considering the Mini because I was coming from a 9780 and wanted to keep a smaller device. I went with iphone because the 4 incher is still smallish by any standards.

Innovation and updating is essential and I would say that a 9900 sized device with what you described would be a sweet little device.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[anon(9721108)]

Exactly. The comparison isn't even close.

yet MANY have used the comparison, many before me. The arguement was that "retro does not sell" and it certainly has in many aspects of the marketplace. THAT was the point.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[thurask]

ah but the retro cars DO drive to the supermarket, movie theatre and school, and so much more

Yet, a lemon BBOS car isn't let into the Instagram supermarket, Google Play movie theater or Snapchat school, is it.

Again, if Y2K killed your clock, by all means, keep using BBOS. Until BB shuts down BIS to pay the bills.

[anon(9721108)]

My god, do the right thing and sign the DNR. Nostalgia only works at Disney.

a Generalization that is easy to criticize. And what does Disney have to do with Blackberry then, any more than retro styling has to do with the success of the VW Beetle or Dodge Challenger sales?

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[TgeekB]

yet MANY have used the comparison, many before me. The arguement was that "retro does not sell" and it certainly has in many aspects of the marketplace. THAT was the point.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

Retro does sell, but I think the fit has to be just right. There have to be enough people, like you, who say "wait, that might be really cool!" In order for it to work. It doesn't work automatically.

I understand your love for the 9900 and how you want it to come back in retro form, I just don't think a dying hardware company is going to pull it off.