[tinochiko]

Yeah, we're talking BB7 and how it continues to sell 3 years later.

If I'm not mistaken BB10 sales are also dropping


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow, I don't even say anything and you assume that I put that there to attack you.. what has that data got to do with BB10 sales? I was merely pointing out that legacy is coming down from a high high, so the 'millions' it sells now should be in context..

TechCraze C0008DDD1

[garnok]

There are markets around the world where BlackBerry was King. In Nigeria and Indonesia for example the BlackBerry was a both a status symbol and a requirement for messaging. In these countries BBOS is in decline too but a market does not go to zero overnight. BBOS sales are falling that is the take away. Whether or not BB10 can replace those sales is the unknown. The known is that BBOS is fading away and will eventually or stop altogether if BlackBerry can not make a go of it with BB10.

To go along with the car analogy. The old VW beetle had a long run long after production ended in Germany. They could have kept on improving the old beetle but at some point it could no longer compete even in these emerging markets.

i dont know about nigeria...but in indonesia no BB is not the king anymore , BB phone price are dropping, they sell BB10 price lower than they sell in other countries, and they are beaten by samsung (selling triple) and andromax while lenovo, LG closing BB sales number

[belfastdispatcher]

Wow, I don't even say anything and you assume that I put that there to attack you.. what has that data got to do with BB10 sales? I was merely pointing out that legacy is coming down from a high high, so the 'millions' it sells now should be in context..

TechCraze C0008DDD1

It's not relevant to the discussion. I myself said I'm surprised it still sells in millions 3 years after it was launched.

Logically It shouldn't sell at all but it does, so it's only natural to think updated models would actually increase sales. Clearly there is a niche market for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tinochiko]

It's not relevant to the discussion. I myself said I'm surprised it still sells in millions 3 years after it was launched.

Logically It shouldn't sell at all but it does, so it's only natural to think updated models would actually increase sales. Clearly there is a niche market for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How is it logical that it shouldn't sell at all? If it's not too much trouble may you break down that logic please.. things don't just disappear; both physically and from people's minds...

And which launch are you referring to exactly? ..

TechCraze C0008DDD1

[belfastdispatcher]

How is it logical that it shouldn't sell at all? If it's not too much trouble may you break down that logic please.. things don't just disappear; both physically and from people's minds...

And which launch are you referring to exactly? ..

TechCraze C0008DDD1

The launch of BB7 3 years ago.

Logically BB7 shouldn't keep selling especially when it has technically been replaced by BB10 one year ago. Yet it's still in the shops and millions a quarter still buy them.

What other manufacturer still sells 3 year old devices? And I don't mean left over stock at third party resellers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tinochiko]

The launch of BB7 3 years ago.

Logically BB7 shouldn't keep selling especially when it has technically been replaced by BB10 one year ago. Yet it's still in the shops and millions a quarter still buy them.

What other manufacturer still sells 3 year old devices? And I don't mean left over stock at third party resellers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You've just repeated your statement though haven't explained your logic... needs a 'because' I don't see the cause and effect that says something that was selling multimillions should suddenly stop being sold after 3 years, as long as there's demand there's supply..



That doesn't mean that the new devices aren't good enough necessarily, it's just brining us back to the title of the poet, which I believe has more to do with marketing than the devices themselves, there's plenty of examples of devices that have sold amazingly well when in fact they aren't the best at what they do, but they're portrayed to be because of the advertising..

TechCraze C0008DDD1

[belfastdispatcher]

You've just repeated your statement though haven't explained your logic... needs a 'because' I don't see the cause and effect that says something that was selling multimillions should suddenly stop being sold after 3 years, as long as there's demand there's supply..



That doesn't mean that the new devices aren't good enough necessarily, it's just brining us back to the title of the poet, which I believe has more to do with marketing than the devices themselves, there's plenty of examples of devices that have sold amazingly well when in fact they aren't the best at what they do, but they're portrayed to be because of the advertising..

TechCraze C0008DDD1

So there's a demand for BBOS devices, the only supply is an ageing range of devices. BlackBerry isn't renewing the supply and so they are handing the existing users on a plate to other platforms. After all very few people will use their upgrade to "upgrade" to the same device they had for the past 2-3 years.

The new devices aren't good enough except perhaps when judging the hardware alone.

The new devices are missing Legacy apps, legacy features, legacy services and other platforms apps and services. So who are the new devices for?

To claim it's only marketing fault it's ludicrous.

Other platforms that didn't have much to offer sold well because they did one or two things really well, BB10 does nothing really well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lnichols]

Yeah, we're talking BB7 and how it continues to sell 3 years later.

If I'm not mistaken BB10 sales are also dropping


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What is the ASP for those BB7 devices that are still selling? How much is the service revenue on those BB7 devices declining per device? What part of the carriers don't want to foot the Bill for BIS, and neither does most of the general smartphone buying public are you guys not getting. A few BIS diehards are not going to make the carrier or BlackBerry any money.

Posted via CB10

[Nine54]

The original poster I was quoting said POP is just fine. My response is BB10 supports POP the way it was intended to work. Now if we say you have to have a massive data center sucking massive amounts of power, bandwidth, etc., constantly polling this POP account to make it appear to work like an instant email push protocol account, can we really say this is more efficient?

Notice how BlackBerry service revenues are dropping? Do you think that the HVAC, power, real estate, Internet bandwidth, etc. that is required to run a data center, or in BlackBerry's case data centers because places like India and Middle East have to have them local so they can tap them, is cheap. All of this so you can make a 1990's mail protocol act like a push service.

You guys ponder all that, really think about all that is involved to make that antiquated POP account do what you want it to do, and wonder why BlackBerry decided to move this processing off onto the phone.

Two words: investment and innovation. BlackBerry apparently hasn't done much of either in terms of evolving BIS and extending it to solve new and different problems unrelated to email. Of course if you just sit on your hands, other technologies will catch up and obsolete you.

How much data center horse power do you think it takes to send you that Instagram photo? All these freakin' services use a ton compute resources to provide arguably non-critical services. And, the issue isn't pushing the processing down onto the phone: it's about battery life. We're in a time where more apps and services than ever are constantly polling for updates and draining battery. How is a reliable, battery-efficient notification service not valuable to these social media services and users?

[tinochiko]

So there's a demand for BBOS devices, the only supply is an ageing range of devices. BlackBerry isn't renewing the supply and so they are handing the existing users on a plate to other platforms. After all very few people will use their upgrade to "upgrade" to the same device they had for the past 2-3 years.

The new devices aren't good enough except perhaps when judging the hardware alone.

The new devices are missing Legacy apps, legacy features, legacy services and other platforms apps and services. So who are the new devices for?

To claim it's only marketing fault it's ludicrous.

Other platforms that didn't have much to offer sold well because they did one or two things really well, BB10 does nothing really well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Right because Blackberry didn't release a legacy device towards the end of last year?

The new devices are superior in hardware and software , so much more stable, what you are missing are a few features that you like about BB07, you can't accept the fact that the house is falling apart and no amount of duct tape will prolong it's life for long..

The new devices are for everyone, what exactly is the one one or two things does the android platform do really well? I'm not sure I should even bother asking you questions since you seem to be having difficulty breaking down the logic, in fact you contradicted the facts by saying few people are willing to upgrade to the smartphone device, clearly a lot of people are, a decreasing number though, but they're there, and for the record, if there was no Z30, I would happy upgrade to a new Z10


Them missing all those features is not an accident, the whole point was to replace legacy with something that worked for the average person, my Z10 does browsing amazingly, it does typing beautifully, I really don't know why you're blinding yourself.... some indigenous people will never accept the value of cash, you can throw a million pounds/dollars to them and they'll burn it for fuel, some people are just comfortable where they are, in an ideal world they could be accommodated individuals like you but it's just impractical...


TechCraze C0008DDD1

[belfastdispatcher]

Right because Blackberry didn't release a legacy device towards the end of last year?

The new devices are superior in hardware and software , so much more stable, what you are missing are a few features that you like about BB07, you can't accept the fact that the house is falling apart and no amount of duct tape will prolong it's life for long..

The new devices are for everyone, what exactly is the one one or two things does the android platform do really well? I'm not sure I should even bother asking you questions since you seem to be having difficulty breaking down the logic, in fact you contradicted the facts by saying few people are willing to upgrade to the smartphone device, clearly a lot of people are, a decreasing number though, but they're there, and for the record, if there was no Z30, I would happy upgrade to a new Z10


Them missing all those features is not an accident, the whole point was to replace legacy with something that worked for the average person, my Z10 does browsing amazingly, it does typing beautifully, I really don't know why you're blinding yourself.... some indigenous people will never accept the value of cash, you can throw a million pounds/dollars to them and they'll burn it for fuel, some people are just comfortable where they are, in an ideal world they could be accommodated individuals like you but it's just impractical...


TechCraze C0008DDD1

On, you're right. Remind me how did this strategy work out for BlackBerry? Oh wait, it didn't. End of story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nine54]

This is quite a mainstream view, and why BlackBerry rightly determined to put their efforts into BB10, which addresses all of those things and more, and de-emphasize the legacy platform, which is saddled with a vast array of insurmountable limitations that make it uncompetitive.

It's the "insurmountable" part that I'm not convinced of. And I'm not trying to be contrarian: it's entirely possible that that is true, but I've yet to see any decent explanation of why. Even more, with the rapid hardware advancements and Moore's Law, a brute-force approach of throwing more hardware at the problem might have helped. The 9900 has less than 1 GB of RAM and the OS and apps run within that RAM. BlackBerry could virtualize the whole thing (make it a VM), stick it on a phone with 2 GB RAM, and let it run side-by-side a more modern platform. This would provide a migration path for users, developers, and BlackBerry itself, allowing the legacy platform to be phased out over time as development on the new platform picks up. Apple took a similar approach when it transitioned from System 9 to OS X. It also would have taken some pressure off of BlackBerry to replicate all features in the new platform right out the gate, which is something it obviously wasn't able to do.

BIS requires a substantial, proprietary committment from carriers to run special infrastructure for the sole use of a SINGLE vendor. When BlackBerry was the top product in most global markets, that was a reasonable choice for carriers to make. However today with Blackberry's marketshare eroding to less than 1% in major markets like the USA, a carrier would have to have some sort of masochistic self-destructive management to go out of their way to make such accomodations for such a minor player in the market.

So stop charging carriers to host the servers. Some of the comments on here make it seem like people think that once a technology is productized and sold, that's it: time to wipe the slate clean and start building something entirely new. Stop thinking about it in terms of the technology and start thinking about it in terms of a business.

Pretend that you're a business and your only product is BIS. You'll constantly be faced with threats all around you, some from start-ups, some from veteran players entering the market, and some from completely different technology paradigms. You must invest, innovate, and be willing to step outside your comfort zone before your competitors force you to. If I'm this BIS company, I need to be proactive in thinking about other opportunities for my product and company. What am I good at? Mobile communications, data compression, battery efficiency, and security. Who else can benefit from a product meeting those needs? And how can I ensure that I continue to add value to my existing customers? If my carrier customers don't want to continue paying for BIS, fine; what can I do to BIS to make valuable enough for them to keep paying for it? What other problems are they having where my core competencies in networking, efficiency, and security can lead to new, complimentary products?

My company spent buku bucks acquiring a company only to turn around a few years later and start giving its primary product away for free. And then a couple years after that, it open-sourced it. It has shifted the strategy around the product multiple times based on market factors and corporate initiatives. But guess what, it still invests in developing the product.

Furthermore, the economics of mobile usage today are much much different than they were 5 years ago during the heyday of BIS. People tout how "cheap" it is, but this is not BlackBerry's decision to make, it is the carrier's decision to make how much they charge for their service. And it is really obvious that carriers are tired of giving that service away for next to nothing, especially since data-usage expectations today are VASTLY higher than they were 5 years ago. You can't expect a car that has a top speed of 195 mph to sell for the same price as a car whose top speed is 65mph.

In addition, in emerging markets I am told that many carriers now offer plans for ie Android devices that are just as cheap as ye-olde BIS plans for BlackBerries. So this so-called "price advantage" for BIS isn't a foregone conclusion either.

Again, it's about innovation. Of course the market landscape is going to evolve in 5 years. If your product and business strategy doesn't evolve with it, then you'll become irrelevant. Sure, the market economics have changed, and in today's world of LTE and high-speed networks, some of BIS's value props might not be as attractive. But don't think that carriers still aren't worried about network efficiency. They implement very expensive appliance that do all kinds of data compression and packet prioritization to ensure that the YouTube video you're playing on your phone streams smoothly and doesn't saturate its networks. If I'm that BIS business, maybe there's more value now in me licensing my IP or licensing my network. Maybe I need to expand into a professional services company specializing in mobile communications and security.

Bottom line is that, sure, maybe BlackBerry didn't invest enough in BIS to ensure it stayed ahead of the competition or maybe commoditization of email delivery by EAS was inevitable. Maybe the business model is outdated and a new go-to-market approach is required. Or, maybe innovative product development is needed. Either way, I'm hard-pressed to think there isn't something valuable in both the technology and in the business.

[Omnitech]

Why does OS7 continue to outsell BB10? - Page 44 - BlackBerry Forums at CrackBerry.com
Post number #1087

I skimmed that post and because it mostly just seemed to be you clarifying your opinions on a few things and there were no questions in it that I could see that were directed at me, saw no need to follow-up to it.

[tinochiko]

On, you're right. Remind me how did this strategy work out for BlackBerry? Oh wait, it didn't. End of story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol wow, having a strategy and implementing it properly are two different things, again we can talk all day about why it didn't work as well as they wanted it to, but BlackBerry is still standing and is moving forward, I don't think legacy is something they'll move forward with so the strategy you want them to implement will never come into fruition, so your story's over before it even begins

TechCraze C0008DDD1

[tinochiko]

I skimmed that post and because it mostly just seemed to be you clarifying your opinions on a few things and there were no questions in it that I could see that were directed at me, saw no need to follow-up to it.

It wasn't questions per say; you misunderstood what I meant by ease of transition so after I explained (in length that may have been more than was required ) what I meant I expected you would have a proper response to it since your previous response was responding to a misunderstood meaning on it but if you don't then fair enough..

TechCraze C0008DDD1

[Omnitech]

Right, except you keep conflating old technology with old products. I'm not saying BlackBerry should continue to support the Bold 9000 or OS 4 devices. What I'm saying is, if old technology--just like the manual transmission--still has value, maybe it should continue to be developed and innovated.

No I am not. There are some things that the legacy devices had that are useful (and that I am on the record here many times as suggesting be included in BB10), and a lot of things that should just be thrown into the dustbin of history.

BIS is an example of the latter, for a variety of reasons.

That is what I'm garnering from at least some folks in the discussion.

Fundamentally, they're not saying to resurrect an old platform or support product x until infinity. They're simply saying that product y is not as good at some things they cared about as product x was. That's it.

Then perhaps instead of referencing "some folks" you can get more specific so I can then quote their words over the last 6 months and show you why they are not simply occasionally musing upon missed old features, but incessantly beating this drum for months on end about why BlackBerry made such a horrible mistake to not continue to produce and update legacy devices and/or incorporate features from them into BB10 which are not practical to include.

It's one thing for someone to occasionally post somewhere that they liked Nikon's old FE camera. It's another thing to make post after post after post, day after day after day for months on end, why Nikon was so stupid to discontinue that model, and why they should re-start production tomorrow.

People have these pet features they like, but refuse to adjust their expectations or their crusade when repeatedly informed why these fantasies of theirs are not remotely practical as a business decision. Yeah, there might be 150 people in the world that wouldn't mind buying a new Nikon FE, but 150 people doesn't make production of an old film camera a worthwhile business enterprise. Because the amount of sales it would generate would only be a microscopic fraction of what it would take to break even on that business, and then the people that bought the camera would discover that film and processing for it is getting increasingly harder to find and more expensive and pretty soon will be nearly impossible to find, among various other things.

[Omnitech]

It's only a problem if you're trying to target customers who don't value backwards-compatibility.

And the turnover in smartphone products demonstrates that the VAST majority of smartphone customers do not seem to value backwards compatibility. The average smartphone user changes their phone every 1-2 years. In many cases changing platforms and losing access to whatever apps they had on the prior device.

To me, one of BlackBerry's questionable decisions was not making BB 10 devices compatible with previous BES versions (other than BES 10).

And if I explained to you the very valid technical and competitive reasons why that is so, would you keep beating that drum forever anyway? Please see my recent short comment here about what constitutes a traditionalist.

And I think all people like the idea of their investment being protected and having some longevity.

"Investment protection" in the smartphone market is such a foreign concept that it's actually kind of funny to see you state that. Smartphones these days are not like vehicles or houses, they are more like seasonal fashions. Whether you or I agree or like it or not, that is the market reality.

Well, you did say "Privacy OS," which I figured was a reference to PrivatOS... But care to elaborate then?

I think that is a subject for a different discussion.

[Omnitech]

It's the "insurmountable" part that I'm not convinced of. And I'm not trying to be contrarian: it's entirely possible that that is true, but I've yet to see any decent explanation of why. Even more, with the rapid hardware advancements and Moore's Law, a brute-force approach of throwing more hardware at the problem might have helped. The 9900 has less than 1 GB of RAM and the OS and apps run within that RAM. BlackBerry could virtualize the whole thing (make it a VM), stick it on a phone with 2 GB RAM, and let it run side-by-side a more modern platform. This would provide a migration path for users, developers, and BlackBerry itself, allowing the legacy platform to be phased out over time as development on the new platform picks up. Apple took a similar approach when it transitioned from System 9 to OS X. It also would have taken some pressure off of BlackBerry to replicate all features in the new platform right out the gate, which is something it obviously wasn't able to do.

Honestly I am tiring of all this tl;dr.

And I am weary of people who won't accept things until people go through chapter/verse again and again, and then they come up with yet some other tortured excuse why they just want what they want anyway and that's it.

If you put a faster CPU and more RAM on a legacy device, you lose half the "advantages" of the legacy platform, ie high battery-life and quick charging. Because the batteries have to be larger, the device has to be larger. Because the power usage is higher when the CPU is faster and the RAM is larger, the battery life is less. If you put everything in a VM, performance suffers EVEN MORE than the crappy performance of the legacy OS in the first place, and adds complexity which causes even more problems and complicates development and maintenance. Etc etc.

So stop charging carriers to host the servers.

Good god, man. It makes no difference if BlackBerry charges carriers anything. Operating, maintaining and monitoring additional infrastructure costs money.

Some of the comments on here make it seem like people think that once a technology is productized and sold, that's it: time to wipe the slate clean and start building something entirely new.

Now you're just starting to sound like a pointless crank, ideologue and devil's advocate.

Stop thinking about it in terms of the technology and start thinking about it in terms of a business.

And that's hilarious because as I have previously pointed-out, it is PRECISELY the fact that the traditionalists DON'T CARE about the business-case for getting their old features back which is the absurd thing about all of this pointless debate.

It's always laughable to watch people in the minority fringe speak as if the whole world wants some obscure nonsense when evidence is everywhere for those to bother to look that people in general do not want it. Narcissism FTW.

[ahpitre]

Blackberry is mostly used by corporate users. Companies won't change to a new OS until the do a lot of testing, and typically wait for a few releases (so major bugs have been fixed). The company I work for still uses old BB devices because they are still testing and evaluating the new OS, including the BB10 Server.

[Bbnivende]

Well how can they not fall away when BB7 is 3 years old? It a testament to the platform that it still sells at all. It's actually amazing that it still sells in the millions a quarter.

Think about it for a minute.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is a testament to the fact that BBM was not cross platform, BIS plans, cheap devices, no negative social stigma in certain markets, many stores selling the phone in certain markets and some users having not used all touch devices continued to prefer the physical keyboard.

BBOS 7 phones may be selling in low numbers in certain markets but the reality is that the total number of BBOS subscribers world wide continues to drop as users leave the platform for Android phones without physical keyboards. It does not help your case that BBOS 7 has not successfully been employed on a phone that does not have a physical keyboard.

It is telling that in places like Nigeria and Indonesia where smartphone sales are increasing every year that BlackBerry sales are dropping. There is no future for BBOS, just a past.

[WES51]

"I don't care that you think there are reasons why I can't buy a brand new 1957 Chevrolet in the showroom today, all this BS about safety standards and leaded gasoline and inability to automate production and unavailability of raw materials and so on.... JUST DO IT BECAUSE I WANT IT!!!.

you completely missed and misinterpreted my point.

I acually meant the complete opposite.

I heard excuses from you and others trying to explain, why it is soo hard for Blackberry to go forward while trying satisfy legacy users, "Blackberry needs to pool their rescources and focus on the new" and alike.

Let me be clear:

There is absolutely no excuse for innovation without including those old features that soo many users want.

To defend such incompetence on the corporate level is just simply poor.

About 3 decades ago, people were programming wonders out of almost nothing, today all you hear is excuses, while so often you find that even simplest software, that can't even run smoothly on high end hardware.

Bravo.

In the time you spent defending BB10, you could have done/wrote something useful for it - IF YOU ARE THAT GOOD, as you imply it.

[belfastdispatcher]

Right because Blackberry didn't release a legacy device towards the end of last year?

The new devices are superior in hardware and software , so much more stable, what you are missing are a few features that you like about BB07, you can't accept the fact that the house is falling apart and no amount of duct tape will prolong it's life for long..

The new devices are for everyone, what exactly is the one one or two things does the android platform do really well? I'm not sure I should even bother asking you questions since you seem to be having difficulty breaking down the logic, in fact you contradicted the facts by saying few people are willing to upgrade to the smartphone device, clearly a lot of people are, a decreasing number though, but they're there, and for the record, if there was no Z30, I would happy upgrade to a new Z10


Them missing all those features is not an accident, the whole point was to replace legacy with something that worked for the average person, my Z10 does browsing amazingly, it does typing beautifully, I really don't know why you're blinding yourself.... some indigenous people will never accept the value of cash, you can throw a million pounds/dollars to them and they'll burn it for fuel, some people are just comfortable where they are, in an ideal world they could be accommodated individuals like you but it's just impractical...


TechCraze C0008DDD1

But there's actually more individuals like me (that like legacy bb) then individuals like you (that like bb10)

The Z10 did so badly it had to be wrote down.

Wake up and smell the coffee. You might like your Z10 but as a product it was a complete failure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nine54]

you completely missed and misinterpreted my point.

I acually meant the complete opposite.

I heard excuses from you and others trying to explain, why it is soo hard for Blackberry to go forward while trying satisfy legacy users, "Blackberry needs to pool their rescources and focus on the new" and alike.

Let me be clear:

There is absolutely no excuse for innovation without including those old features that soo many users want.

To defend such incompetence on the corporate level is just simply poor.

About 3 decades ago, people were programming wonders out of almost nothing, today all you hear is excuses, while so often you find that even simplest software, that can't even run smoothly on high end hardware.

Bravo.

In the time you spent defending BB10, you could have done/wrote something useful for it - IF YOU ARE THAT GOOD, as you imply it.

Thank you, Wes. This is the point I repeatedly have been trying to make, though you admittedly did so in far fewer words. BlackBerry went from a product that was differentiated but failing to a product that is less differentiated and also failing. Laziridis himself reportedly was against the Z10 launch strategy because the device was undifferentiated.

BlackBerry did not--and does not--have the luxury of time or the safety of market dominance to take as long as it has to transition away from a feature-rich, but long-in-the-tooth platform. And while the BBOS limitations might have been too great to overcome without a platform change, the fact that it took BlackBerry so long to release a feature-incomplete, beta quality (yes, 10.0 and 10.1 were beta quality, IMO...maybe less) platform doesn't exactly suggest that it was any easier to adapt QNX to smartphones.

BlackBerry erroneously pursued a red-ocean strategy, competing in a market already saturated with competition. Instead of trying to win over users of other platforms, BlackBerry should have focused on doing everything possible to keep the customers it had won over at least once already. This means stemming the loss of market share in emerging markets and keeping enterprise and government customers on BlackBerry solutions. After stabilizing the base, it then can try to go after under-served areas of the market or aim for new markets altogether. All his comments so far suggest Chen is doing this.

[Bbnivende]

But there's actually more individuals like me (that like legacy bb) then individuals like you (that like bb10)






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why ? A lot of BBOS 7 (and below) owners only want to replace their device when it breaks. More often than not their needs do not include a lot of internet browsing or the latest apps. The majority of owners do not fit your profile. The Q10 and 5 have 3.1 inch screens which arguably is not as good as the 9900 form factor which a trackpad and phone buttons. The fact is that all of the BBOS owners that I know are not into phones. They either have limited needs or they use their employer owned phone for business e-mails.

Do not confuse continued use of BBOS 7 devices with a desire to buy or use a new BBOS 7 device.

Again I would point out that BBOS7 did not and arguably can not meet the need to sell an all touch device or the need to sell a device that has the required apps.

The one point which I can agree on is that the Q10 would have been a lot more successful had it had both a much larger screen and the missing trackpad and features. The Q5 would have been more successful if it had been priced at the same level as the Curve it replaced.

[belfastdispatcher]

Why ? A lot of BBOS 7 (and below) owners only want to replace their device when it breaks. More often than not their needs do not include a lot of internet browsing or the latest apps. The majority of owners do not fit your profile. The Q10 and 5 have 3.1 inch screens which arguably is not as good as the 9900 form factor which a trackpad and phone buttons. The fact is that all of the BBOS owners that I know are not into phones. They either have limited needs or they use their employer owned phone for business e-mails.

Do not confuse continued use of BBOS 7 devices with a desire to buy or use a new BBOS 7 device.

It's simple, if those users will have no new BBOS or BBOS like device to buy they will buy something else.

Why hand them on a plate to other platforms? They sure as helll aren't buying BB10.

Cater for them or loose them, it's simple.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk