[cgk]

Was the OS a loser, or was the company (mis) managing the OS the loser?

It doesn't matter at this point - we are where we are.

[anon(10218918)]

Was the OS a loser, or was the company (mis) managing the OS the loser?

When OS10 came out, most people did not think about privacy and security. But nowadays there is a market for security and privacy!!!

[anon(10252394)]

When OS10 came out, most people did not think about privacy and security. But nowadays there is a market for security and privacy!!!

Not by BlackBerry apparently...

Posted via CB10

[anon(870071)]

The OS didn't fail. The people running Blackberry did...

Agreed! They didn't have the foresight to do more work with developers and focus more resources on apps!

[PantherBlitz]

Isn't that like asking was the dish bad or was it the chef?

Haha, plus they tried to serve that lunch at 3:00 AM.

[app_Developer]

Haha, plus they tried to serve that lunch at 3:00 AM.

On a napkin because the plates weren't quite clean yet.

[Denise in Los Angeles]

Agreed! They didn't have the foresight to do more work with developers and focus more resources on apps!

If memory serves me correctly, BlackBerry did try to get the app developers. They offered money, they offered to write the apps themselves, and they offered the tools to port android apps to the BB10 OS. If the app developers refuse to create apps for BB10 (as they also refused to Microsoft), then it was impossible for BB to do anything else, except use the Amazon app store, which was not a solution.

[anon(870071)]

It's because it was much more lucrative for ios and android at the time!!!!! I don't blame them for being swayed! It was a difficult time for Rim/Blackberry! Because of this hiccup they started losing market share at lightening speed! Then delaying the launch of devices as well really sent them spiralling downward!

[p51]

Isn't that like asking was the dish bad or was it the chef?

Not really. Your analogy references a single iteration of a specific dish. All instances of that dish wouldn't be bad.
Was BB10 a bad OS or was it mismanaged by BlackBerry. Two entirely different questions.
If BB10 was a bad OS, it wouldn't matter who was managing it. Conversely, if it was poor mismanagement by BlackBerry, we can speculate that another company with more resources could have galvanized app devs into supporting the OS

[willboyce]

I actually wouldn't mind paying for apps if it was a way to get support. But I don't use a lot. I have iOS to. Had android. I found myself downloading lots of apps, using them a few times and never looking at them again

Posted via Blackberry Passport silver Edition

[app_Developer]

Not really. Your analogy references a single iteration of a specific dish. All instances of that dish wouldn't be bad.
Was BB10 a bad OS or was it mismanaged by BlackBerry. Two entirely different questions.
If BB10 was a bad OS, it wouldn't matter who was managing it. Conversely, if it was poor mismanagement by BlackBerry, we can speculate that another company with more resources could have galvanized app devs into supporting the OS

???

The folks at BB made the OS. The OS is flawed because of how they made it. It failed because it was flawed, and also late, and offered too little in terms of new capabilities as compared to the already well established competition.

Flawed, very late and not adding enough to what was already out there. That's all down to the company that made it.

[p51]

???

The folks at BB made the OS. The OS is flawed because of how they made it. It failed because it was flawed, and also late, and offered too little in terms of new capabilities as compared to the already well established competition.

Flawed, very late and not adding enough to the what was already out there. That's all down to the company that made it.

Ok

[Bbnivende]

In 2013 consumers were happy with Samsungs etc and iPhones. They were vested.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

In 2013 consumers were happy with Samsungs etc and iPhones. They were vested.

And that's the thing... for consumers and developers 2013 was just too late.

It wasn't about the OS - consumer wanted their Apps and Developers wanted a large stable user base. Maybe if BlackBerry had bought Palm ($1.2 Billion would have been nothing to them back then) and used WebOS to relaunch themselves in late 2010......

I really wonder how long Mike and Jim expected Java to last them as an OS? Hard to believe that for a tech company, then weren't looking ahead back in 2005....

[S1lv1o]

We live in an age in which what seemed impossible or unlikely suddenly becomes a success, if those involved look at the basics of supply and demand. It's like asking taxi companies about an Uber like service: impossible, they would say; but if you asked customers and people with a car and spare time, it would work. In a world of poor online security there might be a market for a safe OS, but that requires a different business model, and more importantly, a different mindset from "we sell phones".

[anon(10173658)]

Although I believe there is room for a third OS in the market...BB10 is not it. BlackBerry had very little success with the OS, so there is Zero chance that another company would grab the licensing agreement

I agree we could do with a 3rd competitor and I think I more professional business oriented OS could work well... but that still wouldnt be BB10, Microsoft are probably the only business out there that has the resource, but their previous attempts failed and even they struggled to get people to develop apps!

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

I agree we could do with a 3rd competitor and I think I more professional business oriented OS could work well... but that still wouldnt be BB10, Microsoft are probably the only business out there that has the resource, but their previous attempts failed and even they struggled to get people to develop apps!

Not sure what a "professional business oriented" OS would offer in 2017?

[Denise in Los Angeles]

I agree we could do with a 3rd competitor and I think I more professional business oriented OS could work well... but that still wouldnt be BB10, Microsoft are probably the only business out there that has the resource, but their previous attempts failed and even they struggled to get people to develop apps!

BlackBerry tried.
Amazon tried.
Microsoft tried.

Maybe no competitor can break into the field this late in the game. Most app developers know that they cover 99% of the market with apps for android and iOS.
Why expend resources developing apps for another OS which would struggle to compete with the kings that already own the market?

[kvndoom]

I dont understand why it's so important to have a third OS anyway. what do you really gain?

[MikeX74]

I dont understand why it's so important to have a third OS anyway. what do you really gain?

The "need" for a third OS stems from opposition to the duopoly currently enjoyed by iOS and Android. It's been suggested that carriers would also prefer a third OS, but it seems to me that it's more likely that carriers would prefer a third OEM powerful enough to use as leverage against the duopoly they really care about: Apple and Samsung.

[Troy Tiscareno]

There is also the fantasy that the mythical THIRD OS would somehow be radically different in that it would be totally secure, capture no user data, support every application and service and protocol, have flagship hardware, and cost less. It would have a big enough userbase to be supported by developers, but also small enough that the contrarians could feel like they were in the "secret club" because they were better and smarter than most people. Of course, it would also have a dark hub, Lithuanian support, HDMI out, and removable battery - and waterproof.

See, when you are completely divorced from financial and business realities, there are no limits to what this phone and OS could be, which lets people complain endlessly about its lack of existence... Lol.

[conite]

The "need" for a third OS stems from opposition to the duopoly currently enjoyed by iOS and Android. It's been suggested that carriers would also prefer a third OS, but it seems to me that it's more likely that carriers would prefer a third OEM powerful enough to use as leverage against the duopoly they really care about: Apple and Samsung.

Who wants a third OS?

Carriers just want to sell plans.

Developers just want to get their apps into people's hands.

Customers want a decent phone, at a decent price, with decent support, that has the apps they want.

[co4nd]

Was the OS a loser, or was the company (mis) managing the OS the loser?

Both

[Ment]

And that's the thing... for consumers and developers 2013 was just too late.

It wasn't about the OS - consumer wanted their Apps and Developers wanted a large stable user base. Maybe if BlackBerry had bought Palm ($1.2 Billion would have been nothing to them back then) and used WebOS to relaunch themselves in late 2010......

I really wonder how long Mike and Jim expected Java to last them as an OS? Hard to believe that for a tech company, then weren't looking ahead back in 2005....

Buying WebOs would've been the best move. Spend the billion and change take a year to update it to BB security level and put it out with the base of apps, dev support, and WebOS fans it already had. But BB was making too much money from BBOS to take such risks. As it was Palm collapsed and alot of headline talent went to Google like Matias Duarte who became head of design for Android.

[Chuck Finley69]

And that's the thing... for consumers and developers 2013 was just too late.

It wasn't about the OS - consumer wanted their Apps and Developers wanted a large stable user base. Maybe if BlackBerry had bought Palm ($1.2 Billion would have been nothing to them back then) and used WebOS to relaunch themselves in late 2010......

I really wonder how long Mike and Jim expected Java to last them as an OS? Hard to believe that for a tech company, then weren't looking ahead back in 2005....

They were looking ahead. They never really expected BB10 to succeed. They were buying time with their BBOS clientele to keep those clients paying monthly BIS/BES user fees as long as possible. They knew that BB10 or even moving to Android would not be good for BB revenue. The carriers wanted to keep data revenue for themselves. BBOS revenue had no way of being replaced once people moved to either BB10 or Android.

Mike and Jim wanted BBOS to keep status quo as long as possible so they could unload their wealth...