03-25-11 08:40 AM
142 ... 3456
tools
  1. sf49ers's Avatar
    Guys this has been explained many times before in this thread, don't confuse QNX kernel with full fledged QNX phone OS (like BB tablet OS). Kernel is a low level software that acts a interfacing layer between the hardware and Operating System or Application software. Kernel is typically very small in size than compared to the actual OS may be even less than 5MB. The kernel provides basic services for all other parts of the operating system, typically including memory management, process management, file management and I/O (input/output) management (i.e., accessing the peripheral devices). These services are requested by other parts of the operating system or by application programs through a specified set of program interfaces referred to as system calls.

    That said, OS 6.1 is purely OS 6.0 running on top QNX kernel is the point in discussion and the speculation. The kernel itself does not interact directly with the user, user interaction is done via application modules in OS 6. That means OS 6 (virtual machine ) will run on top of QNX kernel.

    The reason for the speculation is due to improved feature set observed in 2011 devices which otherwise is limited in the current BB OS Kernel and the most of it is what we have been longing for years on a BB device. The improvements can be seen in how the application memory is handled (storing apps on the flash memory), high screen resolutions, support for improved graphics, improved processor specs etc. Also there were rumors and speculations of sort in the past that the current BB OS had the hit ceiling with RAM utilization and processor utilization, RAM utilization is limited at 256MB and processor speed limited at 624Mhz. The reason to believe this speculation is that RIM seem to have done away with these limitations in phones slated for 2011. We will never know even if RIM tweaked the existing kernel or plan to use a different kernel as from the end user perspective it will be a transparent transition as OS 6 is the layer that abstracts us from the underpinning(kernel).
    Last edited by sf49ers; 03-14-11 at 05:00 PM.
    Culex316 and mahen915 like this.
    03-14-11 04:41 PM
  2. missing_K-W's Avatar
    Guys this has been explained many times before in this thread, don't confuse QNX kernel with full fledged QNX phone OS (like BB tablet OS). Kernel is a low level software that acts a interfacing layer between the hardware and Operating System or Application software. Kernel is typically very small in size than compared to the actual OS may be even less than 5MB. The kernel provides basic services for all other parts of the operating system, typically including memory management, process management, file management and I/O (input/output) management (i.e., accessing the peripheral devices). These services are requested by other parts of the operating system or by application programs through a specified set of program interfaces referred to as system calls.

    That said, OS 6.1 is purely OS 6.0 running on top QNX kernel is the point in discussion and the speculation. The kernel itself does not interact directly with the user, user interaction is done via application modules in OS 6. That means OS 6 (virtual machine ) will run on top of QNX kernel.

    The reason for the speculation is due to improved feature set observed in 2011 devices which otherwise is limited in the current BB OS Kernel and the most of it is what we have been longing for years on a BB device. The improvements can be seen in how the application memory is handled (storing apps on the flash memory), high screen resolutions, support for improved graphics, improved processor specs etc. Also there were rumors and speculations of sort that current BB OS had the hit ceiling with RAM utilization and processor utilization, application running RAM utilization is limited at 256MB and processor speed limited at 624Mhz. The reason to believe this speculation is that RIM seem to have done away with these limitations in phones slated for 2011. We will never know even if RIM tweaked the existing kernel or plan to use a different kernel as from the end user perspective it will be a transparent transition as OS 6 is the layer that abstracts us from the underpinning(kernel).
    I 100% agree....definetely too many variables to not assume a kernel upgrade....

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-14-11 04:58 PM
  3. Rickroller's Avatar
    The reason for the speculation is due to improved feature set observed in 2011 devices which otherwise is limited in the current BB OS Kernel and the most of it is what we have been longing for years on a BB device. The improvements can be seen in how the application memory is handled (storing apps on the flash memory), high screen resolutions, support for improved graphics, improved processor specs etc. Also there were rumors and speculations of sort in the past that the current BB OS had the hit ceiling with RAM utilization and processor utilization, RAM utilization is limited at 256MB and processor speed limited at 624Mhz. The reason to believe this speculation is that RIM seem to have done away with these limitations in phones slated for 2011. We will never know even if RIM tweaked the existing kernel or plan to use a different kernel as from the end user perspective it will be a transparent transition as OS 6 is the layer that abstracts us from the underpinning(kernel).
    This couldn't have anything to do with the fact that RIM was simply using up alot of their old stock and simply rehashing it instead? Now it was the kernel limiting them? Sure..maybe their were "rumours" and "speculation" that perhaps this was why they weren't upgrading to faster processors..but something tells me it had to do more with $$ than anything.

    And i'm not sure what high screen resolutions has to do with "kernels". As far as I know, you can't tweak anything to improve resolution..else why would their have been such a demand for Samsungs screens?
    03-14-11 05:55 PM
  4. sf49ers's Avatar
    This couldn't have anything to do with the fact that RIM was simply using up alot of their old stock and simply rehashing it instead? Now it was the kernel limiting them? Sure..maybe their were "rumours" and "speculation" that perhaps this was why they weren't upgrading to faster processors..but something tells me it had to do more with $$ than anything.

    And i'm not sure what high screen resolutions has to do with "kernels". As far as I know, you can't tweak anything to improve resolution..else why would their have been such a demand for Samsungs screens?
    $$ may not be the factor I will tell you why? Bold 9000 and Bold 9700 had better or comparable specs to the then high-end iPhone 3G and iPhone 3Gs receptively. But we saw the decline in specs only in 2010 and the matter of fact they had the same specs that were used in 2008 and 2009 Blackberries. One more thing is that processor used in Torch is 800Mhz but clocked at 624Mhz and can this be seen as a OS limitation?. Money margins are high in the high-end phones and why would RIM give up on it all of a sudden and only focus on the mid-range market? RIM should have made at-least one flagship model in 2010 with high-end specs to compete against the likes of iPhone and numerous Android but that didn't happen and that only strengthens the speculation about the limitation in the OS rather than the cost. Screen resolution depends on the SOC chip and the kernel should support the chip to leverage the functionality SOC provides though IO, peripherals embedded in it. Also higher screen resolutions needs higher processing power along with a sound GPU and that again strengthens the theory behind the ceiling of processor utilization in the current OS and the reason why we saw no bump up in screen specs higher than 480x360.
    Last edited by sf49ers; 03-14-11 at 07:14 PM.
    Culex316 likes this.
    03-14-11 07:03 PM
  5. StaticFX's Avatar
    the reason they are not using Dual core yet in handhelds is the price and more importantly.. the poor battery life.
    03-14-11 08:35 PM
  6. sivan's Avatar
    I just don't see a compelling reason to just put in a microkernel and have the old OS run on it. What would that achieve? It's a lot of work.

    Even if it's done, same old OS6, just on a better kernel is not very interesting.
    The_Engine likes this.
    03-14-11 11:35 PM
  7. Skeevecr's Avatar
    I just don't see a compelling reason to just put in a microkernel and have the old OS run on it. What would that achieve? It's a lot of work.
    A lot of work that would involve a team that is going to be very busy right now finishing off the playbook so it just makes little sense for anyone to think that os6.1 is anything other than an update to os6.
    03-15-11 05:50 AM
  8. Rootbrian's Avatar
    I guess it would, but it's much much too early to find out for sure if it uses the QNX or a linux/unix kernel.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-15-11 06:47 AM
  9. Rickroller's Avatar
    But we saw the decline in specs only in 2010 and the matter of fact they had the same specs that were used in 2008 and 2009 Blackberries.
    I disagree..they were declining in specs probably mid 2009.

    Money margins are high in the high-end phones and why would RIM give up on it all of a sudden and only focus on the mid-range market?
    RIM has been making most of their money due to the fact they are selling mid range phones for high end market value. In Canada..the Torch is selling off contract for $599. The soon to be released Atrix will also be selling off contract for $599. RIM has been charging top dollar still for their handsets..even in 2010 when they are running mid range hardware. RIM is going to see a shrink in these margins by running higher end hardware in their phones (at least initially..we'll see how many years they can squeek out this new hardware in handsets) because I don't see how they'll be able to charge anymore for them.

    Although tbh..I have no idea how much they are charging carriers for their handsets. Perhaps the carriers will have to be paying a little more now once the new handsets come out and eat some of the costs..because I can't see them charging anymore than what Android's are going for.
    03-15-11 07:53 AM
  10. The_Engine's Avatar
    Storm 2 is still selling at the same price point as a droid x. I would think the x selling circles around s2 for VZW so I am kind of mystified as to why they are still asking so much for the storm 2.

    It should have been $99 or less with contract 6 months after release.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-15-11 10:29 AM
  11. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    the reason they are not using Dual core yet in handhelds is the price and more importantly.. the poor battery life.
    Actually, battery life improves as you go multi-core because you can split the processing across multiple cores effectively running the entire proc at half the speed of the old one. Also, higher core designs also tend to be of a tighter scale of design which increases power efficiency.

    Price is always a big factor for RIM, but the most important thing... the current BBOS cannot run effectively on a dual-core proc. It can't use it... so, until QNX's base is out for the Blackberry, there's no point in putting in dual-cores in the phones.
    03-15-11 11:58 AM
  12. i7guy's Avatar
    Actually, battery life improves as you go multi-core because you can split the processing across multiple cores effectively running the entire proc at half the speed of the old one. Also, higher core designs also tend to be of a tighter scale of design which increases power efficiency.

    Price is always a big factor for RIM, but the most important thing... the current BBOS cannot run effectively on a dual-core proc. It can't use it... so, until QNX's base is out for the Blackberry, there's no point in putting in dual-cores in the phones.
    Basically I disagree with the first part of your statement I think its an incorrect assumption. Agree with the second and third part though.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-15-11 02:45 PM
  13. StaticFX's Avatar
    Actually, battery life improves as you go multi-core because you can split the processing across multiple cores effectively running the entire proc at half the speed of the old one. Also, higher core designs also tend to be of a tighter scale of design which increases power efficiency.

    Price is always a big factor for RIM, but the most important thing... the current BBOS cannot run effectively on a dual-core proc. It can't use it... so, until QNX's base is out for the Blackberry, there's no point in putting in dual-cores in the phones.
    battery does not improve with multicore for the current mobile cpu's.. yes a cpu with a small nano design will use less power. But not the current dual core mobile cpus...
    03-15-11 04:30 PM
  14. diegonei's Avatar
    Basically I disagree with the first part of your statement I think its an incorrect assumption. Agree with the second and third part though.
    Me too, not that my opinion matters anything. Still, I don't think we NEED dual cores with such 'state of the art' OS.

    Biggest time ever complainer has been promoted to MOD? Hmm... I really hope somebody at RIM is reading the blogs, if she could make noise before, imagine what she can accomplish now. Congratulations.
    Last edited by diegonei; 03-21-11 at 09:55 PM.
    03-15-11 04:34 PM
  15. The_Engine's Avatar
    The reason for the speculation is due to improved feature set observed in 2011 devices which otherwise is limited in the current BB OS Kernel and the most of it is what we have been longing for years on a BB device. The improvements can be seen in how the application memory is handled (storing apps on the flash memory),
    We can do this on OS5 ad BB6. Appworld can archive apps to storage. Note, nothing for 6.1 says you can RUN apps from storage or sd cards. Just that you can store them, which is not a new feature. There is a huge distinction between storing apps and running apps from memory.
    high screen resolutions, support for improved graphics, improved processor specs etc.
    These items are all driven by the hardware. The Chipset (CPU/GPU) specifies how graphics are handled and if the device can support a High Res screen. Sure the software has to be there in the forms Graphics Drivers. But I don't think the QNX kernel alone would suddenly give the BB OS JVM higher graphic processing capability. The interface and graphics are at the app layer, not the OS/Driver layer (aside from the actual display adapters, which are critical, but not the whole thing)
    Also there were rumors and speculations of sort in the past that the current BB OS had the hit ceiling with RAM utilization and processor utilization, RAM utilization is limited at 256MB and processor speed limited at 624Mhz.
    How many BB's are out now with more than 256 RAM. Go Ahead and count them...go ahead. I don't see any limit there. Do you?
    The reason to believe this speculation is that RIM seem to have done away with these limitations in phones slated for 2011. We will never know even if RIM tweaked the existing kernel or plan to use a different kernel as from the end user perspective it will be a transparent transition as OS 6 is the layer that abstracts us from the underpinning(kernel).
    Swapping out an OS kernel is not a small task, and some of you keep minimizing that. The BB OS doesnt just consist of a JVM and a kernel. There is a lot going on in between. There would be extensive amounts of work and the whole portion of the OS which works with the kernel would likely need to be rewritten. It is not a plug and play process here. And as some here have stated, why would anyone in their right mind load a crappy OS (front end, JVM, and Middle ware) onto a state of the art Kernel? It's like slapping a Hemi in a yugo.

    The advances that we see in 6.1 and new hardware for 2011 are not items that directly support speculation of a new kernel. The hardware is driving a lot of the improvements. After that RIM is just getting more and more out of that OS5 Kernel. If you go back to the onset of OS5, a lot of folks (in the know) kept saying that there was a lot that the OS5 kernel could do and support. I think the original engineers working on 5 didn't get out of it was RIM expected. It was said several times that RIM swapped out the dev team for BB6 and put their best and brightest engineers on that. These engineers were working on other areas in the past and not the OS (according to our own CB Kevin).

    RIM has a lot to look forward to, and these new devices will be good. But I think to expect any massive change in performance and stability because of the QNX Kernel, is setting yourself for failure. BMX has already described behavior consistent with a new BB OS build and not behavior consistent with how QNX is supposed to work. Specifically OS crashes and hard resets.

    QNX is coming, and it will make a huge impact. However I just caution you all not to hang your hopes on the 6.1 devices. They are a nice Stop gap between BB OS and QNX.

    (and I say again, if the QNX kernel was running below 6.1, or any QNX tech at all, those three letters would be all over the 6. slides we saw. RIM wants to capitalize on QNX's tremendous rep)
    sleepngbear and Culex316 like this.
    03-15-11 09:39 PM
  16. The_Engine's Avatar
    Just came back to this thread and am amazed that no one has continued this conversation.

    re reading some of it I am starting to think the that QNX may but have the impact I originally thought. Launched in 2011 it would being RIM ahead of others in the market. By 2012 it may just close the gap, and even things up a bit.

    RIM also has to address the NOC issues regarding performance and truncation. With 4g settling in in NA there will be a lot of video flying over the web and large amounts of data. They will need to handle that without latency and throughout issues. They also need to deliver full html email and let the consumer decide on if they want to limit email size. Some love that as it keeps their days usage down, but others have a real problem with it.

    So the more I think about it the less I are that QNX will catapult RIM ahead of everyone else. By next year it may just being tkem to parity.

    And I still stand by my position that there is 0 QNX code in 6.1. I would love to be surprised, but it aint happening.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-17-11 07:37 AM
  17. DaedalusIcarusHelios's Avatar
    It seems obvious that 6.1 is a massive improvement. Whether or not any parts of QNX were ported or not, the improvements stated would seem to indicate that 6.1 is a sizable improvement. I would say that talent acquired from QNX, TAT, and Torch Mobile are being utilized to rewrite some of the legacy code.

    I think its important to note that BlackBerry has an install base that is its strength. To up and abandon OS6 now without having legacy apps work would shoot themselves in the foot. Plus, I'm sure it will take some time for QNX to implement full feature parity with BBOS. So while I doubt pieces were taken wholesale from QNX, it is likely it heavily influenced the new reworked code. And I don't think there's any reason why there wouldn't be a new kernel, but it may not be the QNX kernel that the PlayBook has.
    sf49ers likes this.
    03-17-11 10:50 AM
  18. Skeevecr's Avatar
    New stuff in 6.1 will be due to their existing developers (including the torch people) rather than anyone from qnx or tat for the simple fact of the matter that the former will be busy on playbook and tat have only recently been acquired.
    03-17-11 12:48 PM
  19. sf49ers's Avatar
    We can do this on OS5 ad BB6. Appworld can archive apps to storage. Note, nothing for 6.1 says you can RUN apps from storage or sd cards. Just that you can store them, which is not a new feature. There is a huge distinction between storing apps and running apps from memory.
    OS 6.1 states that you can store and run the Apps from the device memory(not RAM) and same as in iOS or Android. And that is a huge plus with 6.1 which otherwise is a limitation bugging current OS/Kernel.

    These items are all driven by the hardware. The Chipset (CPU/GPU) specifies how graphics are handled and if the device can support a High Res screen. Sure the software has to be there in the forms Graphics Drivers. But I don't think the QNX kernel alone would suddenly give the BB OS JVM higher graphic processing capability. The interface and graphics are at the app layer, not the OS/Driver layer (aside from the actual display adapters, which are critical, but not the whole thing)
    Processor speed benefits other peripherals like having high screen resolution etc, a high resolution screen need extra processing power along with a sound GPU. Adding fire to the speculation is that did the current kernel hit the ceiling at 624 Mhz?

    Since the BlackBerry Bold 9000 was launched way back in 2008 RIM has had a bit of a love story with the PXA930 processor from Marvell and the 480x360 screen resolution. This 624Mhz processor was nice and fast when it came out in 2008 but now in mid 2010 it is looking awfully dated. Is 624 Mhz a RIM's fascination or a limitation with the OS?

    All these devices since 2008 more or less use the same processor and clocked at 624Mhz or is this a OS limitation?

    * BlackBerry Bold 9000
    * BlackBerry Pearl 9100
    * BlackBerry Curve 9300
    * BlackBerry Storm 9500
    * BlackBerry Bold 9700
    * Blackberry Torch (PXA940 underclocked from 800 Mhz to 624Mhz)

    Also lets see the Qualcomm Processors but still the OS clocked under 624Mhz even though a 1 Ghz snadragon was widely adapted in other devices.

    * BlackBerry 8530 512mhz
    * BlackBerry 9650 624mhz
    * BlackBerry 9550 624mhz
    * BlackBerry Style 528mhz


    Swapping out an OS kernel is not a small task, and some of you keep minimizing that. The BB OS doesnt just consist of a JVM and a kernel. There is a lot going on in between. There would be extensive amounts of work and the whole portion of the OS which works with the kernel would likely need to be rewritten. It is not a plug and play process here. And as some here have stated, why would anyone in their right mind load a crappy OS (front end, JVM, and Middle ware) onto a state of the art Kernel? It's like slapping a Hemi in a yugo.

    The advances that we see in 6.1 and new hardware for 2011 are not items that directly support speculation of a new kernel. The hardware is driving a lot of the improvements. After that RIM is just getting more and more out of that OS5 Kernel. If you go back to the onset of OS5, a lot of folks (in the know) kept saying that there was a lot that the OS5 kernel could do and support. I think the original engineers working on 5 didn't get out of it was RIM expected. It was said several times that RIM swapped out the dev team for BB6 and put their best and brightest engineers on that. These engineers were working on other areas in the past and not the OS (according to our own CB Kevin).

    RIM has a lot to look forward to, and these new devices will be good. But I think to expect any massive change in performance and stability because of the QNX Kernel, is setting yourself for failure. BMX has already described behavior consistent with a new BB OS build and not behavior consistent with how QNX is supposed to work. Specifically OS crashes and hard resets.

    QNX is coming, and it will make a huge impact. However I just caution you all not to hang your hopes on the 6.1 devices. They are a nice Stop gap between BB OS and QNX.

    (and I say again, if the QNX kernel was running below 6.1, or any QNX tech at all, those three letters would be all over the 6. slides we saw. RIM wants to capitalize on QNX's tremendous rep)
    QNX is POSIX complaint and it shouldn't be that hard to port the code BBOS and libs to the QNX kernel. When they are thinking of porting Android Dalvik (something with no deep insight) in 6 months what's stopping them from doing the BB OS with full support from the RIM OS team who knows in and out of their OS.

    RIM is not doing it over night, if we observe RIM took a back seat for the whole last year and might have doing some serious re-engineering, also QNX should have been working with RIM way before they were acquired and otherwise in no way they would come out with such an amazing tablet.

    For the argument sake why did RIM take so long to refresh products when the have hardware and the OS 6 is available since last year. Why is RIM taking so long to bring Storm series refresh when they are using the same OS 6? The Storm 3 unit was seen in the wild an year ago but it is still another 6 months away from its release, why the wait when the hardware and software are ready? Why are testers seeing so many bugs when they are running the same OS 6 which is stable on other devices?

    RIM's JVM is more than efficient but is limited by the kernel, RIM relies on a virtual machine to be highly secure and portable. More over a QNX OS will be a evolutionary process and the first thing they need to do is ensure the backward compatibility with current apps otherwise RIM will be doomed like palm. More than a flashy UI RIM should be more concerned about the compatibility aspect as the enterprises and third party app developers already might have invested a lot of time, money and effort in to buildings apps for the platform.

    QNX kernel or not but RIM is doing some serious re-engineering of the underpinning in OS 6.1. OS 6.1 will have significant improvements and just more than the hardware.
    Last edited by sf49ers; 03-17-11 at 02:21 PM.
    03-17-11 01:48 PM
  20. rollingrock1988's Avatar
    I agree with the above.

    Even if it isn't QNX I think they may have some influence in it in some way or another.
    03-17-11 03:01 PM
  21. The_Engine's Avatar
    Good points SF. I can't speak to The 624 mhz speed, except to say I think that RIM finds that a sweet spot for speed vs power consumption.

    One thing of note is that Kevin indicated that QNX pretty much built the playbook on their own before the RIM acquisition. This the reason why the playbook breaks so many BB conventions (sealed battery) and why some core features like email integration and notifications are late to the table in development.

    All of what you say are strong points to wher QNX could be involved. It is possible that some of their engineers worked on 6.1.

    But answer this then: with the playbook and tablet OS already announced, and even in market, by the time we see 6.1, what possible reason would RIM have not say that the 6.1 OS included a QNX kernel? That is the real sticking point for me.

    And really? 6.1 can run apps from the sd card!? I missed that one. Only saw "store" on the slides.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-17-11 04:49 PM
  22. Rickroller's Avatar
    For the argument sake why did RIM take so long to refresh products when the have hardware and the OS 6 is available since last year.
    Wasn't the Torch the first handset with OS 6? It was released in August..7 months ago.

    Why is RIM taking so long to bring Storm series refresh when they are using the same OS 6?
    RIM tried to release a refresh running OS 6..but Verizon (?) shut it down.

    Why are testers seeing so many bugs when they are running the same OS 6 which is stable on other devices?
    Define "so many bugs". 6.1 is obviously a different OS than 6.0..and thus will have it's own little quirks. Why do any of the OS version RIM releases still have so many bugs in them despite all the testing?
    03-17-11 05:07 PM
  23. sf49ers's Avatar
    Wasn't the Torch the first handset with OS 6? It was released in August..7 months ago.



    RIM tried to release a refresh running OS 6..but Verizon (?) shut it down.



    Define "so many bugs". 6.1 is obviously a different OS than 6.0..and thus will have it's own little quirks. Why do any of the OS version RIM releases still have so many bugs in them despite all the testing?
    Monaco spotted in the wild in Sept'10.

    First Picture of the BlackBerry Storm 3? - BerryReview
    03-17-11 05:18 PM
  24. sleepngbear's Avatar
    All these devices since 2008 more or less use the same processor and clocked at 624Mhz or is this a OS limitation?
    Lots of interesting points in this post. But to this one in particular, I think the limitation is in what RIM considers acceptable battery life (as The Engine says, a sweet spot for speed vs power consumption). Using the Torch as an example, the under-clocked PXA940 still drains the battery faster than any other BB model, which is the subject of many complaints about the Torch (not me, but many others). RIM execs have been quoted numerous times stating that battery life is among the things they believe their customers consider most important in a smart phone. I'd bet a cold mug o' suds that that's the reason the Torch runs at 624 mhz and not 800.

    As for it being a kernel limitation, remember the kernel is nothing more than low-level software. The ones and zeros don't care how quickly they're being processed; they'll go as fast or as slow as the processor set allows. Which just further supports my belief that it's a power consumption issue.

    But that's kinda beside the point. A lot of interesting points being made on both sides of the argument here. I personally am inclined to think that QNX is not part of 6.1, but that's not something I'd be willing to bet a mug o' suds on.
    03-17-11 08:28 PM
  25. Skeevecr's Avatar
    QNX kernel or not but RIM is doing some serious re-engineering of the underpinning in OS 6.1. OS 6.1 will have significant improvements and just more than the hardware.
    I think we will find that os6.1 has seen some major changes that go way beyond what we might expect from a .1 increment of the os version, but I am sure it will end up being entirely separate from anything to do with qnx who will have had more than enough to do with their time just getting the playbook done without getting involved in anything else and their involvement in handsets won't really start until the playbook launch frees them up to move onto working on the first blackberries that will ship with qnx.
    03-18-11 04:19 AM
142 ... 3456
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD