05-16-11 10:07 AM
50 12
tools
  1. Boots4283's Avatar
    RIM said their BES would be able to support iOS and Android in the future. You can activate on a BIS plan, just use the Enterprise Activation app.
    05-10-11 09:51 PM
  2. johnenglish's Avatar
    In some ways they need to be more like Apple; never admit a fault. Everything you do is perfect and if someone does something differently then they're doing it wrong.

    For example, Steve Jobs said that if a tablet requires multitasking or a stylus then the creators of the tablet have failed. People don't want to think about running multiple applications at once, they just want everything to work.

    When people criticize the Playbook's 7" screen RIM should say "If you need a 10" screen then you've designed a poor UI." or something similiar. The point is to always be projecting confidence and decisiveness, you *know* what consumers want *before* they know they want it. Never let them think otherwise.
    05-10-11 09:57 PM
  3. allengeorge's Avatar
    It's important that RIM figure out who its core market is. Does it want to build premium products like Apple, or does it want to build cheap phones in large quantities like most of the Android manufacturers? Right now it's trying to do both, and its unsurprising that it's doing both badly.

    I'd rather they went the first route, and if they do, then things will turn around at only if the company changes its focus from simply pushing out products to providing great user experiences. I divide users into two categories: end-users (those who buy and use phones), and developers (those who develop for, or you want to develop for, your platform). This focus on user experience would mean reducing the number of products released per year, but raising the quality and improving customer satisfaction on each release. So, if I were in charge, here are some initiatives I'd pursue:


    1. Create a User Interface team, and make improving the user experience the primary focus of every release. Some of their tasks would include: simplifying the PlayBook UI, reducing the myriad ways of bringing up and representing options across the various BlackBerry platforms, rethinking the role of hard buttons on devices, and enforcing strict UI guidelines across all the core apps. They would be responsible for creating detailed Human Interface Guidelines for use by app developers, and gating apps into AppWorld based on those UI guidelines.
    2. Improve the visual appeal of all RIM's customer-visible 'surfaces'. This includes everything from the BIS web-UI, to the look and feel of the UI elements on the phones and the PlayBook, the look and feel of the site, etc..
    3. Work on simplifying user workflows both at a macro and a micro level. At a macro level this would involve tight partnerships with content distributors like Amazon and Netflix, that would allow you to purchase or consume media using your BlackBerry ID only. In essence I would make BlackBerryID the complete parallel of your Apple ID. This could also involve partnering with Microsoft to link the web version of Office with DocsToGo. At a micro level this would involve simplifying how users interact with their devices. Anything and everything would be up for improvement. From something as simple as "How many steps does it take for you to take and select a picture for a contact?" to "How do I buy and listen to music on my BlackBerry?" to ...
    4. Simplify the product lineup drastically. On the smartphone side I would go with two lines only: Full Touchscreen [High-end, Low-end], and Touchscreen + Slider [High-end, Low-end]. On the tablet side, two sizes: 7" and 10".
    5. Release more polished devices, even if it means reducing the feature set drastically. The polish evident in Apple products should be the benchmark. Users shouldn't have to put up with half-working software, devices that drain battery and refuse to boot, laggy UI response, and so on.
    6. Improve marketing drastically. If you want to build a brand, then simply contracting out marketing and relying on reps for hire and carrier displays isn't going to cut it. A BlackBerry should feel like a high-end phone. It should have its own dedicated section, reps should be trained to be able to answer any questions you have concerning it, and so on. If I carrier cannot make this commitment across its stores, I would only display my phones in the stores that can support this attention to detail.


    On the development front RIM is so far behind it's tough to know where to begin. There's massive device fragmentation, the installed base of devices is fairly old and low-powered, the development API, tools and documentation make it much harder to design high-quality BB apps (and as a result, the average BB user doesn't buy many apps), and ... developers simply aren't excited by BlackBerry devices.

    Reducing the number of device form-factors and significantly raising the age of the installed device base (to 6.0 at minimum) would go a long way by itself. Creating high-quality, "must-have" products would do a lot in making that happen. Besides that, some directions I'd pursue include:

    1. Improve the quality and depth of the developer documentation and examples. RIM should aim to meet or exceed the standard of the Apple developer docs. In addition, the examples should look and feel high-quality (having something look good makes people interested in your platform).
    2. Reduce the number of SDKs available. This would involve EOLing any OS framework < 5.0, and making WebWorks, the AIR SDK and the NDK the primary focus of development effort and dollars. I'd seriously debate canning the Java SDKs, or at least shift to using a JRE that supported Java 5.x features.
    3. Partner with experienced tool-development companies to improve the developer tools and simulators. A high-priority would be creating a GUI builder for both BlackBerry smartphones and the PlayBook. It should be dirt-simple for new developers to make a good-looking application UI.
    4. Cancel the Android Player. Its value is questionable. Android apps are never going to look and feel like native apps anyways, and the focus should be on getting developers to build for BlackBerry.
    5. Change the SDK-team culture inside RIM to make supporting third-party developers a core focus of the SDK teams. For example, API signatures and types should be made consistent; if your SDK is meant to be used closely with 3rd-party SDKs (for example, the QNX APIs and the AIR APIs) then everything should "just work" together and should feel consistent. People shouldn't have to ask "Should I use the QNX components or the Flex components", or "How can I make both work together?", etc. Anything to reduce the barrier to entry would be good...


    Basically, RIM has to change its internal culture to one of delivering high-quality across the board (and rewarding efforts to do so!)
    Last edited by allengeorge; 05-10-11 at 11:12 PM.
    05-10-11 10:43 PM
  4. jlspeed29's Avatar
    It's important that RIM figure out who its core market is. Does it want to build premium products like Apple, or does it want to build cheap phones in large quantities like most of the Android manufacturers? Right now it's trying to do both, and its unsurprising that it's doing both badly.
    WOW I'm surprised I;ve never thought of this before......Both Apple and Google and Droid based phones crush RIMM.....yet both are growing....its too late for me to extrapolate this further....tagged for tomorrow..lol...

    but a very interesting point nonetheless...how two different types of devices can thrive in this environment...
    05-10-11 11:00 PM
  5. Skeevecr's Avatar
    Wha RIM should do:
    1.) Accelerate QNX on phones especially the SDK have the SDK by Q4 of 2011 so when the QNX phones are out next year have tons of apps .
    WP7 came Q4 2010 and have thousands of apps more than BB os not to mention the iOS porting API which would make porting of apps from iOS to WP7 easy and when Nokia comes on board more devlopers - BB OS was there for years still no plenty of apps WP7 pulled thousands of apps in less than 9 months
    Not sure where you are getting those figures from, but bbos has more apps than wp7 and that is despite the huge amount of money that ms has thrown at developers to bribe them to develop for wp7.

    As far as accelerating qnx on phones, it is always hilarious when people make these kind of comments as if it is as simple as saying something like that and not a hugely complex process at all.

    5.) Bring more phones to more carriers
    They need new phones out there, but if you look at what is going to be available then they don't need to be bringing out any more unless there is a particular form factor as otherwise they would be stealing sales from each other to a certain extent.


    6.) Get rid of Flip phones
    They don't generally make them, but like any form factor if a carrier comes to them with a big enough order then we could see another one in the future.


    8.) Up the hardwise specs, uh they have 1.2GHz so what iPhone 5 and most andrioid phones uses Dual core processors thats 1.2Ghz on both cores when QNX phones go dual core of 1.2Ghz andrioid phones would go to 2Ghz dual core
    Why care so much about the ludicrous spec arms race at the bleeding edge of the market providing that they are delivering mainstream high end specs in their phones without compromising too much on battery life.
    Technerd.McLeod likes this.
    05-11-11 03:14 AM
  6. Skeevecr's Avatar
    First of all, RIM needs to get it's research team into gear. Look at the best parts of Android and iPhone. Utilise them. For me, the main strong point about iPhone is the apps, for Android the variety.
    Android has variety is quite a comical comment when the majority tend to be the same touchscreen-only model with the occasional landscape slider thrown in for a change when the new lineup from rim probably has more variety than that and in the past they have tried out plenty of other form factors too like the pearl or flip devices.


    After this, RIM should look at bringing out different style form factors. however I believe "3 Curve Models on 36 Month Intervals giving 1 every year" (deRusset, 2011) is too many, given that each 'type' of Curve has a 3 year rotating cycle. I believe this should be reduced to 2 Curve models, on a 12 mth rotation. One new Curve each year.
    I think deRusset's post about devices overlooked that Rim seems to see the 3.2" touch-only device as part of the curve family and as such we are going to get 2 new Curves a year from some carriers with one coming in the summer and then another one in time for xmas. As far as having a certain number of models that doesn't make sense at all, what you will get is what we have now where we see an updated design and specs each year with the most likely thing being that they are of similar specs to the previous years premium models.
    05-11-11 03:29 AM
  7. Skeevecr's Avatar
    I own a BB in a country where it's not officially sold and I think RIM should co-operate more with countries in which BBs are not sold officially. Sure, the market here won't be big for BB, but it'll grow after BB entering the market.
    If you look at how many countries they are available in compared with other smartphones such as the iphone then you would see that they are more than happy to sell them everywhere, but they can't force carriers to take them if they don't want them.
    05-11-11 03:29 AM
  8. Skeevecr's Avatar
    My Internal Focus would be on a consistent road map of device launches, and upgrade cycles
    I would be launching
    2 Bold Models, on 24 Month intervals, 9000 size 1 year, the following year 9700 size
    3 Curve Models on 36 Month Intervals giving 1 every year, but playing with Enter level features, button placement, body shape
    2 Touch Screen Models, a 3.2" Economy touch screen, and a 3.8" Premium touch screen, Both of these would 18 month upgrade cycles lagging 12 months from each other, basically putting the 3.8" specs into the 3.2" 12 months later before launching a New 3.8"
    2 Flip Models, One Pearl sized, one Style sized, released in 24 month intervals Alternating
    2 Slider Models, One Portrait, one Horizontal, Released on 24 Month intervals Alternating.
    What this gives me is Approximately 6 Device launched every year, meaning a device launch every 2 months, This keeps RIM announcing new products consistently never being out of the blogger press, never leaving one device to bask too long in the press as well as attacking most market desires.
    I think that a more likely lineup for next year will be:

    4-4.5" touchscreen only qnx devices with variants for wimax, lte (cdma/lte and gsm/lte) since it would simplify the job of transitioning from the tablet os on playbook. [Target - Easter to early summer]

    Qnx versions of the main three upcoming os7 devices following those initial devices. [Spread from late summer onwards]

    A mid-range offering with specs closer to the curve models, but a more premium style that is closer to the main devices. This wasn't relevant when the top end blackberries were midrange, but is an opportunity while there is a gap between the premium models and the curves. [Xmas]

    Two curves, one all-touch and another touch and qwerty so they have a low end range, using the specs of the 2011 premium models. [one summer, one xmas]

    As far as other form factors, I don't think we will see a new Pearl or Style unless wanted by a particular carrier, the former served its purpose of helping to expand smartphone usage with dumbphone owners, but now something like an all-touch curve would be far better suited to carrying out that role.


    My Next Focus would be on Expanding the Playbook, and the IDEA of the Playbook meets the "Transformer" meets the Atrix.
    as RIM I would be moving the idea of the Transformer into the Office environment, Building 17" Playbooks that Dock into a Station is desired, ALSO that station has a DOCK for a Blackberry, which ports control of the Blackberry to the Playbook Station routing incoming calls through a headset and logging them to a server. this enables an office space to be completely fluid, no one needs a specific desk as they sit down at a terminal and plug in their phone for full access, the Playbook being Portable devices easy to move around as needed, and provides more screen real estate at a similar weight than conventional laptops THIS helps to solidify RIM's business presence making the PBX system reliant on BES.
    I can see them expanding things on the playbook line and docks are likely to become very common with tablets going forward, but 17" playbooks make very little sense when 17" would be simply too heavy for many people to want to use the thing as a tablet and indeed it is actually larger than people tend to go with their laptops even.

    Assuming we get all the 3g/4g models and the rumoured 10" model out of the way this year then I think that next year's playbooks will be spec updates to those form factors along with a dock at least for the larger models, niche sizes for the fans of tablets and weightlifting probably won't come before 2013 by which point the niches will be large enough to make such models viable.
    05-11-11 04:05 AM
  9. _StephenBB81's Avatar

    I can see them expanding things on the playbook line and docks are likely to become very common with tablets going forward, but 17" playbooks make very little sense when 17" would be simply too heavy for many people to want to use the thing as a tablet and indeed it is actually larger than people tend to go with their laptops even.
    My Focus for the 17" Playbook would be for the office environment, it wouldn't be a consumer product, but wouldn't require a full new development team to recreate the device, IMO even 17" isn't big enough but you are correct anything bigger and portability is completely gone, a MAJOR factor for people not getting 17" laptops is weight, a Playbook @ 17" would be considerably lighter than a 17" Laptop, though it's portability reasons are different. I could sooner see myself having a 17" and a 7" than a 7" and a 10" device, the 10" is the marriage between the 2 form factors, or vast realestate and potability.
    05-11-11 06:41 AM
  10. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    It's important that RIM figure out who its core market is. Does it want to build premium products like Apple, or does it want to build cheap phones in large quantities like most of the Android manufacturers?
    Right now it's trying to do both, and its unsurprising that it's doing both badly.

    <snip>

    Basically, RIM has to change its internal culture to one of delivering high-quality across the board (and rewarding efforts to do so!)

    Great post, though I disagree with most of it,
    The premise of your ideas are basically, be more like apple, you can't play Apples game if you are not Apple,

    IF RIM's plans were to only be in North America, then the Apple model would work, but they are looking for a global market, so they need to play the Nokia model, just do it better, which they are doing.
    I very smart man once said, What does Make things as simple as possible but not simpler and I strongly believe the Playbook UI is at that stage, any simpler and it would be less of an experience, and more of just an app launcher.
    05-11-11 06:48 AM
  11. allengeorge's Avatar
    Great post, though I disagree with most of it,
    The premise of your ideas are basically, be more like apple,
    Yes, that's a fair statement.

    Putting aside the "business directions" part of my post, RIM definitely has to execute more like Apple on the development tools and API front. Making your APIs more polished and more consistent, your documents and tools better, all make it easier to build apps, which will solidify RIM's position in developing markets.
    IF RIM's plans were to only be in North America, then the Apple model would work, but they are looking for a global market, so they need to play the Nokia model, just do it better, which they are doing.
    If RIM wants to play the Nokia model, they should ditch BBOS/QNX and start using Android now. If you're going to play the price game you have to cut everything that doesn't differentiate you but adds to your costs. And I'd argue that BBOS/QNX does not differentiate BlackBerry (the keyboard and BBM do).

    The larger problem is: what sets BlackBerry apart from its competitors in the future?
    Apple: polish + # apps
    Android: ubiquity
    BlackBerry: ...? (RIM believes it's social media, but I'm unconvinced)

    ... I strongly believe the Playbook UI is at that stage, any simpler and it would be less of an experience, and more of just an app launcher.
    That's not my anecdotal experience. Moreover, I'll point out that CrackBerry Kevin (#1 BB fanboi ) himself mentioned this UI confusion in his review. There are, if I recall correctly, 7 gestures built into the PlayBook OS and there's no way the average person will remember them all and what they should do in each situation. You can try this by simply giving a PlayBook to someone and not explaining anything about how to navigate around. See what happens!
    05-11-11 08:26 AM
  12. ADGrant's Avatar
    If RIM wants to play the Nokia model, they should ditch BBOS/QNX and start using Android now. If you're going to play the price game you have to cut everything that doesn't differentiate you but adds to your costs. And I'd argue that BBOS/QNX does not differentiate BlackBerry (the keyboard and BBM do).
    I disagree. The BB OS does differentiate RIM's products both positively and negatively. The postive is how easy a BB is to operate qucikly with one hand. The negative is application support and the lack of on device support for non RIM email delivery protocols (e.g. IMAP and EAS).
    05-11-11 08:40 AM
  13. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    Yes, that's a fair statement.

    Putting aside the "business directions" part of my post, RIM definitely has to execute more like Apple on the development tools and API front. Making your APIs more polished and more consistent, your documents and tools better, all make it easier to build apps, which will solidify RIM's position in developing markets.
    I do agree on this point, RIM needs FAR better API's and documentation, and development tools, they are on their way, but not nearly where they need to be yet.

    If RIM wants to play the Nokia model, they should ditch BBOS/QNX and start using Android now. If you're going to play the price game you have to cut everything that doesn't differentiate you but adds to your costs. And I'd argue that BBOS/QNX does not differentiate BlackBerry (the keyboard and BBM do).
    I disagree,
    Android would be the death of RIM, as NOTHING would set them apart.
    and Nokia didn't only play the price game, Nokia played the model for everyone game, they have/had some very exciting high end devices in their time.

    I argue BBOS DOES differentiate the Blackberry, the OS UI is drastically different than that of Android and iOS, it is similar more so to WinMo5ish.
    The Keyboard, BBM are 2 very distibquishing factors, for the BB experience, but I keep the UI up there, I like the amount of information available on the home screen, without being too obtrusive, the quick sound profile changes, and I consider the LED as much a part of the UI as the Hardware.

    The larger problem is: what sets BlackBerry apart from its competitors in the future?
    Apple: polish + # apps
    Android: ubiquity
    BlackBerry: ...? (RIM believes it's social media, but I'm unconvinced)
    Blackberry: Keyboard, Social Media, affordability(once carrier subsidies are removed)


    That's not my anecdotal experience. Moreover, I'll point out that CrackBerry Kevin (#1 BB fanboi ) himself mentioned this UI confusion in his review. There are, if I recall correctly, 7 gestures built into the PlayBook OS and there's no way the average person will remember them all and what they should do in each situation. You can try this by simply giving a PlayBook to someone and not explaining anything about how to navigate around. See what happens!
    My 9 year old Niece has mastered the gestures, and Kevin himself would like to see an additional gesture added, his review was from initial use of the device, the more a person uses the device the more natural the gestures become, The mouse was once seen as a complicated addition to personal computing, people use and understand it now, along with the multitude of extra clicks that are available, short cut keys, again when I was in highschool CTRL X/C/V where Magic tools! wow how did you do that? today a large portion of the keyboard / office using world understand and use those "complicated commands"

    IMO the app switching on the playbook is the simplest of any device on the market, even more so than Apple, which is scary since they are usually out to be the simplest, and then simpler.
    dodger_moore likes this.
    05-11-11 08:49 AM
  14. darkmanx2g's Avatar
    RIM needs to attract the developers. Its going to be very hard because with their marketshare declining and so many tools its causing a lot of confusion. I passed on the Playbook due to this fact. There isn't going to be a huge support for apps and its catered for people with blackberry.
    Its going to be tough and but its not impossible. I was a huge Nintendo fan when they were kings of the industry but they focused on their bread and butter (gameboy) and ignored the hardcore fans. Game devel@opers flocked to sony and xbox. RiM is in the same situation, focused on corporate market ignored the consumer. Developers flocked to android and ios. RiM has a huge challenge and they are hoping QNX is their Wi. But to this day, Nintendo lost the respect and mindshare in the home gaming community. Portable they still own the marketshare.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by darkmanx2g; 05-11-11 at 12:19 PM.
    05-11-11 12:15 PM
  15. dodger_moore's Avatar
    RIM needs to attract the.... I was a huge Nintendo fan when they were kings of the industry but they focused on their bread and butter (gameboy) and ignored the hardcore fans. Game devel@opers flocked to sony and xbox. RiM is.... focused on corporate market ignored... flocked to android and ios. RiM.... hoping QNX is their Wi. But to this day, Nintendo lost the respect and mindshare in the home....till own the marketshare.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Isn't the Wii the biggest selling games console of all time?
    05-11-11 01:00 PM
  16. Snipperdo17's Avatar
    RIM needs to attract the developers. Its going to be very hard because with their marketshare declining and so many tools its causing a lot of confusion. I passed on the Playbook due to this fact. There isn't going to be a huge support for apps and its catered for people with blackberry.
    Its going to be tough and but its not impossible. I was a huge Nintendo fan when they were kings of the industry but they focused on their bread and butter (gameboy) and ignored the hardcore fans. Game devel@opers flocked to sony and xbox. RiM is in the same situation, focused on corporate market ignored the consumer. Developers flocked to android and ios. RiM has a huge challenge and they are hoping QNX is their Wi. But to this day, Nintendo lost the respect and mindshare in the home gaming community. Portable they still own the marketshare.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    By making it incredibly easy to transfer the developer's android apps, they are attracting developers. People need to understand that the current OS for phones isn't going to gain a lot more apps from here til the end of life. The future is QNX.
    05-11-11 01:56 PM
  17. allengeorge's Avatar
    Android Apps

    What you really want is for developers to make building BB-QNX apps their primary focus. Allowing apps to be easily repackaged (not ported - there's a difference) for AppWorld does not do this. It won't attract more developers to the BB-QNX OS - they'll simply treat AppWorld as another storefront.

    Development

    It's not that the development resources "aren't nearly there" - they need substantial improvement, and that's not a one-month job. The more serious concern is that RIM has almost no developer mindshare. The SDK options they're providing feel hohum in comparison to the competition. For example, the Palm WebOS 3.0 SDK and the Ares project look substantially more interesting and compelling than RIM's offerings, and developers might try it out just because of that. When you couple this lack of mindshare with generally uninteresting devices and RIM's collapsing North American market share it's easy to see why so many developers are sitting on the sidelines.

    The only ways I can see of addressing these are:
    1. Focusing on a few SDKs (WebWorks, AIR, NDK) while deprecating the rest.
    2. Putting in the time and effort to build better tools, and clean up the SDKs in order to simplify major workflows in app development, including putting together an app UI. If a newbie BB developer can make a good-looking app in an afternoon you've succeeded.
    3. Providing developers with better tools and documentation for the above.
    4. Building compelling devices.

    That said, I'm unsure that's enough for RIM to regain users. It's just the minimum necessary to stay viable.

    Differentiating Factors

    Of the the factors listed, only BBM and affordability truly differentiate RIM anymore, and those aren't going to hold long. As more users defect the network effect works in reverse, making BBM less compelling. Meanwhile, the plethora of Android manufacturers will eat into RIM's low-cost lineup. These guys don't have to pay to develop an OS - they'll write a few drivers and slap Android on whatever cheap hardware they can source.

    Frankly, I don't know what RIM can do - but I suspect they need a disruptive change to stay relevant. When RIM came out they disrupted the marketplace: you could receive email on your phone, making it a true communication device. But over time that wasn't enough. Apple's disruptive change was recognizing that people wanted to do more with their phones: they made it easy to do "the other stuff" that people did on their computers (consuming media and using programs). Google's disruptive change was in making this phone-as-a-computer experience and operating system available to everyone, even if they didn't have scads of cash. Right now RIM's simply trying to catch up to the phone-as-a-computer experience. But for them to regain marketshare they'll have to start innovating again, and provide something that really sets them apart. I don't know what that could be.
    05-12-11 09:37 AM
  18. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    You have a distaste for the RIM os it seems,

    As a business user, who deals with many other business users across multiple industries, Blackberry is the Standard still because of the Keyboard and the UI, I know multipe guys clutching to 9000's not giving them up for iphones/torches, they like the 9000 shape, feel, look, AND they like the OS, they like what it displays quickly, they like the few short cuts they have learned (admitingly the learned from me during a DEAD trade show when I put on a bb seminar to pass the time in 2009)

    The Blackberry OS is fantastic! Notifications are great, the screen realestate is mostly used well to get you your details NOW, and that is the key for a business user who is busy, details NOW, can he get through all his emails during the smoke break? Can he do everything 1 handed while pulling a suitcase behind him? BB does this best, there are many of us who carry 2,3,4 devices, ALL of us carry atleast 1 BB, and it is the goto device during 7am-8pm EST

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    bostonnerd likes this.
    05-12-11 09:59 AM
  19. qnxqnx's Avatar
    - Unchain future QNX based devices from BIS/BES operating models. Direct all QNX devices to Amazon cloud services. OEM the devices platforms.

    - Disrupt and first to market with 3D interface (TAT) UI on all future QNX based devices

    The message to market is simple:

    OS 6/7 devices, the BB Classic taste and experiences. Touch/Bold/Torch

    QNX devices, multiple VM's - Java for the nostalgic taste of BB 6/7 apps.
    Android for variety of apps.

    QNX devices UI (inclusive of the next major OTA update for PB) should feel NOTHING like OS 6/7. In other words, QNX devices must be a complete rebirth of a TOTALLY new UI experiences. 3D, NFC, Augmented Reality, and natural speech recognition, xbox online integration should all be part of it.

    RIM needs a rebirth not a transition, there is no way to transition from a paging network architecture to a cloud based mobile computing fabrics.

    OEM future QNX devices from Samsung will also be a leapfrogging smart move to increase GM by faster time to market/volume , and differentiate by software values. RIM will never be able to outdo Apple and Samsung on hardware margins.
    05-12-11 10:17 AM
  20. qnxqnx's Avatar
    For example, think of a Samsung produced dual-core, 4.2 touch screen phone running QNX/TAT UI, with Android VM and JAVA VM for BBM, Contacts, Calendar, and Amazon Kindle, and cloud services available for holiday seasons to combat iPhone 5 and a host of other Android dual-core phones. Will RIM stand a chance to recapture some lost market shares in North America?
    05-12-11 10:24 AM
  21. bostonnerd's Avatar
    snip...BB does this best, there are many of us who carry 2,3,4 devices, ALL of us carry atleast 1 BB, and it is the goto device during 7am-8pm EST

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Well said. At the last Davos conference someone did an informal inventory on what the "captains of the universe" where carrying. A great many of them had a BB, iphone, and iPad with them. The right tool for the job sometimes requires multiple devices. That's why I use all three of them regularly.
    05-12-11 10:26 AM
  22. qnxqnx's Avatar
    oh, there is no need to be backward compatible with BIS/BES since these devices will work like all other mobile phones without going through the security protocols of RIM data centers.

    NO WORK FOR THE BIS/BES team for this phone.
    05-12-11 10:26 AM
  23. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    oh, there is no need to be backward compatible with BIS/BES since these devices will work like all other mobile phones without going through the security protocols of RIM data centers.

    NO WORK FOR THE BIS/BES team for this phone.
    That phone would probably not be purchased by a good many BB faithful.

    I know many BES admins who LOVE having BES to control their network, and are fighting tooth and nail to keep from having to support non BES phones,

    I for one don't mind BES, I like being able to log in and change my PIN or add remove emails from my service rather than via my device depending on where I am traveling

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-12-11 03:20 PM
  24. qnxqnx's Avatar
    As a BB faithful, do you want RIM to be around to serve your 10 years habit of using the device as an email/texting only? or do you want RIM to turn the page to be relevant in the next phase of mobile computing?

    RIM needs to put future QNX devices on a separate path from OSx devices. The legacy has been killing the brand for 3 years now, and counting...
    05-12-11 08:46 PM
  25. lnichols's Avatar
    As a BB faithful, do you want RIM to be around to serve your 10 years habit of using the device as an email/texting only? or do you want RIM to turn the page to be relevant in the next phase of mobile computing?

    RIM needs to put future QNX devices on a separate path from OSx devices. The legacy has been killing the brand for 3 years now, and counting...
    If RIM were to abandon the BES model, most, if not all of their business with the US Federal government would stop, as would a lot of business with other security conscience firms. The BES is a FIPS approved VPN concentration device, management platform, and Exchange "bridge" for lack of a better term, all-in-one. Without the BES you would have to get a FIPS approved VPN concentrator at the HQ and a client on the handset to duplicate part of the functionallity of BES, or buy the Good product and clients for the handhelds (assuming a QNX client was developed by Good). Getting rid of BES and handing that business to Good or Cisco/Juniper/Avaya would be a death warrant for RIM.

    RIM is trying to provide a complete solution, where other companies only have pieces. RIM is obviously falling behind on the browsing and media consumption market, but they are still superior for secure, reliable communications. They should be working to improve the things that need improving, not abandoning the things that don't.
    05-16-11 10:07 AM
50 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD