10-26-13 12:39 AM
145 ... 3456
tools
  1. DS1331's Avatar
    Isn't this the same guy that didn't want full touchscreens said they would fail and didn't want bb10 and screw the consumers they'll never catch on,?

    Sent from my HTC One
    10-11-13 06:10 PM
  2. qwerty4ever's Avatar
    Isn't this the same guy that didn't want full touchscreens said they would fail and didn't want bb10 and screw the consumers they'll never catch on,?

    Sent from my HTC One
    Everyone is allowed to be wrong once. ;-) Hopefully, ML has learned from past mistakes.

    Posted via CB10 from the BlackBerry Z10
    DS1331 likes this.
    10-11-13 07:07 PM
  3. Blacklatino's Avatar
    Hopefully he is not as nuts as he was near the end before
    I'll send him a case of fiber. Problem solved......on one end.
    amazinglygraceless likes this.
    10-11-13 08:48 PM
  4. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    Yeah, sounds like a different version of what I read. I guess what I was hoping for just outweighed what it actually said.
    YOU misinterpreted something you read? Lord say it isn't so
    Isn't this the same guy that didn't want full touchscreens said they would fail and didn't want bb10 and screw the consumers they'll never catch on,?
    This confuses me. Two months ago if someone had suggested Mr Lazaridis come back to BlackBerry they would have been mocked mercilessly. For the better part of the last year or so almost everyone pointed the finger of blame for the fate of RIM / BlackBerry at the two Co-Ceo's. There was no end to the pointing out all of the bone headed decisions and statements of these two and NOW this is being treated as a good idea?
    10-11-13 10:10 PM
  5. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    I'll send him a case of fiber. Problem solved......on one end.
    That better be some industrial strength stuff
    10-11-13 10:11 PM
  6. bradu1's Avatar
    YOU misinterpreted something you read? Lord say it isn't so
    Thanks for the love AG!

    (who wants to bet she did watch?)


    Posted via CB10
    10-11-13 10:34 PM
  7. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    Thanks for the love AG!

    (who wants to bet she did watch?)
    She? Seriously? That's it, you're dead to me
    10-11-13 10:43 PM
  8. bradu1's Avatar
    She? Seriously? That's it, you're dead to me
    He? Wow. That totally wasn't on purpose. My bad. Sorry.

    ...But you did watch.

    I'll be over here dead to you know. Whistling in the corner. Totally dead.

    Speaking of.... countdown to Walking Dead!!!

    OK, back to being dead.

    :whistle whistle:

    Posted via CB10
    amazinglygraceless likes this.
    10-11-13 10:46 PM
  9. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    He? Wow. That totally wasn't on purpose. My bad. Sorry.

    OK, back to being dead.

    :whistle whistle:
    Alright Lazarus, you're off the hook...for now
    10-11-13 10:57 PM
  10. Peevish's Avatar
    Alright Lazarus, you're off the hook...for now
    Wait, so you're a dude?
    10-11-13 11:50 PM
  11. fin2007's Avatar
    Isn't this the same guy that didn't want full touchscreens said they would fail and didn't want bb10 and screw the consumers they'll never catch on,?

    Sent from my HTC One

    He said it would fail because at that time RIMM did not really have a touchscreen option.

    What should he say? like "touchscreen is the future, keyboard smartphone is dead"?

    If you look at article from globalmail, both CEOs were 100% aware the iphone threat, but what could they do about that?

    Apple spent 5 years in developing iOS from stripping down Mac OS before 2007, you think RIMM could develop something from scratch in one or two years from scratch? All you could say is that Steve Jobs was just such a genius, he got the idea of bringing iPod, iMac and mobile phone into one device in early 2000s. Maybe some other people also thought about it, but not any other people really tried to implement the idea, and in the early 2000s the technology was not there either.
    DS1331 likes this.
    10-12-13 12:37 AM
  12. birdman_38's Avatar
    If you look at article from globalmail, both CEOs were 100% aware the iphone threat, but what could they do about that?
    They could have hunkered down and started building BlackBerry 10.
    10-12-13 08:22 AM
  13. xandermac's Avatar
    Not that this "deal" will ever be reached but can you imagine a Mike blackberry!

    Plastic screen (non-touch)
    No camera
    Keyboard
    No Eco-System
    No media capability

    Well, it'll be an 8700 v2 obviously. Belt holster included.


    Twitter: xandermac
    10-12-13 11:16 AM
  14. fin2007's Avatar
    They could have hunkered down and started building BlackBerry 10.
    Yes, the article said that Verizon asked them to build some iOS competitor right away, and they tried something and failed badly.

    Then they bought QNX and started BB10. Without QNX, they could not even start to build BB10.

    The key is that Blackberry just did not have the talents needed to build a complicated consumer-oriented OS, they had zero talent and experience on this area.

    If you look at the current 3 OSs, iOS/WP/Andriod, they have been on the market for so long, even Andriod was started to build on 2003, but it is based on Linux which has been on developing by so many smart people around the world for a long even before 2003.

    Why Andriod could pass WP so quickly, the main reason is that it is based on Linux and a open source software, everyone in the world could develop apps for it easily.


    It is just easy to say than to do, basically once iOS was out, the only way for BBRY to survive is to build something on top of Andriod and has some of bbry's only unique features, then today BBRY could still be a player in the market. You have no way to compete a world pool of Andriod developers on software side, even Microsoft can not, bbbry is not even remotely close.
    Last edited by fin2007; 10-12-13 at 12:10 PM.
    imz likes this.
    10-12-13 12:00 PM
  15. birdman_38's Avatar
    The key is that Blackberry just did not have the talents needed to build a complicated consumer-oriented OS, they had zero talent and experience on this area.
    They could have had the talent if they would have continued to invest in R&D.

    You're saying BBOS was never a consumer-oriented OS? Interesting.
    10-12-13 12:03 PM
  16. fin2007's Avatar
    They could have had the talent if they would have continued to invest in R&D.

    You're saying BBOS was never a consumer-oriented OS? Interesting.
    I have no intent to bash Canadians, but on key software developing, Sillicon Valley right now just is not on the same level vs. any other place in the world, all the smartest people in the world came to Silicon Valley since early-mid 1990s.

    What I said "good consumer-oriented OS" is something like your windows XP, or Max OS, and Linux had made some good progress over the years too.

    got it? basically the whole idea of "mobile computing" is bring computer desktop/server software to run on a cell phone. That was exactly what Apple did. If WindowPhone can do the same, let a cell phone run window XP, then I would say windowphone today would be the No.1 again. With the hardware/battery technology keep improving, maybe that day will come, but it need to come sooner for MSFT to catch up, otherwise the current WP has no hope either.
    10-12-13 12:22 PM
  17. BravoZuluDelta's Avatar
    I have no intent to bash Canadians, but on key software developing, Sillicon Valley right now just is not on the same level vs. any other place in the world, all the smartest people in the world came to Silicon Valley since early 1990s.

    What I said "good consumer-oriented OS" is something like your windows XP, or Max OS, and Linux had made some good progress over the years too.

    got it?
    This is true. The (considerable) talent pool from Waterloo is somewhat split and shared between Waterloo and Silicon Valley, but Silicon Valley has many more sources for talent, and the employment benefits are more competitive.

    Posted via CB10 on Q10
    10-12-13 12:24 PM
  18. birdman_38's Avatar
    I have no intent to bash Canadians, but on key software developing, Sillicon Valley right now just is not on the same level vs. any other place in the world, all the smartest people in the world came to Silicon Valley since early-mid 1990s.

    What I said "good consumer-oriented OS" is something like your windows XP, or Max OS, and Linux had made some good progress over the years too.

    got it?
    No need for hostility. I've wondered that as well, if BlackBerry would be located in Silicon Valley how that would have had an effect on the progression of its product lines.
    10-12-13 12:26 PM
  19. Omnitech's Avatar
    Yes, the article said that Verizon asked them to build some iOS competitor right away, and they tried something and failed badly.

    Then they bought QNX and started BB10. Without QNX, they could not even start to build BB10.

    The key is that Blackberry just did not have the talents needed to build a complicated consumer-oriented OS, they had zero talent and experience on this area.

    If you look at the current 3 OSs, iOS/WP/Andriod, they have been on the market for so long, even Andriod was started to build on 2003, but it is based on Linux which has been on developing by so many smart people around the world for a long even before 2003.

    Why Andriod could pass WP so quickly, the main reason is that it is based on Linux and a open source software, everyone in the world could develop apps for it easily.

    The MAIN reason Android grew so quickly is because it is a decent and FREE OS.

    Like so many Google products, Google's massive online advertising profits allow them to throw billions of dollars at a product without having to expect that product's own revenue to support the cost of maintaining and developing it.

    VERY, VERY few companies are in a position to even attempt such things. Certainly not BlackBerry.

    This is the same mechanism that got Microsoft in legal trouble over antitrust issues pertaining to its development and free bundling of Internet Explorer (another product that cost billions of dollars to develop yet was given away for free) in Microsoft Windows.

    But ever since the GW Bush administration's Justice Dept. took the reins on "prosecuting" that case and basically torpedoed it, it's been clear that there is no longer much interest in the US federal government in going after giant US tech monopolies for antitrust reasons.

    Re: the assertion that BlackBerry "did not have the talents needed to build a complicated consumer-oriented OS" - while one could certainly argue that they needed better or different mixture of expertise to build something superior to the current state of the art in mobile OS's, BlackBerry had already built what was at one time one of the pre-eminent consumer smartphone platforms. It just didn't evolve quickly enough. It could be compared to if Microsoft had dawdled for an extra year or two before delivering Windows 95 or Windows 2000 or Vista (all significant platform upgrades), allowing Apple and other competitors to eat into their marketshare.
    10-12-13 12:37 PM
  20. fin2007's Avatar
    The MAIN reason Android grew so quickly is because it is a decent and FREE OS.

    Like so many Google products, Google's massive online advertising profits allow them to throw billions of dollars at a product without having to expect that product's own revenue to support the cost of maintaining and developing it.

    VERY, VERY few companies are in a position to even attempt such things. Certainly not BlackBerry.

    This is the same mechanism that got Microsoft in legal trouble over antitrust issues pertaining to its development and free bundling of Internet Explorer (another product that cost billions of dollars to develop yet was given away for free) in Microsoft Windows.

    But ever since the GW Bush administration's Justice Dept. took the reins on "prosecuting" that case and basically torpedoed it, it's been clear that there is no longer much interest in the US federal government in going after giant US tech monopolies for antitrust reasons.

    Re: the assertion that BlackBerry "did not have the talents needed to build a complicated consumer-oriented OS" - while one could certainly argue that they needed better or different mixture of expertise to build something superior to the current state of the art in mobile OS's, BlackBerry had already built what was at one time one of the pre-eminent consumer smartphone platforms. It just didn't evolve quickly enough. It could be compared to if Microsoft had dawdled for an extra year or two before delivering Windows 95 or Windows 2000 or Vista (all significant platform upgrades), allowing Apple and other competitors to eat into their marketshare.
    No need to argue if BB10 is already there or not, because for some BB fans BB10 is the best OS out there, and I am fully aware this is a BB fan site.

    All I tried to say is it is not as easy as some BB fans said to develop a good/solid computing OS in 3 years, that is why once iOS/Andriod came out, it is already impossible for BBRY to catch up.

    And for those putting all the blames on the former CEOs, they are still not aware how hard/how long it would take to develop something like iOS/Andriod.
    10-12-13 12:52 PM
  21. TGR1's Avatar
    YOU misinterpreted something you read? Lord say it isn't so


    This confuses me. Two months ago if someone had suggested Mr Lazaridis come back to BlackBerry they would have been mocked mercilessly. For the better part of the last year or so almost everyone pointed the finger of blame for the fate of RIM / BlackBerry at the two Co-Ceo's. There was no end to the pointing out all of the bone headed decisions and statements of these two and NOW this is being treated as a good idea?
    Mmm, yeah. Some posts sound a bit too much like the welcoming of the naming of Thorstein Heins as CEO.
    amazinglygraceless likes this.
    10-12-13 01:06 PM
  22. AluminiumRims's Avatar
    Then they bought QNX and started BB10. Without QNX, they could not even start to build BB10.

    The key is that Blackberry just did not have the talents needed to build a complicated consumer-oriented OS, they had zero talent and experience on this area.

    If you look at the current 3 OSs, iOS/WP/Andriod, they have been on the market for so long, even Andriod was started to build on 2003, but it is based on Linux which has been on developing by so many smart people around the world for a long even before 2003.
    Exactly, the Linux kernel was started in the early 90s. QNX is from the 80s, rehashed during early 2000s but with loads of experience with previous generation. Basically, it takes years for an operating system kernel to become stable and mature. Then on top of it all the services and graphical interface, that could easily add several years to the maturity process. Despite Blackberry has little experience of operating system development, they did a very good job on this first crash course. The graphical interface is very good, though a bit limited for now. I hope they can make it scale with several resolutions better in the future. Mind you, if you look at the GUIs for Linux, it has been a far more messy ride than both Android and BB10 with several rewrites along the way.

    Killing BB10 this early would be just a waste of capital, as it shows a lot of promise and will scale so well with the future demands. 6 months out in the open for a new operating system is nothing.
    tmanthib likes this.
    10-12-13 01:52 PM
  23. Killington's Avatar
    Killing BB10 this early would be just a waste of capital, as it shows a lot of promise and will scale so well with the future demands. 6 months out in the open for a new operating system is nothing.
    There in lies the rub. A fantastic new entrant in the mobile OS space but will the company be afforded the time it takes to develop it to its full potential?
    10-12-13 02:09 PM
  24. tmanthib's Avatar
    Anyone can change their thinking, so if Mike buys BlackBerry he can learn from his mistakes and be successful. At least you know he would want to see it succeed.

    Posted via CB10
    10-12-13 02:16 PM
  25. tmanthib's Avatar
    Exactly, the Linux kernel was started in the early 90s. QNX is from the 80s, rehashed during early 2000s but with loads of experience with previous generation. Basically, it takes years for an operating system kernel to become stable and mature. Then on top of it all the services and graphical interface, that could easily add several years to the maturity process. Despite Blackberry has little experience of operating system development, they did a very good job on this first crash course. The graphical interface is very good, though a bit limited for now. I hope they can make it scale with several resolutions better in the future. Mind you, if you look at the GUIs for Linux, it has been a far more messy ride than both Android and BB10 with several rewrites along the way.

    Killing BB10 this early would be just a waste of capital, as it shows a lot of promise and will scale so well with the future demands. 6 months out in the open for a new operating system is nothing.
    Being impatient can destroy a really good product. BB10 will only get better with time in my opinion.

    Posted via CB10
    10-12-13 02:23 PM
145 ... 3456

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-15-13, 12:58 PM
  2. can i get blackberry 10 os on older devices?
    By xenax in forum BlackBerry 10 OS
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-10-13, 02:32 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD