12-05-13 08:17 PM
808 ... 7891011 ...
tools
  1. cgk's Avatar


    The reality of the situation is that RIM and Microsoft will compete for 3rd place in 2013.
    They both have to overtake that well-known powerhouse bada first (2.7% world share to WP7's 1.9% and BB10's 0% (because it's not available yet) according to the latest gartner figures) ...
    05-17-12 10:50 AM
  2. kill_9's Avatar
    People are acting like BB10 will be a miracle.

    I think we had like 100 threads here with that same stink on it when the Playbook was launching. The jury is out, but I wouldn't touch that stock.
    In my opinion, it is more accurate to say some people are hoping BB10 will mark the rebirth of a once innovative pioneering secure mobile messaging technology firm. If Research In Motion can get back in touch with its roots as an engineering-oriented incubator, the future could be very bright. Unfortunately, the company seems to be floundering amid chaotic sea-swells ripping at the foundation with its Jekyll and Hyde personality disorder witnessed by the competing demands for productivity and entertainment.

    I maintain a house-cleaning within the organization is necessary to purge management at every level of the brain-rot plaguing the firm. Thorsten is a straight-shooter whom can easily mobilize the workforce to rise about the status quo and change "business as usual" thinking.
    05-17-12 10:56 AM
  3. morlock_man's Avatar
    Or, the Angry Birds analysts saw a demo of unreleased software from a beleaguered company trying to regain their footing in a market with several strong competitors. BB10 looks nice, but I don't see anything particularly disruptive here.

    The reality of the situation is that RIM and Microsoft will compete for 3rd place in 2013.
    No, you don't actually get to see whats disruptive. They don't demo that. You have to dig deeper, do your research and then you might see it.

    No one would question the validity of MS switching from the 9X kernel to the NT kernel. Nor would anyone question Apple's decision to switch from the dated MacOS kernel to the Mach kernel with OS X.

    Yet how long ago did the R&D for both these developments take place? Over 10 years for both. OSX's architecture is built on 16 year old computer science if you take into account when Rhapsody was first released. The computer science that went into designing the architecture for both these systems are *ancient* as far as the tech industry and the computer science behind it all is concerned. That iPhone you love? Runs a fossilized turd of a kernel older than half the people who post here.

    Both Apple and MS have stepped down from OS development. They're not innovating there at all and it's a major weakness. Even Google is just copying success.

    Everyone claims RIM is fighting for that 3rd spot, but I can't see it. I can't see the first next-generation operating system in over a decade being relegated to a 3rd place rank.
    Last edited by morlock_man; 05-17-12 at 11:04 AM.
    05-17-12 10:58 AM
  4. OzarkaTexile's Avatar
    No, you don't actually get to see whats disruptive. They don't demo that. You have to dig deeper, do your research and then you might see it.

    No one would question the validity of MS switching from the 9X kernel to the NT kernel. Nor would anyone question Apple's decision to switch from the dated MacOS kernel to the Mach kernel with OS X.

    Yet how long ago did the R&D for both these developments take place? Over 10 years for both. OSX's architecture is built on 16 year old computer science if you take into account when Rhapsody was first released. The computer science that went into designing the architecture for both these systems are *ancient* as far as the tech industry and the computer science behind it all is concerned. That iPhone you love? Runs a fossilized turd of a kernel older than half the people who post here.

    Both Apple and MS have stepped down from OS development. They're not innovating there at all and it's a major weakness. Even Google is just copying success.

    Everyone claims RIM is fighting for that 3rd spot, but I can't see it. I can't see the first next-generation operating system in over a decade being relegated to a 3rd place rank.
    So QNX is the disruptive factor and the competitive advantage? If that's the case, BB10 will be as disruptive as Playbook was. That is, only disruptive to RIM.
    05-17-12 11:38 AM
  5. ColdFistOfTruth's Avatar
    No, you don't actually get to see whats disruptive. They don't demo that. You have to dig deeper, do your research and then you might see it.

    No one would question the validity of MS switching from the 9X kernel to the NT kernel. Nor would anyone question Apple's decision to switch from the dated MacOS kernel to the Mach kernel with OS X.

    Yet how long ago did the R&D for both these developments take place? Over 10 years for both. OSX's architecture is built on 16 year old computer science if you take into account when Rhapsody was first released. The computer science that went into designing the architecture for both these systems are *ancient* as far as the tech industry and the computer science behind it all is concerned. That iPhone you love? Runs a fossilized turd of a kernel older than half the people who post here.
    You undersold OSX's "ancient"ness. It's origins go back 40 years (Berkeley Software Distribution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Is it ancient or is it mature?

    But that's not the point. The point is it doesn't matter. The platform simply has to support whatever RIM wants it to do. If they could have achieved their vision with the OS 7 codebase they would have.

    Best pure tech doesn't always win because it hardly ever matters. WE care and love to geek out on it , but we're the 1% -- the rest of the world could care less; they care what happens ABOVE the OS

    Pure tech is NOT going to bring a win to RIM, it's the overall user experience (and RIM surviving intact to complete the vision) that will win customers and brighter days for RIM.

    -CFOT
    05-17-12 12:00 PM
  6. morlock_man's Avatar
    So QNX is the disruptive factor and the competitive advantage? If that's the case, BB10 will be as disruptive as Playbook was. That is, only disruptive to RIM.
    The PlayBook has been RIM's big joke on the industry.

    Sure, you can concentrate on the 'play' aspect of the name and assume its aiming to be some sort of gaming system, but really its closer to the definition used in competitive sports like football.

    Playbook: any plan or set of strategies, as for outlining a campaign in business or politics.
    The PlayBook itself has just been a demo unit and a testbed. It's still not even in it's final form, not even considering the UI. The initial versions of their final development tools are just being released now and some APIs still aren't finished. Anyone who wants to talk about the success of the Playbook had better wait until it's actually a finished product.

    They introduced the unit at a price point close to the iPad 2 to highlight the level of technology going into both systems. Then dropped the price to expand their userbase once the industry would no longer accuse them of dumping to get the product into hands of their beta testers and developers. Then wrote it off as a half billion dollar loss, instead of the half billion dollar marketing and developing investment it really was.

    RIM is playing a very cold a calculating game right now. It's quite fun to watch as they're playing their hands very close to their chest. But the information is available for anyone who's seen the devices and understands the system architecture.

    I wouldn't have seen it coming if they hadn't dropped the prices. I was planning on buying a Droid last year, but changed my mind when the 'firesale' happened. Once I actually had my hands on one, I started reading up on the architecture and capabilities of QNX, especially as it will pertain to the evolution of the cloud. It's the foundation of the future.

    To borrow a phrase from an old Apple commercial...

    Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion.
    [YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZGIn9bpALo[/YT]
    Last edited by morlock_man; 05-17-12 at 12:20 PM.
    _StephenBB81 likes this.
    05-17-12 12:03 PM
  7. cgk's Avatar
    The PlayBook itself has just been a demo unit and a testbed. It's still not even in it's final form, not even considering the UI. The initial versions of their final development tools are just being released now and some APIs still aren't finished. Anyone who wants to talk about the success of the Playbook had better wait until it's actually a finished product.
    Absolute rubbish and revisionist history of the worst sort.

    They introduced the unit at a price point close to the iPad 2 to highlight the level of technology going into both systems. Then dropped the price to expand their userbase once the industry would no longer accuse them of dumping to get the product into hands of their beta testers and developers. Then wrote it off as a half billion dollar loss, instead of the half billion dollar marketing and developing investment it really was.
    This is just nonsense, it was launched by the same price point as the iPad 2 because they expected it to sell at this level. WebOS fans made similar statements about the touchpad, I'm amazed that someone is trying the same tactic here. What you are actually doing (as did WebOS fans when they said broadly the same thing) is saying that executives of the company made misleading statements to the markets in their earnings calls and disclosures. It's nonsense.
    05-17-12 12:23 PM
  8. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    Some points:

    • People need to quit insinuating that people who don't get the technical advantages of any one platform are stupid.
    • Sometimes, truth hurts. Sometimes, it really, really, isn't a conspiracy.
    • Choice is a very, very good thing.


    Also, it sounds good to claim that the Playbook was a calculated test bed, but that simply was not the case. If it was, then RIM's future is guaranteed, because not too many corporations can get away with charging people $500 to be beta testers.

    If that is the case, I am formally requesting that the pejorative "iSheep" be retired immediately, because the sheep ain't over there. Wow.
    05-17-12 12:24 PM
  9. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    They introduced the unit at a price point close to the iPad 2 to highlight the level of technology going into both systems. Then dropped the price to expand their userbase once the industry would no longer accuse them of dumping to get the product into hands of their beta testers and developers. Then wrote it off as a half billion dollar loss, instead of the half billion dollar marketing and developing investment it really was.
    If you aren't in PR, you are missing your true calling in life. I honestly mean that with sincere respect.
    05-17-12 12:26 PM
  10. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    The Playbook has BECOME a test bed, leading the way to BB10, it did not start out that way. Once RIM was so deeply involved with the product they had to do something with it, rather than just kill it off. The device has come a long way in a year, and should have been released in its current form, rather than what was there before. This was a HUGE miscalculation by RIM, but they are making the best of a blunder they made.
    howarmat and app_Developer like this.
    05-17-12 12:27 PM
  11. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    The Playbook has BECOME a test bed, leading the way to BB10, it did not start out that way. Once RIM was so deeply involved with the product they had to do something with it, rather than just kill it off. The device has come a long way in a year, and should have been released in its current form, rather than what was there before. This was a HUGE miscalculation by RIM, but they are making the best of a blunder they made.
    I can live with this theory. I can get with the idea that they made a blunder, and did their darnedest to get some good out of it.

    Don't try to tell me that RIM planned this whole fiasco, and that the handling of the playbook was a supposedly genius occurrence to test a new OS.

    C'mon son...
    05-17-12 12:39 PM
  12. morlock_man's Avatar
    The Playbook has BECOME a test bed, leading the way to BB10, it did not start out that way. Once RIM was so deeply involved with the product they had to do something with it, rather than just kill it off. The device has come a long way in a year, and should have been released in its current form, rather than what was there before. This was a HUGE miscalculation by RIM, but they are making the best of a blunder they made.
    Doubtful.

    They had to know that the development work they were doing with the Playbook was going straight into their BB10 phones. They obviously knew they weren't going to keep the BB7.1 line going as their flagship when they were migrating to QNX as a foundation, so BB10 was always in the works.

    To announce it too early would have been more damaging to their current line of phones.

    It honestly looks better for RIM if they play the fool with the PlayBook. It keeps them under the radar long enough to finish off development.

    Some points:
    People need to quit insinuating that people who don't get the technical advantages of any one platform are stupid.
    Sometimes, truth hurts. Sometimes, it really, really, isn't a conspiracy.
    Choice is a very, very good thing.
    1. Don't study one, study them all. Operating systems nowadays are practically religions. They've all got parts right and they've all got their devout believers and fanatics. BB10 is like the Buddhism of operating systems, distilled down to the basics of whats necessary to make awesome.

    2. Conspiracies of ignorance aren't conspiracies.

    3. Choice is always good, but only a fool would go for Windows 3.1 if Windows 7 was available. Especially if they both ran on the same hardware and Windows 3.1 was priced higher.
    05-17-12 12:47 PM
  13. tchocky77's Avatar
    Morlock _ Man.......you sir,.....I just don't know what to say.......can you really believe the things you say, my man? You, down in your soul,....believe that's how it went down with the playbook?

    RIM could do with many more like you is all I can say. Lol.
    05-17-12 12:47 PM
  14. sleepngbear's Avatar
    Absolute rubbish and revisionist history of the worst sort.
    Which part exactly is rubbish? Every single critic of the PlayBook called it an unfinished product when it was released. I believe the much overused description was 'half-baked', an expression which to this day makes me cringe. I will neither accept nor reject that sentiment, as it is all relative and purely a matter of opinion. The fact of the matter is, we are watching a QNX-based mobile OS evolve before our eyes on the PlayBook tablet. The current tablet OS has come a long way since it was first introduced, and will advance at least that much again before we see it in the form of BB10 on a handheld devices, which makes a lot of that which you mock pretty dead-on-balls accurate.
    Last edited by sleepngbear; 05-17-12 at 12:57 PM.
    05-17-12 12:50 PM
  15. sleepngbear's Avatar
    I can live with this theory. I can get with the idea that they made a blunder, and did their darnedest to get some good out of it.

    Don't try to tell me that RIM planned this whole fiasco, and that the handling of the playbook was a supposedly genius occurrence to test a new OS.

    C'mon son...
    He did say this was a blunder that RIM is now trying to make the most of. That's hardly calling it planned. But I too very strongly believe that the PlayBook always was intended to be a testbed for QNX, although I am also very sure that RIM expected it to be far better received than it was.
    pantlesspenguin likes this.
    05-17-12 12:55 PM
  16. morlock_man's Avatar
    Morlock _ Man.......you sir,.....I just don't know what to say.......can you really believe the things you say, my man? You, down in your soul,....believe that's how it went down with the playbook?

    RIM could do with many more like you is all I can say. Lol.
    They dropped the PlayBook into the marketplace as a finished device with a half-finished UI, missing PIM apps, a Native SDK to be dropped sometime in the future and a handful of unfinished APIs. The Camera API still hasn't even dropped for it. When they drop the 2.1 beta they've already got a horde of people to test it for them. This lets them work all the kinks out of the system beforehand, as well as identify weakpoints and fix them (like Dingleberry or uniquely encrypted apps).

    It's not like rolling out Windows 7 beta. Everyone already has a computer. You can't just beta test a tablet OS without providing the hardware. It doesn't work like that anymore.
    05-17-12 12:55 PM
  17. cgk's Avatar
    Which part exactly is rubbish? Every single critic of the PlayBook called it an unfinished product when it was released. I believe the much overused description was 'half-baked', an expression which has to this day makes me cringe. I will neither accept nor reject that sentiment, as it is all relative and purely a matter of opinion. The fact of the matter is, we are watching a QNX-based mobile OS evolve before our eyes on the PlayBook tablet. The current tablet OS has come a long way since it was first introduced, and will advance at least that much again before we see it in the form of BB10 on a handheld devices, which makes a lot of that which you mock pretty dead-on-balls accurate.
    That it was half-baked and unfinished doesn't have anything to do with the fact that RIM seem to be deluded enough to think they could get ipad 2 prices for it, it was more than likely half-baked because they ran out of time. That it was half-baked because it was planned that way and it was all a secret test-bed program that they were planning to take a $500 million write-down on, and that board-members were lying to the market when they said that sales were disappointing (because secretly they planned it all along) that's too far out there to take seriously.
    Last edited by cgk; 05-17-12 at 01:02 PM.
    05-17-12 12:55 PM
  18. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    Which part exactly is rubbish? Every single critic of the PlayBook called it an unfinished product when it was released. I believe the much overused description was 'half-baked', an expression which has to this day makes me cringe. I will neither accept nor reject that sentiment, as it is all relative and purely a matter of opinion. The fact of the matter is, we are watching a QNX-based mobile OS evolve before our eyes on the PlayBook tablet. The current tablet OS has come a long way since it was first introduced, and will advance at least that much again before we see it in the form of BB10 on a handheld devices, which makes a lot of that which you mock pretty dead-on-balls accurate.
    SG, you believe that RIM wanted to release an unfinished product?

    Morlock is saying (or at least, I am understanding him to say) that RIM created this financial disaster on purpose. All this time, while mere mortals like us wondered why they did what they did, Morlock will have us believe that it was a strategy cooked up in Waterloo.

    Now, if that does not strike fear in the hearts of investors, i don't know what will.
    05-17-12 12:57 PM
  19. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    He did say this was a blunder that RIM is now trying to make the most of. That's hardly calling it planned. But I too very strongly believe that the PlayBook always was intended to be a testbed for QNX, although I am also very sure that RIM expected it to be far better received than it was.
    I agree with you. And I think minus the pricing blunder, we would all be singing a different tune. I'd rather deal with a naive RIM than a sneaky one, though, but maybe I'm the one being naive.
    05-17-12 12:59 PM
  20. sleepngbear's Avatar
    Well, this surely isn't the first time we've been called delusional.
    05-17-12 01:02 PM
  21. morlock_man's Avatar
    SG, you believe that RIM wanted to release an unfinished product?

    Morlock is saying (or at least, I am understanding him to say) that RIM created this financial disaster on purpose. All this time, while mere mortals like us wondered why they did what they did, Morlock will have us believe that it was a strategy cooked up in Waterloo.

    Now, if that does not strike fear in the hearts of investors, i don't know what will.
    Kinda, yeah.

    The hardware is finished. It's not unfinished in that manner, unless you want 4G.

    It took them a single year to go from buying QNX to dropping the PlayBook. Thats an astounding rate of development for any operating system. Do your homework and you won't find anything else like it. They had to get something out into the market to speed development along even further.

    Even writing the drivers for the platform takes time and energy, they have to be refined to ensure system calls can't be used to corrupt or bypass system security. That would be the main reason why USB OTG hasn't been released yet, it represents the largest security hole that needs to be addressed.
    05-17-12 01:09 PM
  22. sleepngbear's Avatar
    SG, you believe that RIM wanted to release an unfinished product?

    Morlock is saying (or at least, I am understanding him to say) that RIM created this financial disaster on purpose. All this time, while mere mortals like us wondered why they did what they did, Morlock will have us believe that it was a strategy cooked up in Waterloo.

    Now, if that does not strike fear in the hearts of investors, i don't know what will.
    Nope, I'm not saying that at all. I will suggest though that RIM assumed it was finished enough to release, knowing full well that most other similar devices are released in a relative unfinished state (please, that is not an invitation to begin arguing what has been released more unfinished or less). I don't think that's what Mr. Morlock is saying either, although he'd have to clarify that himself. I gave up trying to decipher the underlying thoughts of others for Lent ... and liked it.
    05-17-12 01:10 PM
  23. EchoTango's Avatar
    I think some of you pieced together bits and pieces of a horse and came out with an SUV.

    The Playbook was a fully functioning device IF YOU USED IT AS A COMPANION DEVICE WITH AN EXISTING BLACKBERRY. For some reason RIM's marketing played that aspect down and went with "Professional Grade Tablet", setting unrealistic expectations in the consumer space. I don't believe they ever expected the device to take off like the iPad and exclusively targeted the product to commercial users. It's just Marketing didn't get the memo.

    I half think that RIM thought that with the exuberance for the iPad, there would be some positive fall-out for Playbook. Instead they got a bunch of disappointed consumers that didn't have the capability to use all the features in a simplistic way like the iPad.

    Instead they got (prior to the price drop) an expensive web browser.
    05-17-12 01:58 PM
  24. princesultan's Avatar
    talk about going off topic...

    so the stock's up 4.5% today. at least that's a good sign.
    pantlesspenguin likes this.
    05-17-12 02:10 PM
  25. morlock_man's Avatar
    Stock analysts != tech analysts.
    05-17-12 02:15 PM
808 ... 7891011 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD