About Apps...

It think it's time to address a few misconceptions about high-profile apps (or the lack of) in App World.

1. Believe it or not, it costs companies thousands of dollars to develop an application on a new platform. Programming isn't as easy as backing one out at the end of a long day. You need to design the UI, organize your code (analysis), code your prototype, check usability, create assets, code the final product, test, fix and release.
2. Research In Motion cannot be held responsible for the lack of applications on App World. The PlayBook is an untested market and until we have clear numbers on how many devices are sold and how many customers we can reach with our apps, we'll hold on investing money into creating apps for the platform.
3. Complaining to RIM or about RIM won't change a thing. Join the PlayBook App Initiative, contact the businesses you want to create apps. Without numbers, it's hard for management to take a decision to invest money into a platform.
4. Wait for the NDK. A lot of apps are simply not possible (or overly complicated to build) without native code.

Originally Posted by FineWolf

It think it's time to address a few misconceptions about high-profile apps (or the lack of) in App World.

1. Believe it or not, it costs companies thousands of dollars to develop an application on a new platform. Programming isn't as easy as backing one out at the end of a long day. You need to design the UI, organize your code (analysis), code your prototype, check usability, create assets, code the final product, test, fix and release.
2. Research In Motion cannot be held responsible for the lack of applications on App World. The PlayBook is an untested market and until we have clear numbers on how many devices are sold and how many customers we can reach with our apps, we'll hold on investing money into creating apps for the platform.
3. Complaining to RIM or about RIM won't change a thing. Join the PlayBook App Initiative, contact the businesses you want to create apps. Without numbers, it's hard for management to take a decision to invest money into a platform.
4. Wait for the NDK. Alot of apps are simply not possible (or overly complicated to build) without a Native API.

RIM acquired TAT last December. Apart from a buggy Scrapbook app and showing of their demos, The Astonishing Tribe has provided nothing but empty promises and smoky mirrors.

Not to diverge, but the apps on my BB are pathetic compared to its competition. And my hopes of having decent (RIM) developed apps are getting bleaker by the day.

Originally Posted by bb.pl

RIM acquired TAT last December. Apart from a buggy Scrapbook app and showing of their demos, The Astonishing Tribe has provided nothing but empty promises and smoky mirrors.

Not to diverge, but the apps on my BB are pathetic compared to its competition. And my hopes of having decent (RIM) developed apps are getting bleaker by the day.

TAT and RIM are working on the NDK and native PIM apps. They don't have unlimited resources.

I rather have them work on the NDK (which will help us get more high quality apps) than having them work on little one-use-only-apps.

Originally Posted by FineWolf

TAT and RIM are working on the NDK and native PIM apps. They don't have unlimited resources.

I rather have them work on the NDK (which will help us get more high quality apps) than having them work on little one-use-only-apps.

Yes, but the shelf life of the tablet itself are not very long. (would guesstimate around 3 years +/- a few months)

If you take 12 months to develop NDK and another 12 months to develop it, by that time its almost time it reaches the consumer, the device itself becomes close to obsolete.

I'm sure it would be good/better for play book 2, 3 etc but for the one I have chances are dim.

btw, great job on the initiative to list all the info on your other thread.

Originally Posted by bb.pl

Yes, but the shelf life of the tablet itself are not very long. (would guesstimate around 3 years +/- a few months)

If you take 12 months to develop NDK and another 12 months to develop it, by that time its almost time it reaches the consumer, the device itself becomes close to obsolete.

I'm sure it would be good/better for play book 2, 3 etc but for the one I have chances are dim.

btw, great job on the initiative to list all the info on your other thread.

The NDK in beta form is coming out in July and gold is expected in Q3.. Where in the world are you getting your 12 month figure?

Speaking as someone who returned the PB yesterday because of a lack of apps and someone who (still) wants to love the PB, I want to comment on the flawed logic of this post and (hopefully) prompt RIM to win me back.

First, a business must take into consideration the adoption rate of their product and build a level of commitment from developers to pass the tipping point for users to commit to adopt their product. It is not our responsibility as users to pull through the apps we need. The consequences of these actions, or lack thereof, is seen in the market forces in the form of us the user voting with our dollars.

Second, the obviation of responsibility to RIM by using the cost of development is a filatious argument. The manufacture of a closed environment platform such as QNX, has an obligation to facilitate development of software products that will, in turn, benefit them by fostering need/desire for their product. Furthermore, RIM directly contributed to the difficulty in development by delaying the necessary development tools.

In summary RIM is acting as though they WANT the playbook to fail. They could only accelerate this failure further by manufacturing faulty hardware (oops too late, power button, dead pixels, and poor wifi).

Please don't flame me, or respond viciously that I am a PB hater, I said from the start, I have returned mine only until I see an RDP client, an SSH client and OS updates that fix known issues.

Originally Posted by FineWolf

It think it's time to address a few misconceptions about high-profile apps (or the lack of) in App World.

1. Believe it or not, it costs companies thousands of dollars to develop an application on a new platform. Programming isn't as easy as backing one out at the end of a long day. You need to design the UI, organize your code (analysis), code your prototype, check usability, create assets, code the final product, test, fix and release.
2. Research In Motion cannot be held responsible for the lack of applications on App World. The PlayBook is an untested market and until we have clear numbers on how many devices are sold and how many customers we can reach with our apps, we'll hold on investing money into creating apps for the platform.
3. Complaining to RIM or about RIM won't change a thing. Join the PlayBook App Initiative, contact the businesses you want to create apps. Without numbers, it's hard for management to take a decision to invest money into a platform.
4. Wait for the NDK. A lot of apps are simply not possible (or overly complicated to build) without native code.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Originally Posted by FineWolf

Research In Motion cannot be held responsible for the lack of applications on App World.

Originally Posted by FineWolf

Wait for the NDK. A lot of apps are simply not possible (or overly complicated to build) without native code.

I think you got to the root of the problem by contradicting yourself right there.

Originally Posted by smhosmer

Speaking as someone who returned the PB yesterday because of a lack of apps and someone who (still) wants to love the PB, I want to comment on the flawed logic of this post and (hopefully) prompt RIM to win me back.

First, a business must take into consideration the adoption rate of their product and build a level of commitment from developers to pass the tipping point for users to commit to adopt their product. It is not our responsibility as users to pull through the apps we need. The consequences of these actions, or lack thereof, is seen in the market forces in the form of us the user voting with our dollars.

Second, the obviation of responsibility to RIM by using the cost of development is a filatious argument. The manufacture of a closed environment platform such as QNX, has an obligation to facilitate development of software products that will, in turn, benefit them by fostering need/desire for their product. Furthermore, RIM directly contributed to the difficulty in development by delaying the necessary development tools.

In summary RIM is acting as though they WANT the playbook to fail. They could only accelerate this failure further by manufacturing faulty hardware (oops too late, power button, dead pixels, and poor wifi).

Please don't flame me, or respond viciously that I am a PB hater, I said from the start, I have returned mine only until I see an RDP client, an SSH client and OS updates that fix known issues.




Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

+1

The OP is backwards. Customers buy, companies sell and develop.

Originally Posted by bb.pl

RIM acquired TAT last December. Apart from a buggy Scrapbook app and showing of their demos, The Astonishing Tribe has provided nothing but empty promises and smoky mirrors.

Not to diverge, but the apps on my BB are pathetic compared to its competition. And my hopes of having decent (RIM) developed apps are getting bleaker by the day.

IMO they are not to Astonishing. Unless you consider them disappearing right after the Playbook was launched Astonishing

Originally Posted by FineWolf

It think it's time to address a few misconceptions about high-profile apps (or the lack of) in App World. . . . . .


3. Complaining to RIM or about RIM won't change a thing. Join the PlayBook App Initiative, contact the businesses you want to create apps. Without numbers, it's hard for management to take a decision to invest money into a platform.

4. Wait for the NDK. A lot of apps are simply not possible (or overly complicated to build) without native code.

Thanks for the post. It is nice to see a little balance now and then. I suppose if RIM waited until everything was completely buttoned down, the Playbook would never have been released. Despite all of the angst and grumbling, sturm und drang, I still think that release, when and as it was and is at this time is a positive step in the Playbook's eventual success. There has been a lot of interest and hopefully enough enthusiasm to show the device's potential, and its market potential.

RIM walked a difficult line in its pre-release promotion of the Playbook. I get that they wanted to draw attention to it, and to step up and say that they think this will be a game-changer, but they did that so well, building to a sense of expectation that was bound to be deflated at release, because, as RIM must have known all the long, the apps and full functionality wouldn't yet be there. But they have to get more updates out and into existing Playbooks, now, or else risk losing momentum.

It would have been a tricky piece of salesmanship for RIM to entice buyers with getting in on the ground floor with a fantastic device that will go a big mile when all is said and done. Where's the premium for early buyers, for jumping on board early? Where's the disenctive to simply defer and await the enchancements and thus greater value? Go figure. Don't know what I want. But I know how to get it.

The high whining trill here is not just the locusts singing, off in the distance. Sure, we would all like to do more, faster and easier right now, but a lot of us are also loyal to, and thus concerned for, RIM and want them to make this thing hum.

Not much new app today. Zipio. Tic tac dance.
I am still waiting for aljazeera or bloomberg. Or instapaper. Or zinio. These crowd are not only about writing software or technicalities. They are more towards business model or whether rim really bother to approach them. Did rim ask them to come in?