Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Research In Motion To Be Sold, Possibly To Samsung

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the all-about-the-benjamins dept.

Businesses 218

New submitter ve6ay writes "The talk of the tech world over the past day is that RIM, struggling mightily in these last months, was in talks to be bought either partially or wholly by Samsung. Sources at the Boy Genius Report indicate that while RIM may be trying to sell, it is asking way too much for itself."

cancel ×

218 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Old news is old (5, Informative)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736860)

Old news is even denied by Samsung [reuters.com] .

Re:Old news is old (3, Funny)

A Big Gnu Thrush (12795) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736882)

SOPA blackout would have saved Soulskill some embarrassment.

Re:Old news is old (2)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736966)

He would probably post it tomorrow anyway.

Re:Old news is old (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737148)

He would probably post it tomorrow anyway.

According to Slashdot's dupe policy, he is obligated to.

Re:Old news is old (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738526)

hrhrhrhr

Re:Old news is old (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736896)

Samsung is even denying merging Tzen with Bada. All of that to make a great confusion.

Re:Old news is old (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738222)

Maybe Samsung was confusing Bada with RIM?

Re:Old news is old (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736898)

Dear me... is it that easy nowadays to influence stock prices? I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist - but seriously:

1. Buy RIM shares
2. Post some anonymous rumour on tech blog, watch share price jump.
3. Sell RIM shares.
4. PROFIT!

Re:Old news is old (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737106)

Dear me... is it that easy nowadays to influence stock prices? I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist - but seriously:

1. Buy RIM shares
2. Post some anonymous rumour on tech blog, watch share price jump.
3. Sell RIM shares.
4. PROFIT!

Technically speaking, a Conspiracy is three or more people who are in collusion with each other to commit an illegal act.
So if you're doing it all by yourself, it's not Conspiracy by definition, regardless of the legality.

But yeah, it works pretty well. At least, it works well if you're a day-trader.

Re:Old news is old (5, Funny)

deniable (76198) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737280)

So, it's a pump-n-dump RIM job.

Um, rim shot.

Re:Old news is old (2, Funny)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738234)

I prefer this:

1. Wait until RIM shares get boost.
2. Buy RIM puts.
3. Wait until RIM rumors disproved.
4. Sell RIM puts, i.e. profit!

Slashdot's choice of stories is puzzling (3, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738022)

There have been some real news stories, but slashdot won't publish those. Instead slashdot posts stories about rumors - even rumors that have been proved false.

Can't wait for the next TechGuy Google smear rumor to be published on slashdot.

Re:Old news is old (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738674)

Mr. Hanky forgets the golden rule of corporate PR. Deny everything until it happens.

you're a day late (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736866)

Was a rumor and nothing more. This has been debunked by samsung.

Too late. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736868)

Re:Too late. (5, Funny)

Phil06 (877749) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738134)

RIM should try HP, they're suckers for stuff like this

W7VOA tweeted about this hours ago... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736876)

https://twitter.com/#!/W7VOA/status/159449502166691841

Steve Herman @W7VOA

Samsung Electronics denying RIM takeover speculation. #Blackbery #Korea

Getting old (1)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736878)

And to think, it was not too long ago that a Blackberry was "the phone to own".

Re:Getting old (1, Funny)

Massacrifice (249974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737610)

And to think, it was not too long ago that a Blackberry was "the phone to own".

Now it's the phone to get 0wned!

Re:Getting old (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738504)

According to our management, it still is!
(Unless you are said management, then the only right phone is the iPhone)

CENSORED (-1, Offtopic)

baptiste (256004) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736886)

If Slashdot won't do anything to speak out against SOPA/PIPA, we users have to matters into our own hands, so instead of reading this extremely insightful comment about this old news story (its censored!), please take action and speak out against these terrible bills: http://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/ [google.com]

Re:CENSORED (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736928)

I came here to say this. Sad to see what Slashdot has become.

Re:CENSORED (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738812)

*I* came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And I'm all outta asses.

Re:CENSORED (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736958)

Best thing to do is to move all servers outside the US. That's the only way to fix the problem. These blackouts aren't going to accomplish anything.

Re:CENSORED (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737046)

You'd need to move the primary DNS servers outside the US, too, because that's where they're going to start blocking.

Re:CENSORED (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737104)

Right, 'cause the Chinese people don't have any problem accessing servers blocked by the government, do they?
Sorry, the "best thing to do" is pass laws guaranteeing freedom on the net, instead of blocking freedom. While simultaneously working on a network of anonymous encrypting proxies, I guess. Content owners do have right to implement technical measures to protect their property rights, but in the absence of government intervention, I believe the freetards can implement technical measures guaranteeing freedom of speech at a much faster rate.

Re:CENSORED (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737180)

The Chinese people are generally dissuaded

Contents owners do have the right to implement technical measures to protect their property rights, but only to extent it is legal (Sony root kit), and why do they want the right to shut down an entire domain, not hosted in the USA, for infringing *Civil* laws that might not even apply in the country where the server is hosted ...?

i.e. why should I in one country, be prevented in accessing a server in another country, that hosts files that are legal to distribute in both, by a company in third country who has no jurisdiction in either country ...?!

Re:CENSORED (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738248)

This is the problem everyone has:

" but only to extent it is legal"

'Legal' is getting more ridiculous every year. cf copyright.

Re:CENSORED (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736978)

[This message was removed pursuant to the Stop Online Piracy Act due to an accusation of copyright infringement by Research in Motion]

Re:CENSORED (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737312)

No, removing posts is DMCA. SOPA would nuke the domain. Get your stupid laws straight.

Re:CENSORED (1)

Alter_3d (948458) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738856)

No, removing posts is DMCA. SOPA would nuke the domain. Get your stupid laws straight.

No, SOPA would nuke the domain, then take the hosting companys servers, then dissolve the company, then go to the owners's houses and kick their puppies.

Wait, what were we talking about?

Raising Awareness? (1)

Comboman (895500) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737156)

The purpose of the blackout is raise awareness for the SOPA/PIPA issue among the general public who use websites like Wikipedia and Google but due to a lack of coverage in the mainstream press haven't heard much about the proposed legislation. I doubt any reader of Slashdot isn't already keenly aware of this issue.

Re:Raising Awareness? (4, Interesting)

Splab (574204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737196)

Also, I wholeheartedly believe it's the wrong aproach. The US really needs a legal overhaul - SOPA, PIPA and CIPA should be approved, put them through and let people live under this regime for 3-4 months, then people will start to notice how truly wrong the world has become.

A single day of black out will make people think "oh, but it's not my fight really". Make it stick, force people to jump through hoops to get their youtube and lolcat fix; then action will be taken and it will be swift.

Re:CENSORED (2)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737190)

The SOPA subject came on several occasions, and was discussed copiously here on /..
Adding another SOPA story would do better than a blackout.

Re:CENSORED (1)

MachineShedFred (621896) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737712)

Any issue that has the ACLU, MoveOn, and the Tea Party Patriots shoulder to shoulder should definitely be paid attention to, and recognized as a universally bad idea.

If those three organizations can get together on it, surely the rest of us can too?

Re:CENSORED (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737752)

Yeah, simply force *your* opinion down peoples throats. HEY DUDE, WE GOT IT! About two dozens of pages i've visited today removed all content, THATS not the way to get people "to take action", i'm currently more pissed on asswhipes like them than on SOPA, is that what they/you want?!

STOP FORCE FEEDING US!

Is it still possible? (3, Informative)

neokushan (932374) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736902)

I don't think this rumour of samsung buying out RIM is true, but it's worth noting that RIM's share price took a dive when Samsung denied it, theoretically that could have been a clever move by the big S to make the purchase cheaper.

Frankly, though, I don't think RIM has anything of value to offer Samsung.

Re:Is it still possible? (0, Redundant)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737054)

Frankly, though, I don't think RIM has anything of value to offer Samsung.

Well, except for the prospect of offering "RIM jobs" to attract new engineers, no, it doesn't.

Re:Is it still possible? (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737144)

It does seem a little odd. Also, the suggestion of Samsung distancing itself from the Android eco-system (in the BGR article) is the opposite of what I want from a phone manufacturer. I have the Galaxy Nexus, and the pairing of Samsung's phone design and Android ICS is very slick. If anything, I'd say there's a big shiny niche in the market for the first manufacturer to decide to offer vanilla ICS on all their handsets instead of adding their own UI over the top.

Re:Is it still possible? (2)

neokushan (932374) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737204)

Plus, Samsung has their own mobile OS (BADA), as well as what's left of Nokia's Meego (Tizen). They certainly don't need BlackberryOS on top of that.

Why isn't /. dark today? (1, Offtopic)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736906)

Seems like it should go without saying..

An even better plan: (4, Insightful)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736920)

An article for each senator who supports SOPA, with the corresponding senate.gov link

Re:An even better plan: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38736952)

great idea!

get started, lemme know when you've got it done, so I can click a link or two to express my dismay.

Re:An even better plan: (1)

evilbessie (873633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737120)

By SOPA you obviously mean H.R 3261, or something that NO senators support, it being a House bill. The corresponding senate bill is PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), S.968.

Then what are we worried about? (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737328)

I stand corrected. Sweet. If no senators support it what are we worried about? It can't become law without passing the Senate, per my hazy recollections of schoolhouse Rock.

Re:Then what are we worried about? (1)

brokeninside (34168) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737572)

I think you missed the GP's point. No senators will vote for SOPA because it is a HOUSE bill. Some senators, however, may vote for the corresponding bill (PIPA) in the SENATE.

Granted, the GP was a bit confusing by talking of senators not supporting SOPA because it is a house bill. Senators support various house bills all the time by lobbying their colleagues in the house to pass this bill or that bill. It's just that, being senators, they don't get to vote on house bills.

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737008)

Because that would be pointless. Your average /.er already knows (hopefully!) about SOPA.

As it is the Wikipedia blackout is circumvented easily enough with a quick tap of the esc key.

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737038)

Wikipedia's blackout is circumvented by NoScript.

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737094)

One doesn't need NoScript.

Firefox>view>page style>no style

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (1)

yanyan (302849) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737696)

Or by simply disabling javascript in the browser.

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737068)

black out youtube that will make some noise.

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (1)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738244)

It may be easy for us, but what about your parents? or grandparents?
They're going to be voting on these same congress people, and will also be affected by these laws.

Which do you think they visit more Wiki/Google or slashdot?

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737330)

Everybody here already knows. The masses don't come here. Shut down something they care about like Wikipedia or Facebook. Hell, shut down Farmville for an hour and it will be bigger than shutting down Slashdot for a week.

Re:Why isn't /. dark today? (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737676)

Mass market web sites going dark or doing other things to raise awareness is useful because many if not most are not aware of the far reaching implications, one of which is the probable increase in costs for many websites to the point they may have shut down. By shutting down today, these sites are expressing these consequences in a concrete fashion that may result in some backlash to the small number of person who support draconian measures to protect even fewer interests, to the point where support is no longer viable. In fact the bill is effectively dead, but will come back if the climate changes after november and the persons who fight for the elite at the expense of the pesants have control of government.

/. is not a website where many are not aware fo the issue. Those that wish to have already taken action. /. dark will serve no purpose. /. as a place to serve information and coordinate, as it is doing, does. For example, if Wikipedia served pages of links, as /. is, no mass market consumer is going to read it. by going dark, it sends a tangible message.

jim & mike are in their own reality (1)

almitchell (1237520) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736990)

But maybe Nokia and RIM could both salvage something if they merged. Not that Jim & Mike can grasp the reality in front of them.

Somebody end its misery already! (1)

rahulreddy1986007 (1081373) | more than 2 years ago | (#38736996)

This company has seen more than its fair share of dismal performances. Can RIM RIP atleast now?

Please don't change the company name! (-1, Redundant)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737018)

As a software engineer in the job market, I'd hate it if I could no longer make jokes about "getting a RIM job"!

The sooner RIM dies.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737066)

.. the sooner I can stop wasting time dealing with their crappy back end, documentation and "Blackberry Enterprise Server compatible" data plans that are nothing more than a rip-off mechanism for telcos.

Re:The sooner RIM dies.. (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737444)

While their proprietary data method generally sucks, it's not always a ripoff... In particular, their data roaming charges tend to be lower than standard data plans.

The US President's Blackberry (2, Interesting)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737070)

If I were the US president, I wouldn't want my Blackberry [infosecuri...gazine.com] to be at the mercy of a South Korean corporation. It's risky enough for a Canadian corp to be running such a sensitive device, but if it's going to be foreign (and so not entirely subject to US laws, and obviously having a national interest that sometimes competes with America's), Canadian is about the least risky. Especially after decades of integration with sensitive US operations, including the space arm on the NASA shuttles. But South Korea is not nearly as reliable, given its understandably different national interests and lower integration with US law. Not to mention the higher stakes in S. Korea with its insane nuke-armed neighbor changing kings and looking for new terms in their permanent war backed by the US.

In any case President Me would rather have an Android phone, with an OS my spooks could inspect with a fine toothed comb, than a closed OS - whether foreign made or not. I wouldn't want Steve Jobs' ghost having secret access to my top-secret iPhone messages, especially when there are so many laws and lawsuits Apple could use my help "fixing". Even just tracking my location through a commercial datacenter seems a breach of national security.

The US has such a large military, and budget to match, that I'd expect the White House to come with our own government smartphones on a secure network. There's no reason my phone couldn't use a gateway device carried by my entourage that goes over a secure military satellite network, even if the gateway is too big for me to carry myself. I don't carry the nuke football, either. But I could carry a civilian smartphone, battery out, in case I was separated from my entourage and as a last resort had to make a call on a public network.

I claim copyright! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737098)

I've already thought up news stories about other companies being bought and sold. You're infringing on my rights!

I'll have this place shut down.

Stock Prices? That's your kicker? (1)

RobinEggs (1453925) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737114)

The whole slew of articles depends on inference, rumors, and anonymous sources. Par for the course.

The most ignorant moment, however, comes in the itworld article, when they claim that stock movements are giving credence to the rumors: RIM went up by 6.7%.

That's what happens for rumors, even crazy ones: stock prices go up. Credible rumors, however, would produce more action than that. Actual plans in the works, actual offers on the table, would create much, much more: the same article talks about Yahoo! rejecting $31 dollars a share at a time when they were valued at ~$19. RIM couldn't expect anywhere near the same premium, but nevertheless buyouts frequently come with some gravy, and a credible rumor could easily prompt the pure speculators, and even many sane investors, to push the stock up 20% or more. RIM went up a lousy 6.7%.

In other words, this isn't a credible rumor and even most speculators aren't seriously believing this talk yet. Call us when the stock goes up 15% or more, not to mention when you get a source with an actual name or some details.

I don't understand what went wrong (3, Insightful)

billcarson (2438218) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737124)

I don't see at what point Blackberry failed? They started out as a messenger aimed at the corporate world, with reliability, uptime and ease of use as their selling points. They still offer that. The business world still has a need for this type of communication. What went wrong? I think it is a pity to see a motivated company like this go down.

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (5, Interesting)

psergiu (67614) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737214)

They failed at: reliability, uptime and ease of use
Real life example:
- Today i just missed a rescheduled meeting because my BlackBerry failed to ring the alarm (usually happens after too many days with no reboot);
- Had about 4 half-day to full-day outages in the last month;
- BES server upgrade caused ~15% of the Blackberry users in my department to lose access for around 3 days and then they had to reformat their devices to be able to receive mail again.

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738730)

Wow, now I am happy with my Symbian phone. The music player crashes all the time, but at least the calendar and the alarm clock always did their job.

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737256)

(Posting AC because I'm at work)

I don't see at what point Blackberry failed?

What? Really? I can tell you the exact moment their downfall began. It's when the iPhone was announced and they decided they didn't have to adapt. Every other major phone maker quickly shifted gears, to one degree or another, except RIM. And RIM has been failing ever since. It's only recently that the downward fall has accelerated to this staggering degree but it all began the instant the iPhone was announced.

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737344)

I don't see at what point Blackberry failed?
They started out as a messenger aimed at the corporate world, with reliability, uptime and ease of use as their selling points.
They still offer that. The business world still has a need for this type of communication. What went wrong?
I think it is a pity to see a motivated company like this go down.

RIM became damaged goods. They lost their reputation as a secure corporate messenger when they decided to give corporate secrets away to any oppressive government that asked. Throw a couple of service blackouts into the mix and now no one trusts them.

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (5, Insightful)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737642)

They were revolutionary in their day, but now everyone offers email on their phones...

They failed to move with the times, so now while they still offer the same features everyone else offers something more and RIM devices are now perceived as dated and boring.

Their products are tied to Microsoft (BES requires windows and is primarily tied to exchange), who released a competitor in the form of activesync and bundle it for free with exchange, rim cannot possibly be cheaper because if you have everything you need to run a blackberry server you also have activesync, and likely also have an MS sales rep in your ear.

They try to lock you in to their products (you need a blackberry server, a blackberry handset and a blackberry specific data plan), but aren't big enough to get away with this strategy... Even MS Activesync is more open, there are multiple implementations on both the client and server end, and they work with standard carrier data plans.

They route traffic through their servers, creating an additional single point of failure. With a standard data plan the traffic is routed by the telco to your server via the Internet... With RIM the data is routed by the telco to rim via the internet, who they route it back to you via the internet... If RIM has an outage (and they have had several recently) then you are dead in the water... If your internet connection or telco suffers an outage you have the ability to change provider with minimal fuss, if RIM has an outage you have to migrate away from blackberry to another manufacturer which means changing your server infrastructure and replacing handsets.

The non enterprise (ie consumer oriented) blackberry service is intentionally crippled.

It is becoming more common for employees to provide their own phones rather than using company supplied ones, not many people want to buy a blackberry for their own use (partly due to the crippled consumer level service).

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (1)

billcarson (2438218) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738328)

They indeed provide a very closed and locked product, but that should not be a problem for the business world? I think most companies just want a product which has proven itself, is compatible with their legacy systems and will be supported for a long time. The fact that the whole 'supply chain' (if I can call it that way) is controlled by RIM is not really a minus at that point; it was moreover the reason why BB's had faster email and web response times than the competition. Most of the people on /. criticize RIM for not having the same open policy towards developers for their system, and not 'being like the iphone'. I personally don't see how those two factors would influence their sales in the corporate world. Games and silly applications are not what managers are waiting for, and useful applications will find their way on the device (eventually, when they passed the 'hype' stage).

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738040)

Well one problem was, to qout a common cliche, "It's the interface stupid!"
e.g.
The fonts on the BB are crap.
i.e.
The whole UI design suffers the same problem as the UI on the PS3 - it looks like it was designed by an engineer instead of the sexy UI of the iPhone or XBox360 :-/

Sexy devices sell. RIM completely under estimated the importance of having a clean, easy, consistent UI - the iPhone showed everybody you don't need to be stuck with shitty UIs on a phone - and sexy sells.

Re:I don't understand what went wrong (3)

Zerbey (15536) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738756)

They failed because they refused to innovate, expecting that they would continue on customer loyalty alone. It hasn't happened.

sic transit gloria mundi (5, Funny)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737140)

RIM joins a long range of former tech prom queens and class presidents that did not make it:

Palm, altavista, NeXT, digg, motorola, SGI, Sun, Spice Girls.

Re:sic transit gloria mundi (5, Insightful)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737172)

Dunno if I'd include NeXT in that list. It was bought out by a bigger richer company that wanted its technology and IP, and I'm posting using that technology right now.

Re:sic transit gloria mundi (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737290)

You could say the same thing about Sun.

Re:sic transit gloria mundi (5, Funny)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737306)

You are missing the point. I am using the energy and aminoacids from the Shith kebob I ate this morning. It does not make the chicken successful.

Re:sic transit gloria mundi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738342)

Not the point you're trying to make, I know, but chicken and cattle must be one of the safest species around. Want to ensure the survival of your species? Be tasty to humans!

Re:sic transit gloria mundi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738488)

This is the awesomest metaphor I've ever read in the history of anything (and I'm not even being sarcastic though I know it sounds like it)

Re:sic transit gloria mundi (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737354)

I really wouldn't include Altavista and Digg in this list. The rest of those companies had real physical products. Altavista and Digg just set up websites. Some others you might want to add to the list are DEC, Commodore, Tandy, and 3DFX

Re:sic transit gloria mundi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738418)

Osborne and Eagle Computers?

If they are bought by Samsung and expand... (2, Funny)

ikarys (865465) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737178)

there might be a recruitment company cold calling for RIM jobs.

Re:If they are bought by Samsung and expand... (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737346)

You know where you can stick your RIM jobs.

Anyone who buys RIM is a fool... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737186)

The Blackberry brand is so tarnished there is no recovery. Anyone who buys RIM is just wasting their money. Let's see who is stupid enough to do it.

Re:Anyone who buys RIM is a fool... (1)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737480)

I would assume you are buying the patent portfolio and some engineering talent and ditching the rest.

Re:Anyone who buys RIM is a fool... (1)

Massacrifice (249974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737702)

And corporate customers too.

APPLE should buy RIM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737384)

Apple should buy RIM to capture the Patents and the push email technology. It would be a good merger for Apple.

Re:APPLE should buy RIM (1)

acoustix (123925) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737586)

It would be bad for both companies. Apple has repeatedly said that they don't care about the enterprise. The only thing that Apple would want is the patents.

Re:APPLE should buy RIM (4, Informative)

MachineShedFred (621896) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737820)

As someone who works with mobility products in Fortune-50 business, I can tell you that Apple cares quite deeply for the enterprise. They just have a starting point of a consumer device, but with every software release it adds more and more of what enterprise wants. They are asking, enterprise is answering, and Apple is changing their stuff to suit.

RIM is not, and that's why RIM is dying.

RIM is adapting, don't kid yourself (1)

1800maxim (702377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738500)

I'm sorry but what is RIM not changing? Just about everything? Hardware? Check. Software? Check.

RIM already has the enterprise market, and it is the most feature-rich mobile enterprise solution. Apple is inching to get there, but they are still a ways off.

While Apple is inching into enterprise, RIM is inching into consumer. They started at different positions, but attempting to cover both segments. Having said that, RIM will always be enterprise at heart, and apple will always be consumer at heart. Apple isn't known to be a particularly enterprise-oriented solutions provider.

[this coming from an iPhone user]

P.S. Ironically, perhaps Apple could fix their iPhone to be more consumer friendly by introducing such basic features as ringer profile management. And when it eventually does build it into the OS, not hail it as the greatest Cupertino invention for a smart phone, but humbly acknowledge its absence as a brain fart.

Re:APPLE should buy RIM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738336)

The only thing that Apple would want is the patents.

Apple gets all the patents and fires all the employees. I don't see how this is bad for Apple?

Re:APPLE should buy RIM (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737664)

Patents maybe, the technology probably isn't worth much...

PlayBook OS 2.0 beta changed my view of RIM (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737612)

I recently bought a PlayBook for $199 and gave it a try. I liked it, but it didn't feel polished. Recently I downloaded and installed the PlayBook OS 2.0 beta and think it feels much more polished. The browser performance is also much better. Now I really like the PlayBook -- even more than my iPad. I especially prefer the form factor. Sure there aren't as many apps for the Playbook, but most apps on iPad are games and duplication. I don't care for games. As long as the apps you need are available on the PlayBook then that is good enough. BlackBerry bridge probably satisfied the email / calendaring needs of users who already own a BlackBerry smartphone, and 2.0 OS will ship with a stand alone email / calendaring application.

BlackBerry has many loyal fans and a large international market that is helping to fund their operation until BB10 comes out on smartphones (same as PlayBook 2.0 OS). I suspect once BB10 is available on smartphones, BlackBerry fans will have a reason to stay or come back. While I was having my hair cut I overheard a guy talking about his new iPhone and how he regrets switching from BlackBerry. Another guy said he spent so much time learning BB, he doesn't want to have to re-learn everything on iPhone (he must be afraid of technology.) My point is, there are people who actually prefer BlackBerry for whatever reason, no matter what you say to them.

There could be a money making opportunity here. Everyone in North America is pessimistic about PlayBook and RIM. Write some apps for PlayBook, then when BB10 comes out and BlackBerry fans come back / buy PlayBooks, they will go in the app store and will find only your apps. Of course I'm exaggerating (there are many other apps, but not as many as iPad/Android), but you get the point.

FYI I am an iPhone user and Android fan. I also have a BlackBerry Bold 9900 from work, and I don't like it. My recent experience with PlayBook changed my opinion of RIM and their future.

Re:PlayBook OS 2.0 beta changed my view of RIM (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38738052)

You're an iPhone user and an Android fan, and yet you have a Blackberry to use the bridge to make email work on the Playbook.

I think you're full of shit. Better hurry and cash that last astroturfing check before it bounces.

Re:PlayBook OS 2.0 beta changed my view of RIM (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738870)

Note: if you're a geek in enterprise, you experiment with different technologies.

There's been many of times I've had a blackberry on my hip, another personal phone in my pocket, and an experimental phone along for the ride.

Bad for the economy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737626)

What about all the RIM jobs?

from the last linked ot article (1)

ILongForDarkness (1134931) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737734)

"dwarfed by its two superior competitors" Apple and Google. I'll give it to Apple because they actually build products but Google? How much does it matter how large they are they don't make the devices and it isn't either of those companies' only product so it isn't like they are dedicated to the market and that they wouldn't just pump their money elsewhere if it didn't work out.

I Call B$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38737744)

on the source
the submitter
the editor
even Slashdot deserves better than this.

Control and SOPA (1)

trolman (648780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737844)

The MSM owners control this story. The only thing wrong with RIM is lack of MSM funding.

Patents (2)

brucmack (572780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38737990)

RIM may not have a future as an independent company, but they should still be able to fetch a good price. They've got a nice fat patent portfolio, and likely also a nice portfolio of enterprise customers that are too locked-in to be switching from BB anytime soon.

RIM is already dead (5, Interesting)

Casca (4032) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738532)

They just don't know it yet. I have their latest and greatest 9860 (because I don't have a choice - thanks corporate idiots), and it is a complete and utter piece of shit. The first phone bricked itself within the first week, common problem with this model. The screen is plastic, and feels like it. The touchscreen is horribly inaccurate, making typing on it something dreadful and to be avoided. The on/off button is the entire top of the phone, so when you slip it in a pocket, it is very likely to turn the screen on. It is so under-powered, I'm constantly playing the guessing game of "did I tap the dialog box or not". The "app store" looks like the bargain bin at Blockbuster. Every time I pick this phone up it pisses me off.

Shut it Down (0)

trolman (648780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38738694)

With headlines like this it would have been best to shut down for the day.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>