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!

RIM's Future Hangs On Developer Support For 'New BlackBerry'

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the if-you-build-it-they-may-or-may-not-come dept.

Blackberry 148

alphadogg writes "With its future up for grabs, Research in Motion at its annual BlackBerry World conference next week will focus on simplifying development for its soon-to-be-unveiled BlackBerry 10 operating system. HTML5 is one key technology in that strategy to create a viable ecosystem of applications for a new generation of mobile devices expected to ship by year-end. The simplicity is needed because BB10, based on a real time kernel acquired with RIM's buyout of QNX Software Systems in 2010, is a complete break with the software that runs on standard BlackBerry smartphones. 'It's a bit of a challenge,' says Tyler Lessard, formerly a RIM vice president in charge of the global developer program, and since October 2011 chief marketing officer at mobile security vendor Fixmo. 'There's very little or no compatibility between the old and new operating systems. Existing apps can't be carried forward to QNX and BB 10. The question is, once the BlackBerry 10 smartphones launch, can RIM have an adequate catalog of apps?'"

cancel ×

148 comments

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

Doing it wrong. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833099)

Embrace Android, become a hardware power house. License BES tech, advertise battery life.

Re:Doing it wrong. (3, Insightful)

plazman30 (531348) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833145)

Agreed. Layer your services on top of Android and be done with it. Why develop an OS, when a free one is there waiting for you to add to it.

Re:Doing it wrong. (2, Insightful)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833223)

Agreed. Layer your services on top of Android and be done with it. Why develop an OS, when a free one is there waiting for you to add to it.

Why would I buy a RIM when and LG or HTC or Samsung behaved the same? That's a recipe for death. It won't be long before google offers the same enterprise e-mail that rim does. What is the distinguishing feature?

Re:Doing it wrong. (4, Insightful)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833359)

> What is the distinguishing feature?
Unlike LG, HTC or Samsung, RIM is a North American company, I would still prefer RIM and I want RIM to develop their own OS. Android and Apple-iOS have lots of drawbacks and problems, as a consumer I want more options.

Re:Doing it wrong. (2)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833463)

To be fair you also have Windows Phone which is debatable better positioned in the future (not by much but MS will spend lots) than RIM, and also WebOS which is looking like where BB will be in 3 years unless RIM gets their shit together.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833499)

Hahahaha ha snirk. Wait, you're serious? (points and laughs). Three turkeys also do not make an eagle.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833505)

Are you high?

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833597)

Three turkeys do not make an eagle.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39834291)

(north) America, Fuck Yeah?

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

pla (258480) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834503)

Unlike LG, HTC or Samsung, RIM is a North American company

You may have heard of this new startup, really shaking up the market these days... Goes by the cutesy name of "Apple"? Straight out of Cupertino, you don't get much more North American than that.

Not to mention that Microsoft and Google also come from the US... And for the record, your Crackberry came from Malaysia, which last time I checked didn't recently become a Canadian province.

What's a 'North American' phone? (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#39835217)

> What is the distinguishing feature? Unlike LG, HTC or Samsung, RIM is a North American company, I would still prefer RIM and I want RIM to develop their own OS. Android and Apple-iOS have lots of drawbacks and problems, as a consumer I want more options.

If that's your criteria (being North American), then you can by Mot as well. It's owned by Google. If enough people thought like you, Palm would have been a success.

Incidentally, how do you define 'North American' (or for that matter American)? Samsung, HTC and LG have Android on their phones, not some native Korean or Chinese OS. Or conversely, those phones are manufactured in China, but so for that matter is Mot, Nokia, Sony-Ericsson and others. In fact, using this criteria, one can question whether Samsung and LG are Korean any longer, or Sony is Japanese any longer, or Nokia is European any longer. Or does RIM manufacture in Canada itself?

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833401)

There's no particular reason to for them to have to change how the base Android OS works if they went with it. RIM's strength is, was, and if they survive will be their security and administration model. The reason Google will never offer an enterprise email that is "the same" is that Google is an advertising company and everybody had better remember that. However, RIM's email and messaging infrastructure was designed in such a way that even RIM couldn't tap it easily and nobody else could at all. That's powerful, and the fact that their devices just work well is also powerful. I personally own an Android and I've also had the displeasure of trying to make iOS devices do things I want instead of things Apple wants, but for work the Blackberries just work correctly and get their business done. I think they're totally boring as personal phones with the current OS, but they serve their intended business purpose very well.

Is it just me, or did RIM's serious public troubles start about the time they started caving into various government's demands for eavesdropping on their system? That those demands had to be made at all, unlike for Android or iOS, is rather telling by itself and SHOULD have been a marketing coup for RIM, but they went and caved instead of telling India and a couple of others to go get lost. For want of being willing to sacrifice one country's business they have earned both the distrust of people who want to actually have a secure system plus the ire of the government/corporate spying establishment for daring to have something like that in the first place. Then all of the sudden it became "corporate owned media dump on RIM" time even though the media wouldn't know the difference between a Blackberry and an Android phone if you hit them in the heads with them. (Hint: the Blackberry would do less damage, being lighter AND having longer battery life).

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833825)

You might not, but an enterprise with it's own BES or which has heavily vetted the crackberry might be very interested.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39835687)

The distinguishing feature is that RIM is not an advertising company profiting from your personnel details and habits.

Re:Doing it wrong. (4, Insightful)

Sipper (462582) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833257)

Agreed. Layer your services on top of Android and be done with it. Why develop an OS, when a free one is there waiting for you to add to it.

Yeah, that way you can fragment development based not only on what the hardware manufacturer does to the version of Android shipped with the phone, but also fragment as time goes on with various versions of Android. :-/

The issue isn't that they didn't go with Android -- the issue is that there's no compatibility between their old OS and their new OS. Historically that kind of departure doesn't usually work out well.

An example of where this kind of transition works is the migration Apple went through between OS 9 and OS X. OS X shipped with an emulator, "OS Classic", to allow people to run OS 9 applications -- and sometime they later dropped support for this. They also shipped 'Rosetta' to simultaneously support PowerPC and Intel architecture -- and now they're dropping support for that, too. But during the transitions they supported applications, at least for a couple of years. With no similar "transition support", RIM is taking a big risk, and there's a good chance they're going to get burnt, because in terms of application support they're starting from scratch again.

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833313)

You make it sound like the existing BB OS has applications anyone cares about. I think we can probably agree that blackberry's irrelevance is a result of its failure to innovate - I'd argue conservative measures for the sake of maintaining the status quo are shortsighted.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39835415)

Yeah, that way you can fragment development based not only on what the hardware manufacturer does to the version of Android shipped with the phone, but also fragment as time goes on with various versions of Android. :-/

Yo dawg, we heard you like to fragment...

Re:Doing it wrong. (1, Interesting)

dumon (868923) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833495)

Why develop an OS, when a free one is there waiting for you to add to it.

Let's see... - on one side, you've got Apple - own OS + own hardware. On the other side, you'v got the army of "everybody else", Google's Android + own hardware. Now what possible difference could make on more addition to that Android soup ? I am glad RIM decided to forge it's own OS - that has the potential of making them a strong player in the smartphone contest. And what's event better - it's QNX based, which means - native apps, oh yeeeeaaah ! Take that, Java !

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834123)

What possible difference can they make by going with their own OS, though, other than increased development costs? i.e. what exact purpose is better served by building from scratch over building on Android?

As for "native", did you miss the mention of HTML5 in the story? Sure, they'll let you use native code outside of UI, but that is there in Android as well.

Re:Doing it wrong. (2, Interesting)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834067)

Because Android is a laggy, buggy piece of trash that has horrible standby battery drain. Android is antiquated, a pre-iOS junkheap that should have been thrown away the moment iOS was first revealed. MSFT threw away Windows Mobile to develop WP7/8, Palm threw away Palm OS for webOS, RIM the old BB OS for the new QNX OS, and Nokia originally was transitioning away from Symbian for MeeGo. Google is the only one who decided to just rip off Apple as fast as possible by slapping on a touchscreen layer onto their outdated OS, and flip-flopped on Network Neutrality to sign a deal with Verizon to push the Droid brand.

That's why Android lags, and it's also got horrible battery life.

Windows Phone 7 is a POS OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39835155)

You really are a dumb fuck aren't you? The reason Windows Phone is so shitty and laggy is that it's built upon the equally shitty and laggy Windows CE. Calling Windows Phone a brand new OS is really just bullshit since it's based upon the antiquated and shitty Windows CE codebase. This explains why multi-tasking on Windows Phones is so horrible.

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834537)

Well for one thing the QNX kernel has capabilities in doing types of multitasking that might work better with distributed processing that the Linux kernel (which is ultimately designed around x86 type architectures) doesn't have. In theory there could be huge advantages for BB10. I don't believe that RIM has the technical excellence to pull this off at this point but QNX is a really interesting OS.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39835919)

Because that free OS is inferior. Why build your own car when you can buy a ford?

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833199)

Yup. RIM is an enterprise software company trying to be a consumer electronics company.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833225)

World doesn't need another crap version of Android.

(Only the pure Google experience is anything other than shite which means you have to get a Nexus or nothing or hack about).

Plus too much useful stuff is only possible by root apps. (If you take those away most of Android's usefulness evaporates when compared to iOS (which I hate) or WP7 (Which I like due to the fact the UI has to be consistant - if Android mandated all the software be identical and just have the innovation hardware related it would be allot better).

QNX is better than Linux for what it does.

(Sucks you cannot make photon apps though and the way it is locked down so much by RIM - stops stuff like pkgsrc being useful for the playbook etc).

Android is mediocre it wastes the best things that the opensource community has to offer. If it just had a proper native API (Or used qt4 or go or anything not using a jvm or interpreted)

Choice is good I hope for god's sake we never get into a situation where there is just iOS and Android (Tizen looks better than either for tablets - I can do without an ecosystem of crappy adware especially given the tools to with a modest amount of efffort use the best of OSS Linux desktop apps.(Nothing comparable to desktop mplayer / clementine on Android tablets).

Overall we would be better off if honeycomb had refused to run Android phone apps at all (Maybe 3rd party hack to get it to work). As it stands even the absolute basics suck on honeycomb / ICS (tablet version)

People speak of the numbers of apps as being important but it isn't all that matters is that there is one example of every type of app that isn't total junk. (I probably need 20 apps). Only probably need 100 in total there is opensource stuff already for most of what people want all it needs is a well designed tablet UI. 1000's of useless adware crap apps are of no use to anybody.

Other than tapatalk (Which is far superior to using any web forum) and maybe comic / pdf readers I cannot think of any apps better than desktop Linux equivalents (And in the case of the last two it is purely the form factor that makes them better the pc app is almost certainly more featureful and a better design).

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834685)

Embrace Android, become a hardware power house.

yeah, just like... um... well I'm sure SOMEONE'S doing it.

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

JonJ (907502) | more than 2 years ago | (#39836097)

Samsung?

Re:Doing it wrong. (1)

21mhz (443080) | more than 2 years ago | (#39836107)

Yeah, they are just about the only company making profits on Android.

Re:Doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39834751)

And how do you think RIM gets good battery life for their phones?

Hint: It's a LOT more than the hardware. Their software design is the true key to that. Running Android would give them another 8 hour phone.

The answer. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833119)

The question is, once the BlackBerry 10 smartphones launch, can RIM have an adequate catalog of apps?

No.

Could be worse (0)

bobstreo (1320787) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833135)

Could be staking their dwindling future on windows phones.

But if they don't innovate (read port to android and ditch the hardware business) they're doomed.

Re:Could be worse (1)

hantms (2527172) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833155)

Could be staking their dwindling future on windows phones.

But if they don't innovate (read port to android and ditch the hardware business) they're doomed.

If they port to Android and ditch the hardware business they're still doomed.

Re:Could be worse (1)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833319)

It's not like Android is making much money either - Google makes $2 per phone, Apple $575 [slashdot.org] .

And with the way that the Android platform has already fragmented, it's going to go the way of Linux on the desktop.

Want to buy an Android phone? Good luck comparing features, and figuring out if your manufacturer will even be offering updates 6 months from now.

All Android did was kill off Apple's other competitors, leaving the top - and all the profits- to Apple. RIM is just one more victim.

Re:Could be worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833367)

Apples and oranges, if you'll pardon the pun.

You can't compare what google make per handset to what apple makes. Take the hardware profit from apple's $575 and I'm sure you'll find numbers closer to google's $5.

But we all know google's product is not the OS, it's us.

Re:Could be worse (1, Insightful)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833895)

You also can't compare android to an iPad - which is why Amazon sells more Kindle tablets than all the other Android makers combined.

In other words, there's the iPad, the Kindle, and "everybody else", which explains why manufacturers are abandoning the tablet market as unprofitable. Only the iPad can command iPad prices from the masses ... because everything else really is a crappy, poorly-supported wanna-be knock-off.

But back on-topic - there is no way in H*** that RIM is going to survive - not by switching to Android, and not by sticking with QNS and hoping that they get any developer traction. The market has spoken.

Re:Could be worse (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834133)

which explains why manufacturers are abandoning the tablet market as unprofitable.

Who exactly is leaving the tablet market? All companies that have made Android tablets so far have announced new models.

Only the iPad can command iPad prices from the masses ... because everything else really is a crappy, poorly-supported wanna-be knock-off.

Did you even see Asus Transformer?

Re:Could be worse (1)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834441)

How much did HP lose on their touchpad because of the "race to the bottom" for all non-iPad tablets? A billion is still a lot of money.

Dell abanoned their "Streak" Android tablet [pcworld.com] , and is now concentrating on Windows tablets.

Is the Transformer nice? Sure - but the sales numbers tell a different story - people who look at it still end up buying an iPad instead. If they need a real keypad plus portability, they buy a laptop

Re:Could be worse (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834497)

Dell abanoned their "Streak" Android tablet, and is now concentrating on Windows tablets.

Anyone else? Because one manufacturer out of a dozen is not exactly consistent with the bleak picture that you've pained in your original post, where it sounded like everyone, or at least most companies, are leaving the market. But they don't, because even the relatively small slice they end up with after Apple takes away theirs, is still large enough to turn a decent profit.

Is the Transformer nice? Sure - but the sales numbers tell a different story - people who look at it still end up buying an iPad instead.

That does not follow. Most people who buy iPad, don't even look at anything else before doing that.

If they need a real keypad plus portability, they buy a laptop

You miss the point of Transformer. I need a laptop, but I also need a tablet - because the two are good at different things. If I can make both into one device such that I don't need to lug around two, all the better.

Re:Could be worse (1)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834653)

When that "one manufacturer" (two actually - both Dell and HP) are the #1 and #2 computer vendors in the world, it means a LOT.

The market is Apple iPad at the high end, Amazon Kindle at the low end, and everyone else trying to compete for the scraps that are left, which basically means the price pressure is such that they will never be able to "make it up in volume."

Google screwed up. They should have bought Motorola before releasing Android, and made it exclusively for Motorola. You'd have Googlerola Smartphones and tablets, and no issues with hardware compatibility.

Android is about to get a serious whack in the head from a completely unexpected direction - Valve. Valve is working on a full stack - linux+steam. Expect to see it on TVs (so forget the already-dead UbuntuTV), tablets, and handhelds.

They already have the content people want, a working app store, complete with drm that the studios will go along with for streaming movies, etc. - imagine no longer needing a game console to play games, stream netflix (or bypass netflix and/or hulu completely), surf the net, etc. People will buy that, in various form factors.

Manufacturers, given a choice between free Android, or Free Steam + a cut of revenues, will drop Android.

Re:Could be worse (1)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834085)

The BoM of an iPhone is $180. Apple's margins on the device are massive. That's true for all manufacturers that sell their phones at retail.

Re:Could be worse (2)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833203)

Could be staking their dwindling future on windows phones.

Seriously, I wonder what the prospects for the windows phone are. My starting assumption is that Microsoft knows they need to succeed in the smart phone game and that this would be a good thing to blow their cash hoard on unless they want to stay a PC software company. So I assume they are going to make some company succeed but may have not made up their minds which.

The obvious choice is Nokia's headlong commitment to Windows phones. Clearly a willing partner with the manufacturing, distribution and hardware support capability that knows how to work with every phone company. That's good. The down side is perhaps they are and ARM based smart phone. Can they make the leap to Intel? Early reviews say windows RT (arm) is a total half baked disaster. On the other hand reviews of the XOLO (which is intel android) say that the arm emulation is almost flawless. So there is a possibility they could run windows 8 intel but emulate the legacy ARM drivers and programs.

If they are first to market with the widest distribution of a high power windows 8 then developers will target that devices characteristics. Could be a win. If they try to tough it out on ARM I suspect a big fail.

Then there is samsung who dabbles in windows smart phones. Samsung either needs to fork Android like amazon did or keep a foot in windows or they expose themselves to whims of google. If they fork it, they can dictate control of the OS to the carriers just like Apple does. Empirically apple iphones are great precisely because Verizon or AT&T is not trying to customize it to maximize their revenue stream.

But I think neither android or iphone is so great that Microsoft can't succeed given they already have about 100K of developed Apps. Conversely this is exactly why Blackberry has zero chance. No app base means no customers means no developers.

Re:Could be worse (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834615)

. My starting assumption is that Microsoft knows they need to succeed in the smart phone game and that this would be a good thing to blow their cash hoard on unless they want to stay a PC software company. So I assume they are going to make some company succeed but may have not made up their minds which.

You are assuming wrong. The board discussed this something like about 18mo back. While they are willing to lose a little on this market they are not going to focus on this market as a core strategic direction at this time. They don't see earning the money back from this market, hardware is expensive driven by expensive parts, the carriers have enormous power and the software needs are light. Microsoft is going to continue to bring out new Windows mobile and have a division to try and keep a foot in the door if they can and of course if the situation were to change drastically...

Re:Could be worse (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833989)

but if their marketshare exceeds Windows Phone in a reasonable time frame, I will piss my pants laughing. I guess Nokia shareholders will piss their pants for other reasons however.

WebOS versus Android Round 2, Fight! (4, Insightful)

SlashdotWanker (1476819) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833141)

They're going to be stuck in the same position that Palm was only 3 years further down the line in technology. QNX is pretty slick but they're going to have to encourage (bribe) developers and keep pushing the way Microsoft has with Windows Phone if they want to have a prayer... Every day they wait on hardware is a slightly smaller chance of any kind of success.

Re:WebOS versus Android Round 2, Fight! (2)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833287)

In what world is Microsoft pushing Windows Phones? They've got the most pathetic lineup of any platform. A grand total of one (1) phone on Verizon's network.

Re:WebOS versus Android Round 2, Fight! (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833507)

Verizon got burned on the KIN. There's no way in hell they're going to push Windows Phones. They will pretend, and that's it.

Re:WebOS versus Android Round 2, Fight! (1)

21mhz (443080) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833743)

That's how we know your world is limited to Verizon. In ours, there are also AT&T and T-Mobile, who have fairly popular Windows Phone models. Not to mention other countries out there because who cares about them anyway.

Re:WebOS versus Android Round 2, Fight! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833967)

And arguably Apple has the worst lineup of all, only one current-gen phone!

But it's an iPhone, after all. (1)

Gimbal (2474818) | more than 2 years ago | (#39835009)

n/t

Posting from Playbook 2.0 (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833149)

Works great, very stable, responsive.
Lots of good apps, just filter out some Android apps to get higher quality. A lot of the complaints are from miscreants/malcontents.

Check out BallxHole. Very realistic physics, Free version available. Lots of native Os 2.0 apps. As for phone os10, good point ... Hope they maintain backward compat!

Legitimate question... (1)

readandburn (825014) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833325)

What makes a Playbook a better choice than an Android tablet or an iPad? I know nothing about them.

Re:Legitimate question... (2)

gslj (214011) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833393)

I just got the $200 model of Playbook for myself. I thought it had better hardware than the $200 Android tablets (camera, hdmi connection), less cost than an iPad and is easier to carry in a pocket for reading and so on. The software selection got a lot better through the Android compatability.

-Gareth

Re:Legitimate question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833487)

What makes a Playbook a better choice than an Android tablet or an iPad? I know nothing about them.

500 bucks versus 300 bucks starting price. If Rim makes any cash at all pushing cheap tablets I would be surprised, but if there is any room there at all then 600 dollar ipads are in trouble cause the BB tabs are really very good especially when a tricked out 64 gig one comes in just over 400 bucks and a 64 gig ipads or Samsungs are way more expensive.

If enough people really try out the BB tab OS then things might just change around for Rim as their software and core apps are really very good.

I do not think that Rim as a hope in hell of breaking into the market given the mind set of the consumer but if they do gain traction watch out 'cause Apple could loose out really fast because they are based heavily on trendy marketing, and social networking on the Ipad is not an exclusive Apple strong point to say the least considering what you pay for their products.

If Rim comes up with a really slick secure social media system based on what they already have going with their e-mail systems then things could very quickly get turned upside down in the tablet market...essentially a real time server enhanced facebook on steroids with multimedia capabilities could do the trick...

but I doubt Rim has the cash or server base to pull something like this off. My thinking is that if they partnered with Google or Microsoft then it could work, but I suspect all that will happen is they will get assimilated by either Google or Microsoft very soon as their working capital dries up. Either way it could spell real trouble for Apple if Rims good tech gets bought up by those who have the money to built it up into something new for the consumer. Think about the possibility for real time business networking as well and you will understand what I am getting at and why Rim could shake things up in a hurry. IBM might even consider putting something together with Rim I can see many different possible outcomes all of which do not include Rim succeeding without serious partnering.

Re:Posting from Playbook 2.0 (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834147)

A lot of the complaints are from miscreants/malcontents.

So all reviews are positive, so long as you exclude those users who aren't happy?

Curious about their future (1)

mpol (719243) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833165)

I myself am quite happy with my Blackberry and I'm really curious what they will bring to the table.
I really think they should diversify their hardware, bring some qwerty models, like the Curve, Bold and Torch. But also full touchsreen devices, with small screens to bigger screens. Like 3,2" and 3,7" and 4,3" for example.
I do think they are still interesting for developers. They will have their own platform. But also Qt support, which might bring in a lot of old Nokia developers. They also support Android, allthough apps for BB-Android need to be repackaged.

Re:Curious about their future (1)

chucklebutte (921447) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833259)

No! Diversifying is the worst idea! One phone, one model, keep it simple. Android is too fractured, iPhone has one model, with a service pack released about every 9 months. Apple success is because of the simplicity, one model with slight hardware variations over the course of what like 5 years? Which means most apps on the 3GS works on the 4S. OS5 apps don't always work well with OS6, and wont even run on OS7. I love my Blackberry (Have the Torch 8910, wish I had a Bold 9900...) and my Playbooks! OS2 is amazing!

Ditch the Curve, Torch, Storm, Pearl, That silly flip phone thingy, and stick to the Bold. Keep the Qwerty, more battery life and security hype, and hammer it home that App World has just as many app's as any other App store out there (Take away the 1000's of duplicates and you have about 33,000 unique apps, about the same as BB App World.)

Go #TeamBlackBerry!

Re:Curious about their future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39835847)

(Take away the 1000's of duplicates and you have about 33,000 unique apps, about the same as BB App World.)

Which part of your anatomy did you pluck those figures from? I'm sure it wasn't your brain...

Re:Curious about their future (2)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833443)

RIM can't afford a billion models and feature sets. They tried that, it led them here. They need a hero phone or 2 and to avoid another expensive PlayBook like flop- despite how nice the device itself is.

IOS, or... this? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833169)

So I'm making an app, i can chose to develop for iOS.... or the BB10?

Seriously, why would i spent any time and resources on that platform, when I could just target iOS, and take advantage of the app store and the entire ecosystem that doesn't exist for the BB10?

Re:IOS, or... this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833277)

because you're writing for enterprise customers instead of teenagers?

Re:IOS, or... this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833349)

Worst. Troll. Ever.

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834163)

Why would I write a tablet app for enterprise customers? Where's the market I'm going to get money from? And even if it's there, would I get more money from that over writing, say, a decent game for iOS?

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834661)

Lots of enterprises are moving towards tablets. They are becoming standard in medicine. Salesforces and starting to use them because of instant on features. They are moving heavily towards retail.

And enterprise customers don't use the app store they use an enterprise phone management system to distribute apps.

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

Barsteward (969998) | more than 2 years ago | (#39836157)

If you develop an enterprise app that is useful, you could probably charge a lot more for it.

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

teg (97890) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833459)

So I'm making an app, i can chose to develop for iOS.... or the BB10?

Seriously, why would i spent any time and resources on that platform, when I could just target iOS, and take advantage of the app store and the entire ecosystem that doesn't exist for the BB10?

Because everyone else is writing for iOS, and you'd have a lot less competition on the BB10 platform?

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

SadButTrue (848439) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833635)

So you're suggesting that desktop software developers should develop for Linux instead of Windows? It is hard to overstate the absurdity of that statement.

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834671)

The problem with Linux desktop software was that the people drawn to the Linux desktop didn't want to buy applications. There were companies that made money on the Mac back when it has 2-5% marketshare.

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

SadButTrue (848439) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834791)

All fine and good. No one is suggesting that you can't make money on Linux or the Mac. I am not even suggesting that people won't make money coding for BB10. Hell, I will go as far as to say that people that specifically target deficiencies in BB10 may do well.

My reply was specifically about the idea that you should target low adoption platforms before high adoption ones "because there is less competition". It is nonsense, and that is what I wanted to illustrate with my analogy.

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#39835043)

I understand that, and I think the analogy is flawed. Less competition, especially for a mediocre product can be critical in terms of sales. A market 50x as large with 50x as much competition will on average be worse to enter into with a new product because by random chance alone you'll have competitors who have a substantially better product already present. Microsoft office basically sucks the oxygen out of the office suite for windows even though the windows market is massive. That's why OpenOffice's in the 1990s (then called StarOffice) did in fact thrive as a commercial offering for Linux and Sun where there was no comparable office suite while far better and far better funded suites for the Windows platform like Lotus SmartSuite were dying.

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

SadButTrue (848439) | more than 2 years ago | (#39835239)

I couldn't agree more. I even stated as much.
If you are targeting a market that is very crowded on one platform and very open on another much smaller platform then it MAY be better to target the smaller one. Your office example is an excellent example of this.
A second scenario where the smaller platform may be better is for highly skewed demographics or usage patterns. For instance if I were developing a LOB app BB7 may very well be the best place to start. It would be worth investigating at the very least.

My issue is not with that fact that there are edge cases where the smaller platform can win. It is with the idea, that in general, you should start with the smaller, in this case smallest, platform. (smallest because BB10 hasn't been released yet)

"Because everyone is writing for iOS, and you'd have a lot less competition on the BB10 platform"

Re:IOS, or... this? (1)

gutnor (872759) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833649)

Because everything exist on the iPhone and everything that does not exist get cloned as soon as your app reaches the store. It used to be that you could have an original idea and develop it (fun), now even before you start you see 10 implementations already in the store, that kills the fun right there.
It is still good to develop for the iPhone because of the incredible amount of resources you have. However, that is a harsh and very competitive environment. If you are not coding to become rich or create a software empire, you may want a more "open" (as in you have a chance of being seen on merit without a dedicating half your time marketing) environment.

For existing developer (Android, IOS), all boils down to market opportunity: less competition to grab the market shares early on.

going the way of WebOS? (1)

binarstu (720435) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833215)

It looks like BlackBerry might be set to make the same mistake Palm did when they launched WebOS. Palm completely abandoned a huge "ecosystem" of PalmOS users, software, and developers by not supporting PalmOS software on WebOS. I'm not suggesting that this move was solely responsible for Palm's demise, but it certainly contributed. Sounds like BlackBerry is getting ready to do the same thing with their "Blackberry 10" OS.

Re:going the way of WebOS? (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833425)

Yeah Palm killed off their old PalmOS ecosystem at precisely the same time as Blackberry is now- with the decline in full swing but still not a sure thing entirely. Killing legacy might be their only choice like it was for Palm, but it will kill them as well. Who will even consider writing for BB10 from scratch? In the case of both companies the time for salvation was open for a few years, and passed because they were stuck between the old way and the new one. In the end the new way won, but not before irrelevance was already insured. Sad too because WebOS, and BB10 as it is in on the PlayBook seem great. Just too damn late.

Then there's no future for RIM (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833219)

"RIM's Future Hangs On Developer Support For 'New BlackBerry'"

I had a "quad band" (?) BlackBerry for years and kinda liked it's "full" keyboard to SMS.

But I've developped for the BlackBerry which you *could* more or less program in Java but it was nonsense. They did definitely alienate the developers. If Java wasn't an option (it is now for Android btw ; ) then they should have made that clearer. It was by far the most buggy JVM of all the phones (and that's not a compliment, some of them were really terrible : but Blackberry's JVM was the buggiest of them all).

And the lock-in (proprietary APIs and whatnots). RIM is going the way so many tech companies went: things are turning fast in this world.

If they wanted to count on developers then they should have taken good care of them. Bad APIs. Bad support. Snobbish attitude.

What goes around comes around and the developers are now getting their revenge.

Goodbye RIM : )

There is a market for dumb phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833271)

Blackberry could continue to fill the role for businesses of a cheap, reliable text/phone appliance.

Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (3, Interesting)

echusarcana (832151) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833279)

The Blackberry Ecosystem is such an enormous pain to develop for. Just trying to port over an existing Android app is one roadblock after another: the porting / re-signing tools were flaky. You had to use shitty MS Windows and follow weird badly written signing instructions. Developing natively is probably even worse - I hardly got anywhere with that. And this is all before you get to the market posting requirements.

In comparison, the Android development environment "just works". Toss Eclipse on Ubuntu, do a couple add-ins, and you are up and running in an hour or two. Very very low cost to develop an application. Clear instructions on what you need to do to get on the market. Amazon was pretty simple as well.

The banks and government business is the only thing keeping RIM afloat, and that can last a little while, but its a bad business model. RIM deserves to die.

Have that resume ready, RIM employees. You are going to need it soon.

Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (3, Informative)

kae77 (1006997) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833309)

You mean the Android emulator, with documented situations where it doesn't work? Or you're blaming windows for the problems, which is a Microsoft product? Or developing natively, which hasn't even been fully released yet? You'll have to wait until next week to see the full NDK. I'm no developer, but from what I've heard about Android 'just working' involves supporting hundreds of devices, and plenty of different versions of Android just to get it working. Make no mistake, RIM has not been the easiest to develop for in the past, but they're working overtime to get communication working now. Alec Saunders has made himself completely available to developers to work out problems. Name one other company that gives you that kind of access to people who can make the changes needed. Don't sing the swan song just yet, the bets are still out on this one.

Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (1)

daniel78 (2563977) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833861)

Agreed - from what i've seen on the dev forums, the amount of involvement/activity/support from RIM devs has been excellent. Wining over app developers is essential to their survival and they seem to have realised this. Whether that's enough at this point is, of course, another question. I hope it works out for them.

Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (1)

Tapewolf (1639955) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833395)

Are you talking about current Blackberry development system? Because that's the bit they're (very sensibly) leaving behind.

Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833543)

Umm... Isn't QNX momentous development environment built on eclipse o.O
Your comments lead me to believe you have never developed anything, you clearly have no clue what you are taking about,
And is just being another DROID fan gurl.

Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (2)

daniel78 (2563977) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833727)

I actually completely disagree... at least in regard to native stuff, java-only on Android isn't so bad.

For me, native Android dev has (over the past few years) been one headache after another and only recently has it started to approach being in any way user-friendly (though i still use command line tools and makefiles to build native code ,and have to switch to eclipse to develop the required, but wasteful, java wrapper) . There is *still* no native c++ debugger (at least not one provided by google), other than command-line-based gdb (and even that is flaky as hell), which in 2012 is, quite frankly, embarrassing (the latest preview of the adt tools supposedly goes some way to rectify this, but the track record from google on the reliability of new features, hasn't been great). Almost every NDK release has had issues that required me to either debug/hack the build tools, or implement some other workaround.

As I say, its getting better, but this stuff should have been ready from day 1.

My recent foray into playbook dev has, on the other hand, been surprisingly good. Expectations weren't high, but so far everything has just worked. Everything ran from Eclipse - compiled and debugged just fine (Even has wifi debugging which was a welcome surprise). The provided libraries seem well thought out and provide access to pretty much all the functionality of the device (compare to android where the NDK provides almost zero access to anything OS related - requiring the frequent use of JNI to call into java code. Android 2.3+ has better features in this regard (though still not great), but it'll be a while before 2.2 is a negligible minority).

I think RIM certainly has an uphill struggle ahead, but based on my experience, if they fail, it won't be down to poor developer tools.

Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833863)

I'm kind of torn there philosophically, as while I understand why everyone wants their stuff multiplatform, I also think that Java makes a huge amount of sense for Android. There are currently Android devices out there with at least four different CPU architectures (Two flavors of ARM, x86, and MIPS). That is a rare case of Java's mission statement making perfect sense. I tend to kind of think they should've just skipped the NDK altogether for sanity's sake.

Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39836143)

There's nothing "just works" about andriod development. I recently went from zero to hello andriod and compared to doing the same thing with ios it was a lot of steps. Apple has the crown for "just works". I didn't need to read a series of instructions to get things running in ios, but I did for andriod.

But hey, at least it's nowhere near as painful as RVDS over JTAG to get up and running and use :P

"...can RIM have an adequate catalog of apps?" (4, Insightful)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833295)

Answer: does RIM currently have an adequate catalog of apps?

Re:"...can RIM have an adequate catalog of apps?" (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833429)

True even the current apps are pretty weak, RIM needs a compatibility layer with older OS's bad otherwise lots of these companies who were only willing to support updates to the dwindling BB base will just say screw it to a full rewrite. And the Android apps on BB10 doesn't cut it.

Re:"...can RIM have an adequate catalog of apps?" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39835053)

The same than Android: You need to cough lots of money for get crappy apps without ads, or get just crappy apps *with ads*. I have both Android and Blackberry and their main use is to browse internet on the go or play emulators on Android. The rest are just good intentions, ebooks but no PDF reader or propietary format$, office on the go but don't edit or open bad the files, etc.

Support for.. new blackberry... (-1, Redundant)

NReitzel (77941) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833415)

Hahaha...

Oh, Buahahahahaha... hahaha...

Hahaha.... (hic) hahahaha...

stop, pleast stop (hic) hahahaha.....

question (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833667)

What does "real time kernel" mean?

Re:question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833711)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_operating_system

Re:question (2, Funny)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833725)

What does "real time kernel" mean?

It means that the OS can make guarantees about the time of response to events (usually external inputs).
This is very important for things like antilock brake control systems, not so much for consumer electronics.

In this case, however, it's helpful because we can be assured that Blackberry OS Version 10 will tank within a guaranteed limited time.

Re:question (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834701)

Cute answer. The importance of an RTOS for consumer electronics is responsiveness. Most OSes are optimized to do the most work on a given quantity of hardware. If however you optimize for responsiveness the system "feels" faster even though top of the line apps won't run. You reduce total productive capacity of the hardware but in exchange end user satisfaction skyrockets.

This used to be one of the core differences between Windows Desktop and Windows Server how the kernel was tweaked. And in the case of QNX it isn't a little tweaking but a bottom up design.

Re:question (1)

alannon (54117) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833831)

Well, if it's 'hard' Real Time, It means that the kernel is designed to give certain guarantees for responsiveness. An example could be that a process that requests it can be certain that it gets a timeslice every certain number of milliseconds either most of the time (for a 'soft' RTOS) or completely deterministically (for a 'hard' RTOS).

Re:question (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#39835389)

Well, if it's 'hard' Real Time, It means that the kernel is designed to give certain guarantees for responsiveness. An example could be that a process that requests it can be certain that it gets a timeslice every certain number of milliseconds either most of the time (for a 'soft' RTOS) or completely deterministically (for a 'hard' RTOS).

Thank you for the answer. Can you give me an example of a non-RTOS? I've having trouble finding explanations of these things that I can understand via the google (but I'm not particularly bright about these things).

Sorry, RIM... (4, Informative)

alannon (54117) | more than 2 years ago | (#39833809)

As a (former) Blackberry developer, I've decided that I will be doing no more development for their platforms. They pissed away any goodwill I had for them by their crappy tools, crappy support and their ridiculous policies. As an example, in order to become a development partner, which is the ONLY way to get real support from them, you have to sign a license that basically gives RIM rights to use any of your source code that you develop for their platform. Or typically, if you tried to discuss a problem on their support forums, they would allow developers to spend weeks or months trying to figure out a problem before stepping in and say, "Oh, ya, we know about this. It's on our internal bug tracking system," and then close the discussion to new posts. This was often for bugs that had been around for several major API versions, or even from the very FIRST API version.

Fighting through the mess seemed like it was worth it when it seemed like everybody in the market for the software I was developing had a Blackberry, but now that it's dropped down to almost zero, you want me to invest my time and money into a brand new platform? No, thanks. At this point, I'm content to see you slip beneath the waves and to try to forget you exist. Goodbye.

Re:Sorry, RIM... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39834429)

GOOD !!!
BlackBerry can use one less incompetent app developer that cant figure out how stuffs works.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out... Meanwhile we will enjoy our andoidlike crapware free market.

Why not a Blackberry Branded Android? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39833949)

Optimized to write the Blackberry Email App?

This opens the market to run the end to end encrypted blackberry email app on all androids, not just blackberyy. Poof instant mega market share.

This also opens up the blackbery to run Angry Birds and that whole ecosystem and makes it a very useful AND mainstream device. Poof, instant app catalog.

And gives the crusty old farts that love their Blackberries (like say a president) a very nice upgrade path. Poof, the hardcore, loyal, exclusive fan base will love you forever.

There is a big Military/Government appetite for secure email. Blackberry is already there, while everyone is not even really playing, never mind playing catchup.

Make the secure back end servers available as a separate, exclusive and expensive product.

Put a special chip in the Blackberry for encryption/security that speeds things up.

"It just runs better on a blackberry."

Blackberry rebrands itself as a premium secure communications company, lands fat government and fortune 1000 contracts for the higher ups that need the security.

Blackberry can make a fat margin on it's premium branded phone.

My Android app can run on it, so I can make a buck too!

"Are you running email, or BLACKBERRY email?"

Preload the Premium blackberry phones with blackberry software and transfer software and a special cable that attaches to the old phone that makes Old Fart Migration easy and Guaranteed.

  You'll get the Premium Dollars.

RIM is so dead (1)

lanner (107308) | more than 2 years ago | (#39834283)

RIM is so dead that posting on this story isn't worth anyone's time.

Android is they :D (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39834397)

Oh my!!
Androidlers are soooo upset that blackberry users have a real OS to use that they have to vomit propaganda
All over the Internet. I am scratching my head as to why they support android when Microsoft clearly owns it
Due to license royalties and is the company profiting the most from it, but they don't seem to like talking about that. :/

Re:Android is they :D (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39835555)

Do you really think anyone gives a shit about RIM or Blackberry? They're going to be dead in 2-3 years so enjoy it while you can. It really was a Riches to Rags story. They're a toxic cesspool of a company.

Open source... (1)

freeasinrealale (928218) | more than 2 years ago | (#39835133)

Open source QNX. Its their only hope.
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>