Comments on: RIM’s Future: Dead, Alive, Reborn?

By: Jadi RIM, Apa yang Akan Kalian Lakukan? « Cerita Dari Farid Aulia Tanjung

Jadi RIM, Apa yang Akan Kalian Lakukan? « Cerita Dari Farid Aulia Tanjung — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 00:09:42 +0000

[...] Saya baru saja membaca artikel mengenai masa depan Blackberry (nih, tak cantumin: http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/04/01/rim%E2%80%99s-future-dead-alive-reborn/). [...]

By: RIM’s future: dead, alive or reborn? | wallpaperpointblank.info

RIM’s future: dead, alive or reborn? | wallpaperpointblank.info — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 22:18:21 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Charles

Charles — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 01:17:01 +0000

“the selection of tools for workers by a group that claims to understand their needs better than they do is an archaic concept.”

Except that this is exactly what Apple does.

I think what the writer meant to say was
“[The idea that] the selection of tools for workers by a group that claims to understand their needs better than they do is an archaic concept[, is an archaic concept].”

As to how insanely risky it is… that’s another matter.

By: crackruckles

crackruckles — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:30:05 +0000

Coding for the playbook is actually quite easy, you are not restricted to just one language like you are with android or iOS. The playbook supports C, C++, Air, html5 web works and java for android app development. So saying that there are not enough in the way of application frameworks for blackberry is just incorrect, sure the native C / C++ framework is a little lite at the moment but everything has to start somewhere. As to why blackberry didnt just folk android was most probably done because of the extremely poor security that android offers and since security is the entire focus of the blackberry it would just be plain stupid to even bother trying to patch all the little holes that exist. But hey that’s just my opinion.

By: huxley

huxley — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:55:10 +0000

@stan

And in your hurry to defend QNX you miss Jean-Louis’ point: QNX is a great kernel, but it doesn’t give you software frameworks which developers want to use to develop their software. It is a part of the equation which is necessary but not sufficient.

Apple’s nuKernel isn’t a barn-burner like QNX, but few people care much about Apple’s kernel, it’s frameworks which do laps around anything RIM has developed and more importantly have allowed a virtuous circle of developer-software-installed base to develop.

A great kernel does nothing but provide a foundation, but you can’t live in a foundation.

By: Canucker

Canucker — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 22:57:41 +0000

While it is true that with the jettisoning of Balsillie, Heins has more options and could sell (the day after the results were released, even the Canadian government said they wouldn’t block a sale), the real options are very limited. As has been pointed out, it’s tough to imagine a partner (I simply don’t see a fit with Microsoft, now they have Nokia by their nuts), licensing will not substitute for their traditional profit centres, and the business model is losing air. Their best option is probably to “see it out” with BBOS10 since they do still have 75 million subscribers. They’ll lose a bunch of these but that’s still a stronger base than WP7. If they can value-engineer the low end, their cheaper TCO might be an advantage in developing markets (against Android, at least). Whatever the outcome, their glory days are well behind them.

By: Martin Omander

Martin Omander — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 20:06:52 +0000

No other handset maker has bounced back after running off “the cliff”:

http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2012/03/the-cliff-theory-of-handset-collapse-why-in-mobile-phones-do-companies-die-so-fast-siemens-motorola-.html

RIM could be the first, but the odds are not in their favor.

By: stan

stan — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 20:02:00 +0000

You betray a certain ignorance about QNX with your attempt to belittle it. It is used in Cisco switches, nuclear power plants, medical applications, and other applications where software glitches are a matter of life and death. It was originally designed as an embedded, real-time version of unix.

By: theharder

theharder — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 19:26:50 +0000

Wouldn’t Microsoft be most interested in the PlayBook hardware? Could the PlayBook tablet (hardware) not be made to run Metro quite efficiently?

By: chano

chano — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 15:47:14 +0000

There is nothing new happening here.
The true smartphone is a computer + telephony.
The smarts derive from the strength of the computing capabilities.
In that sense, the BB was never a smartphone.
It was a PDA+telephony+mail.
But the rapid decline is due to the overarching (almost obsessive) complacency.

By: Wayne

Wayne — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 15:35:08 +0000

I don’t see MS purchasing RIM, but if they can get into a deal with RIM like they did with Nokia it could be beneficial to both parties.

By: PHenry

PHenry — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:55:09 +0000

re Why not just fork Android?
I would guess that would be like admitting their own OS is no good and not worth continuing to work on. hhhmmmm But then the natural question is, didn’t they already do that by buying another OS and replacing their own with it? YUP! IMHO at least. The kicker is, at least with the old OS, devs could use java, now I’m told, with QNX, you have to use C. hhmmm pointers went out of style with java and pushed even further aside with C#.

By: Marc K

Marc K — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:48:13 +0000

Rather than buying a brand new OS, why didn’t RIM simply fork Android like Amazon did?

By: PHenry

PHenry — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:22:33 +0000

re Microsoft buying RIM?
Interesting thought experiment. But what about the problem is RIM has gone from one version of OS which lets developers use Java, to another version which requires C coding, to the possibility of yet ANOTHER OS which requires C#? You think they’re having a “framework” problem now?

As a WP7 dev, I think it’s GREAT that MS is rumoured to be guying RIM. But in reality? I’m not sure it makes sense financially? I understand there’s the MBA “financially” but I’m talking about the DEV definition. Developing a whole new IDE suite, API framework, porting all existing C code, and all the 70,000 apps? There is a chance to create a plugin for WP on top of the BB….that is one option I guess?

By: Adewale Adetoye

Adewale Adetoye — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 12:30:20 +0000

I think Microsoft’s buying of RIM is a pefect idea… I mean more phones to support wp7,8. BB os dont make sense at all..

By: Lun Esex

Lun Esex — Sun, 01 Apr 2012 22:12:37 +0000

What would Microsoft get out of actually buying RIM, rather than doing a Nokia and throwing enough money at them to get them to adopt Windows Phone?

Buying RIM would be a millstone around Microsoft’s neck. They’re not growing, they’re shrinking, so it’s a long term liability rather than an asset. Plus Microsoft has had a spotty record at best with acquisitions. See: Danger, Connectix, WebTV, TellMe. Buying Hotmail was ok in the end, but after the integration hassles arguably the company could’ve done better if they hadn’t sold to Microsoft. Bungie seems to be the best example in recent memory, but they famously kept themselves independent inside Microsoft and then spun out again into a separate company in 2007.

Slipping RIM a briefcase full of cash in exchange for them adopting Windows Phone would be a lot cheaper and have a lot less risk. If RIM then still goes under Microsoft could just write that off as a single line item on their balance sheet.

By: WaltFrench

WaltFrench — Sun, 01 Apr 2012 20:57:11 +0000

Samsung has enjoyed an explosive increase in sales by outdoing all the other Androids, including Moto. But given RIM’s sluggishness and Microsoft’s inflexibility, it’s hard to imagine how RIM would be doing anything other than postponing the inevitable a few days. They’re not competitive or even experienced in 32-bit hardware; they don’t have a unique UI to slap atop WP8, even if it were allowed, and their actual core features—BBM for cost-conscious international teens and secure messaging for the financial überlords—are no longer sufficient differentiators.
.
The other side of this story is that Microsoft can ill afford to sow suspicion at Nokia and its new pal Sammy (with whom Microsoft has a significant deal of some sort since their license covering Android) and whomever else Microsoft has bought lesser deals. If Microsoft buys RIM I can’t imagine BlackBerry lasting as a brand any more than Danger. Certainly, if I were Mr Ballmer, I wouldn’t want to tempt my board into thinking I was in such a hurry to burn money that I was incapable of learning.