Comments on: Saving Private RIM http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/ Media, Tech & Business Models Wed, 22 May 2013 03:43:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: alberto http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-42666 alberto Mon, 13 May 2013 09:26:38 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-42666 Ottimo, articolo davvero interessante, era proprio quello che cercavo! Grazie per lo spunto! Ottimo, articolo davvero interessante, era proprio quello che cercavo! Grazie per lo spunto!

]]> By: Adrian Duggan http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-29919 Adrian Duggan Wed, 28 Nov 2012 15:00:55 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-29919 Where does all this leave a mere consumer? Here I am thinking of buying a tablet for my missus. Now I own an Ipad 1 and operate a bold,they just don't mix, especially as my blackberry is on enterprise configuration. However my missus owns the curve,so was thinking of buying the playbook. However everyone I speak to screams 'no don't do it. A. Android is better and B. if RIM goes bust you will be stuck with a no support,no apps etc. Whats the truth,is the market for RIM imploding..do I get the playbook or go Android. Based on the above article,I am screwed. Where does all this leave a mere consumer? Here I am thinking of buying a tablet for my missus. Now I own an Ipad 1 and operate a bold,they just don’t mix, especially as my blackberry is on enterprise configuration. However my missus owns the curve,so was thinking of buying the playbook. However everyone I speak to screams ‘no don’t do it. A. Android is better and B. if RIM goes bust you will be stuck with a no support,no apps etc.

Whats the truth,is the market for RIM imploding..do I get the playbook or go Android. Based on the above article,I am screwed.

]]> By: The ‘experts’ who never see BBM will never understand RIM | Technology and Gadget News http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27181 The ‘experts’ who never see BBM will never understand RIM | Technology and Gadget News Thu, 16 Aug 2012 00:14:55 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27181 [...] Analysis Written off by pundits and the markets, barely a day goes by without a fresh requiem for RIM. A recent example comes from Jean-Louis Gassee in Saving Private RIM. [...] [...] Analysis Written off by pundits and the markets, barely a day goes by without a fresh requiem for RIM. A recent example comes from Jean-Louis Gassee in Saving Private RIM. [...]

]]> By: The ‘experts’ who never see BBM will never understand RIM | Business Blogs and News http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27178 The ‘experts’ who never see BBM will never understand RIM | Business Blogs and News Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:39:48 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27178 [...] Analysis Written off by pundits and the markets, barely a day goes by without a fresh requiem for RIM. A recent example comes from Jean-Louis Gassee in Saving Private RIM. [...] [...] Analysis Written off by pundits and the markets, barely a day goes by without a fresh requiem for RIM. A recent example comes from Jean-Louis Gassee in Saving Private RIM. [...]

]]> By: The ‘experts’ who never see BBM will never understand RIM – BlackBerry News - BerryLicio.us | BerryLicio.us http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27173 The ‘experts’ who never see BBM will never understand RIM – BlackBerry News - BerryLicio.us | BerryLicio.us Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:44:23 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27173 [...] Written off by pundits and the markets, barely a day goes by without a fresh requiem for RIM. A recent example comes from Jean-Louis Gassee in Saving Private RIM. [...] [...] Written off by pundits and the markets, barely a day goes by without a fresh requiem for RIM. A recent example comes from Jean-Louis Gassee in Saving Private RIM. [...]

]]> By: Rob in Cupertino http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27171 Rob in Cupertino Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:09:38 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27171 I like the iphone. I have one of the very first ones (4GB if you remember). But, I suspect that RIM, if they are committed to what they are doing just might have a shot. My reasons are: 1) whereas computers are very sticky (sorry I don't do Mac cause I think Windows), phones and tablets are much less so. I am amazed how much people switch between tablets and phones. People have less invested in their tablets and phones. Remember they are personal statements(fashion or otherwise). What becomes cool is often something that is not the thing that "everyone" else is doing. People will switch. 2) Yes, there are lots of apps, but many of those apps cannot be found, according to studies. There are only about a 1000 apps that are downloaded in a meaningful quantity. Most people will only see and download the top apps (favs). So, as a developer of apps, new ecosystems become fresh territory where one can make their mark. Can't get any traction with iTunes, perhaps one can be a top app on BB10. 3) The choice of QNX may mean that RIM bought into a preexisting ecosystem (autos etc.) which could be a potential market for their services. Could this lead to the next big thing? 4) A recent report from Chetan Sharma Consulting found that 90 percent of tablet users are only using Wi-Fi, even if the tablets have cellular data capabilities. As well, most of the larger tablets never leave home. Is this how it will always be, or is there something missing that is keeping people from using their tablet's outside the home. I want to go through Safeway and have all my preselected deals pointed out to me as I go up and down the aisles. I cannot do that yet. 5) Has the iphone plateaued at the moment, making it easier for others to catch up? The obvious big improvements were in the early days. Disclaimer: I got myself a BB Playbook to see what it is all about, and I quite like it. The software is still a bit rough around the edges, but I don't want to give up the multitasking now that I have gotten used to it. And, it is quite fun to see what "missing" feature they will fix or add (such as downloading podcasts in the background while I am doing something else, which was added in the latest OS release a week ago). I like the iphone. I have one of the very first ones (4GB if you remember). But, I suspect that RIM, if they are committed to what they are doing just might have a shot. My reasons are: 1) whereas computers are very sticky (sorry I don’t do Mac cause I think Windows), phones and tablets are much less so. I am amazed how much people switch between tablets and phones. People have less invested in their tablets and phones. Remember they are personal statements(fashion or otherwise). What becomes cool is often something that is not the thing that “everyone” else is doing. People will switch. 2) Yes, there are lots of apps, but many of those apps cannot be found, according to studies. There are only about a 1000 apps that are downloaded in a meaningful quantity. Most people will only see and download the top apps (favs). So, as a developer of apps, new ecosystems become fresh territory where one can make their mark. Can’t get any traction with iTunes, perhaps one can be a top app on BB10. 3) The choice of QNX may mean that RIM bought into a preexisting ecosystem (autos etc.) which could be a potential market for their services. Could this lead to the next big thing? 4) A recent report from Chetan Sharma Consulting found that 90 percent of tablet users are only using Wi-Fi, even if the tablets have cellular data capabilities. As well, most of the larger tablets never leave home. Is this how it will always be, or is there something missing that is keeping people from using their tablet’s outside the home. I want to go through Safeway and have all my preselected deals pointed out to me as I go up and down the aisles. I cannot do that yet. 5) Has the iphone plateaued at the moment, making it easier for others to catch up? The obvious big improvements were in the early days.

Disclaimer: I got myself a BB Playbook to see what it is all about, and I quite like it. The software is still a bit rough around the edges, but I don’t want to give up the multitasking now that I have gotten used to it. And, it is quite fun to see what “missing” feature they will fix or add (such as downloading podcasts in the background while I am doing something else, which was added in the latest OS release a week ago).

]]> By: Steve http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27123 Steve Thu, 09 Aug 2012 18:45:00 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27123 @Michael Schmitt: We get it, you're a big fan of RIM. However, saying that you know what they are working on doesn't really help this discussion. You mention "calling a spade a spade". That's precisely what JLG is doing. No matter how you spin this, RIM is in trouble and trending downwards. Could things turn around? Sure, anything is possible. In this case, the general consensus is that it's improbable. That's not based out of a hatred for RIM. It's based on the facts of the current climate in the mobile market today. @Mark Sigal: Exactly! Improving the OS is simply a minimum requirement to stay in the game. But look at Microsoft... they've done that and it simply isn't enough. An ecosystem needs to be built that outclasses that of Android or iOS. I don't think RIM understands this and if they do, I see no evidence that they're not already to late. The tools needed to compete in today's smartphone market are much different than they were 5 - 10 years ago. @Lun Esex: Agreed. JLG seems to be playing up the $150M investment by MS to dramatic effect. It's generally understood that MS's investment was more symbolic than anything else. The continued investment in Office meant more than the cash. Apple was in bad shape, but the $150M wasn't the make or break deal. It was a vote of confidence that did also serve to keep them out of trouble with the DOJ. @Michael Schmitt: We get it, you’re a big fan of RIM. However, saying that you know what they are working on doesn’t really help this discussion. You mention “calling a spade a spade”. That’s precisely what JLG is doing. No matter how you spin this, RIM is in trouble and trending downwards. Could things turn around? Sure, anything is possible. In this case, the general consensus is that it’s improbable. That’s not based out of a hatred for RIM. It’s based on the facts of the current climate in the mobile market today.

@Mark Sigal: Exactly! Improving the OS is simply a minimum requirement to stay in the game. But look at Microsoft… they’ve done that and it simply isn’t enough. An ecosystem needs to be built that outclasses that of Android or iOS. I don’t think RIM understands this and if they do, I see no evidence that they’re not already to late. The tools needed to compete in today’s smartphone market are much different than they were 5 – 10 years ago.

@Lun Esex: Agreed. JLG seems to be playing up the $150M investment by MS to dramatic effect. It’s generally understood that MS’s investment was more symbolic than anything else. The continued investment in Office meant more than the cash. Apple was in bad shape, but the $150M wasn’t the make or break deal. It was a vote of confidence that did also serve to keep them out of trouble with the DOJ.

]]> By: Jean-Louis Gassée http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27116 Jean-Louis Gassée Thu, 09 Aug 2012 00:22:15 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27116 @ Lun Esex: You're right. Name calling and other uncivil comments don't help. We tought about removing such comments and made a deliberate decision to let them continue. One thought is they're self-destructive: personal attacks and other insults demean the originator, not the target. That said, I'm afraid it turn into too much pollution. We'll see. @ Lun Esex: You’re right. Name calling and other uncivil comments don’t help. We tought about removing such comments and made a deliberate decision to let them continue. One thought is they’re self-destructive: personal attacks and other insults demean the originator, not the target.
That said, I’m afraid it turn into too much pollution. We’ll see.

]]> By: Lun Esex http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27113 Lun Esex Wed, 08 Aug 2012 21:59:50 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27113 @JLG: It's unfortunate that so many of the comments on your blog have degenerated to such a level of vitriol and name-calling, with arguments based so much on opinion and hypothesis rather than specific factual information. @JLG:
It’s unfortunate that so many of the comments on your blog have degenerated to such a level of vitriol and name-calling, with arguments based so much on opinion and hypothesis rather than specific factual information.

]]> By: Ali http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27110 Ali Wed, 08 Aug 2012 18:30:11 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27110 What I'd like to see is a RIM machine that'd let people make custom ROMs, which gives users options to adapt the hardware to their needs. So, open it up but have excellent hardware and with a kernel of sorts that's super-fast, swishy, sweet graphics and able to plug-in to other machines as well e.g. why can't my RIM phone talk with and/or easily connect/share to my Cowon MP3 player? What I’d like to see is a RIM machine that’d let people make custom ROMs, which gives users options to adapt the hardware to their needs. So, open it up but have excellent hardware and with a kernel of sorts that’s super-fast, swishy, sweet graphics and able to plug-in to other machines as well e.g. why can’t my RIM phone talk with and/or easily connect/share to my Cowon MP3 player?

]]> By: Cyan http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27108 Cyan Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:48:43 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27108 @Lun it's sad to see an apple-fanboy downplaying the importance of the 1997's 150M$ package from Microsoft, and completely change the wording of JLG article long the way. The 150M$ package brought with it a message : Microsoft will come the rescue of Apple. As a consequence, the Mac platform is* viable*. It made a terrible difference in the purchasing decision of Apple users, especially corporate ones : are they investing in a dead end, or something they know will be there a few years down the line ? That's, in essence, what Microsoft gave to Apple in 1997 (at the request of Steve Jobs by the way). As said by JLG, the "money package" did not come alone : there was also a commitment to continue developing critical applications for the platform for many years. And a personal note from Bill Gates at the conference. This is the kind of strong messages Apple needed to just remain relevant. A starting point, from which Jobs could build something greater. Making a straight relation with current investment in Facebook is purposely falsifying the importance of the event. Only to pretend that Apple "could have succeeded alone", without any helping hand from Redmont in its darkest days. Sure, please yourself. Rewriting history is a much too common practice among apple-fanboys, this is plain sickening. @Lun it’s sad to see an apple-fanboy downplaying the importance of the 1997′s 150M$ package from Microsoft, and completely change the wording of JLG article long the way.

The 150M$ package brought with it a message : Microsoft will come the rescue of Apple. As a consequence, the Mac platform is* viable*. It made a terrible difference in the purchasing decision of Apple users, especially corporate ones : are they investing in a dead end, or something they know will be there a few years down the line ?

That’s, in essence, what Microsoft gave to Apple in 1997 (at the request of Steve Jobs by the way). As said by JLG, the “money package” did not come alone : there was also a commitment to continue developing critical applications for the platform for many years. And a personal note from Bill Gates at the conference.
This is the kind of strong messages Apple needed to just remain relevant. A starting point, from which Jobs could build something greater.

Making a straight relation with current investment in Facebook is purposely falsifying the importance of the event. Only to pretend that Apple “could have succeeded alone”, without any helping hand from Redmont in its darkest days. Sure, please yourself.

Rewriting history is a much too common practice among apple-fanboys, this is plain sickening.

]]> By: Lun Esex http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27107 Lun Esex Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:30:58 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27107 @JLG: I'm sad to see you promulgating the fiction that Apple was "rescued" by Microsoft's $150 million investment, and linking to an article two years after the fact that was entirely bereft of any true context or actual figures other than that "$150 million" one. . When Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple stock in 1997, Apple still had $1.2 billion (that's "billion" with a "B") in the bank: . http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html . It really wasn't all that much money for either company. What it more amounted to was a settlement to the patent disputes between the two companies that Apple had brought against Microsoft for copying some code from QuickTime. Now if $150 million seems like a lot for a patent settlement, consider that it's estimated that Apple paid Nokia $600 million to settle the patent dispute between them last year, and Apple is asking for $2.5 billion in their case against Samsung. . In addition Microsoft was paying for Apple to set Internet Explorer as the default browser in Mac OS. How much has been paid for other, similar deals? How much does Google pay to Mozilla and Apple for their position as the default search engine in Firefox and Safari? . Note that just a few months earlier in 1997 Microsoft had bought the little company WebTV outright for $425 million. Later that year Microsoft acquired Hotmail for $500 million. In 2007, 10 years later, Microsoft invested $240 million in Facebook. Far from "rescuing" Facebook this amounted to a mere 1.6% of that company. Just last year Microsoft paid $8.5 billion (that's again with a "B") for Skype. . $150 million is only a symbolic amount of money for companies of this size. @JLG:
I’m sad to see you promulgating the fiction that Apple was “rescued” by Microsoft’s $150 million investment, and linking to an article two years after the fact that was entirely bereft of any true context or actual figures other than that “$150 million” one.
.
When Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple stock in 1997, Apple still had $1.2 billion (that’s “billion” with a “B”) in the bank:
.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html
.
It really wasn’t all that much money for either company. What it more amounted to was a settlement to the patent disputes between the two companies that Apple had brought against Microsoft for copying some code from QuickTime. Now if $150 million seems like a lot for a patent settlement, consider that it’s estimated that Apple paid Nokia $600 million to settle the patent dispute between them last year, and Apple is asking for $2.5 billion in their case against Samsung.
.
In addition Microsoft was paying for Apple to set Internet Explorer as the default browser in Mac OS. How much has been paid for other, similar deals? How much does Google pay to Mozilla and Apple for their position as the default search engine in Firefox and Safari?
.
Note that just a few months earlier in 1997 Microsoft had bought the little company WebTV outright for $425 million. Later that year Microsoft acquired Hotmail for $500 million. In 2007, 10 years later, Microsoft invested $240 million in Facebook. Far from “rescuing” Facebook this amounted to a mere 1.6% of that company. Just last year Microsoft paid $8.5 billion (that’s again with a “B”) for Skype.
.
$150 million is only a symbolic amount of money for companies of this size.

]]> By: Michael Schmitt http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27102 Michael Schmitt Tue, 07 Aug 2012 22:51:46 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27102 @MC The problem with everyone is that everybody cursed the iPhone in 2007, saying it would never crush BlackBerry: http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2007/01/an_iphone_reali_1.html Reality of course sunk in and is killing the BlackBerry. This Author is in theory claiming that BlackBerry 10 will not kill the iPhone. Really? How do they know what RIM is working on? I'll save this Page and in 5 years come back and say I told you that BlackBerry can come back! The reason: I know what they're working on! @MC The problem with everyone is that everybody cursed the iPhone in 2007, saying it would never crush BlackBerry: http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2007/01/an_iphone_reali_1.html

Reality of course sunk in and is killing the BlackBerry. This Author is in theory claiming that BlackBerry 10 will not kill the iPhone. Really? How do they know what RIM is working on? I’ll save this Page and in 5 years come back and say I told you that BlackBerry can come back! The reason: I know what they’re working on!

]]> By: rnc http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27101 rnc Tue, 07 Aug 2012 22:15:46 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27101 No RIM is not gettng ready to do anything spectacular (other than reaching the point of being cheap enough to purchase for any relevent patents). When the first IPhone came out three cell phone companies laughed, derided and predicted that Apple was out of it's league. Those three companies.....RIM, Nokia and Motorola, last time I checked the only two cell phone companies (or companies that make cell phones) that were profitable were Apple and Samsung (heck Apple generates more revenue from IPhone sales than Microsoft generates altogether). Hubris and arrogance did it's little dance and the titans have been replaced by the new gods of olympus (and to MS and all of the other name calling RIM supporters from above, I don't own a single Apple product or even a smart phone), but reality is reality, No RIM is not gettng ready to do anything spectacular (other than reaching the point of being cheap enough to purchase for any relevent patents). When the first IPhone came out three cell phone companies laughed, derided and predicted that Apple was out of it’s league. Those three companies…..RIM, Nokia and Motorola, last time I checked the only two cell phone companies (or companies that make cell phones) that were profitable were Apple and Samsung (heck Apple generates more revenue from IPhone sales than Microsoft generates altogether). Hubris and arrogance did it’s little dance and the titans have been replaced by the new gods of olympus (and to MS and all of the other name calling RIM supporters from above, I don’t own a single Apple product or even a smart phone), but reality is reality,

]]> By: Links of the day | 在网上找到 | renaissance chambara | Ged Carroll http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27100 Links of the day | 在网上找到 | renaissance chambara | Ged Carroll Tue, 07 Aug 2012 22:02:40 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27100 [...] Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note – no obvious path back [...] [...] Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note – no obvious path back [...]

]]> By: Boot up: Apple pried open in Samsung patents battle, how to save RIM’s BlackBerry, and more | Tech Chatter http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27089 Boot up: Apple pried open in Samsung patents battle, how to save RIM’s BlackBerry, and more | Tech Chatter Tue, 07 Aug 2012 06:34:41 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27089 [...] Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry Monday Note [...] [...] Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry Monday Note [...]

]]> By: minzhu http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27085 minzhu Mon, 06 Aug 2012 23:16:41 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27085 with present RIM culture, engineer will layoff, pretender will keep in RIM, and then let them stay in old RIM, new RIM will be good with present RIM culture, engineer will layoff, pretender will keep in RIM, and then let them stay in old RIM, new RIM will be good

]]> By: Michael Schmitt http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27084 Michael Schmitt Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:36:10 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27084 The comments of death to RIM that you see in here, are exactly the comments you saw about Apple in 1997... You're all about to witness a change, one that you will not want to accept but RIM will come out on top if you believe it or not! The comments of death to RIM that you see in here, are exactly the comments you saw about Apple in 1997… You’re all about to witness a change, one that you will not want to accept but RIM will come out on top if you believe it or not!

]]> By: Saving Private RIM - Technovia http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27082 Saving Private RIM - Technovia Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:50:42 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27082 [...] via Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note. [...] [...] via Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note. [...]

]]> By: Damian http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27081 Damian Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:49:56 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27081 Nice post, I'm waiting to see BB10 before making my mind about RIM's direction. But It doesn't seem good, on a software level It they can't win against the polished iOS interface or the Android platform, It would be nice to see RIM focusing on the hardware of their new smartphones, that has been always their strong point and maybe they can still offer something interesting, I'd like changing my recharge-me-everyday atrix 2 for a Blackberry with a stupidly high battery life and BB10. Nice post, I’m waiting to see BB10 before making my mind about RIM’s direction. But It doesn’t seem good, on a software level It they can’t win against the polished iOS interface or the Android platform,

It would be nice to see RIM focusing on the hardware of their new smartphones, that has been always their strong point and maybe they can still offer something interesting, I’d like changing my recharge-me-everyday atrix 2 for a Blackberry with a stupidly high battery life and BB10.

]]> By: Mobile News Weekly Roundup: July 30-August 5 | Mutual Mobile http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27080 Mobile News Weekly Roundup: July 30-August 5 | Mutual Mobile Mon, 06 Aug 2012 15:45:52 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27080 [...] Monday Note – What will it take for RIM to pull off an Apple-like comeback? [...] [...] Monday Note – What will it take for RIM to pull off an Apple-like comeback? [...]

]]> By: Saving Private RIM - BlackBerry Forums at CrackBerry.com http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27079 Saving Private RIM - BlackBerry Forums at CrackBerry.com Mon, 06 Aug 2012 15:10:38 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27079 [...] Private RIM Opinion piece from Gasee and some other French dude. Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note Liked [...] [...] Private RIM Opinion piece from Gasee and some other French dude. Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note Liked [...]

]]> By: nik http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27078 nik Mon, 06 Aug 2012 14:44:40 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27078 QNX is a great operating system, lots of parallels there with NextSTEP since it is a microkernel as well. I don't think it will get very far though, not now with Android being so popular and not without a decent application development stack and VM for developers (like .NET or Java, writing UNIX C GUI apps isn't very attractive) I disagree with you regarding licensing. The attraction and popularity of RIM has always been its software and services, not hardware design. IMO the hardware was terrible, but it sent and received email flawlessly. Apple spent ~7 years attempting to get a similar email and PIM sync system working, through false attempt after false attempt, mobileme etc. and now iCloud, which still isn't perfect. the entire time RIM was sitting on the best solution in the world, but instead of seeing Apple as a potential partner where they could provide the cloud element, they freaked out and attempted to compete on the rest of the platform The only other working sync is ActiveSync from Microsoft. HTC Android devices 'powered by RIM' for the enterprise, or iPhone devices powered by RIM. they could do this without official partnerships, just develop clients for each of the platforms. they already have the worldwide server network and could compete with Good and MobileIron IMO they should have done this 3-4 years ago. a leveraged buyout must be getting to the point of being attractive, problem is that most LBO firms are only competent at stripping, merging and selling like a wrecking yard or chop-shop rather than innovating. I feel RIM are on their own with this till the end. QNX is a great operating system, lots of parallels there with NextSTEP since it is a microkernel as well. I don’t think it will get very far though, not now with Android being so popular and not without a decent application development stack and VM for developers (like .NET or Java, writing UNIX C GUI apps isn’t very attractive)

I disagree with you regarding licensing. The attraction and popularity of RIM has always been its software and services, not hardware design. IMO the hardware was terrible, but it sent and received email flawlessly.

Apple spent ~7 years attempting to get a similar email and PIM sync system working, through false attempt after false attempt, mobileme etc. and now iCloud, which still isn’t perfect. the entire time RIM was sitting on the best solution in the world, but instead of seeing Apple as a potential partner where they could provide the cloud element, they freaked out and attempted to compete on the rest of the platform

The only other working sync is ActiveSync from Microsoft. HTC Android devices ‘powered by RIM’ for the enterprise, or iPhone devices powered by RIM. they could do this without official partnerships, just develop clients for each of the platforms. they already have the worldwide server network and could compete with Good and MobileIron

IMO they should have done this 3-4 years ago. a leveraged buyout must be getting to the point of being attractive, problem is that most LBO firms are only competent at stripping, merging and selling like a wrecking yard or chop-shop rather than innovating. I feel RIM are on their own with this till the end.

]]> By: Saving Private RIM - BlackBerry Forums at CrackBerry.com http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27077 Saving Private RIM - BlackBerry Forums at CrackBerry.com Mon, 06 Aug 2012 14:15:36 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27077 [...] Private RIM Opinion piece from Gasee and some other French dude. Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note Liked by [...] [...] Private RIM Opinion piece from Gasee and some other French dude. Saving Private Research in Motion, RIM, Blackberry | Monday Note Liked by [...]

]]> By: Fred http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27074 Fred Mon, 06 Aug 2012 09:20:47 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27074 Why not saving private RIM with crowdfunding? Just kidding... More seriously, I would have loved to see the once praised Palm's WebOS on my future BB. It would have stood a chance vs Apple and Android. BB should buy it back from HP! In a highly competitive (and disruptive) market such as the smartphones, there is always room for more (innovative) players. "Competition is healthy". Why not saving private RIM with crowdfunding? Just kidding…
More seriously, I would have loved to see the once praised Palm’s WebOS on my future BB. It would have stood a chance vs Apple and Android. BB should buy it back from HP!
In a highly competitive (and disruptive) market such as the smartphones, there is always room for more (innovative) players. “Competition is healthy”.

]]> By: unlockworldwide http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27073 unlockworldwide Mon, 06 Aug 2012 08:50:43 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27073 While there is nothing specifically wrong with the concept of a person buying every available smartphone, tablet or other device, is there some genetic defect that causes these people to become aggressively opinionated and stridently rude? The author, an apparently successful person, accustomed to placing money $$$$ behind his opinion, does not claim to be an oracle. The aggressors on the other hand, notwithstanding claims of technical prowess, usually appear unable to handle spellcheck. Technically, in my opinion, BB10 ...... mmmm .... why bother? While there is nothing specifically wrong with the concept of a person buying every available smartphone, tablet or other device, is there some genetic defect that causes these people to become aggressively opinionated and stridently rude?

The author, an apparently successful person, accustomed to placing money $$$$ behind his opinion, does not claim to be an oracle. The aggressors on the other hand, notwithstanding claims of technical prowess, usually appear unable to handle spellcheck.

Technically, in my opinion, BB10 …… mmmm …. why bother?

]]> By: Wilhelm Reuch http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27072 Wilhelm Reuch Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:41:05 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27072 In my opinion Android has better phone API:s than iOS but iOS is a much better computer. Together they pretty much cover to spectrum. In fact people who look at the iPhone from within a framework of traditional smartphones seldom understand why the iPhone has disrupted (even destroyed) the smartphone business. Today there are only two left standing - Apple and the apple-copycat Samsung. So were does RIM fit in. They picked up QNX but QNX is strong on communications and as a real-time kernel but seriously lacking wen it comes to UX (animation, typography, advanced graphics and so on). And RIM is not a computing company - it is still very much a smartphone company. - so RIM unlikely has the necessary resources to add what QNX needs to be a viable platform for developers. In my opinion Android has better phone API:s than iOS but iOS is a much better computer. Together they pretty much cover to spectrum.

In fact people who look at the iPhone from within a framework of traditional smartphones seldom understand why the iPhone has disrupted (even destroyed) the smartphone business. Today there are only two left standing – Apple and the apple-copycat Samsung.

So were does RIM fit in. They picked up QNX but QNX is strong on communications and as a real-time kernel but seriously lacking wen it comes to UX (animation, typography, advanced graphics and so on).

And RIM is not a computing company – it is still very much a smartphone company. – so RIM unlikely has the necessary resources to add what QNX needs to be a viable platform for developers.

]]> By: Hamranhansenhansen http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27071 Hamranhansenhansen Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:38:14 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27071 > No one else [but RIM] has an OS with > an ultra low energy profile. Apple has 2: iOS and iPod OS (iPod nano and classic.) And both were tuned from inception for ARM mobiles and consumer users. A car actually has way, way more energy than an iPod or iPhone. QNX is getting terrible battery life for mobile computing compared to Apple's solutions. And QNX has not shipped on mobiles. iOS has a battery-optimized app platform (no Flash, limited actions in the background, native C/C++ code) that will take years for anyone else to develop. The problem is that RIM's best case scenario is to be 5 years or more behind Apple for the next 5 years. They will have no customers left because it is easy to get the Apple products and people need these features now > No one else [but RIM] has an OS with
> an ultra low energy profile.

Apple has 2: iOS and iPod OS (iPod nano and classic.) And both were tuned from inception for ARM mobiles and consumer users. A car actually has way, way more energy than an iPod or iPhone. QNX is getting terrible battery life for mobile computing compared to Apple’s solutions. And QNX has not shipped on mobiles. iOS has a battery-optimized app platform (no Flash, limited actions in the background, native C/C++ code) that will take years for anyone else to develop.

The problem is that RIM’s best case scenario is to be 5 years or more behind Apple for the next 5 years. They will have no customers left because it is easy to get the Apple products and people need these features now

]]> By: Hamranhansenhansen http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27070 Hamranhansenhansen Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:19:58 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27070 You are right. Software licensing only ever worked for Microsoft, and it took the IBM monopoly and many criminal acts on the part of Microsoft executives to make it work. RIM would be better off making iPhone accessories. If I switch from BlackBerry to iPhone, why can't I buy a snap-on RIM keyboard and a BBM app for an extra $100? You are right. Software licensing only ever worked for Microsoft, and it took the IBM monopoly and many criminal acts on the part of Microsoft executives to make it work.

RIM would be better off making iPhone accessories. If I switch from BlackBerry to iPhone, why can’t I buy a snap-on RIM keyboard and a BBM app for an extra $100?

]]> By: Cyan http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/08/05/saving-private-rim/#comment-27069 Cyan Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:19:56 +0000 http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=4861#comment-27069 QNX has good track record on the embedded market. Maybe they should focus on this segment, while it is still "free" (ok, there is competition, but nothing really serious, ... yet). They don't need to "flee" the smartphone market; even if their market share falls to 2%, it's still a sizable number of consumers to serve. Plus it's a good place to make the brand known. They would just have to "size down" on Smartphone market to meet sustainable level, and invest in the new promising market. QNX has good track record on the embedded market.
Maybe they should focus on this segment, while it is still “free” (ok, there is competition, but nothing really serious, … yet).

They don’t need to “flee” the smartphone market; even if their market share falls to 2%, it’s still a sizable number of consumers to serve. Plus it’s a good place to make the brand known.
They would just have to “size down” on Smartphone market to meet sustainable level, and invest in the new promising market.

]]>