RIM unveils 7-inch 'PlayBook' tablet set to launch in early 2011 - Page 8

No, you missed it. I clearly said was I not accusing anyone of "fake" videos. Not RIM, not Apple, not anybody. Better luck to you next time.


I don't have to back up a claim I never made. Read back, this will be clear since it was stated in plain language.

If they can solve the battery issue, if they can bring it to market quickly (say, Feb 2011), if they can convince their enterprise partners to wait, if they can roll out a good enough SDK, if they can build reasonable quantities, if they can price it right (say, $700)...

A lot of ifs... but it could happen.

I don't believe there'd be any profit for a while... but that's not the immediate objective.


They will have stopped the bleeding -- the erosion of their platform in their base market segment.

The will have mitigated performance issues by overpowering them with hardware.


As we used to say in the mainframe biz at IBM -- "There's no substitute for cubic inches".

.

I think I see why you are not on the same page as most here ... you are seeing the PlayBook 'ad' as just another ad. We are seeing it as an attempt at a product introduction in other words a big deal. As I explained earlier your analogy with the iPod as doesn't wash for me since that was a tease about a real product - Apple just wanted to keep the real thing for a live unveiling. The PlayBook ad was obviously more than that. Look at the length and lack of a product. It was an attempt at winning over mind share and to keep shareholder's hopes alive in RIM. You may end up being correct and it is just a genuine ad for a product and next week RIM may show the actual product or at least a silhouette held by a dancer

A what??? Yeah, I guess if you take that attitude, you've stopped listening.

Says ultra thin in the specs, but from the video it looked to be thicker even than some netbooks. I'm also curious about the OS, is it really Blackberry's OS or is it Windows OS? It's just that it's way better then the OS I've ever seen on any existing Blackberry device, so curious if it might actually be running WinMobile or something.

Competition is good, very good. If it delivers as promised it will help drive forward innovation & drive down prices. Consumer win! A market where Apple or google just dominate the competition is not a good one, we need more innovative companies to come onto the scene & offer game changers.

Not at all, I was trying to colorfully point out going around in circles eventually becomes pointless. There will be many new threads to discuss

You, likely, are right about sales numbers -- except if RIM can stem the erosion of its core business, then it has to be a resounding success!

I want that in my next iPhone...

Yup, if you understand it as just an ad, doing the things ads always try to do, you will be able to stay in your shoes. Others have made the same observation as I have, but haven't stuck around to defend them. FWIW, I have a feeling that RIM will follow up this tease with a more substantial introduction. Do you think otherwise? If so, why? Personally, I don't think RIM is going to completely squander their reputation by failing to introduce the product, something very like the one they've teased about. That's the implication I've heard expressed several times in this thread. I've challenged this implication several times, and had zero response to my question about how someone could apparently believe that RIM is a very stupid company. I've seen no evidence of this, so I'm genuinely curious.

<headslap> The playbook has 1GB or RAM and either 16 0r 32BG of Flash. The iPad has 256MB or RAM and 16, 32 or 64GB of flash, the iPhone has 512MB of RAM and 16 or 32GB of Flash.

With the Playbook running a dual core processor and multitasking, it NEEDS 1GB RAM to not starve. That uis the same ration as the single core iPhone. The iPad which does not yet multi-task can get by just fine on the 256MB, but it will need a RAM freshening before too long after iOS 4.2 ships.

As for raw speed, the limiting factor is single core speed. No differences between desktops and mobile devices here, simple laws of physics. And desktop OS software still has a long way to go to make adequate use of multi core machines, high end software does OK up through 4 cores. But outside the high end stuff you don't get much extra raw speed kick, what you do get is more smoothness shifting from one process to another, and OS responsiveness. AND you get A LOT more power draw which means lower battery life.

(I'm assuming BB is using a Cortex A9 dual core processor, the same basics apply to other processor lines too) Not all Cortex cores are alike, Apple has sunk a lot of power management talent and hours into improving their implementation of the core. If Blackberry just buys the Cortex IP and has it fabbed directly they won't see anything like Apples power curve, making the battery life even worse. Also, will BB have the core fabbed with the RAM in the same package as Apple does? That's not a standard delivery option, but does wonderful things for RAM access speed (actually more important for raw speed than Ghz when the specs are relatively close) and eliminating power draw for an external memory controller. Its a fine line to walk when you play in Blackberrys end of the design space.

You don't have to be a stupid company to do stupid things...


... like hold a special event to introduce an iPod-HiFi and a leather iPod case (less than a year before the iPhone announcement).

.

I think it will have only a minor effect in that regard.

Except they didn't name it Playbook, they named it PlayBook.

Since you seem to be a fan of "plain language" .... this should help even you.

Post #39: ... Originally Posted by addicted44

There is a difference between demoing a product in front of a live audience and saying you need 3 months to release it (specifying the exact month it will be released) and creating a fake video in photoshop and saying you will release it "early 2011", a timespan which can range anywhere from Jan-Apr/May.

your reply: ... What's "fake" about the video? In fact it looks a lot like something Apple might do. A public demo also doesn't tell you much except that they've got working prototypes. I don't have any idea whether this product will be any good, or whether it will ship in three or six months, or never. But I think it's silly to criticize RIM for pre-announcing the product with a gee-wiz video, when that's exactly the kind of thing Apple does, and does so well.


Post #74 ... Originally Posted by ctwise

The reason why they don't show an actual device in the video is because they don't have a device ready to show. That's what people mean by "fake".

Your reply: ... Oh come on. Enough with the double standards. Apple does this kind of thing all the time.

You can twist the words all you want but it is clear what other posters were talking about and what you replied to.
It's time to "man up" and admit your mistake instead of trying to put the blame on everyone's "failure" to understand what you are saying. ... although I don't ever expect to see you do that ... it's not part of your DNA.

Granted, but you have to admit that some are suggesting that RIM is about to commit a colossal blunder of a magnitude far greater than your example. Has been argued here: the video is a fake, the product absolutely won't ship for at least six months, RIM isn't going to say anything more substantial about the product before then, it won't work anything like the teaser video implies, and finally, that it might after all be complete vaporware.

Hell, if I'm going to have to defend my deeply radical proposition that the purpose of advertising is to advertise, then don't you think someone who makes the above claims should be required to back them up with at least a tiny shred of evidence?

I think it's time for you to "man up" and admit that you neither know or care to know what I am talking about, and that your mission is to make others misunderstand it too.

I agree with you. This being an apple-centic site, of course very few would want to see any company, or even can accept that any company, would successfully launch a highly successful tablet computer as the ipad. I can't say for sure what'll happen, but boy are there suddenly an awful lot of crystal balls showing up now isn't there? That should be good to call me shill, troll at least 20 times.

If the mobile pad, tablet, whatever, is truly the 'next big thing', then there's no way with all these huge players with gobs of cash, that there won't be at least 2 other very big players besides the ipad. One can't take any sane view of another company's release of such a device as a complete attack! on apple's ipad and a damning view of the ipad.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

I am still at IBM neither the hardware or saying have changed over the years...LOL.

I don't think anyone is saying that RIM isn't going to introduce a tablet. Of course they are, they are in desperation mode, and without a tablet they are toast. They have to have a tablet. They may be toast with a tablet, too, but without one, definitely. But, here's what you said that started this part of the discussion:


It's entirely mistaken to equate these in any way. There's a huge difference between walking on stage and demoing an actual product prototype, a finished prototype, and showing a concept video. There's a huge difference between showing working screen shots and, again, a concept video. And there's a huge difference between "early 2011" and "60 days". The PlayBook will not be here in 3 months (early January), and it most likely won't be here in 6 months (early April), maybe in 9 months (end of June, technically still "early" (vs. late) 2011), or maybe it will slip into Q3... or Q4.

So, this is why everyone is disagreeing with you.

EDIT: The reason why I, and apparently others, don't believe this will be shipping in 3 months, and probably not in 6 months, is that you can tell from the video that it's an unfinished design. (Thus why I called it a "concept video" and others have referred to it as "fake") RIM has a ton of work to even finish this on the drawing board, let alone get it into production and bring it to market. It's just not reasonable to expect that they'll be able to do this in a shorter time frame.

Well alot of members on this forum (not you) believe that every other company has to fail or do poorly so Apple can do well. I just simply don't see it that way. I like it when another company comes to market with a decent device. While I enjoy my Apple systems and products I still enjoy things like PC gaming and I would be shit out of luck if Apple was my only option.

I don't think either of us have to worry about Apple stock while I didn't expect it to go this high I am certainly glad it did.

Be prepared for drawing and quartering, but only after tarring and feathering.

Way back when this thread was a mere youngster, I mentioned what I thought were RIM's substantial challenges to making a success out of this product. For sure it's going to be an uphill climb. But since I consider them to be a competent company with a large and fairly loyal customer base, I certainly would not count them out before they even enter the ring -- which is what many here appear so anxious to do, merely on the strength (or weakness) of one video.

See what I mean about your DNA? ... Still avoiding the obvious and trying to shift the blame elsewhere. .... nice

I don't think anyone is counting them out based solely on the video. Their chances of success are being discounted a) based on the point they are in producing this (very early), b) their to-date lackluster success at producing touchscreen devices, and c) their likelihood of not being able to attract significant enough mind share to their device given the competition for the same from iOS and Android.

and d) not made by Apple

The fact of the matter is that BB has higher market share in North America than iOS or Android, and their phones offer greater encryption. If this integrates well with BB devices, I can see it doing well. Sure it won't have the apps or the mindshare of the iPad, but it will likely have its place in the market. It may turn out to be a very successful product for RIM.

You don't have to outsell the iPad, or even take sales from the iPad to have a successful tablet as it appears like the market for tablets is going to expand rapidly and Apple won't fill it all.

RIM gave THREE different shipping dates: next month for enterprise/developers, early 2010 for generall US release, and Q2 for international. They won't be that specific if they weren't close to final release.

The new Blackberries with OS 6 came out pretty soon after the "concept video". The actual devices came out pretty close in performance to the concept video --- the only complaint so far has been that it's underpowered by the slow cpu. If these blackberries came out with a 1 GHz CPU, then it would have been perfectly mirroring the concept video.

Someone has probably mentioned this already but I'm wondering if the rumoured 7" iPad that was supposed to be more like the iPhone and is now a finished product ( http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=113294 ) was in fact this Blackberry tablet. It's a taller type of screen and resembles an iPhone shape way more than an iPad. In the Chinese factories, it probably wouldn't have any branding on it.

Just take a look at QNX CAR --- same concept. UI/Graphics designers are used to Adobe Flash, so QNX just put the skinning on Flash.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f3WIn14fd0

Yes, but RIM has zero mind share for touchscreen devices, and practically zero mind share with developers, as opposed to (my point (c)) iOS and Android.

If this is so common name me 3 companies that announced a product to ship in the next 3-5 months for which absolutely nothing for the product exists at the time of the annoncement. Mind you Dick Applebaum claims that nothing about the product currently exists, hence his claim that it will be a year before it ships. Btw at the launch event, the president of QNX claimed they had been working on the os for about a year.

Not having seen the BB6 concept video to compare, I can only say that, based on this video, and what information they did release, I don't believe this will be released before Summer 2011, in the US, or elsewhere.

Well, since I never claimed "nothing" exists for this tablet, I don't see why validation of my comment should be held to your interpretation of someone else's comment that may have nothing to do with mine.

But, as far as 3 companies (and there are probably thousands of these, but who keeps track of them all) who have announced products nowhere near ready to ship:

1. Microsoft - Access (arguably, not ready to ship when it did ship)
2. Google - Chrome OS
3. Palm - webOS

The last one, while certainly not the biggest lag in announcement to shipment, is included to point out that it was 6 months from announcement to product shipping. So, at least 6 months to actual shipping tablets, is not at all far-fetched in this case.

i think you are pretty much right. Now on the notin of Apple etc using this info to outdo the Playbook. Whatever they were going to do has been done and is being tested by now.

but this up to 6 more months of waiting is giving folks more time to decide not to wait and to try an ipad, buy an ipad and become entrenched in it. So when Apple reveals ipad 2 the week before the Playbook comes out those folks will be less likely to jump ship and will wait the month for the ipad release. That is if the typically rampant rumors don't already have them ready to stick around.

This was an issue with the Slate and such as well. They had a prime chance during the 60-90 days before the ipad was out and during all that 'can't keep them in stock','won't let folks buy more than 2' stuff. They blew it. RIM has done the same thing. Even just focusing on businesses isn't a sure thing because tons of businesses are using ipads.

RIM released the BB OS 6 teaser video at the end of April 2010, and the first BB OS 6 phone came out in Sept --- about 4.5 months. Put 4.5 months from today and you get a mid February release.

Yes, but, as I said, I have not seen the BB OS 6 teaser video, so cannot compare what was shown there vs. eventual release date to what was shown in the PlayBook teaser video vs ETA. Based on the PlayBook teaser video, I think they are at least 6 months out. (And, I'm not willing to accept your word they are comparable.) At least we are agreed it's nothing but a teaser video, though.

If you have not seen the BB OS 6 teaser video, then watch it before you start posting dozens of comments about it. What you are doing is --- in legal terms --- willful blindness.

I haven't posted any comments about the BB OS 6 teaser video, other than to say I haven't seen it.

So instead of spending 3 minutes of your time to watch the BB OS 6 teaser video, you spent that 3 minutes writing numerous comments on how you haven't seen the video.

Well, MacBook was already taken...

Basically you are stating that you are uninformed and wish to remain that way so that that you can keep making wild assumptions, but here you go.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAwEx8WmWEk

I think there's likely to be a substantive difference between how Apple depicts its stuff (via ads, product roll-outs, demos, whatever you like) and the RIM piece in question. I say "likely" because we haven't seen the finished product and it could hover in midair with friggin' laser beams, for all I know.

iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch ads (regular iPod ads are a bit different because it has become so ubiquitous as to make any question of "how does that work?" irrelevant, for advertising purposes) always show the device in use, emphasizing the UI, apps, and any aspects of physicality Apple is interested in touting. And yes, they use music, editing and production design to make the whole thing look fun, or hip, or empowering, or whatever. But the important thing is that what is being depicted is precisely how those devices in fact look and behave, however festive the alleged circumstance and however pretty the hand models may be.

My question regarding the Rim video is specifically about whether the UI, apps and physicality as shown will correspond to the device as shipped. If they don't-- if RIM (as Nokia before it) has elected to indulge in some exaggeration or wishful thinking in terms of the speed and fluidity of their UI, or the slickness of their transitions, or the manner in which one might reasonably be expected to manipulate and operate the device-- then this is something that Apple never, ever does, and a difference in kind rather than degree.

This actually gets into a larger difference between Apple's ad strategy and pretty much every other handset maker: despite the mockery of Jobs' use of "magical" as a product descriptor, it's Apple that just puts the device itself on the screen and lets the user interactions speak for themselves, whereas the others attempt to generate a sense of mystery or wonder or magical empowerment by showing, not the device in use, but urban spaces transformed, the user transformed, phone as ray gun, phone as drug, phone as portal to alternate universe, etc.

To that extent the RIM thing is actually relatively constrained (although I would guess the UI doesn't actually appear on the things around you) but unless it can actually do exactly what they show it's still a victim of "magical" thinking.