or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › RIM sees PlayBook OS as 10-year future for smartphones, tablets
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RIM sees PlayBook OS as 10-year future for smartphones, tablets

post #1 of 132
Thread Starter 
Research in Motion co-CEO Mike Lazaridis revealed Tuesday that the QNX-based BlackBerry Tablet OS in the upcoming PlayBook tablet will eventually make its way onto multi-core BlackBerry smartphones and different-sized tablets over the next ten years.

Lazaridis discussed the BlackBerry maker's plans Tuesday with Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher at the D: Dive Into Mobile conference in San Francisco, Calif., All Things Digital reports.

To kick off the onstage interview, Lazaridis showed off the upcoming PlayBook tablet, which he called "the perfect size." When questioned by Mossberg whether RIM is working on any other sizes, Lazaridis acknowledged the company's plans for different sizes.

Lazaridis emphasized that RIM is betting heavily on the PlayBook and its BlackBerry Tablet OS. "This is a complete mobile computing platform," said Lazaridis. "All of this is coming together to set up BlackBerry for the next decade."

According to Lazaridis, the 7-inch PlayBook, which RIM unveiled in September, is still "tracking" for a first quarter launch.

As RIM's smartphones begin to include multi-core processors, "they'll all be running the Playbook platform," said Lazaridis, who believes the PlayBook OS will help RIM "jump into the next decade of mobile computing."

When questioned whether RIM was leaving behind BlackBerry phones by moving ahead with next generation technology in tablets, Lazaridis emphasized RIM's global strategy. RIM won't abandon developing markets that have yet to reach 3G or 4G and can't afford high-end stuff, he explained.

Lazaridis also claimed during the interview that the BlackBerry began appealing to consumers by itself. "We didn't go out and try to make BlackBerry a consumer device. It crossed over on its own," he said.

RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis. Apple is trying to upgrade a mobile phone OS for tablets, while RIM is starting with a "bona-fide mobile computing platform" for tablets, he asserted.

Referencing the iPad's lack of Adobe Flash compatibility, Lazaridis asked, "Why would you limit yourself?" In November, RIM posted a comparison video between the iPad and the PlayBook, touting the PlayBook's ability to run Flash.

The competition between Apple and RIM has increased as RIM prepares to enter the tablet market, in which Apple has taken a substantial early lead.

In October Apple CEO Steve Jobs asserted that many 7-inch tablets would be dead on arrival. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."
post #2 of 132
I can't wait for Jobs to introduce iPad 2. He is going to get in so many digs about the competition... its going to be hilarious!!
post #3 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."

Oh yeah? I don't think so, Jim Balsillie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF View Post

I can't wait for Jobs to introduce iPad 2. He is going to get in so many digs about the competition... its going to be hilarious!!
post #4 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis. Apple is trying to upgrade a mobile phone OS for tablets, while RIM is starting with a "bona-fide mobile computing platform" for tablets, he asserted.

Except that iOS came from Mac OS X and that iOS for iPad uses a completely rethought UI that is idealized for the display I/O.

I think RiMs plan with QNX and, to a degree, Adobe AIR are considerably more sound than using a desktop OS or using Android 2.x on a tablet, they are acting way to cocky for a product that hasnt proven to be viable in the market. Im rooting for them a little less than before these quotes from Lazaridis.

Quote:
Referencing the iPad's lack of Adobe Flash compatibility, Lazaridis asked, "Why would you limit yourself?" In November, RIM posted a comparison video between the iPad and the PlayBook, touting the PlayBook's ability to run Flash.

I dont know about anyone else, but I dont want to limit myself so I keep Adobe Flash disabled as much as possible so I can maximize the use of my battery, which I find is far more important than potentially trying to view a video from a site that is only in Flash.

I wonder how well the Blackberry phones are going to take being a digital hub streaming from carrier to WiFi for PlayBooks. That seems to eat through tiny cellphone batteries in no time.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #5 of 132
So RIM incorporates touch-based control with flash in addition to having a few, bland, "tricks" up their sleeve and thinks they have the next decade of 'mobile' computing figured out?

Awesome, I want a job there: " imagine a future where you have THREE hands!!!! I bet Apple hasnt thought of that yet"

CEO: "see that it is done! I want to one-up Jobs. And make certain that a flash-version of MahJong is seen operating as a background task!"

End product: the same blackberry that was available last year with new voice commands and a suede belt clip.
post #6 of 132
I'm not sure RiM is still in business after 10 years.
Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
post #7 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I wonder how well the Blackberry phones are going to take being a digital hub streaming from carrier to WiFi for PlayBooks. That seems to eat through tiny cellphone batteries in no time.

Excellent point.

None of the encrypted data on the Blackberry will actually reside on the Playbook. When out of range of your Blackberry, the Playbook will have no email, contact or calendar data on it.

I understand that this is motivated by security concerns, but I see this as a major limiting factor. And you're right to question how this will perform. If all my contacts, email and calendar are streaming live from my Blackberry how will performance be impacted?

And by forcing all information to live on the Blackberry my devices will be doing battery double duty. Browsing emails on the Playbook will keep the bluetooth connection active draining the battery on both the Playbook and the Blackberry.

Maybe they have a magic solution to keep things moving. Otherwise, it will not be an ideal experience.
post #8 of 132
RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."

i think Mister Jimmy is confusing Apple "telling customers what to think", with Apple "making great products that customers want to buy"

but that's just me.
post #9 of 132
FYI, engadget did a live blog of the interview. Poor Mike didn't seem to make any sense. And he got raked over the coals more than a few times.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/07/m...-the-playbook/
post #10 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF View Post

Excellent point.

None of the encrypted data on the Blackberry will actually reside on the Playbook. When out of range of your Blackberry, the Playbook will have no email, contact or calendar data on it.

I understand that this is motivated by security concerns, but I see this as a major limiting factor. And you're right to question how this will perform. If all my contacts, email and calendar are streaming live from my Blackberry how will performance be impacted?

And by forcing all information to live on the Blackberry my devices will be doing battery double duty. Browsing emails on the Playbook will keep the bluetooth connection active draining the battery on both the Playbook and the Blackberry.

Maybe they have a magic solution to keep things moving. Otherwise, it will not be an ideal experience.

We all know what happened to the Palm Folio that leached everything from the phone.
post #11 of 132
So Lazaridis, Apple's operating system is only good enough for phones? Don't tell the Mac users!
post #12 of 132
I thought their strength was in the business arena, and my understanding is there has been a lot of interest in tablets from businesses. So why would they call their first tablet the "Playbook" and aim it at consumers? Why not leverage their reputation in business, and their Blackberry brand, to sell a serious tablet to big companies?
post #13 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I thought their strength was in the business arena, and my understanding is there has been a lot of interest in tablets from businesses. So why would they call their first tablet the "Playbook" and aim it at consumers? Why not leverage their reputation in business, and their Blackberry brand, to sell a serious tablet to big companies?

Playbook is a business term as well. I hear it all the time, usually in sales organizations.

In many ways they are aiming it at businesses to start. The focus on security and pairing with Blackberry's will make it easy for enterprises that already have Blackberries to deploy the Playbook.

I think behind the scenes RIM knows how they need to market the Playbook, but so far they're doing a poor job of executing on that vision.
post #14 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF View Post

FYI, engadget did a live blog of the interview. Poor Mike didn't seem to make any sense. And he got raked over the coals more than a few times.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/07/m...-the-playbook/

I posted a bunch of excerpts and comments in another thread, but basically he came off as brain damaged. Most of his answers didn't make any sense, and the tech press were openly, well, not so much hostile as dumbfounded that he was saying the things he was saying.

Oh, what the hell, here's the stuff I pulled out:

Quote:
4:36PM Walt: But look, there's a growing consensus that your OS is dated. When will this become the new OS?

Mike: By focusing on the tablet market, we see it as a way of freeing where smartphones can go.

Kara: So the tablet is the phone?

4:37PM Mike: No, the tablet is what mobile computing is all about. In cases where we want a high performance smartphone, the tablet is perfect for it.

(an aside from the editors at Engadget) What? We think he's saying the phone is no good for multimedia experiences... and that RIM will hang onto its old mobile OS! Really? Really Mike?

4:38PM Mike: A lot of markets are still on 2G. Even in 3G markets, BlackBerry is in its own space and becomes very popular. What the PlayBook allows us to do is jump into the next stage of mobile. In the US the PlayBook is perfectly targeted.

Walt: I'm a little confused. You said it will free the smartphone to focus on communication. You mean it will free you to not pay as much attention to apps and video and music on the phone?

4:39PM Mike: What I'm saying is that with BB 6 it's a great multimedia platform. But the difference is, rather than being all things to all people, we can present the best platform for the application. Full web, real multitasking... very few people can do it properly. The point here is in that environment, you can use it differently. But a 7inch screen is too big to be a phone.

4:40PM Kara: So you're saying that the strategy of Google and Apple -- making the phone with video and audio, that's not the right direction?

Mike: We're going to see different categories. You're going to see smartphones taking on multicore processing, you're going to see powerful tablets...

(Another aside from Engadget) He isn't making any sense at all. Quite literally, we don't know what Mike is talking about right now.

I don't think I've ever seen such gibberish from the CEO of a major tech company, not even from Ballmer in full cry. Good lord. Don't they sit down and get their story straight, at least, even if they're not sure they can execute?

And it gets worse:

Quote:
4:58PM Q -- Lance Ulanoff from PC Magazine: So I own a Torch, but it's slow and has a low res screen. I'm confused, you're creating a false dichotomy between the PlayBook and the smartphone. I don't understand that. How can you deliver this phone without the best hardware available today? You seem to be looking to the tablet for that. But this is a tiny tablet. What is the strategy? Why are you demoting my phone?

Mike: First of all, the Torch was designed to be a launch vehicle for BB 6. That argument could be used in reverse. In a world where Half VGA was high performance, the world had moved on to 1GHz CPUs and higher res displays... when you see how quickly that phone moves around, just imagine the next generation...

(Engadget again)That answer also makes no sense.

Lance: I don't see that performance. I see the lag.

4:59PM Mike: Here's another way of looking at it. If it's 1GHz now, it'll be 2GHz next year... we're bypassing the arms race and going straight to multicore. We're going to lead the way in an environment where we can scale properly without burning up the battery

So they're currently shipping underpowered, underspecced phones because presently the hardware will get better and then! Then, watch out! Because, I think, maybe they port the Playbook OS to their phones? Which seems to contradict what he was saying earlier, about how the tablet is the phone, or something? I mean, really, what the hell?

If the CEO is this much at sea about what they're doing, what hope is there for RIM to follow any kind of effective, coherent product strategy? And if they actually flounder around as madly as Lazaridis' remarks suggest they intend to, what chance do they have of competing against actually well run competitors with a disciplined roadmap?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #15 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

Oh yeah? I don't think so, Jim Balsillie.

Whatever, serf
post #16 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF View Post

Playbook is a business term as well. I hear it all the time, usually in sales organizations.

Ah yes, you are right. I was thinking they were using it in the sense of Sony's Playstation.
post #17 of 132
This feels like the tablet version of the Windows 7 phone...

When the PlayBook finally comes out, RIM will refuse to give sales numbers because they will not want anyone to know how bad it is selling. Perhaps they are hoping it will stall die-hard blackberry using enterprise customers long enough to re-write all of their smart phone software for QNX... I think the real tablet strategy is that their QNX software is not yet ready to be a smart phone. I wouldn't be surprised if they take a strategy where you get the PlayBook for free with the phone as they try to stall for time. Or maybe it is the other way around since a Blackberry phone probably costs about 50 cents to make it is getting so far behind.

QNX is a great OS, but it was designed for embedded systems. RIM will need to take it quite a bit further to make it great for smartphone/tablet apps. As was commented in the Engadget article, the video was stuttering despite having a processor that is twice as fast as the iPad and significantly more RAM.

BB6 to QNX may look like WIndows Mobile 6 to 7...

Personally though, I like QNX. I'd love this to surpass the Android phone. Targeting iOS and QNX is much easier then targeting iOS and Android. I just don't think that RIM will pull it off.
post #18 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

This feels like the tablet version of the Windows 7 phone...

When the PlayBook finally comes out, RIM will refuse to give sales numbers because they will not want anyone to know how bad it is selling. Perhaps they are hoping it will stall die-hard blackberry using enterprise customers long enough to re-write all of their smart phone software for QNX... I think the real tablet strategy is that their QNX software is not yet ready to be a smart phone. I wouldn't be surprised if they take a strategy where you get the PlayBook for free with the phone as they try to stall for time. Or maybe it is the other way around since a Blackberry phone probably costs about 50 cents to make it is getting so far behind.

QNX is a great OS, but it was designed for embedded systems. RIM will need to take it quite a bit further to make it great for smartphone/tablet apps. As was commented in the Engadget article, the video was stuttering despite having a processor that is twice as fast as the iPad and significantly more RAM.

BB6 to QNX may look like WIndows Mobile 6 to 7...

Personally though, I like QNX. I'd love this to surpass the Android phone. Targeting iOS and QNX is much easier then targeting iOS and Android. I just don't think that RIM will pull it off.

It's not that QNX is not ready for the smart phone --- it's rather that dual core ARM processors are still in first gen and you can't put it into a phone.

And last Friday's Playbook demo in Canada, RIM VP stated that things like the browser is not optimized yet and is still running on single core. And at tonight's presentation, the Playbook was running the most number of apps in its history of demos (and you can watch the demo video at http://video.allthingsd.com/).
post #19 of 132
Allow me... All too easy.


"Lazaridis showed off the upcoming PlayBook tablet, which he called "the perfect size." When questioned by Mossberg whether RIM is working on any other sizes, Lazaridis acknowledged the company's plans for different sizes."

Translation: Steve Jobs said 7" was rubbish so we gotta say 7" is perfect. But just so we look forward-thinking and have an actual clue, we'll say we have plans for different sizes.


Lazaridis emphasized that RIM is betting heavily on the PlayBook and its BlackBerry Tablet OS. "This is a complete mobile computing platform," said Lazaridis. "All of this is coming together to set up BlackBerry for the next decade."

Translation: We're definitely screwed, so we hope this tablet and funky new tablet OS will save all of us from certain irrelevance. Who cares it's a tablet OS. Just say it's BlackBerry in the next decade, that will sound visionary.


According to Lazaridis, the 7-inch PlayBook, which RIM unveiled in September, is still "tracking" for a first quarter launch.

Translation: Oh gawd, I hope we pull this of. I have no idea...


When questioned whether RIM was leaving behind BlackBerry phones by moving ahead with next generation technology in tablets, Lazaridis emphasized RIM's global strategy. RIM won't abandon developing markets that have yet to reach 3G or 4G and can't afford high-end stuff, he explained.

Translation: Hell yeah we'll still be selling cheap crap all around the world... Who knows what our high-end smartphone business will be like. Just churn out our same BB OS and phones, send it to the "developing markets", because, heck, they don't care about the latest gadgets do they... Wait, do they?


Lazaridis also claimed during the interview that the BlackBerry began appealing to consumers by itself. "We didn't go out and try to make BlackBerry a consumer device. It crossed over on its own," he said.

Translation: We were sitting on our asses in our fine suits and thank goodness this phenomenon came along. But consumers suck. Let's still focus on businesses, because that's what matters, not mom and pop and kids... Yeah, I think tablets will be the future. Did I mention the tablet is the future?


RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis. Apple is trying to upgrade a mobile phone OS for tablets, while RIM is starting with a "bona-fide mobile computing platform" for tablets, he asserted.

Translation: My pals at Adobe tell me Adobe Air and Flash is part of a real bona-fide mobile computing platform. What's this Unix stuff? Is that the same as QNX? It ends with an "X".


Referencing the iPad's lack of Adobe Flash compatibility, Lazaridis asked, "Why would you limit yourself?"

Translation: Again, my pals at Adobe told me that Flash is the future. Never mind most Blackberries can't even display web content, Flash is the future. And tablets. And somehow that's going to take our smartphones, into the future. Somehow.


In October Apple CEO Steve Jobs asserted that many 7-inch tablets would be dead on arrival. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."

Translation: Geez... I sure hope someone is listening to me telling them that Blackberry tablets are the future... of smartphones...
post #20 of 132
This thinking, at least from a marketing feel, smells of failure.

Sun Microsystems - The Network Is The Computer


BlackBerry - The Tablet Is The Phone
post #21 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF View Post

I can't wait for Jobs to introduce iPad 2. He is going to get in so many digs about the competition... its going to be hilarious!!

His competitors think tablets are just the sum of their components & hardware specs. That appeals to geeks, but not everyone is a geek.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #22 of 132
The company I am working for is BB based for now. The BB will STILL be supported come 2011. But new devices will default to iPsomething from the fruit company.
I haven't heard any complaints yet.

(Also: Needing a phone to connect a 7" tablet to the net when on the road? Really? Imagine Apple would have come up with this idea. RIM would declare that Apple simply does not get the needs of a bisiness user.)
post #23 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauerg View Post

The company I am working for is BB based for now. The BB will STILL be supported come 2011. But new devices will default to iPsomething from the fruit company.
I haven't heard any complaints yet.

(Also: Needing a phone to connect a 7" tablet to the net when on the road? Really? Imagine Apple would have come up with this idea. RIM would declare that Apple simply does not get the needs of a bisiness user.)

You don't need a phone to connect Playbook to the net, you need a mifi --- which Apple did come up with the idea when they sell the ipad on Verizon.
post #24 of 132
Is the dual-core Cortex-A9 low-power and small enough to be an adequate option for the next iPhone? If not, how about a single-core Cortex-A9, which does offer many features over Cortex-A8 that I think iOS would benefit?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #25 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Is the dual-core Cortex-A9 low-power and small enough to be an adequate option for the next iPhone? If not, how about a single-core Cortex-A9, which does offer many features over Cortex-A8 that I think iOS would benefit?

I think that the problem is timing.

Apple designs the A4 so we expect them to design the A5. But if semi-conductor companies like TI that specialize these things can't come out cell phone versions of dual core cortex a9 until much later next year, then there is no way that Apple can make a dual-core cortex a9 based A5 in that time frame.
post #26 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I thought their strength was in the business arena, and my understanding is there has been a lot of interest in tablets from businesses. So why would they call their first tablet the "Playbook" and aim it at consumers? Why not leverage their reputation in business, and their Blackberry brand, to sell a serious tablet to big companies?

That is the question I had hoped Walt Mossberg would ask the RIM CEO. I don't get it either.
post #27 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis. Apple is trying to upgrade a mobile phone OS for tablets, while RIM is starting with a "bona-fide mobile computing platform" for tablets, he asserted.

He is either deliberately distorting the truth or really showing his ignorance here. iOS was conceived and developed for tablets in it's earliest stages, they just released for iPhone first when it emerged it would also make a brilliant phone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

In October Apple CEO Steve Jobs asserted that many 7-inch tablets would be dead on arrival. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."

But I'm with RIM on this one, Apple fan though I am. 7" will be a compelling form factor. Not better than 10", I trust Jobs on that, just different: in a way that a MacBook Air 11" is from a 17" MacBook Pro. Buyers of one have different needs & preferences to the other. Jobs spouted marketing BS about filing fingers down for a 7" device. If you can use iOS on an 3.5" iPod Touch, you could use it on a 7" device. Software optimisation for screen size would be all it needed.
post #28 of 132
With Mr.Lazaridis so clearly seeing that "the tablet is the future" for RIM (and somehow for its BlackBerry phones too?), I'm a little puzzled as to why they have only just begun making one?

Or is Mr.Lazaridis sudden tablet-clearsight of the kind you get after being bitch-slapped hard and repeatedly with an iPad I wonder?
post #29 of 132
what he explained, very badly, was that RIM plans to have its own proprietary OS for the long term, based on QNX, that requires more powerful processors than those being used today for phones/tabs. but that once those processors are available, RIM will use this new OS for all future products, including their BB's. (just like iOS does, which he dissed amazingly stupidly as noted by others here).

well, fine, that's a reasonable 10 year technical plan.

then he went on that RIM can become a "crossover" consumer company as well as enterprise. clumsily avoiding the total failure of its Storm and Torch attempts at that, and instead grasping at the Flash straw as a basis for hope. he had better be careful - "working with" Adobe can easily become being totally dependent on Adobe. is there an escape Plan B if that goes wrong?

what he did not describe is how RIM will make its new tablets work great for its existing enterprise market, which is the first thing a smart RIM CEO would make sure of. instead this guy seems to have a serious case of "Apple envy."

so in that regard, one would think RIM's best hope to become a consumer company would be the "social" web. but RIM has no social ecosystem - or any kind of consumer ecosystem. as all the new OS's more or less match each others technical abilities, it will be their ecosystems that distinguish them in the market. Apple and Google each have very strong but very different ones. MS and Nokia are trying but remain weak. RIM's got none, except email which ain't enough.

so the smartest thing RIM could do is "merge" with Facebook, and integrate into its booming new ecosystem. that would create a very formidable combination! (and Facebook likes Flash too.)

but RIM never will do that with this guy in charge. he is too proud and too stupid. too insular and too stubborn. reminds me of the last Nokia CEO, who finally got dumped this year when none of his efforts to meet the iPhone/Android challenge worked either. this RIM guy will get fired for the same reason by 2012, or maybe even late next year.
post #30 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post

But I'm with RIM on this one, Apple fan though I am. 7" will be a compelling form factor. Not better than 10", I trust Jobs on that, just different: in a way that a MacBook Air 11" is from a 17" MacBook Pro. Buyers of one have different needs & preferences to the other. Jobs spouted marketing BS about filing fingers down for a 7" device. If you can use iOS on an 3.5" iPod Touch, you could use it on a 7" device. Software optimisation for screen size would be all it needed.

I've got an iPhone 4 and an iPod. I type on the iPhone as little as possible. I can do it, but if I can wait until I get to a physical keyboard, I would.

With my iPad I'll use it's keyboard to type lengthy blog posts. Also, I have Zinio. It's fine on the iPad. Anything smaller and it would be too small.

I would buy a 7 inch tablet, but it's functionality to me would be more like the iPhone than the iPad. I can handle the PITA factor of typing on the iPhone because its convenient and I take it everywhere. If I made it a point to take a 7 inch tablet with me, I'd want to be able to type on it as easily as my iPad.
post #31 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

... so in that regard, one would think RIM's best hope to become a consumer company would be the "social" web. but RIM has no social ecosystem - or any kind of consumer ecosystem. as all the new OS's more or less match each others technical abilities, it will be their ecosystems that distinguish them in the market. Apple and Google each have very strong but very different ones. MS and Nokia are trying but remain weak. RIM's got none, except email which ain't enough. So the smartest thing RIM could do is "merge" with Facebook, and integrate into its booming new ecosystem. that would create a very formidable combination! (and Facebook likes Flash too.)

this is actually a really interesting point.

BBM aint enough.
Windows Phone 7 probably has more medium term success potential due to XBox and Cloud Services than other factors. It remains to be seen if MS leverage that as well or better than Apple leverage MobileMe, Mobile iWork and Ping. Ping hasn't exactly set social alight, but the key building blocks are there. I'd like to see Apple buy Dropbox, Twitter and Instagram and keep them Ad and data-mining free.
It remains to be seen if Facebook really IS too big to over-commercialize itself into oblivion. I could see Apple adding a "social" tab to iTunes though.
All of which underscores how far off the pace what Adobe and RIM offer each other is. I can see what Android and Google offer in the social and cloud space but it remains to be seen if users accept Ads as the driving force behind these offerings and whether they can seamlessly integrate for the mass market. Prediction. 3 horse race by 2013. RIM RIP.
post #32 of 132
iPhone is doing well in enterprise, and it seems to be gaining by the day. And enterprise sales are RIM's bread and butter. I'd be surprised if RIM lasts another 5 or 6 years, let alone 10.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #33 of 132
This was predictable: http://www.ankleskater.com/pagemaker...20101202180300

And of course, inevitable.
post #34 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuwafuwa View Post

I'm not sure RiM is still in business after 10 years.

I totally agree. To make a stupid 1980s computer analogy, the blackberry was the C64, the playbook will be the Amiga, and RIM will go out of business.
post #35 of 132
Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."

So true. We want Jim Balsillie to tell us what to think.
post #36 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauerg View Post

(Also: Needing a phone to connect a 7" tablet to the net when on the road? Really? Imagine Apple would have come up with this idea. RIM would declare that Apple simply does not get the needs of a bisiness user.)

You mean like all the people here who were hoping they would be able to tether the iPad to the iPhones they already owned? Imagine Apple had come up with it. People here would have been calling it a great idea but since it's not Apple, it's clearly a stupid concept.
post #37 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

I think that the problem is timing.

Apple designs the A4 so we expect them to design the A5. But if semi-conductor companies like TI that specialize these things can't come out cell phone versions of dual core cortex a9 until much later next year, then there is no way that Apple can make a dual-core cortex a9 based A5 in that time frame.

Yes, Apple, who bought PA Semi that designed a low power version of the Power Architecture AND Intrinsity, who designed the Hummingbird core, has no chops to design a dual-core Cortex A9 with Samsung as a partner for the iPhone 5.

Never mind that the A9 is also actually more efficient than the A8 on a per cycle basis, has lower idle power, can idle an unused core and can be clocked for less time (or clocked lower) to do a task than on the A8.

Never mind that Ti is claiming it will be shipping Dual Core A9 OMAP4430s for use in smartphones before the end of 2010 and several dual core A9 phones (LG) are already announced for 2011 launch probably before the iPhone 5.

Wanna bet that Apple already has a dual core A9 design done already?

Another example of you making bald assertions not based remotely on reality.
post #38 of 132
It's pretty evident that RIM is completely out of ideas.
post #39 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

As RIM's smartphones begin to include multi-core processors, "they'll all be running the Playbook platform," said Lazaridis, who believes the PlayBook OS will help RIM "jump into the next decade of mobile computing."

Unfortunately, that will be a decade late. This is what happens when you stop innovating and start trying to play catch up.

As for the "Apple telling people what to do" crack, I have to say that I'm willing to put a bit of faith in Apple's r&d team when they say that after lots of testing, 7" doesn't quite cut it. Lots of folks think they know what they like until they actually get it in their hands; didn't folks mock the portrait orientation and large bezel of the iPad when it was introduced? Now everyone's mimicking the form factor of the iPad. Why? Because it's good. It works. It works despite the fact that all the Apple haters thought they wanted a smaller bezel and a widescreen tablet.

I can't wait to see how this all shakes out - quite fascinating, isn't it?
post #40 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis. Apple is trying to upgrade a mobile phone OS for tablets, while RIM is starting with a "bona-fide mobile computing platform" for tablets, he asserted.

This is completely false. As we all know, the iPad was being developed at least at the same time as the iPhone, if not before. Apple wisely held off until they had all the kinks worked out with the iPhone.

That's one thing that Apple does brilliantly that no one else seems to grasp: they don't release half-baked products or features.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › RIM sees PlayBook OS as 10-year future for smartphones, tablets