We were talking about this last night and I started to read about this further on another site. Which like you found alot of this started to make more sense. Also information about it using QNX and the BlackBerry OS 6 currently found on the new Torch.
What I was also reading which led me to believe this is going to be driven more for corporate use or IT use is its suppose to link to your Blackberry so you can display anything from your BB onto our Playbook without saving the data for security reasons.
So it looks like the only real way to take full advantage of what this Playbook has to offer is to also own a BB. Which is kind of interesting on some level BB going that way because that is what Apple does, tries to get you to buy into their entire ecosystem.
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".
Oh good grief. That's just the point. Iconic is not even remotely the same as talking about or demonstrating the product's features. You (and others) have apparently missed that none of Apple's product ads are about specs. Those iPod ads in particular, tell you nothing whatsoever about how the product works. They are all about communicating music and fun. As much as anything else, they market lifestyle. It's a mystery to me how anyone can object even slightly when RIM tries to do the same thing. FWIW, I doubt they'll be able do it nearly as well as Apple, but I can't get angry at them for trying.
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
The Apple ad was an invitation to the October launch of the actual product. It was a finished product by then. The 'ad' as you call it for the RIM device seem to be somewhat less than that to me. Is the actual final product there, even as a silhouette as it is in the apple invitation ad? The Apple ad, remember was done as a 'tease' so Apple could actually show the real thing live.
It's one thing to tease with a product and another to simply create an illusion of one. However, reading back through all the posts in this thread you seem to have an axe to grind but I can't figure what it is, so I doubt you will agree with anything I say.
A what??? Yeah, I guess if you take that attitude, you've stopped listening.
Well based on the specs it seems like a fairly decent device. Dual core is certainly nice as is 1080P playback. Not sure what battery life is going to be which will be a factor.
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.
A very big if. Frankly, I don't think this particular tablet is going to be a big success. I think, at most, it will achieve niche status with some hardcore Blackberry shops, who want everything RIM. (The kind of mentality that until recently, when it became impossible, wanted to buy everything from IBM.) Unfortunately, I think RIM is kind of in the same boat as Nokia, adrift, without navigational aids.
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 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
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.
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.
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).
What I thought of when I saw playbook wasn't some book to play with, but rather a useful tool much like that of a playbook a football coach would use. Playbook can be equated to what the plan for the business day would be, or what the plan to achieve certain goals is. Know what I mean?
Except they didn't name it Playbook, they named it PlayBook.
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.
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.
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.
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).
.
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?
Since you seem to be a fan of "plain language" .... this should help even you.
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.
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.
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.
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 am still at IBM neither the hardware or saying have changed over the years...LOL.
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.
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:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
You mean, like Apple announcing the iPad in January and not shipping until April? I read "early 2011" as possibly being little more than three months away.
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.
I was just trying to be funny there, not deep ... and meant no disrespect on you any other poster. Actually, being serious for a moment, I just need Apple to be #1 till I sell my stock and retire then my bias may wain (Nooo not really).
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.
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.
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.
Comments
We were talking about this last night and I started to read about this further on another site. Which like you found alot of this started to make more sense. Also information about it using QNX and the BlackBerry OS 6 currently found on the new Torch.
What I was also reading which led me to believe this is going to be driven more for corporate use or IT use is its suppose to link to your Blackberry so you can display anything from your BB onto our Playbook without saving the data for security reasons.
So it looks like the only real way to take full advantage of what this Playbook has to offer is to also own a BB. Which is kind of interesting on some level BB going that way because that is what Apple does, tries to get you to buy into their entire ecosystem.
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".
.
Oh good grief. That's just the point. Iconic is not even remotely the same as talking about or demonstrating the product's features. You (and others) have apparently missed that none of Apple's product ads are about specs. Those iPod ads in particular, tell you nothing whatsoever about how the product works. They are all about communicating music and fun. As much as anything else, they market lifestyle. It's a mystery to me how anyone can object even slightly when RIM tries to do the same thing. FWIW, I doubt they'll be able do it nearly as well as Apple, but I can't get angry at them for trying.
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
The Apple ad was an invitation to the October launch of the actual product. It was a finished product by then. The 'ad' as you call it for the RIM device seem to be somewhat less than that to me. Is the actual final product there, even as a silhouette as it is in the apple invitation ad? The Apple ad, remember was done as a 'tease' so Apple could actually show the real thing live.
It's one thing to tease with a product and another to simply create an illusion of one. However, reading back through all the posts in this thread you seem to have an axe to grind but I can't figure what it is, so I doubt you will agree with anything I say.
A what??? Yeah, I guess if you take that attitude, you've stopped listening.
Well based on the specs it seems like a fairly decent device. Dual core is certainly nice as is 1080P playback. Not sure what battery life is going to be which will be a factor.
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.
A what??? Yeah, I guess if you take that attitude, you've stopped listening.
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
A very big if. Frankly, I don't think this particular tablet is going to be a big success. I think, at most, it will achieve niche status with some hardcore Blackberry shops, who want everything RIM. (The kind of mentality that until recently, when it became impossible, wanted to buy everything from IBM.) Unfortunately, I think RIM is kind of in the same boat as Nokia, adrift, without navigational aids.
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!
Dual core A9 and 1 GB RAM caught my eye -- though it seems overkill for a smaller screen.
.
I want that in my next iPhone...
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
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.
The iPhone 4 has 16Gb or 32Gb of RAM NOT 512MB.
The PlayBook only has 1GB or on board storage.
<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.
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.
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).
.
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 think it will have only a minor effect in that regard.
What I thought of when I saw playbook wasn't some book to play with, but rather a useful tool much like that of a playbook a football coach would use. Playbook can be equated to what the plan for the business day would be, or what the plan to achieve certain goals is. Know what I mean?
Except they didn't name it Playbook, they named it PlayBook.
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.
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.
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).
.
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?
Since you seem to be a fan of "plain language" .... this should help even you.
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.
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.
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.
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 am still at IBM neither the hardware or saying have changed over the years...LOL.
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.
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:
You mean, like Apple announcing the iPad in January and not shipping until April? I read "early 2011" as possibly being little more than three months away.
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.
I was just trying to be funny there, not deep ... and meant no disrespect on you any other poster. Actually, being serious for a moment, I just need Apple to be #1 till I sell my stock and retire then my bias may wain
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.
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.
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.