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.)
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.
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?
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.
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
... 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.
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.
(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.
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.
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?
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.
Kudos to AI for a very concise interpretation of what Lazaridis was apparently trying to say. I read several blogs of the event and Lazaridis' comments were totally disjointed and didn't make any sense -- to the point that the interviewers said he didn't make sense.
Second:
RIMM has an earnings call on December 16th -- lets' hope the numbers are good or this guy will be hurting.
Third:
Quote:
According to Lazaridis, the 7-inch PlayBook, which RIM unveiled in September, is still "tracking" for a first quarter launch.
Rim's Fiscal Year 2011 runs thru Feb 2011 -- that could mean that a first quarter launch (1Q FY 2012) is Mar-May 2011 (using standard co-CEO vernacular).
If it doesn't "track" successfully, it could mean 2Q FY 2012 or Jun-Aug 2011.
What will the tablet marketplace look like, say, Jun 2011?
Comments
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.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Or is Mr.Lazaridis sudden tablet-clearsight of the kind you get after being bitch-slapped hard and repeatedly with an iPad I wonder?
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.
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.
... 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.
And of course, inevitable.
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.
So true. We want Jim Balsillie to tell us what to think.
(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.
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.
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."
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
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?
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.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
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.
Kudos to AI for a very concise interpretation of what Lazaridis was apparently trying to say. I read several blogs of the event and Lazaridis' comments were totally disjointed and didn't make any sense -- to the point that the interviewers said he didn't make sense.
Second:
RIMM has an earnings call on December 16th -- lets' hope the numbers are good or this guy will be hurting.
Third:
According to Lazaridis, the 7-inch PlayBook, which RIM unveiled in September, is still "tracking" for a first quarter launch.
Rim's Fiscal Year 2011 runs thru Feb 2011 -- that could mean that a first quarter launch (1Q FY 2012) is Mar-May 2011 (using standard co-CEO vernacular).
If it doesn't "track" successfully, it could mean 2Q FY 2012 or Jun-Aug 2011.
What will the tablet marketplace look like, say, Jun 2011?
.