RIM struggling to fix PlayBook tablet battery issues, analyst says

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 85
    This is what happens when you jump the gun!
  • Reply 22 of 85
    Just keep calling us Apple fans sheeple if it makes you feel better.
  • Reply 23 of 85
    Sorry.

    Could not resist.
  • Reply 24 of 85
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Plenty of "mobile" stuff are embedded with QNX without a large battery --- from handheld military radios to highend logitech universal remotes.



    http://onqpl.blogspot.com/2010/05/30...nger-into.html



    QNX made a demo of running their OS in the compaq ipaq a million years ago.



    http://eqip.openqnx.com/ipaq_bsp/embed_intro.html
  • Reply 25 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    So RIM needs two CEOs to do the job of one normal one?



    Co-CEOs - lol - And neither one is any good...
  • Reply 26 of 85
    gary54gary54 Posts: 169member
    They were touting how speedy the browser was .. using a dual core processor. In a tablet? More powerful processors of any given generation typically use more power. Why would anyone be surprised at battery life issues?
  • Reply 27 of 85
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post


    They were touting how speedy the browser was .. using a dual core processor. In a tablet? More powerful processors of any given generation typically use more power. Why would anyone be surprised at battery life issues?



    At the Rogers event, it was clearly stated by QNX that they were only running a single core for the browser for the moment (because it was ported by the Torch browser team, not by QNX themselves).



    Shaw Wu has no idea what he was talking about --- because he is blaming it on QNX. Plenty of embedded low-powered battery operated stuff are done with QNX.



    If the RIM Playbook does indeed have a battery life issue --- then it is (1) adobe flash and (2) fast dual core cpu --- nothing to do with QNX itself.
  • Reply 28 of 85
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    So RIM needs two CEOs to do the job of one normal one?



    First of all, they are not CEOs but co-CEOs.



    Much like many 'family' run limited companies, the man listed at the top may consider himself The CEO. However, it is the wife that really has the final say.



    By the way, there are many companies that have three co-CEOs.



    Some of the well-known companies that use/have used these power-sharing structures [co-CEOs] include Bed Bath & Beyond, Martha Stewart, Charles Schwab, Golden West Financial, and Neiman Marcus Group. as well as, Citigroup, Daimle.rChrysler, and Bank of America



    And considering the financial crisis we are experiencing today, perhaps there should be more co-CEOs. Better yet, make it a capital crime subject to capital punishment for one of them if found guilty of scamming its investors.
  • Reply 29 of 85
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Well, he might be right there. The PlayBook?s resource heavy OS is designed to run HW that Apple won?t need in the iPad for another decade.



    The resource heaviness is an adobe flash problem --- which is really a website designer problem. Remember the playbook vs. ipad browser video where they show html5 animation and notice how slow the ipad was.



    The same idiot that designs a website with adobe flash that requires a dual-core CPU in order to view smoothly ---- is going to design the same website with HTML5 animation that requires a dual-core CPU.



    You don't need to wait for another decade for the need of dual core cpu. There are plenty of idiots that will code their websites with all kinds of crazy HTML5 graphics that requires a fast dual core cpu with gpu hardware accel. browser.
  • Reply 30 of 85
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    First of all, they are not CEOs but co-CEOs.



    QNX used to have alternating CEO's between the two founders. One guy is the CEO and the other guy is the president --- and they flipped the positions every year.
  • Reply 31 of 85
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,372member
    As Balsillie said, 'Playbook is way ahead of iPad' ... he meant in power consumption I now realize.
  • Reply 32 of 85
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,372member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by haruhiko View Post


    The problem is...



    Why announce a product that is not even finished?



    I'm guessing but perhaps he was hoping to dent iPad sales over Christmas and also maybe to excite share holders? Pretty stupid move though, whatever the reason.
  • Reply 33 of 85
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    I'm guessing but perhaps he was hoping to dent iPad sales over Christmas and also maybe to excite share holders? Pretty stupid move though, whatever the reason.



    Large number of enterprise customers got their Playbook for testing 6 weeks after they originally announced it --- news would have leaked out anyway.
  • Reply 34 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    "...RIMM pushed out its launch to the May 2011 quarter."



    When they first announced it I really wanted it to succeed or at least make some impact. May 2011 means shipping, assuming they get the kinks sorted out, middle of 2011. And that's probably just starting in North America alone for the first few months! Well past 1.5 years after Apple announced the first-generation iPad, by the time PlayBook gains any traction globally. RIMM has been talking this up like it was going to come in and destroy the iPad and be a big game changer. What utter CEO-speak corporate lying gibberish nonsense. They're running scared, holding on to their BlackBerry cash cow is all they have left in 2011, it's too late to catch up with iPhone, iPad and Android Gingebread.



    There is only one (well two) words for this.

    PLAYJOB FAIL
  • Reply 35 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    ...And considering the financial crisis we are experiencing today, perhaps there should be more co-CEOs...



    Not if they are like RIMM's. BTW which one is responsible for the PlayBook's failure?

    Might as well start assigning the blame now.
  • Reply 36 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Neither was Mac OS X/Darwin/NeXTSTEP, WebKit, QuickTime, etc. but Apple made it efficient enough for mobiles. Just give RiM another decade and I’m sure they’ll work it out with QNX… assuming they are still in business then. .



    People also forget that mobile is more than just "handheld". Apple has been dealing with battery tech since the late 80's when the Mac Portable debuted with a lead acid battery. Years after building PowerBooks and even Newtons gave Apple enough expertise to manage iPod batteries which led to iPhones and iPads. Apple even now does their own proprietary battery chemistry.



    Strangely, you'd think that RIM which has been only building battery-enabled handhelds for a decade would be better than this. But I guess the lesson learned here is that battery tech and management is a lot harder thait looks.
  • Reply 37 of 85
    tnsftnsf Posts: 203member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    If the RIM Playbook does indeed have a battery life issue --- then it is (1) adobe flash and (2) fast dual core cpu --- nothing to do with QNX itself.



    Its unfair to blame it on QNX as a whole, but I believe the implementation of QNX on the Playbook could definitely contribute to poor battery life. There are many choices that can be made when implementing the OS that will impact battery life and I have no doubt that the "true" multitasking that RIM is attempting is a big one.



    I suppose its a bit of chicken/egg. If RIM decides to have "true" multitasking and QNX burns lots of power as a result then who's fault is it? RIM's for deciding to implement "true" multitasking? Or QNX' for using lots of power when multitasking?



    Either way I believe there is some validity to Shaw Wu's claim that making QNX perform on a tablet is a much different implementation that QNX has done in the past and presents challenges that maybe they haven't overcome yet.
  • Reply 38 of 85
    tnsftnsf Posts: 203member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    Large number of enterprise customers got their Playbook for testing 6 weeks after they originally announced it --- news would have leaked out anyway.



    I don't think thats quite true. I think RIM has been a bit disingenuous when talking about who has the Playbook in their hands. I think they've got dev models that they're showing around, but I don't think there are many large customers with actual models in their own possession. I know of some very significant launch partners who aren't expecting models for development until a month from now.
  • Reply 39 of 85
    sheffsheff Posts: 1,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mgl323 View Post


    Uninstall Adobe Flash?



    Hahaha. Good one.



    Yea the playbook is a small notch above vaporware at this point . That said I think RIM is way ahead of their corporate equals - MS and Nokia. RIM has a loyal corporate following, at least on the east coast. I think this will help the PlayBook in terms of speed of adoption and acceptability in the corporate world.
  • Reply 40 of 85
    tnsftnsf Posts: 203member
    BTW, I think this rumour is a prime example of underinformed analysts having way too much power. Analysts in general don't impress me because they don't seem to understand the technology and the markets. They tend to focus more on numbers and calculations, which don't always tell the whole story.



    In this case, we have a single analyst spouting an unverified claim and suddenly its all over every tech publication on the net. RIM will probably be forced to respond to this in order to avoid a run on the bank, so to speak. Look at Shaw Wu's position on RIM... his target price is basically the current market price and his shipment estimates for probably the lowest of all analysts. Clearly, Shaw is pessimistic on RIM and yet somehow he is in a position to exert significant control over market expectations with just a few key strokes and no evidence.



    Just my two cents.
Sign In or Register to comment.