The original iphone didn't change a thing --- Apple was trying to sell a $600 simlocked phone with a 2 year contract. The business model bombed. The world changed with the 3G iphone, not the original iphone.
What arrogant nonsense. Don't rewrite history. Perhaps for you, it took that long (in fact, I recall you going on endlessly, a couple of years ago and well after the 3G phone, about how the iPhone was doomed since it was not available on Verizon -- and you sure had change your tune on that front!).
For most of us, and pretty much all of your pathetic incumbent industry -- carriers, handset makers, retailers, suppliers, you name it -- the original iPhone changed everything. Some got it right away. For others -- like RIM and Nokia -- it took longer, but it has come home to roost.
I've been a RIM user for the last 4 years as it is a requirement by my company that I carry one. I like my RIM and find it more and more useful as I discover more apps, but it is lacking dearly in style, tech, and usability.
The phone was purchased for me less than a year ago but sports a sluggish CPU for even the time this model was introduced (Blackberry Bold). The battery life is very poor often not lasting a day even with minimal use.
The phone came with the Blackberry 5.0 OS but I updated to 6.0 as soon as I could. Luckily the phone was new enough and my carrier allowed me to upgrade. However, the OS is not very intuitive and wastes much of my time trying to get to where I need to go. Even so, it is much better than the 5.0 OS but not by a leap. A leap would be an Android or iPhone OS, but again I'm on a Bold which is a non-touch smartphone.
RIM is too slow at upgrading their hardware with the features people are begging for. I was hoping to get a Storm 3 that was much rumored about but the phone never materialized. Instead the Torch was released to much ho-hum reviews and I was left to pick up a Bold. The phone feels great in the hand and I do love the physical keys but I was looking forward to a transition device that the Storm 2 provides but just with newer internals hence the Storm 3.
RIM should be better named RIP as my company's execs are leaving their platform for Android and iPhone. My next phone will not be a RIM. This is something that RIM could have prevented but now it is too late. Apple will release a 5th gen phone and Android will get better and better as well eating into RIM's and Nokia's bottom lines.
I don't really have a dog in this hunt, but I think it's way too soon to write off RIM. They still have a huge installed base and a certain amount of customer loyalty, especially in the corporate world. They also own a powerful brand name, which I'd have to point out was essentially Apple's only asset before they were brought back from the brink. RIM is nowhere close to irrelevancy; in fact they are easily more relevant to the smartphone market today than Apple was to the PC market in 1997. They absolutely have a chance to make a comeback.
While the current CEOs appear a bit clueless it does not follow that RIM will be more successful if they are replaced. All phone hardware companies are getting clobbered in terms of market share and/or profits with the exception of HTC and Apple. RIM has actually done pretty well at least treading water. The smart phones remain a very small share of the cell market so lots of opportunity to turn around.
Note while android had been a bigger share of each vendor's products the total vendor share of market and certainly profit has not improved. Basically android is displacing a static or decreasing share of Symbian and Windows CE. Apple is increasing real share in OS (ESP if you include all mobile elements) and gobbling all the profit.
The future for RIM will demand a deep change in core competencies (disruptive and destructive) to re-attack the new market environment. So the leadership, current or new, needs to take this on.
I agree. I think replacing the CEOs won't fix their problems anytime soon. RIM became much too comfortable with their market position before the iPhone was introduced. They are worse than Microsoft with their Windows and Office dependancies. At least Microsoft has been trying new things and investing in web services. Although Microsoft is losing money in those new or expanding areas of business, at least they are not completely complacent like RIM.
RIM has little chance of turning things around in the near future. They need to reduce their product line, improve their software, attract developers to their platform, and strengthen their enterprise position with new services, possibly with enterprise cloud services. That won't be easy for them to do. They didn't really have strong competition before. Now they have to innovate like never before. I just don't think it's in the current corporate culture to do so. For that reason, perhaps their CEOs should be replaced and a new leader can change that.
Comments
Your declaration was incorrect.
The original iphone didn't change a thing --- Apple was trying to sell a $600 simlocked phone with a 2 year contract. The business model bombed. The world changed with the 3G iphone, not the original iphone.
What arrogant nonsense. Don't rewrite history. Perhaps for you, it took that long (in fact, I recall you going on endlessly, a couple of years ago and well after the 3G phone, about how the iPhone was doomed since it was not available on Verizon -- and you sure had change your tune on that front!).
For most of us, and pretty much all of your pathetic incumbent industry -- carriers, handset makers, retailers, suppliers, you name it -- the original iPhone changed everything. Some got it right away. For others -- like RIM and Nokia -- it took longer, but it has come home to roost.
The phone was purchased for me less than a year ago but sports a sluggish CPU for even the time this model was introduced (Blackberry Bold). The battery life is very poor often not lasting a day even with minimal use.
The phone came with the Blackberry 5.0 OS but I updated to 6.0 as soon as I could. Luckily the phone was new enough and my carrier allowed me to upgrade. However, the OS is not very intuitive and wastes much of my time trying to get to where I need to go. Even so, it is much better than the 5.0 OS but not by a leap. A leap would be an Android or iPhone OS, but again I'm on a Bold which is a non-touch smartphone.
RIM is too slow at upgrading their hardware with the features people are begging for. I was hoping to get a Storm 3 that was much rumored about but the phone never materialized. Instead the Torch was released to much ho-hum reviews and I was left to pick up a Bold. The phone feels great in the hand and I do love the physical keys but I was looking forward to a transition device that the Storm 2 provides but just with newer internals hence the Storm 3.
RIM should be better named RIP as my company's execs are leaving their platform for Android and iPhone. My next phone will not be a RIM. This is something that RIM could have prevented but now it is too late. Apple will release a 5th gen phone and Android will get better and better as well eating into RIM's and Nokia's bottom lines.
As for "PC-style POSIX", you do know that is just techno verbal diarrhea that makes no sense, right?
No, he doesn't unfortunately.
While the current CEOs appear a bit clueless it does not follow that RIM will be more successful if they are replaced. All phone hardware companies are getting clobbered in terms of market share and/or profits with the exception of HTC and Apple. RIM has actually done pretty well at least treading water. The smart phones remain a very small share of the cell market so lots of opportunity to turn around.
Note while android had been a bigger share of each vendor's products the total vendor share of market and certainly profit has not improved. Basically android is displacing a static or decreasing share of Symbian and Windows CE. Apple is increasing real share in OS (ESP if you include all mobile elements) and gobbling all the profit.
The future for RIM will demand a deep change in core competencies (disruptive and destructive) to re-attack the new market environment. So the leadership, current or new, needs to take this on.
I agree. I think replacing the CEOs won't fix their problems anytime soon. RIM became much too comfortable with their market position before the iPhone was introduced. They are worse than Microsoft with their Windows and Office dependancies. At least Microsoft has been trying new things and investing in web services. Although Microsoft is losing money in those new or expanding areas of business, at least they are not completely complacent like RIM.
RIM has little chance of turning things around in the near future. They need to reduce their product line, improve their software, attract developers to their platform, and strengthen their enterprise position with new services, possibly with enterprise cloud services. That won't be easy for them to do. They didn't really have strong competition before. Now they have to innovate like never before. I just don't think it's in the current corporate culture to do so. For that reason, perhaps their CEOs should be replaced and a new leader can change that.