Based on what's out there right now (RIM, HP, Acer, Asus, etc.) even sadder RIM is the norm rather than the exception. Executives without a clue, copy someone else, punch clock, fire lower level employees and coast towards retirement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fred 1
I find a little sad. RIM was a good company with a good product for many years. They just didn't see the train and didn't get of the tract they were on.
The fact that Asus shipped 80,000 Transformer Prime and RIM shipped more than 6x that number --- tells you that RIM isn't doing that bad.
I don't understand your conclusion. "Could be a lot worse" does not equate to "We're not doing poorly."
PS: I wonder if there is a term for when someone compares two things in an unsound way in order to make one thing look better in comparison. This is certainly common with children who are very quick to rat each other out it means they will get in less trouble.
I don't understand your conclusion. "Could be a lot worse" does not equate to "We're not doing poorly."
PS: I wonder if there is a term for when someone compares two things in an unsound way in order to make one thing look better in comparison. This is certainly common with children who are very quick to rat each other out it means they will get in less trouble.
Poorly or not --- it is basically the 3rd best selling tablets behind the ipad and the kindle fire.
Poorly or not --- it is basically the 3rd best selling tablets behind the ipad and the kindle fire.
Isn't BB the 3rd most popular smartphone platform after iOS and Android? Does that make it a success when they have a negative profit for the quarter, have a severely lowered ARP, that didn't help them to sell as many unit YoY in a rapidly growing smartphone market? I certainly don't think so.
And what's the 2nd best selling PMP? The Zune? Apple has tied up the PMP and tablet market so well that people colloquially refer to them as iPod and iPad markets.
RIM is the sinking of the Lusitania and Titanic combined. I feel very bad for the employees who are definitely going to suffer the most due to company mismanagement and unclear vision of the future. \
If it weren't for Android, RIM would never have fallen so far and fast as it did. I don't think Apple is to blame for this debacle. It's those dirt cheap Android smartphones that did RIM in.
I agree that it was primary Android that was gunning for RIM. Before iPhone was demonstrated, Android prototypes all looked like Blackberries, so RIM's days were numbered as a sole-source supplier of overpriced e-mail readers. That being said, large entities will continue to buy them in quantity, but their value per unit is dramatically lower than it used to be.
Isn't BB the 3rd most popular smartphone platform after iOS and Android? Does that make it a success when they have a negative profit for the quarter, have a severely lowered ARP, that didn't help them to sell as many unit YoY in a rapidly growing smartphone market? I certainly don't think so.
And what's the 2nd best selling PMP? The Zune? Apple has tied up the PMP and tablet market so well that people colloquially refer to them as iPod and iPad markets.
Success is relative. They have an operating profit before special charges relating to layoffs.
And I was only responding to the original comment that RIM not killing the Playbook is a sign of anything --- when everybody else is not killing their tablet business as well (and RIM outsells these companies on tablet sales).
I know several people from RIM who I was in school with. When Apple introduced iPhone the fall of 2007, they totally dismissed it. "Apple doesn't know anything about phones.", "The iPhone is a data hog, AT&T hates it and iPhone users can't get email in New York", "It doesn't have native apps.", "It doesn't have push email.", etc.
Their technical arrogance was incredible. I warned them that current superiority means nothing and Apple would do to RIM what RIM did to Palm if they didn't smarten up. What's more is that everything they were saying I would later hear Lazaritis or other senior RIM people saying, which suggests this was a cultural problem that permeated the entire organization.
Their arguments revolved around technical supreriority; the efficiency with which the Blackberry transmits and receives email, the minimal use of data networks, etc. What they all failed to recognize, or concede when I would point it out, was that none of these things mattered to the user. Furthermore, they are all technical limitations that could be (and were) overcome by Apple as it gained experience.
But therein lay the problem. RIM was successful because their customer wasn't the end user, but rather the carriers. They started with pagers at a time when cellular networks had very little bandwidth. Their email service was hugely successful, not because it was unique, but because their mobile email solution put the least load on the networks. This mattered most to carriers, and carriers sold phones to consumers.
This relationship was ultimately RIM's undoing, and is the bane of most cell phone makers. Users buy phones from carriers, carriers buy phones from the OEMs. Every carrier wants an edge up over their competition, so they demand RIM, and others, to make a unique phone for them. This leads to a large number of phones to develop and support. As a result, RIM has multiple chipsets, multiple cameras, multiple variants of the operating system, etc. And thus the engineering, manufacturing, testing and support costs are enormous. It also makes it difficult to impart change, because the organization you must change is huge and has a lot of momentum.
All of this was fine until Apple came along and changed the game. Technologically, Apple's iPhone was innovative, for sure. However, Apple's truly disruptive innovation was to bypass the carrier and sell the phone directly to consumers. One phone for everyone, in two colors and three sizes. This business model innovation allowed Apple to devote more engineers and developers to a single phone, and pay greater attention to the consumer than the carrier. The popularity of the iPhone had carriers scrambling to get it while Apple resisted making each carrier a separate version. The only exception is where a carriers network requires a different communication chipset.
There's obviously more to the story, such as the use of a more advance operating system, etc. But the moral of the story is not to become arrogant. As Steve said, "Stay hungry, stay foolish".
RIM may do better, if they can learn to be a little hungry and foolish.
However, Apple's truly disruptive innovation was to bypass the carrier and sell the phone directly to consumers.
Then carriers came to regret it.
The whole issue came down to RIM thought the carriers were logical and not stupid --- they thought that carriers would react like Verizon initially. RIM was wrong in that --- carriers were stupid and now 5 years later, came to regret their initial decisions.
RIM is the sinking of the Lusitania and Titanic combined. I feel very bad for the employees who are definitely going to suffer the most due to company mismanagement and unclear vision of the future. \
If it weren't for Android, RIM would never have fallen so far and fast as it did. I don't think Apple is to blame for this debacle. It's those dirt cheap Android smartphones that did RIM in.
Is Apple the iceberg, the torpedo or both?
Android has hurt them in the low-end for sure but in all the big companies I work in (consulting) it is iPhones everywhere that are displacing high-end BBs.
I agree that it was primary Android that was gunning for RIM. Before iPhone was demonstrated, Android prototypes all looked like Blackberries, so RIM's days were numbered as a sole-source supplier of overpriced e-mail readers. That being said, large entities will continue to buy them in quantity, but their value per unit is dramatically lower than it used to be.
I can't swear to it but I believe Android's origin was as a response to WinCE/WinMob which threatened to lock Google out of an MS dominated world. It had some passing similarities to Palm and RIM but MS was the target of fear for Google.
The whole issue came down to RIM thought the carriers were logical and not stupid --- they thought that carriers would react like Verizon initially. RIM was wrong in that --- carriers were stupid and now 5 years later, came to regret their initial decisions.
Will it come to the same place in my country, where electronics chains and cash-and-carry phone hawkers rule the market? And carriers are left to sale contracts and packages, their phone shops play only bit parts?
Its interesting how RIM dominated then fell off. This gets repeated so often...The Sony Walkman etc. I hope the same thing does not happen to Apple, one bad sign is that they waited to long to get into the TV market.
Maybe Apple has changed its mind about entering TV market, seeing Philips and Sharp just drop dead, Sony Bravia coughing up blood and there is no gold at the end of HD rainbow. We know now the TV land is not the Promised Land like PC and smartphone were.
The reason Tim paid out iDividens is probably Apple TV is going to be cactus if it comes out now, way too late to make any money. So the dividends is to buy Apple some breathing room while they are looking for the new market that TV is no longer it.
The fact that Asus shipped 80,000 Transformer Prime and RIM shipped more than 6x that number --- tells you that RIM isn't doing that bad.
OK, so by your figures RIM sold, I mean shipped, about 480,000, but you must have missed this:
The company also announced pre-tax charges of $54 million related to a service interruption the company experienced in the third quarter last fall (which required service credits to affected users), and a $485 million "inventory provision" made for the poor selling PlayBook tablet.
So, shipped 480,000 that required a write off of $485,000,000. Sounds pretty good to me.
In the Southern Hemisphere, will they circle it in the oppose direction?
I know you're making a joke, but I think MythBusters busted that common belief.
edit:
Quote:
Okay. The first thing you should know is that the Coriolis Effect (the phenomenon that makes storms spin in opposite directions in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres) is NOT strong enough to have an effect in hand basins and bath tubs. The direction water spins in hand basins, bathtubs and sinks is determined by how big the plug hole is, and the shape and depth of the basin/tub/sink. Mythbusters proves this in one episode where they show footage of water draining in different parts all over the world and the water can spin anti-clockwise AND clock-wise in the Northern Hemisphere and anti-clockwise and clock-wise in the Southern Hemisphere.
SECONDLY (and this is the part where I actually answer your question) I've noticed that Australian toilets are designed differently to American toilets. When I went to America I noticed that American toilets have a very small outlet and are much shallower than Australian toilets, with water filling up about half the depth of the toilet bowl. So, because of this, water DOES spiral when you flush. It also seems to take a lot longer to fully flush. I had NEVER seen this design before, and finally knew why Americans always ask the question you have just asked.
Comments
I find a little sad. RIM was a good company with a good product for many years. They just didn't see the train and didn't get of the tract they were on.
The fact that Asus shipped 80,000 Transformer Prime and RIM shipped more than 6x that number --- tells you that RIM isn't doing that bad.
I don't understand your conclusion. "Could be a lot worse" does not equate to "We're not doing poorly."
PS: I wonder if there is a term for when someone compares two things in an unsound way in order to make one thing look better in comparison. This is certainly common with children who are very quick to rat each other out it means they will get in less trouble.
I don't understand your conclusion. "Could be a lot worse" does not equate to "We're not doing poorly."
PS: I wonder if there is a term for when someone compares two things in an unsound way in order to make one thing look better in comparison. This is certainly common with children who are very quick to rat each other out it means they will get in less trouble.
Poorly or not --- it is basically the 3rd best selling tablets behind the ipad and the kindle fire.
Poorly or not --- it is basically the 3rd best selling tablets behind the ipad and the kindle fire.
Isn't BB the 3rd most popular smartphone platform after iOS and Android? Does that make it a success when they have a negative profit for the quarter, have a severely lowered ARP, that didn't help them to sell as many unit YoY in a rapidly growing smartphone market? I certainly don't think so.
And what's the 2nd best selling PMP? The Zune? Apple has tied up the PMP and tablet market so well that people colloquially refer to them as iPod and iPad markets.
RIM is the sinking of the Lusitania and Titanic combined. I feel very bad for the employees who are definitely going to suffer the most due to company mismanagement and unclear vision of the future.
If it weren't for Android, RIM would never have fallen so far and fast as it did. I don't think Apple is to blame for this debacle. It's those dirt cheap Android smartphones that did RIM in.
I agree that it was primary Android that was gunning for RIM. Before iPhone was demonstrated, Android prototypes all looked like Blackberries, so RIM's days were numbered as a sole-source supplier of overpriced e-mail readers. That being said, large entities will continue to buy them in quantity, but their value per unit is dramatically lower than it used to be.
Isn't BB the 3rd most popular smartphone platform after iOS and Android? Does that make it a success when they have a negative profit for the quarter, have a severely lowered ARP, that didn't help them to sell as many unit YoY in a rapidly growing smartphone market? I certainly don't think so.
And what's the 2nd best selling PMP? The Zune? Apple has tied up the PMP and tablet market so well that people colloquially refer to them as iPod and iPad markets.
Success is relative. They have an operating profit before special charges relating to layoffs.
And I was only responding to the original comment that RIM not killing the Playbook is a sign of anything --- when everybody else is not killing their tablet business as well (and RIM outsells these companies on tablet sales).
Now that slogan is gonna leave a bad taste in RIM's employees mouths!
/
/
/
Too Funny!!!!!
Their technical arrogance was incredible. I warned them that current superiority means nothing and Apple would do to RIM what RIM did to Palm if they didn't smarten up. What's more is that everything they were saying I would later hear Lazaritis or other senior RIM people saying, which suggests this was a cultural problem that permeated the entire organization.
Their arguments revolved around technical supreriority; the efficiency with which the Blackberry transmits and receives email, the minimal use of data networks, etc. What they all failed to recognize, or concede when I would point it out, was that none of these things mattered to the user. Furthermore, they are all technical limitations that could be (and were) overcome by Apple as it gained experience.
But therein lay the problem. RIM was successful because their customer wasn't the end user, but rather the carriers. They started with pagers at a time when cellular networks had very little bandwidth. Their email service was hugely successful, not because it was unique, but because their mobile email solution put the least load on the networks. This mattered most to carriers, and carriers sold phones to consumers.
This relationship was ultimately RIM's undoing, and is the bane of most cell phone makers. Users buy phones from carriers, carriers buy phones from the OEMs. Every carrier wants an edge up over their competition, so they demand RIM, and others, to make a unique phone for them. This leads to a large number of phones to develop and support. As a result, RIM has multiple chipsets, multiple cameras, multiple variants of the operating system, etc. And thus the engineering, manufacturing, testing and support costs are enormous. It also makes it difficult to impart change, because the organization you must change is huge and has a lot of momentum.
All of this was fine until Apple came along and changed the game. Technologically, Apple's iPhone was innovative, for sure. However, Apple's truly disruptive innovation was to bypass the carrier and sell the phone directly to consumers. One phone for everyone, in two colors and three sizes. This business model innovation allowed Apple to devote more engineers and developers to a single phone, and pay greater attention to the consumer than the carrier. The popularity of the iPhone had carriers scrambling to get it while Apple resisted making each carrier a separate version. The only exception is where a carriers network requires a different communication chipset.
There's obviously more to the story, such as the use of a more advance operating system, etc. But the moral of the story is not to become arrogant. As Steve said, "Stay hungry, stay foolish".
RIM may do better, if they can learn to be a little hungry and foolish.
However, Apple's truly disruptive innovation was to bypass the carrier and sell the phone directly to consumers.
Then carriers came to regret it.
The whole issue came down to RIM thought the carriers were logical and not stupid --- they thought that carriers would react like Verizon initially. RIM was wrong in that --- carriers were stupid and now 5 years later, came to regret their initial decisions.
RIM is the sinking of the Lusitania and Titanic combined. I feel very bad for the employees who are definitely going to suffer the most due to company mismanagement and unclear vision of the future.
If it weren't for Android, RIM would never have fallen so far and fast as it did. I don't think Apple is to blame for this debacle. It's those dirt cheap Android smartphones that did RIM in.
Is Apple the iceberg, the torpedo or both?
Android has hurt them in the low-end for sure but in all the big companies I work in (consulting) it is iPhones everywhere that are displacing high-end BBs.
I agree that it was primary Android that was gunning for RIM. Before iPhone was demonstrated, Android prototypes all looked like Blackberries, so RIM's days were numbered as a sole-source supplier of overpriced e-mail readers. That being said, large entities will continue to buy them in quantity, but their value per unit is dramatically lower than it used to be.
I can't swear to it but I believe Android's origin was as a response to WinCE/WinMob which threatened to lock Google out of an MS dominated world. It had some passing similarities to Palm and RIM but MS was the target of fear for Google.
Funny how it all turned out, eh?
Poorly or not --- it is basically the 3rd best selling tablets behind the ipad and the kindle fire.
AT A LOSS!!
Can't make that up in volume...
Then carriers came to regret it.
The whole issue came down to RIM thought the carriers were logical and not stupid --- they thought that carriers would react like Verizon initially. RIM was wrong in that --- carriers were stupid and now 5 years later, came to regret their initial decisions.
Will it come to the same place in my country, where electronics chains and cash-and-carry phone hawkers rule the market? And carriers are left to sale contracts and packages, their phone shops play only bit parts?
Their new slogan is...
RiM: We're circling it!
In the Southern Hemisphere, will they circle it in the oppose direction?
Its interesting how RIM dominated then fell off. This gets repeated so often...The Sony Walkman etc. I hope the same thing does not happen to Apple, one bad sign is that they waited to long to get into the TV market.
Maybe Apple has changed its mind about entering TV market, seeing Philips and Sharp just drop dead, Sony Bravia coughing up blood and there is no gold at the end of HD rainbow. We know now the TV land is not the Promised Land like PC and smartphone were.
The reason Tim paid out iDividens is probably Apple TV is going to be cactus if it comes out now, way too late to make any money. So the dividends is to buy Apple some breathing room while they are looking for the new market that TV is no longer it.
AT A LOSS!!
Can't make that up in volume...
So was the number 2 tablet, the Kindle Fire.
The fact that Asus shipped 80,000 Transformer Prime and RIM shipped more than 6x that number --- tells you that RIM isn't doing that bad.
OK, so by your figures RIM sold, I mean shipped, about 480,000, but you must have missed this:
The company also announced pre-tax charges of $54 million related to a service interruption the company experienced in the third quarter last fall (which required service credits to affected users), and a $485 million "inventory provision" made for the poor selling PlayBook tablet.
So, shipped 480,000 that required a write off of $485,000,000. Sounds pretty good to me.
In the Southern Hemisphere, will they circle it in the oppose direction?
I know you're making a joke, but I think MythBusters busted that common belief.
edit:
Okay. The first thing you should know is that the Coriolis Effect (the phenomenon that makes storms spin in opposite directions in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres) is NOT strong enough to have an effect in hand basins and bath tubs. The direction water spins in hand basins, bathtubs and sinks is determined by how big the plug hole is, and the shape and depth of the basin/tub/sink. Mythbusters proves this in one episode where they show footage of water draining in different parts all over the world and the water can spin anti-clockwise AND clock-wise in the Northern Hemisphere and anti-clockwise and clock-wise in the Southern Hemisphere.
SECONDLY (and this is the part where I actually answer your question) I've noticed that Australian toilets are designed differently to American toilets. When I went to America I noticed that American toilets have a very small outlet and are much shallower than Australian toilets, with water filling up about half the depth of the toilet bowl. So, because of this, water DOES spiral when you flush. It also seems to take a lot longer to fully flush. I had NEVER seen this design before, and finally knew why Americans always ask the question you have just asked.
And each of the execs will get a PlayBook as farewell gift.
A sculpture of pair of thumbs is the obvious farewell gift I'd have thought.
I know you're making a joke, but I think MythBusters busted that common belief.
edit:
Of course it is true for air mass rotations, which is where I suspect the water story came from originally.