Isn't this the same argument that RealMedia just lost when they objected to not being able to store their music in an iTunes library. I kind-of get the argument that protocols should not fall under copyright regulations. One way to separate the format from the service might be to open all protocols but allow protocol servers to protect the keys for an encrypted implementation of that protocol.
It is ironic that Blackberry's iron grip on their protocol allowed them to grow their business without being stomped on by competitors in the early days of their endeavor but that they would close the door on other such company development now that it does not suit them. In Blackberry's case their reliance on the closed nature of their offering caused them to miss the touch-screen/smarter-phone boat and they imploded as their business user-base jumped ship.
"Innovate or Die" is the mantra in this industry (not just Blackberry… Apple too).
Seriously? You can't tell the difference? No one was demanding that Blackberry open up BBM. It was Blackberry that decided to do that. They did it because there aren't enough Blackberry users to support it, and they still think that they can monetize it with Ads, subscription fees, or both. That's nuts! But BBM's user base hasn't grown since the first quarter it came out. It's essencially, a failure. So now he's demanding that other companies be forced to support Blackberry. That's a big difference. If users of iPhones and Android devices and Win Phone said that they wanted to be able to use BBM, that would be one thing, but they didn't. And if they did, that would be asking Blackberry to support their platforms, not a demand that the government force them to do it.
I skimmed the article and missed the force part, so yes there's a vast difference.
So for years when BB had a significant market share they did not share their message software but now they have lost their market they want others to be forced to include BBs platform? This from a company who raised their license fees so much that my employer was forced to give up BB and move to other platforms.
We can all understand why he wants this. But even if these companies agreed to it, it would take time for it to happen. By then, Blackberry might be out of the phone business.
He's been talking about monetizing BBM since he first got there. He's still talking about it. But he's been there for a while now, and it hasn't halpened yet. Despite all of his talk about it, possibly they've put feelers out to their commercial and government clients, and they've been negative. If so, then he's really got problems. Server revenue has dropped dramatically as companies and government agencies drop BES. Phones sales and use are way down. Blackberry announced that they had 80 million active users of BBM at the end of the first quarter it came out. But even though they recently claimed that it was downloaded 120 million times, their active user base over a year after it came out stands at just 85 million. That includes iPhone and Android users, possible Win Phone too, if it supports that. So, it's going nowhere.
That why he's making this demand, I suppose. Not that it would help them make any money. But I imagine that he thinks it would help to sell a few more phones.
How is that any different when many here were asking for a cross platform BBM?
It's different because they weren't asking government to use the threat of violence to compel RIM to create cross platform BBM and this cretin is asking government to use the threat of violence (a.k.a. "law") to compel cross platform iMessage. It's a matter of morality. Do I threaten to put you in a cage to compel you to do my bidding, or do I present you with a reasoned argument as to how it is in your best interest to follow my recommendation?
How is that any different when many here were asking for a cross platform BBM?
Because it costs MONEY for any developer to create an app on a different platform. And if that platform's app makes NO MONEY, you have LOST MONEY.
Making money is the primary reason that developers write apps for iOS first. iOS customers are wealthier and are far more likely to spend their money than customers on other platforms.
Additionally, developing apps is a form of FREE SPEECH since writing code is a creative work.
In Canada, there may be a law to force you to write your work both in English and French. But NOT IN THE UNITED STATES.
Should we force developers to write for the DEAD Symbian Phones too? What about Windows CE? DUH to Blackberry's CEO. The CEO and his company are LOSERS asking for a handout.
I kind of agree about iMessage (and BBM as it was a few years ago). The age of proprietary communication protocols tied to specific hardware vendors or operating systems has mostly been relegated to the dust, and just needs a final kick to put it completely down for the good of all. Same for FaceTime too, why isn't that on other operating systems, especially since it was released as an open standard /s.
Netflix though, Netflix is an independent and platform agnostic company not in any way analagous to a public utility, so that doesn't really fly. They have no skin in the game of which manufacturer or OS is winning, they exist to serve customers in a way that earns a profit. If they don't want to produce for BBOS then that's their perogative.
I don't really agree with that. Yes, it's true that vendors such as Google, and even Microsoft, that are totally, or mostly software houses, or service houses want to spread their services elsewhere. That's how they make money. But Apple is a hardware company. Its software and services are there for the purpose of selling that hardware. It would be nuts for them to give those services to every other platform. There are plenty of services, and software, that reside on several platforms. The best way users can express their displeasure at more propriatary services would be to not use them.
So if you're not happy about iMessage, which does work across platforms, though not with the software itself being available on other platforms, then use something else. Don't like that FaceTime is only for Apple? Then use Skype.
The solution is simple. You don't have to force a vendor to do it.
It's different because they weren't asking government to use the threat of violence to compel RIM to create cross platform BBM and this cretin is asking government to use the threat of violence (a.k.a. "law") to compel cross platform iMessage. It's a matter of morality. Do I threaten to put you in a cage to compel you to do my bidding, or do I present you with a reasoned argument as to how it is in your best interest to follow my recommendation?
Yes thanks. I was made aware of the difference my other posters.
What a totally disgusting, offensive and anti-American thought process the current Blackberry CEO has. App neutrality?
Companies should be forced to make their app work across all platforms, even if they don't want to, or even if they'd lose money and waste resources in the process?
Hell no.
Everybody knows that Blackberry is in deep trouble, due to their own stupidity and arrogance, but that is no excuse for them to peddle these sorts of ideas. If Blackberry's marketshare wasn't 0.0000000000100024 %, then maybe more companies would bother to provide apps for Blackberry.
I kind of agree about iMessage (and BBM as it was a few years ago). The age of proprietary communication protocols tied to specific hardware vendors or operating systems has mostly been relegated to the dust, and just needs a final kick to put it completely down for the good of all. Same for FaceTime too, why isn't that on other operating systems, especially since it was released as an open standard /s.
I'd so love for Apple to open up iMessage and FaceTime by releasing those apps on Android. To be able to send iMessages to everyone (Android users would download iMessage) would make my usage of my Apple devices far more seamless and enjoyable. Juggling messaging apps is quite annoying.
Railroads aren't a particularly good analogy for the internet of today. Freight trains own the rails, with passenger trains only allowed on tracks when freight trains aren't running. Not all tracks are open to every train company, in fact most tracks can only be used by the train company that owns them. The home delivery lines are the only ones really owned by the internet companies and the only ones that really matter. iMessage and Netflix are like specialized locomotives traveling on all the tracks. They are owned by individual companies and used by people who use that company's products. Just because they run on the same tracks as other locomotives doesn't mean the other company's locomotives have any right to the special products Apple and Netflix have. Use a car analogy. Subaru, VW and Porsche all use variations of flat engines. Just because they do doesn't mean Ford or Chevy should automatically be given these engines to use in their cars. Companies don't have to share, this isn't kindergarten, it's post school companies can do what they want to do within reason. iMessage and Netflix services are not "standards" so they don't have to be shared. BB is trying to stay relevant and they can't. That's the bottom line of this whole article.
I think he is trying to get some idiot on capitol hill (plenty there) to make an inquiry into this and get a concession or two out of some larger players to just make it go away. If he is paying some lobbyist enough, he may well get something for his trouble regardless of how dumb it is.
Well I think companies should do what's in their best interest. Why lose money on developing a bbm app to never see a return in your investment.
In somewhat related news, Chase bank is pulling their Windows app... They already don't have a blackberry app. If a company that wants to reach as many people as possible is limiting who they distribute to, it's definitely because there is no upside to develop for them
Generally, I'm all for interoperability. But a lot of those services that Chen is talking about are already interoperable. And the ones that aren't, can be worked around, to some extent.
So iMessage works to communicate with any phones, just as every other messaging app does. Do you get all the services if you're not on an iPhone, iPad or Mac? No, of course not, that's the point. FaceTime? Well, Apple offered it as a standard, it's up to other companies to support that. If Chen doesn't want to do that, then why should Apple do it for them? Microsoft has Skype, so they don't support it. Google has theirs, whatever the name is, so they don't support it. But whatever.
This kind of sounds like Google with regards to patents.
Anyone remember their stance on patents that they consider a "de facto standard"? Basically if I invent something, and it becomes popular, then the patents should be made SEP's even if I, as the owner, don't want to declare them as part of a standard.
Anti-American? This has nothing to do with America.
It's certainly anti-freedom and anti-free will. And the companies that he wants to force to provide apps for blackberry happen to be American, like Netflix and Apple.
Apple are total dickheads, iChat rocks but do I use it to communicate with fellow co workers no because they have to work with windows based clients all day and they need cross platform interactivity so we use Skype, on my iPhone do I use iChat to text no because half the people I text are on Android so I use WhatsApp. How can the worlds biggest mobile phone maker not get this, they could own this market if they went cross platform.
I'd so love for Apple to open up iMessage and FaceTime by releasing those apps on Android. To be able to send iMessages to everyone (Android users would download iMessage) would make my usage of my Apple devices far more seamless and enjoyable. Juggling messaging apps is quite annoying.
Get better friends.
Apple can't release FaceTime on other platforms because of lawsuits.
How is that any different when many here were asking for a cross platform BBM?
Edit: I misread the article, and have since amended my thoughts.
I never asked for that or expected that, and even Blackberry didn't do it out of the goodness of their heart!!!! They only did it because they were failing. The Government can't make a person or company waste time and money writing software or every single platform out there. That's just beyond silly. Netflix is on a ton of systems. If anything they must be on more systems then anything else and yet not even THAT is good enough. Netflix is on far, far, far more systems then BBM is!!!! Can I even get BBM on my Windows or Mac PC? How about on TIZEN? They really need to get working and set a example before spouting off on something this dumb.
Comments
It is ironic that Blackberry's iron grip on their protocol allowed them to grow their business without being stomped on by competitors in the early days of their endeavor but that they would close the door on other such company development now that it does not suit them. In Blackberry's case their reliance on the closed nature of their offering caused them to miss the touch-screen/smarter-phone boat and they imploded as their business user-base jumped ship.
"Innovate or Die" is the mantra in this industry (not just Blackberry… Apple too).
I skimmed the article and missed the force part, so yes there's a vast difference.
We can all understand why he wants this. But even if these companies agreed to it, it would take time for it to happen. By then, Blackberry might be out of the phone business.
He's been talking about monetizing BBM since he first got there. He's still talking about it. But he's been there for a while now, and it hasn't halpened yet. Despite all of his talk about it, possibly they've put feelers out to their commercial and government clients, and they've been negative. If so, then he's really got problems. Server revenue has dropped dramatically as companies and government agencies drop BES. Phones sales and use are way down. Blackberry announced that they had 80 million active users of BBM at the end of the first quarter it came out. But even though they recently claimed that it was downloaded 120 million times, their active user base over a year after it came out stands at just 85 million. That includes iPhone and Android users, possible Win Phone too, if it supports that. So, it's going nowhere.
That why he's making this demand, I suppose. Not that it would help them make any money. But I imagine that he thinks it would help to sell a few more phones.
How is that any different when many here were asking for a cross platform BBM?
It's different because they weren't asking government to use the threat of violence to compel RIM to create cross platform BBM and this cretin is asking government to use the threat of violence (a.k.a. "law") to compel cross platform iMessage. It's a matter of morality. Do I threaten to put you in a cage to compel you to do my bidding, or do I present you with a reasoned argument as to how it is in your best interest to follow my recommendation?
How is that any different when many here were asking for a cross platform BBM?
Because it costs MONEY for any developer to create an app on a different platform. And if that platform's app makes NO MONEY, you have LOST MONEY.
Making money is the primary reason that developers write apps for iOS first. iOS customers are wealthier and are far more likely to spend their money than customers on other platforms.
Additionally, developing apps is a form of FREE SPEECH since writing code is a creative work.
In Canada, there may be a law to force you to write your work both in English and French. But NOT IN THE UNITED STATES.
Should we force developers to write for the DEAD Symbian Phones too? What about Windows CE? DUH to Blackberry's CEO. The CEO and his company are LOSERS asking for a handout.
I don't really agree with that. Yes, it's true that vendors such as Google, and even Microsoft, that are totally, or mostly software houses, or service houses want to spread their services elsewhere. That's how they make money. But Apple is a hardware company. Its software and services are there for the purpose of selling that hardware. It would be nuts for them to give those services to every other platform. There are plenty of services, and software, that reside on several platforms. The best way users can express their displeasure at more propriatary services would be to not use them.
So if you're not happy about iMessage, which does work across platforms, though not with the software itself being available on other platforms, then use something else. Don't like that FaceTime is only for Apple? Then use Skype.
The solution is simple. You don't have to force a vendor to do it.
I so want a cross-platform iMessage.
Yes thanks. I was made aware of the difference my other posters.
What a totally disgusting, offensive and anti-American thought process the current Blackberry CEO has. App neutrality?
Companies should be forced to make their app work across all platforms, even if they don't want to, or even if they'd lose money and waste resources in the process?
Hell no.
Everybody knows that Blackberry is in deep trouble, due to their own stupidity and arrogance, but that is no excuse for them to peddle these sorts of ideas. If Blackberry's marketshare wasn't 0.0000000000100024 %, then maybe more companies would bother to provide apps for Blackberry.
I kind of agree about iMessage (and BBM as it was a few years ago). The age of proprietary communication protocols tied to specific hardware vendors or operating systems has mostly been relegated to the dust, and just needs a final kick to put it completely down for the good of all. Same for FaceTime too, why isn't that on other operating systems, especially since it was released as an open standard /s.
I'd so love for Apple to open up iMessage and FaceTime by releasing those apps on Android. To be able to send iMessages to everyone (Android users would download iMessage) would make my usage of my Apple devices far more seamless and enjoyable. Juggling messaging apps is quite annoying.
Railroads aren't a particularly good analogy for the internet of today. Freight trains own the rails, with passenger trains only allowed on tracks when freight trains aren't running. Not all tracks are open to every train company, in fact most tracks can only be used by the train company that owns them. The home delivery lines are the only ones really owned by the internet companies and the only ones that really matter. iMessage and Netflix are like specialized locomotives traveling on all the tracks. They are owned by individual companies and used by people who use that company's products. Just because they run on the same tracks as other locomotives doesn't mean the other company's locomotives have any right to the special products Apple and Netflix have. Use a car analogy. Subaru, VW and Porsche all use variations of flat engines. Just because they do doesn't mean Ford or Chevy should automatically be given these engines to use in their cars. Companies don't have to share, this isn't kindergarten, it's post school companies can do what they want to do within reason. iMessage and Netflix services are not "standards" so they don't have to be shared. BB is trying to stay relevant and they can't. That's the bottom line of this whole article.
I think he is trying to get some idiot on capitol hill (plenty there) to make an inquiry into this and get a concession or two out of some larger players to just make it go away. If he is paying some lobbyist enough, he may well get something for his trouble regardless of how dumb it is.
Generally, I'm all for interoperability. But a lot of those services that Chen is talking about are already interoperable. And the ones that aren't, can be worked around, to some extent.
So iMessage works to communicate with any phones, just as every other messaging app does. Do you get all the services if you're not on an iPhone, iPad or Mac? No, of course not, that's the point. FaceTime? Well, Apple offered it as a standard, it's up to other companies to support that. If Chen doesn't want to do that, then why should Apple do it for them? Microsoft has Skype, so they don't support it. Google has theirs, whatever the name is, so they don't support it. But whatever.
It is a good thing that Netflix is not available on Blackberry devices!... At least from a corporate stand point.
What a totally disgusting, offensive and anti-American thought process the current Blackberry CEO has.
Anti-American? This has nothing to do with America. Your last few presidents have been wiping their ass with your constitution anyway.
This kind of sounds like Google with regards to patents.
Anyone remember their stance on patents that they consider a "de facto standard"? Basically if I invent something, and it becomes popular, then the patents should be made SEP's even if I, as the owner, don't want to declare them as part of a standard.
It's certainly anti-freedom and anti-free will. And the companies that he wants to force to provide apps for blackberry happen to be American, like Netflix and Apple.
I'd so love for Apple to open up iMessage and FaceTime by releasing those apps on Android. To be able to send iMessages to everyone (Android users would download iMessage) would make my usage of my Apple devices far more seamless and enjoyable. Juggling messaging apps is quite annoying.
Get better friends.
Apple can't release FaceTime on other platforms because of lawsuits.
How is that any different when many here were asking for a cross platform BBM?
Edit: I misread the article, and have since amended my thoughts.
I never asked for that or expected that, and even Blackberry didn't do it out of the goodness of their heart!!!! They only did it because they were failing. The Government can't make a person or company waste time and money writing software or every single platform out there. That's just beyond silly. Netflix is on a ton of systems. If anything they must be on more systems then anything else and yet not even THAT is good enough. Netflix is on far, far, far more systems then BBM is!!!! Can I even get BBM on my Windows or Mac PC? How about on TIZEN? They really need to get working and set a example before spouting off on something this dumb.