NYPD handcuffed by investment in Microsoft's Windows Phone, now switching to Apple's iPhon...

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 53
    jakebjakeb Posts: 562member
    Why did they go with windows phone? Seems like a bizarre choice. 

    I think ios is the right choice in terms of security and IT support, but i would have understood if they picked Android. But windows phone???
  • Reply 42 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    wizard69 said:

    melgross said:
    red oak said:
    LOL

    I bet the technology selection group was old school Windows and anti-Apple.   What incompetence.  They should all be fired 
    More like old school kickbacks and bribes...

    No.
    I would not dismiss the possibility.   Generally though I find that the government in NYC repeatedly demonstrates mass ignorance as to what is happening in the real world.   NYC is not a good place to be.
    NYC is a great place to be. The government here makes not more mistakes than anywhere else. It’s a very large place, and very expensive to run. If you look around, you’ll see problems that governments make everywhere. Look at the federal government these days. There couldn’t possibly be a more screwed up one than that.
  • Reply 43 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    gatorguy said:
    jbdragon said:
    slurpy said:
    Who makes these kinds of criminally horrible decisions like investing $160,000,000 in windows phone just 2 yrs ago? Unreal. 
    This was the kind of crap being spread a few years back to mislead people: http://www.macworld.com/article/1167112/report_windows_phone_will_pass_iphone_by_2016.html That's the whole problem with these criminals lying to investors. Extremely bad advice given with no responsibility taken.


    Blackberry was suppose to still be around with 5.9% of the market share by 2016. Where are they now? They tried to go Android, how has that worked out? It hasn't!!! I said that right from the start that it was a completely dumb move. They would now be 1 of many company's, fighting from scraps. Losing all control over to Google. How the F could that ever help them? 
    BB is considering licensing their proprietary hardened version of Android. That's at least a little sump'n. 
    I don’t see how Google’s license would allow that. It’s also not considered to be more secure than Samsung’s Knox, which is considered to be overall, somewhat less secure than the iPhone.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 44 of 53
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,213member
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    jbdragon said:
    slurpy said:
    Who makes these kinds of criminally horrible decisions like investing $160,000,000 in windows phone just 2 yrs ago? Unreal. 
    This was the kind of crap being spread a few years back to mislead people: http://www.macworld.com/article/1167112/report_windows_phone_will_pass_iphone_by_2016.html That's the whole problem with these criminals lying to investors. Extremely bad advice given with no responsibility taken.


    Blackberry was suppose to still be around with 5.9% of the market share by 2016. Where are they now? They tried to go Android, how has that worked out? It hasn't!!! I said that right from the start that it was a completely dumb move. They would now be 1 of many company's, fighting from scraps. Losing all control over to Google. How the F could that ever help them? 
    BB is considering licensing their proprietary hardened version of Android. That's at least a little sump'n. 
    I don’t see how Google’s license would allow that. It’s also not considered to be more secure than Samsung’s Knox, which is considered to be overall, somewhat less secure than the iPhone.
    Mel, it's not the same Android-derived OS as Google Android. 
    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4102182-blackberry-licensing-android-os-non-branded-blackberry-devices-game-changer
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 45 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    wizard69 said:
    OMG! Windows Phones. I had no idea the NYPD got stuck with that platform. I'd sure like to know who convinced the NYPD to go with Windows Phones and what was their motive to go with a dying platform. It was probably borne from the wonderful theory that no one ever got fired for choosing Windows. The Big Apple is filled with Apple retail stores and iPhone users so I think the NYPD should definitely go with iPhones.
    New York City is one of the most corrupt in the United States and suffers from some of the most ignorant people you will ever meet.     This is the city that outlaws Geiger counters because they scare people.    So in a nut shell it is either corruption, ignorance or a combination of both.
    Oh boy.

    remember the old adage, in a paraphrased way, because I don’t remember the wording:

    don’t assign to corruption that which can be explained by incompetence. Or something like that. That’s what seems to have happened here. Allowing one person to make a decision like that without using outside experts is incompetent, but not corrupt. It would have to be shown that she gained by that decision.
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 46 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    jbdragon said:
    slurpy said:
    Who makes these kinds of criminally horrible decisions like investing $160,000,000 in windows phone just 2 yrs ago? Unreal. 
    This was the kind of crap being spread a few years back to mislead people: http://www.macworld.com/article/1167112/report_windows_phone_will_pass_iphone_by_2016.html That's the whole problem with these criminals lying to investors. Extremely bad advice given with no responsibility taken.


    Blackberry was suppose to still be around with 5.9% of the market share by 2016. Where are they now? They tried to go Android, how has that worked out? It hasn't!!! I said that right from the start that it was a completely dumb move. They would now be 1 of many company's, fighting from scraps. Losing all control over to Google. How the F could that ever help them? 
    BB is considering licensing their proprietary hardened version of Android. That's at least a little sump'n. 
    I don’t see how Google’s license would allow that. It’s also not considered to be more secure than Samsung’s Knox, which is considered to be overall, somewhat less secure than the iPhone.
    Mel, it's not the same Android-derived OS as Google Android. 
    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4102182-blackberry-licensing-android-os-non-branded-blackberry-devices-game-changer
    SeekingAlpha doesn’t get me there from that link, and when I try to find where I can type the article number in, there isn’t a place. I don’t know why that link takes me to today’s posts.

    but what I think is happening from what I know of Blackberry, is that they’re not going to make any more phones after the one they’re coming out with now, and they’ve licensed this company to make phones for them, under the Blackberry brand name. If that’s what this article is about, then it’s not the same as licensing it out to a third party such as LG with phones bearing the LG brand name.

    if you can find a way for me to get to that article, I’d like to read it, if I haven’t already, which I suspect I already have somewhere.

    This could be what you’re thinking about:

    http://www.computerworld.com/article/3151183/smartphones/blackberry-hands-its-brand-to-tcl-maker-of-its-last-smartphones.html
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 47 of 53
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,213member
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    jbdragon said:
    slurpy said:
    Who makes these kinds of criminally horrible decisions like investing $160,000,000 in windows phone just 2 yrs ago? Unreal. 
    This was the kind of crap being spread a few years back to mislead people: http://www.macworld.com/article/1167112/report_windows_phone_will_pass_iphone_by_2016.html That's the whole problem with these criminals lying to investors. Extremely bad advice given with no responsibility taken.


    Blackberry was suppose to still be around with 5.9% of the market share by 2016. Where are they now? They tried to go Android, how has that worked out? It hasn't!!! I said that right from the start that it was a completely dumb move. They would now be 1 of many company's, fighting from scraps. Losing all control over to Google. How the F could that ever help them? 
    BB is considering licensing their proprietary hardened version of Android. That's at least a little sump'n. 
    I don’t see how Google’s license would allow that. It’s also not considered to be more secure than Samsung’s Knox, which is considered to be overall, somewhat less secure than the iPhone.
    Mel, it's not the same Android-derived OS as Google Android. 
    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4102182-blackberry-licensing-android-os-non-branded-blackberry-devices-game-changer
    SeekingAlpha doesn’t get me there from that link, and when I try to find where I can type the article number in, there isn’t a place. I don’t know why that link takes me to today’s posts.

    but what I think is happening from what I know of Blackberry, is that they’re not going to make any more phones after the one they’re coming out with now, and they’ve licensed this company to make phones for them, under the Blackberry brand name. If that’s what this article is about, then it’s not the same as licensing it out to a third party such as LG with phones bearing the LG brand name.

    if you can find a way for me to get to that article, I’d like to read it, if I haven’t already, which I suspect I already have somewhere.

    This could be what you’re thinking about:

    http://www.computerworld.com/article/3151183/smartphones/blackberry-hands-its-brand-to-tcl-maker-of-its-last-smartphones.html
    Nope, I'm not referring to that. I don't know why the SeekingAlpha link didn't work for you (I just tried it myself with success) but try this one.
    http://telecom.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/blackberry-to-soon-announce-secure-os-licensing-deals-with-smartphone-makers/60209451
    or this one if you're still not seeing it:
    https://www.technobuffalo.com/2017/08/25/blackberrys-secure-android-os-is-coming-to-third-party-phones/

    Blackberry considers it the next phase of its licensing plans according to the SeekingAlpha link. First the name and now their specialized version of Android as an OS. 
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 48 of 53
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    slurpy said:
    Who makes these kinds of criminally horrible decisions like investing $160,000,000 in windows phone just 2 yrs ago? Unreal. 
    According to reports, the decision for the entire department was made by one and only one person:

    http://nypost.com/2017/08/28/nypd-needs-to-replace-36k-useless-smartphones/
    Your tax dollars at work!
  • Reply 49 of 53
    ronnronn Posts: 654member
    Lovely quote from former NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton, the bum that made her NYPD Deputy Commissioner for Information Technology:

    As Bratton told reporters, of Tisch, “She’s a terror if she doesn’t get her way, so I usually let her get her way, so she’s certainly getting her way with this technology."

    How'd that work out for ya?! She is certainly not adequate for the job. Nor was she an 
    appropriate hire for her previous position, Director of Policy and Planning for NYPD’s Counterterrorism Bureau. This smells of kickbacks to cronies and/or self-interests. My bet is both given her previous job and some of the conflicts of interests between her and her family (major political and charitable donors), and the De Blasio administration.
  • Reply 50 of 53
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,372member
    wizard69 said:
    dewme said:
    This is just another example of a recurring pattern in technology adoption within large organizations. Whether it's desktop devices, operating systems, mobile devices, office productivity suites, software development tools, software development processes, CRM systems, accounting & reporting tools, etc., the same technology lifecycle pattern seems to repeat over and over again. Companies get enticed into going "all in" to adopt a particular tool, technology, or process as a standard, sink hundreds of millions of dollars and immeasurable worker hours rolling it out and supporting it and then watch it slip into obsolescence and decay, only to be replaced by a new or different standard within a few years or so.

    As bad as it sounds, this recurring technology lifecycle of attraction -> adoption -> standardization -> decline -> abandonment is more of the nature of the beast rather than a fault or failing with the technology itself. It's more of a Darwinian process that's characteristic of technology evolution in general. Of course there will be some organizations that get burned badly by this lifecycle, especially when technology like Windows Phone takes the fast track to the decline and abandonment phases. It sucks for those who pushed for a technology choice that turned out to be suddenly dead ended. But total avoidance of the lifecycle is impossible because you never know when the vendor or owner of the technology you buy into will give up on it and leave you hung out to dry. The decision makers for the NYC phone case bet all their chips on a Microsoft promise. Microsoft is a big, powerful, long lived, and reliable business partner - so what could possibly go wrong?  

    Everything.

    Who is to blame? If you have to assign blame I'd put a bit more of it on Microsoft than NYC. Sure, the minuscule market share of Windows Phone compared to Apple and Android was a legitimate warning sign for NYC. But I'd imagine that Microsoft provided NYC with plenty of assurances that Microsoft was the right choice and would deliver on the promise. Microsoft didn't live up to their promise and NYC is left holding the bag. NYC chose unwisely but Microsoft proved that it is not a reliable business partner.

    Everyone lost.
    While you may have a point about tech in general this really doesn't apply here!    A fundamental reality is that you don't trust salesman.   In the case of Windows Phone the reality at the time was pretty clear, it didn't have a chance in hell in the market place.   There can only be two explanations, ignorance or corruption, either way everybody involved in the purchase decision should be fired at the minimum.
    There's plenty of blame to go around. It's always easy just to blame the person who made the acquisition decision and say they should never have chosen Microsoft. Yep, bad buying decision. But they did choose Microsoft, which is a well respected company trying to establish major inroads with large organizations to sell additional products and services like Azure cloud by establishing reliable and comprehensive business relationships with high profile customers. They apparently couldn't deliver on their promise. That's why I think Microsoft has a big share of blame. Microsoft's post acquisition behavior has allegedly left an organization tasked with public safety scrambling to fill a gap in a key communication infrastructure component. That should give pause to other large organizations looking for providers of similar products and services.

    The most troubling part of this story is the internal people who are blaming the bad decision on a recalcitrant employee. What about this employee's boss and everyone else in the employee's chain of command? Assigning blame and responsibility to the lowest person in the chain of command is the hallmark of a "culture of incompetence." This kind of behavior allows incompetent people to rise to high levels of authority by insulating themselves from responsibility and accountability with layers of flunkies who will be there to take the fall for the indiscretions and failings of those in command. 
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 51 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    jbdragon said:
    slurpy said:
    Who makes these kinds of criminally horrible decisions like investing $160,000,000 in windows phone just 2 yrs ago? Unreal. 
    This was the kind of crap being spread a few years back to mislead people: http://www.macworld.com/article/1167112/report_windows_phone_will_pass_iphone_by_2016.html That's the whole problem with these criminals lying to investors. Extremely bad advice given with no responsibility taken.


    Blackberry was suppose to still be around with 5.9% of the market share by 2016. Where are they now? They tried to go Android, how has that worked out? It hasn't!!! I said that right from the start that it was a completely dumb move. They would now be 1 of many company's, fighting from scraps. Losing all control over to Google. How the F could that ever help them? 
    BB is considering licensing their proprietary hardened version of Android. That's at least a little sump'n. 
    I don’t see how Google’s license would allow that. It’s also not considered to be more secure than Samsung’s Knox, which is considered to be overall, somewhat less secure than the iPhone.
    Mel, it's not the same Android-derived OS as Google Android. 
    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4102182-blackberry-licensing-android-os-non-branded-blackberry-devices-game-changer
    SeekingAlpha doesn’t get me there from that link, and when I try to find where I can type the article number in, there isn’t a place. I don’t know why that link takes me to today’s posts.

    but what I think is happening from what I know of Blackberry, is that they’re not going to make any more phones after the one they’re coming out with now, and they’ve licensed this company to make phones for them, under the Blackberry brand name. If that’s what this article is about, then it’s not the same as licensing it out to a third party such as LG with phones bearing the LG brand name.

    if you can find a way for me to get to that article, I’d like to read it, if I haven’t already, which I suspect I already have somewhere.

    This could be what you’re thinking about:

    http://www.computerworld.com/article/3151183/smartphones/blackberry-hands-its-brand-to-tcl-maker-of-its-last-smartphones.html
    Nope, I'm not referring to that. I don't know why the SeekingAlpha link didn't work for you (I just tried it myself with success) but try this one.
    http://telecom.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/blackberry-to-soon-announce-secure-os-licensing-deals-with-smartphone-makers/60209451
    or this one if you're still not seeing it:
    https://www.technobuffalo.com/2017/08/25/blackberrys-secure-android-os-is-coming-to-third-party-phones/

    Blackberry considers it the next phase of its licensing plans according to the SeekingAlpha link. First the name and now their specialized version of Android as an OS. 
    Ok, that was interesting. It’s a bit confusing though. It says that they will be able to self brand, but then that the deal is similar to the TCL deal, which is not self branding, but Blackberry branding.

    i have seen the Google Android contract some time ago, and it states very definately that companies are not allowed to license any version of Android, as Google retains all rights to that. So I wonder how Blackberry thinks it can do this. Unless it’s not really licensing the OS itself, but the security implementations it’s added.
  • Reply 52 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member

    dewme said:
    wizard69 said:
    dewme said:
    This is just another example of a recurring pattern in technology adoption within large organizations. Whether it's desktop devices, operating systems, mobile devices, office productivity suites, software development tools, software development processes, CRM systems, accounting & reporting tools, etc., the same technology lifecycle pattern seems to repeat over and over again. Companies get enticed into going "all in" to adopt a particular tool, technology, or process as a standard, sink hundreds of millions of dollars and immeasurable worker hours rolling it out and supporting it and then watch it slip into obsolescence and decay, only to be replaced by a new or different standard within a few years or so.

    As bad as it sounds, this recurring technology lifecycle of attraction -> adoption -> standardization -> decline -> abandonment is more of the nature of the beast rather than a fault or failing with the technology itself. It's more of a Darwinian process that's characteristic of technology evolution in general. Of course there will be some organizations that get burned badly by this lifecycle, especially when technology like Windows Phone takes the fast track to the decline and abandonment phases. It sucks for those who pushed for a technology choice that turned out to be suddenly dead ended. But total avoidance of the lifecycle is impossible because you never know when the vendor or owner of the technology you buy into will give up on it and leave you hung out to dry. The decision makers for the NYC phone case bet all their chips on a Microsoft promise. Microsoft is a big, powerful, long lived, and reliable business partner - so what could possibly go wrong?  

    Everything.

    Who is to blame? If you have to assign blame I'd put a bit more of it on Microsoft than NYC. Sure, the minuscule market share of Windows Phone compared to Apple and Android was a legitimate warning sign for NYC. But I'd imagine that Microsoft provided NYC with plenty of assurances that Microsoft was the right choice and would deliver on the promise. Microsoft didn't live up to their promise and NYC is left holding the bag. NYC chose unwisely but Microsoft proved that it is not a reliable business partner.

    Everyone lost.
    While you may have a point about tech in general this really doesn't apply here!    A fundamental reality is that you don't trust salesman.   In the case of Windows Phone the reality at the time was pretty clear, it didn't have a chance in hell in the market place.   There can only be two explanations, ignorance or corruption, either way everybody involved in the purchase decision should be fired at the minimum.
    There's plenty of blame to go around. It's always easy just to blame the person who made the acquisition decision and say they should never have chosen Microsoft. Yep, bad buying decision. But they did choose Microsoft, which is a well respected company trying to establish major inroads with large organizations to sell additional products and services like Azure cloud by establishing reliable and comprehensive business relationships with high profile customers. They apparently couldn't deliver on their promise. That's why I think Microsoft has a big share of blame. Microsoft's post acquisition behavior has allegedly left an organization tasked with public safety scrambling to fill a gap in a key communication infrastructure component. That should give pause to other large organizations looking for providers of similar products and services.

    The most troubling part of this story is the internal people who are blaming the bad decision on a recalcitrant employee. What about this employee's boss and everyone else in the employee's chain of command? Assigning blame and responsibility to the lowest person in the chain of command is the hallmark of a "culture of incompetence." This kind of behavior allows incompetent people to rise to high levels of authority by insulating themselves from responsibility and accountability with layers of flunkies who will be there to take the fall for the indiscretions and failings of those in command. 
    You’re obviously correct. For Bratton to think, that as police commissioner he had to concede final say because she would be a “terror” is very strange. He wasn’t known as being weak.
  • Reply 53 of 53
    They don’t learn from the Zune
Sign In or Register to comment.