RIM Does Not Want PlayBook Devs, Complains One Potential Developer

fidget42 writes "It appears as if Research In Motion is trying to discourage people from developing for the PlayBook by making the process too darn complicated." This is a pretty serious rant; has anyone had a better experience with RIM's system? Sometimes the gap between developers and users (even when those users are other developers) can be more of a chasm.

Comments

First Post?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they want to "Play it by ear" :p

Cry me a river..

[Anonymous Coward]

Boohoo.. the guy is crying about having to fill out a couple forms and downloading a couple files. Writing his rant probably took 3 times longer than all the supposed "extra" time he had to spend on setup compared to competing platforms.

I know first impression counts, but does 30 minutes count in the grand scheme of things when you are going to spend days, weeks or even months learning and working on something? Must be the ADHD generation..

What happened to staying up through the night because you are so excited to learn and get something working?

Re:Cry me a river..

[Superken7]

Why would someone say up the night developing for a platform that is a PITA when they can go and develop painfully for "the King" ? (be it iOS or Android, whatever)

I would rather focus on making my app great rather than wasting time dealing with a hideous development environment.

Moreover, the author not just complains about time. Its about money, too:
"I do, however, notice that although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge. Now just in case you’ve never looked in to competing developer programs, Apple charges $99, and Google charges $25. Considering you are by far the underdog in this game, how do you justify charging double the price of the market leader? Also, with the $99 or $25 charge, Apple and Google let you publish and unlimited number of apps on their stores. You, on the other hand, have decided that for $200, a developer should only get to publish 10 apps, and it will cost $200 for every additional 10 apps"

Re:Cry me a river..

[TheLink]

I'm wondering why he even bothered to post such a long rant about it.

Does he care that much about RIM's success? Was he forced to write RIM stuff?

If I wasn't forced into using RIM and was looking at the options, I'd look at RIM's much higher entrance barrier, go "fuck it", and develop for a different platform. Not my problem - RIM's problem.

Re:Cry me a river..

[Anonymous Coward]

TFA suggests he does care about RIM's success:
"Living in Waterloo, it’s hard not to be reminded of you. I walk by your campus every day, most of my friends have worked for you at some point, and you are the largest supporter of the university I attend. So it seemed like a rather good idea to at least attempt to write an app for the Playbook,"

So, he wanted to contribute to RIM's success, found it much more difficult to do vs. Apple/Google, and decided to write his post in frustration and maybe in hopes that someone at RIM will read the article and decide to change things.

Re:Cry me a river..

[Richard_at_work]

Having delved into writing software for the Blackberry, I would have to say that my experiences were much the same as his...

Heres what I had to say on the subject:

I have, for the past two days, been trying to get a working Blackberry Developer environment setup so I can do some Blackberry development - and you know what? Its been the worst possible nightmare I have yet experienced in software development.

The suggested environment is a mix of the Open Source IDE Eclipse and the Blackberry JDK plugin collection - how hard can it be? As it turns out, quite hard.

Blackberry offer a download package called "BlackBerry Java Plug-in for Eclipse v1.1 (full installer)", which according to the instructions you are supposed to install over an Eclipse 3.5 installation - however, this gave me an Eclipse install which had the necessary files in the plugins directory, but no hint of anything Blackberry related in the actual IDE itself.

No errors, no warnings, nothing - infact, the plugin installation log has a steady stream of "Success" entries.

A second option presented itself from the Blackberry forums, which was that the aforementioned package actually includes a fully working copy of Eclipse itself, which it will install for you if you point it at an empty destination directory. Tried this, same result.

Back to the forums and blog posts I went, this time coming across two alternative methods of installing the plugin - using raw archive files. Unfortunately, even for posts just a few months old, all the links to pages on the Blackberry site results in 404 error messages - thanks Blackberry!

A fourth option is to install the plugin from within Eclipse, by adding the Blackberry JDK site to the target list for the "Install Software" option (under Help). Both suggested urls gave errors, and finally the third url (http://www.blackberry.com/go/eclipseUpdate/3.5/java) allowed me to conduct an install.

Unfortunately, the install ended with the same result as before - completely successful install, completely pristine Blackberry-less Eclipse.

Someone then mentioned something useful - Blackberry list "Java® SE Development Kit (JDK) 6, update 10 or later." in the prerequisites for the Java Plug-in for Eclipse, however there is a known issue with update 21 which causes issues with Eclipse. Blackberry never mention this, it would be good to know! So, off to hunt for an JDK 6 Update 20 link (which involved trial and error changing of the urk on the Oracle java site as they do not offer SE JDK 6 update 20 for download, only JDK with EE, which installs a metric ton of stuff I dont want).

So, tried loading Eclipse with JDK 6u20 installed instead of u21. Well well well, we now have a Blackberry Project option :)

Unfortunately, creating a new project results in a dialog box stating:

"Blackberry preprocessor is being configured. Eclipse will restart to take effect and re-build the workspace."

So, restart Eclipse and ... get the same dialog. Restart again and ... well, this looks familiar. Great, a restart cycle that you cannot get out of...

Luckily, this is fixed by adding the following to the Eclipse config.ini file ($ECLIPSE_HOME/configuration/config.ini)"

osgi.framework.extensions=org.eclipse.mtj.core.hooks,net.rim.ejde

And now I have an IDE which includes a Blackberry project option and a usable editor - surely it can only get better from here on in?

And no, it didn't get any better from there on in - buggy VMs, issues installing the fucking keys (there are three keys BB require you to install to sign their stuff, the "install keys" option disappears from the right click menu after the first time you use it but it turns out that it only installs one of the three keys - so once you realise this, you have to hunt around the preferences for the right place to install the other two!), and generally a pain in the arse development system.

Re:Cry me a river..

[Anonymous Coward]

he is a cock-sucking apple fan - look at the archive on his page and it should be clear.

nothing more to it than that.

Re:Cry me a river..

[dadioflex]

Maybe he inherently likes RIM because they provide jobs in his neighbourhood, and contribute a significant amount to Canada's GDP. But he has criticisms about their future plans. One of those tech does not equal US stories. Maybe he hopes they take their thumb out of their ass and provide an alternative to Android. Or IOS, obviously.

Re:Cry me a river..

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

Why would someone say up the night developing for a platform that is a PITA when they can go and develop painfully for "the King" ? (be it iOS or Android, whatever)

I would rather focus on making my app great rather than wasting time dealing with a hideous development environment.

Moreover, the author not just complains about time. Its about money, too: "I do, however, notice that although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge. Now just in case you’ve never looked in to competing developer programs, Apple charges $99, and Google charges $25. Considering you are by far the underdog in this game, how do you justify charging double the price of the market leader? Also, with the $99 or $25 charge, Apple and Google let you publish and unlimited number of apps on their stores. You, on the other hand, have decided that for $200, a developer should only get to publish 10 apps, and it will cost $200 for every additional 10 apps"

Actually I haven't read anything that says they'd resume charging or not - only that they reserve the right to. SInce they're currently in the process of giving away free PlayBooks to developers who submit PlayBook apps, I rather doubt they'll be shooting themselves in the foot that way in the near future, if at all. One thing is certain - if you have a vendor account and you get it for free, they're not going to make you pay for it retroactively. In the worst case (if they do decide to shoot themselves in the foot) you'll have to start paying to submit apps, presumably $20/submission. (This honestly wouldn't be a bad thing as far as I'm concerned - since they suspended the fees for registering and submitting apps, we have problems like this [berryreview.com] in app world [for phones]. A differentiating factor for the RIM app store was the minimal amount of that kind of crap, before they dropped th

Re:Cry me a river..

[data64]

He lives in the city that RIM is based in. The economy of this entire city is very closed tied to RIM at this point.

Re:Cry me a river..

[Anonymous Coward]

You, on the other hand, have decided that for $200, a developer should only get to publish 10 apps, and it will cost $200 for every additional 10 apps"

Furthermore, updating your app counts as a new app submission, which will probably translate to infrequent or non-existent bug-fixing for many apps.

Re:Cry me a river..

[Anonymous Coward]

Last time I used that site (about a year ago), you had to fill in the same form for EVERY FILE you downloaded. Often, the download would fail or the link would be broken; I remember once filling in that form at 3 or 4 times trying to get a single file before giving up. Even with auto complete it was really annoying.

My Favourite part

[Superken7]

"First up, I have to put the simulator into development mode, which makes total sense because of those times when you don’t want to use the simulator for development."

I really hope RIM doesn't consider that dev environment to be anywhere near final. Or wait. Maybe they just want to encourage devs to write Android apps and use them on the Playbook?
Yeah, given how messed up the process is, and how critical it is for a platform starting at 0 native apps to start ramping up available 3rd party apps, I am going to assume they just don't wanna have you write playbook apps, they just want you to write Android apps! (assuming they are really compatible)

Update

[Superken7]

"Update: It should be noted that I was using the WebWorks SDK and not the AIR SDK. A commenter on HN mentioned that if you’re using Adobe Builder, it will eventually get you to a Build and Run button, but that they experienced similar problems as well"

Eventually sounds somewhat amiguous.... IMHO, if the setup takes 20min more than on other platforms I don't think thats a big deal, as long as its simple enough during development.

Re:Update

[Anonymous Coward]

ahh, amiguous, that feeling you have when somebody says something to you on the street or at the store and you try to remember if youre friends or not.

Re:Update

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not 20 minutes more, it's an hour of installation. At first, the mac instructions had you download the windows version of VMWare Fusion. To even be able to try out the sdk costs $80 on a mac. Note that you can get started developing for iOS at no cost with a single download.

As a developer, little time sinks can make a big difference. For example, building and running my app on the iPad simulator takes about 5 seconds. It's easy to test iterations and small tweaks to the UI. On Android with the honeycomb emulator, it takes more than a minute (assuming the emulator is running, it takes about 3 minutes for the emulator to start on a dual quad core box with 16G of ram) I never found out on the Playbook, since I don't want to spend money buying an emulator for a currently vapor product.

Re:Update

[Superken7]

hahaha! sorry, I obviously meant to say "ambiguous". ;P

Re:Update

[mangino]

It's not 20 minutes more, it's an hour of installation. At first, the mac instructions had you download the windows version of VMWare Fusion. To even be able to try out the sdk costs $80 on a mac. Note that you can get started developing for iOS at no cost with a single download.

As a developer, little time sinks can make a big difference. For example, building and running my app on the iPad simulator takes about 5 seconds. It's easy to test iterations and small tweaks to the UI. On Android with the honeycomb emulator, it takes more than a minute (assuming the emulator is running, it takes about 3 minutes for the emulator to start on a dual quad core box with 16G of ram) I never found out on the Playbook, since I don't want to spend money buying an emulator for a currently vapor product.

(accidentally posted as AC the first time)

Re:Update

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was that feeling you get when you see someone you know but can't remember their name?

Re:Update

[Bogtha]

Note that you can get started developing for iOS at no cost with a single download.

I don't think that's an entirely fair comparison... in order to get started developing for the Playbook, you need VMWare, in order to get started developing for iOS, you need a Mac. The latter is quite a bit more expensive.

Re:Update

[Anonymous Coward]

VMWare is indeed cheaper than a Mac (or a PC) but it has that annoying inconvenience of being a virtual machine.

Re:Update

[swalve]

If you do it right, you don't have to continually test. That's the sign of a hacker, not a programmer. Don't get me wrong, that's how I learned too. But then you graduate beyond ADHD "programming" and buy yourself a notepad. Run the test, write down all the issues, fix all of them, test again. Gets you down to maybe 5 iterations, instead of 1000.

Re:Update

[JesseDegenerate]

Or you could just use a VM of a mac, genius. (it's not that hard)

Re:Update

[Midnight Thunder]

Then again don't you need a Mac to develop for iOS? Though, this approach is probably makes sense for iOS or WP7, but for RIM - aren't the apps in Java?

Re:Update

[GreyLurk]

Note that you can get started developing for iOS at no cost with a single download.

Really? When I looked into starting iOS Development, it looked like it would cost me at least $799 to pick up the development environment, since it only came pre-packaged with custom hardware and an operating system. Although, at least their $799 package works with my existing monitor and keyboard.

Re:Update

[ThePhilips]

If you do it right, you don't have to continually test. That's the sign of a hacker, not a programmer. Don't get me wrong, that's how I learned too. But then you graduate beyond ADHD "programming" and buy yourself a notepad. Run the test, write down all the issues, fix all of them, test again. Gets you down to maybe 5 iterations, instead of 1000.

From my experience of building seamless UIs, you can never be done in 5 iterations. Finalizing and polishing some UI element placement can easily take 10-20 runs.

Functionality? - often takes minutes to code and yes 3-5 runs. Making the functionality accessible in an intuitive fashion? - days, sometimes weeks.

And it doesn't even matter what type of UI it is - touchscreen, WebUI or CLI - in my experience accessibility and intuitiveness always take much much more time to get right than the core functionality itself.

Re:Update

[toriver]

So your PC came free? I mean, you could have chosen a Mac initially instead of getting a PC, and Eclipse would run fine there.

(Some native-tied plugins might not work though, depending on how interested the plugins' developers were in compiling for Mac OS X).

Re:Update

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think that's an entirely fair comparison... in order to get started developing for the Playbook, you need VMWare, in order to get started developing for iOS, you need a Mac. The latter is quite a bit more expensive.

So you don't need any hardware to develop for the Playbook? Just VMWare. No PC of any kind. Kewl.

Re:Update

[mangino]

If you don't continuously test, you're not doing it right. Maybe I'm biased because I practice TDD.

Let's say you're right and that it takes me 5 iterations to test and get the result right. Now I have at least 6 different resolutions to test on for android, and at least 3 different skins for the device maker. That's about 18 different devices I need to test. Each one requires launching a new emulator. If I need to make a change for any emulator (for example, the red button on Motoblur doesn't look right or the strok handling on HTC sense is different) I get to do it again.

Now let's talk data. What does the UI look like with a lot of data, with little data, with pathologic data? Each of those requires testing on each version.

Suddenly, we have a combinatorial explosion. This where I see the big problem with android fragmentation.

Of course, it's RIM

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't the first time RIM has put forth the impression that they don't actually want anybody developing software for their platform.

Re:Of course, it's RIM

[A Big Gnu Thrush]

I did BlackBerry development for years, and RIM was always difficult to deal with. Simple stuff like having to fill out the same web form every time I wanted to download something, even though I was logged in. Android and iOS have better tools, better support, better experience for the developer.

Re:Of course, it's RIM

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I suspect that RIM is in for a nasty surprise if they want their tablet to succeed...

So long as their target market is "ugly; but secure and comparatively inexpensive email/cellphone appliances for suits" along with a sideline in "best keyboard for kids on cheap plans, now that sidekick is dead", they can afford to have a relatively sucky dev process. Their email/BBM stuff is 1st party, and much of the 3rd party development is by and/or for deep-pocketed corporate outfits that have hellishly complex requirements and processes anyway.

The problem arises if they want to play in the consumer market(or address the longterm/strategic threat that the more 'likeable' platforms will, either natively or in 'business' versions, harden up when it comes to security and management), they are going to have a very hard time attracting casual and indie developers to bring games and whatnot with their existing process.

The fact that they've gone and put out a tablet suggests that they do want to do this(Mr. Corporate Suit already has a laptop, and everybody in his office has the same power adapters/docking stations, that runs Outlook and all his horrid windows-only enterprise applications and a blackberry for mobile email. He will be picking up a tablet why? Tablet is a consumer move...)

Buller?

[i-linux123]

", right? RIM? Bueller?" What does that mean and why does he repeat it so often? I don't understand what the problem is, he is expecting a spoon to come flying towards his mouth.

Re:Buller?

[dOxxx]

", right? RIM? Bueller?"
What does that mean and why does he repeat it so often?

Ferris Bueller's Day Off: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091042/

Re:Buller?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I didn't get it either. It was really grating on me by the end.

Re:Buller?

[Pop69]

How old are you ?

Does your Mum know that you're using her computer ?

Re:Buller?

[cultiv8]

It's from Ferris Bueller's Day Off

Re:Buller?

[i-linux123]

I'm in my mid-twenties. And you seem to be implying that I'm young becuase I don't know every crappy reference to crappy popular culture stuff, right? Pops? Buller?

Re:Buller?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I would like to imply that. I am also in my twenties, and I think you must have never left your parents basement to not know Ferris Bueller.

Re:Buller?

[Anonymous Coward]

Clueless 20-something?

Re:Buller?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously if you're in the US, Canada or UK this is one of the most popular movies of all time. They have literally played it hundreds of thousands of times on television for over 20 years, to call it crappy is appalling, it's one of the greats. Highly recommended.
Other greats you probably missed: Willow, Masters of the Universe, Adventures in Babysitting, Labyrinth, The Dark Crystal.

Re:Buller?

[scrib]

Don't feel bad... I GET the reference and it left me wondering what his problem was. It distracted from his message and the reference doesn't actually make sense in the context of the article.

It made me want to exclaim "there's no crying in RIM development!" (An equally out of place A League of Their Own reference.)

Re:Buller?

[Methuseus]

Well, seeing as I never watched much TV, I guess it's amazing that I've seen the movie like twice. I think maybe one reference to the movie is fine, but after the second one it's too much. I only got the reference because so many other things reference it. I honestly don't really think it's funny the way the writer uses it in this case

Re:Buller?

[i-linux123]

Ok, now you're making me curious so I'll watch this movie today. And no, I haven't seen any of the mentioned movies. Thnx!

Re:Buller?

[shutdown -p now]

I don't understand what the problem is, he is expecting a spoon to come flying towards his mouth.

If the spoon does just that on iOS, Android, webOS, WP7 etc, then his expectation is not unreasonable.

Re:Buller?

[Blakey Rat]

It's a movie reference. It would be funny if:
1) He used it in the correct context. (Reading a list of names.)
2) He used it only once. (The second time, the joke is dead.)

But don't worry, the article is written in about the most insipid way imaginable. I was actually interested in reading about Playbook development, as I'd been thinking about trying my own hand about it, but I couldn't read more than a few paragraphs-- I think I got to the second "RIM? Bueller?" or a little past it.

Please: I know it's just a blog, but have someone edit it for you. Please.

I disagree about the $200

[larry bagina]

$200 vs $100 isn't a big deal, particularly if this thing is targeted towards businesses. And it's $0 today. Perhaps the biggest problem with the iTunes App Store (and Google Marketplace) is the spam apps -- shit that takes little or no time to build and has no value. RSS feed apps, wallpapers of images from other games, copy/paste a wikipedia article, "howto: guides for other games, etc. Putting a price on it should eliminate some of that shit.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[GaryOlson]

Exactly. $200 is a low price to enter an already defined market of enterprise customers who have real money to spend. And enterprise customers who have real security requirements which Android hasn't even begun to address.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[Trufagus]

Agreed. $200, $100, whatever. Some fee is fine. (Mind you, they must be careful - for devs in other countries those can be large amounts).

What is much more important is the rules of the App Store. Does the App Store have simple, written rules?

I remember the story of the dev who had an app for both iPhone and Android and in his listings he mentioned that he had won an award for best Android app. He got rejected by Apple for even mentioning Android. On a practical level that is easy to fix, but it makes you feel like the App Store is some kind of arbitrary and petty despotism.

More significant was when Apple changed their rules to block all location based ads (not delivered by Apple and partners). Lots of companies were affected by that.

So, I'm not going to fret about the $200 fee. Just tell me what the rules are.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[Bogtha]

I think the idea that they are aiming towards businesses is quite relevant. iOS took off in a big way as a platform precisely because anybody could develop for it. Some of the biggest successes on the App Store are from lone developers or just a couple of people collaborating. You might very well get rid of the shit by raising the bar... but unfortunately you'll be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[Lehk228]

anybody could develop for it.*

as long as the final product is approved by St. Jobs

Re:I disagree about the $200

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think the point was the amount, but rather the rigamarole of having to provide the same information several times, and then this:

"You wanted me to print off a notarized statement of identification form, fill it out, take it to notary with government issue ID to have it notarized, and then return it to you so that you could be absolutely sure with 100% accuracy that I was who I said I was."

This is lunacy at it's best. I know apple makes you fax something, and google barely asks you to do anything, but this is just cheezeball redtape designed to make only "serious" developers even try to develop for it.

All the development environment issues are non-issue, the iPhone has the easiest "out of the box" environment to setup, and it's emulator is actually just runs the application compiled for x86. Likewise so is Windows Phone 7 (install and off you go.) Android is a bit more of a PITA (especially if you have an x64 system and were setup for x64 Java on the machine) but if you follow the instructions it works nearly out of the box as well. Don't get me started on Symbian and WebOS... while WebOS was rather easy to download, it requires installing so many frivolous things ... for development?

Here's another complaint I'm going to throw out there, and please someone run with it:
Why the fark do I have to have 3 different CVS programs... by the same software company (CVS, SVN, HG), and they all install services that run all the time as well?

Re:I disagree about the $200

[EvilIdler]

Apple don't even need you to fax anything nowadays. Everything can be filled in on iTunes Connect. RIM's process is ridiculous by comparison.

Requiring VMWare? Installing an ISO from an installer, THEN requiring you to install that in the VM? What the hell? Android's SDK, which is about one download more complicated than Apple's (in other words, not very complicated) gets you a simulator/emulator right there in the IDE. Why couldn't RIM look at a working setup like that for inspiration?

Re:I disagree about the $200

[gaspyy]

That was Android's Marketplace philosophy. $25 (on-time I think) developer fee and that's it. Self-signed (aka worthless) certificates. No review process. The result is that the store is full of shitty (and sometimes malicious) apps.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[shutdown -p now]

do you even need to register with Apple if you just want to write code and test in emulator (rather than physical device)? With WP7 you get SDK for free and only pay for unlocking device for direct app deployment. On Android you do not pay at all.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[Anonymous Coward]

Did anyone mention that iOS is $99 a year? It's not a one time thing people.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[perryizgr8]

yeah, the one-time fee is a $1000 mac.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[toriver]

Register, yes: To get into the part of developer.apple.com that has the SDK downloads (the XCode you get with the Mac does not contain the iOS SDK parts). You need to pay to get the parts that deal with code signing etc. so in order to run the app on someone's device instead of the (limited) emulator you need to pay the $99.

Re:I disagree about the $200

[toriver]

Yes, because PCs grow on trees, you can go into the woods and pick on for free!

Re:I disagree about the $200

[perryizgr8]

no because you can get a stellar pc for $500 and you can choose any vendor, any software.

Maybe

[Colin Smith]

They just don't want 100,000 fart apps, or the kinds of developers who really can't do anything more than produce fart apps.

I mean, are you just a "fart app developer"?
 

Re:Maybe

[GreyLurk]

Sure, The $20/submission fee keeps out fart apps, but the thing is that it's not $20/app. If I submit Application A and one of my users finds a bug, I obviously need to submit an update... That UPDATE costs another $20. What if you add a feature? Another $20. So basically, the model that the Blackberry App World model encourages is for you to submit bugfixes only when they're absolutely critical, and to avoid adding new features.

Re:Maybe

[CastrTroy]

Plus, $200 is only a very tiny amount of money to pay out for software development. The Playbook you need to buy to test the thing out on would cost much more. I'm assuming they have an emulator, but that's not sufficient for full testing. You need the real deal if you want to test your app under real world conditions. $200 is less than a day's salary for most developers. Sure it's more than the other guys charge, but it's still quite acceptable. They probably do want to prevent fart apps. I wish the other smart phone platforms would do this as well.

Re:Maybe

[Daniel_Staal]

You assume all developers are paid developers working on a salary.

For large portions of the iApp ecosystem, this is not true. RIM has basically told the hobbyist developer to go away with that up-front fee.

Re:Maybe

[syockit]

An update is not a new title (unless you chose to do so), so no extra $20 incurred here.

Blackberry is over.

[Anonymous Coward]

Only corporate drones and hipsters use blackberries. Everyone else has gone to better stuff. Nokia was defeated, now Blackberry. Get an ipad, you know that you are an Apple fanboy in the closet.

Re:Blackberry is over.

[Midnight Thunder]

The company I work for even has started allowing people to use their iOS based systems for work e-mail and calendar. The only catch is that you have allow them to remote wipe the device if it is stolen.

Re:Blackberry is over.

[Dan541]

Is it really a catch, considering how much personal information is in phones these days it's probably in most people's best interest to have a stolen device wiped.

Whining, nothing more

[gaspyy]

Random whining programmer thinks process X is too complicated for him.

For me it was a non-issue. It took me exactly 2 hours to port my game (http://itunes.apple.com/app/sparkchess/id398133128) from iPad/Android to Playbook and test it, including installing the simulator. The signing process was a little more complex but really nothing fancy. If anything, on the whole I found the process faster and easier than publishing on iOS.

It took about one week for the app to be approved and it's now in AppWorld.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[kangsterizer]

in any case the $200 per 10 apps is a rip off, even if they'd streamline the process.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[opportunityisnowhere]

Granted, the letter might be a little over the top, but he makes a lot of valid points. RIM's developer website is notoriously terrible, the organization sucks, it typically takes forever to find what you're looking for, and like the guy said, you have to enter your personal info over and over anytime you visit the site. RIM's infrastructure is plagued with issues, their signing servers go down routinely and AppWorld has constant hiccups. If they want to seriously complete with Android and iOS marketplaces, they have a lot of work to do.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? Tell me more about SparkChess By Media Division SRL (http://itunes.apple.com/app/sparkchess/id398133128).

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Tharsman]

Do those 2 hours include the entire time spent configuring the environment for the first time and the time it took you to get notarized papers and send them to RIM?

Re:Whining, nothing more

[gaspyy]

It's a non-issue: for now it's totally free.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[gaspyy]

Do those 2 hours include the entire time spent configuring the environment for the first time and the time it took you to get notarized papers and send them to RIM?

Yes, the 2 hours included installing the SDK and reading through the documentation as well as installing the simulator. They have step-by-step tutorials for this.

As a company, I didn't have to get a notarized paper, I only had to provide a scanned company registration, just like with Apple. Approval time was 2 days I think.

Getting the app signed was a 3 step process - ask for permission, get a file, run 2 command line tools.

Of course, it's much simpler with Android, where you can use a self-signed certificate, but for a user, I think it's beneficial to have some sort of verification process for vendors. I don't want my apps lumped together with scammers.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Anonymous Coward]

It pretty much eliminates the need to moderate for crap apps...why would anyone pay $20 to release a crap app? They probably wouldn't...they'll take their time and make something creative/useful to help guarantee that they'll get tat $20 back! It also helps prevent free apps..which tend to be low quality or otherwise sponsored versions of their costly clones.

If they don't have any money makers out of those 10 applications to cover the $200 (that's only $20 each or $40 if you including the demo)...then aren't they're quite literally pumping out apps that nobody thinks is worth anything? I have no problem with that, as a developer or a user.

At least that's where I think they're going with all of this.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Anonymous Coward]

2 hours to install a new SDK, read through the SDK documentation, and port a game to a new OS they've never seen or used before?

Bullshit!

Does anyone who's an actual developer believe this?

Re:Whining, nothing more

[gaspyy]

You can find SparkChess in AppStore, Android Marketplace, AppWorld and Google Webstore (no.2 paid app).

Show me something you've done, Mr. Anonymous Coward and then you can call bullshit on me.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Anonymous Coward]

Random reply from some programmer charging a lot of money for a yet another chess game with a poor GUI. No wonder you can't see the problem with RIMs dev environment.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe you; the interface looks rushed.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Tharsman]

As a company, I didn't have to get a notarized paper, I only had to provide a scanned company registration, just like with Apple. Approval time was 2 days I think.

As a company, I think you stand in a very different platform than the writer of the article. As an individual, it does seem a bit hostile to go through such a process. It did cross my mind that his point may be mute as a company, but also, as a company, a lot of programmers would still develop for the platform because they were told to do so (for the exception of one man companies that the IRS considers illegal, you will have to hire a janitor or something to work around the 1 employee rule and not face any retaliation.) The single hobbyist programmer, though, is very important for these markets, and RIM is indeed making it hard for them.

As for "scammers", I'd say their app approval process should be the one handling that, just the way Apple does.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Anonymous Coward]

...his point may be mute...

moot is the word you're looking for... unless you mean to say that his point is unable to speak.

Re:Whining, nothing more

[Anonymous Coward]

That's $200 flat fee, not a recurring $100 per annum charge. In two years, your overhead is now less assuming you have a few core applications (which most do)

sounds like windows phone

[Anonymous Coward]

200 dollars early on, now eur 113, notorized and all, even passport send, w-8 (incl. wrong address), i-tin taking months and no notice of problem until after then repeat multi-month delay. one can go on and on but the incompetence is mind blowing. go google.

Re:sounds like windows phone

[andrea.sartori]

i beg your pardon?

bush era theft of freedom/privacy to be undone?

[Anonymous Coward]

instead of increased under the current regime? if the egyptians can do it?

My other favorite part

[pikine]

although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge. ... You, on the other hand, have decided that for $200, a developer should only get to publish 10 apps, and it will cost $200 for every additional 10 apps. ... After getting all my personal information in, and being thoroughly disgusted with your ignorant pricing scheme, I’m now ready to start the actual process of developing.

Their pricing scheme is not ignorant, but certainly arrogant. On one hand, RIM knows that popularity is a chicken and egg problem. If they don't have apps, they won't have users, and if there are no users, there will be no apps. They want some apps to show up at the beginning to seed users, but later on they want more apps to be paid. I don't know if the pricing scheme will achieve what they want. According to Distimo last year, Blackberry had a paid/free app ratio on par with Apple iOS, but has the most expensive average paid app price.

Sarcasm aside, as it stands, the Playbook SDK is complete crap.

One has to sympathize with RIM's internal software engineers if that is the same tool they have to work with to develop their own apps. This is not an indication that RIM wants to turn developers away, but an indication that their software development process is not very efficient. The complicated process is not only a turn-off for external developers, but also their internal ones. The question is, is this the best process they could come up with, or is it that good ideas or designs in the company have problem becoming realized?

Re:My other favorite part

[GreyLurk]

One has to sympathize with RIM's internal software engineers if that is the same tool they have to work with to develop their own apps. This is not an indication that RIM wants to turn developers away, but an indication that their software development process is not very efficient. The complicated process is not only a turn-off for external developers, but also their internal ones. The question is, is this the best process they could come up with, or is it that good ideas or designs in the company have problem becoming realized?

Honestly, the dev tools for the Flash/AIR platform are pretty solid, but the RIM SDKs are pretty horribly architected. It's loosely based on the Adobe Flex APIs, but it ignores all of the conventions set up in the Flex APIs, and isn't even internally consistent with itself. Half of the reason for using a Flash-based API is to have the built in smooth transitions (Fade, slide, etc..), but for whatever reason, the QNX components don't work with the built in transitions. You can build an app without QNX components, sure, but it'll run way slower, and doesn't blend in with the QNX UI.

And let's even look at the QNX "standard UI". Oh wait, there isn't one. The only example of an application that we have to loosely try to base our UI around is the web browser that TFA mentions. Of course, none of the standard UI metaphors that the browser uses are built in to the API? The "tab drawer" that happens when you swipe down? It's fully custom constructed, you'd have to write the whole thing yourself from primitive UI Rectangles and hand-built transitions and event handlers if you wanted to have a similar thing in your app. Take a look at Android or iOS, where tabs, accordions, toast notifications, and view-stacks are built in metaphors in the UI. I don't know when it's going to all be fixed, but it's in serious need of massive repair.

Re:My other favorite part

[davester666]

It's average paid app price is the most expensive [compared with iOS, Android, WP7] because...the minimum fee you can charge is $2.99.

Re:My other favorite part

[shutdown -p now]

Speaking of chicken and egg problem when playing catch-up - just yesterday, Microsoft announced that the limit of 5 submissions of free aps per $99/yr developer subscription is now raised to 100. Which is to say that before you can make money on developers, you must first have developers...

Re:My other favorite part

[narcc]

.the minimum fee you can charge is $2.99.

I can only assume that you've imagined this.

There are lot's of BB apps that cost less than $2.99 -- some 1.99 some 0.99 and some are free.

Re:My other favorite part

[davester666]

No, that's what came back from googling "blackberry app store minimum price".

For example: http://crackberry.com/2-99-minimum-paid-app-price-blackberry-app-world

However, it appears that they have since changed the minimum price since they first opened the store to match Apple's pricing levels. It is not clear when they did this.

Re:My other favorite part

[narcc]

It is not clear when they did this.

At least a few months before you posted your comment. It's not like they changed the price after you hit submit.

apple fanboi blog posted on slashdot...

[Anonymous Coward]

8 out of 10 posts are about how wonderful and correct apple is, and how horrible and wrong everyone else is...

• You Win, RIM! (Apple is better!)
• What's Wrong With Being Wrong?
• Why Apple Doesn't Need Feature Parity
• $4 iPad Stand
• Quick Thoughts on the iPad
• A Bad Day To Be An Apple Hater
• Gizmodo's Trade Secret Liability (Apple should sue!)
• Cross Compilers & Public APIs (Banning them on Apple devices was smart!)
• The Moderate’s Position on iPad Openness
• Rupert Murdoch and The Laws Of Economics

RIM is not long for this world.

[LoudMusic]

RIM is not long for this world.

What? RIM is being obtuse with developers?

[Chas]

NO WAY MAN!

This is status quo for them.

Let's just say I'm NOT enamored of the platform and let it go at that.

Then again, my experience with several third-party BB app developers has been less than stellar as well. But it'd really help if RIM's infrastructure wasn't such a shoddy hodge-podge to begin with.

Come on! It's still beta!

[quetwo]

This is still all beta software he is dealing with. The platform is still not complete, and RIM is still tweaking the process for creating applications for their new, still unreleased tablet. This is why it's called bleeding-edge -- it's because it's not polished and you may bleed a bit working with it. That is also why those who take the pains and actually publish to the AppWorld first are the ones who are most rewarded. If your app is the first on the market, you will be most visible on opening day, and since it is still free -- you really are only loosing time.

On another note -- there are plenty of walk-throughs available when working with this beta software, from both RIM and Adobe. RIM has also been offering nearly weekly developer web-casts on how to work with it too. Sure, it's not as polished as the iOS development platform (you know, with it being Apple only, certificate issues, profile issues and publishing issues aside), but it does work.

Re:Come on! It's still beta!

[blincoln]

This is still all beta software he is dealing with.

You could say that about all of RIM's software. I can virtually guarantee that the experience will not improve significantly between now and the "release". Or ever, most likely.

Can we let RIM die, already ?

[billcopc]

I'm going to be a dick, as usual, and ask why people still bother with RIM in 2011.

I'm in the frustrating position of having to develop (admittedly simple) apps for iOS, Android, BB and WinPhone7. After experimenting with all four platforms, I found iOS by far the most "pleasant" to work with, as both user and developer. Now this was the first time I ever worked with a Mac, and I was pleasantly surprised by XCode and its tight integration with the SDK. The whole drag&drop thing between interfaces and code was a bit of a mindfuck, but it does make sense once you learn it. More importantly, almost everything you learn for the iPhone carries over to the iPad, and the workflow is identical.

Android was a not-too-distant second, their Eclipse toolkit is decent, if slightly disjointed, but app performance and usability is greatly dependent on the actual phone hardware, and it seems 99% of them are utter garbage except for that coveted Samsung Galaxy.

BB's interface makes me want to throw puppies in a wood chipper, and the JDE is a throwback to the 90's, lacking many creature comforts found in modern IDEs. Code signing is a pain in the ass, and even though the JDE said I had no "restricted items" in my code, it still refused to run on a real phone. And that emulator ? Fuck sake, do I really need to "boot" the emulator every single time ? Slowest dev cycle ever! I'm just grateful they used the WebKit browser like the other two, so once I got my hybrid app to compile and run, I was pretty much done, though I dread the day the client hires me to build the 2.0 version. The actual phones seem to be plagued with stability issues, freezing or losing network connectivity for no apparent reason, and I regularly encountered an issue where it simply refused to sync, requiring a reboot of the phone, and killing of the host-side tasks that were stuck in limbo. Just messy all around.

And finally we have Windows Phone 7. Development was actually decent, maybe because I was already familiar with Visual Studio, maybe because they significantly improved things since WinMobile 6. Now the browser, on the other hand, is a steamer. Apparently it's "based on" IE7, well to my untrained eye it's based on Netscape 3.0, because the damn thing can't compute HTML5, nor CSS, nor half of jQuery. It's ass. I don't care for the phone's UI, though it seems sleek and more streamlined than all the others.

So to me, it seems the Blackberry is sorely outclassed. They were early to the game, but failed to keep up with the times. So I reiterate my question: why in hell are people still buying and supporting this dinosaur of a platform, and the near-sighted company behind it ?

Re:Can we let RIM die, already ?

[opportunityisnowhere]

Users stick with the platform because it works, it still does what it was designed to do extremely well and that's what most enterprise users are looking for. That's users though, RIM is losing developer support left and right. I attended a local dev group meeting and I was the only mobile dev that still supported RIM in the bunch.

Re:Can we let RIM die, already ?

[Anonymous Coward]

As soon as iOS/Android get real granular app permissions that *I* have control over (not the app developer), I'll jump ship in a heartbeat.
Example: You can either have access to my personal information OR access to the internet, pick one.

It's amazing the number of apps out there with the "default" permission-set of "EVERYTHING".

Re:Can we let RIM die, already ?

[Anonymous Coward]

RIM makes great phone hardware. That's why. I would (and do) take having a communication device in my pocket over a device that can run many apps any day of the week.

Re:Can we let RIM die, already ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because 99.99% of the people buying BB are not app developers? And for those people, a BB does what they want? I know it is hard to comprehend for a shallow-minded computer engineer/developer since you don't interact much with PEOPLE.

Re:Can we let RIM die, already ?

[Anonymous Coward]

hahahahhahahaha

yes, governments and medical companies are really going to let employees use devices with horrible encryption for company data.

RIM may have lost out for the average consumer, but for enterprise, it's still king.

Re:Can we let RIM die, already ?

[Fallout2man]

You want to know Why Blackberry's network is so horrible? RIM routes 100% of your traffic straight to them before it gets to go to the regular Internet. Why do you think you need to run a separate MDS daemon to connect to the internet on your Blackberry Sim? It's because that SIM's looking for a hardcoded path to a RIM server so it can use BES. Admitedly BES had some good stuff it did back in the day, but right now it exists for one and only one reason.

Saudi Arabia, India and who only knows who else all want irrevocable backdoors into the Blackberry, and RIM can provide that because they've built their entire phone and its ability to access phone or internet features around requiring a constantly active-connection between RIM's servers, the Phone, and RIM's special crypto packages to secure the whole thing (which oh-so conveniently carry backdoors.)

Why is RIM still alive? Well, that's obvious. There are some things in this world not even Steve Jobs will do for money. :p

Re:Can we let RIM die, already ?

[billcopc]

Also, cocks.

But seriously, us shallow-minded developers are too busy trying to make these things easy for PEOPLE to use, and BB gets in our way. But don't let that get in the way of your dickless anonymous trolling. Carry on, squirt.

It's not even that hard

[Rossman]

As someone currently developing an app for the Playbook I can tell you that article is mostly b/s.

It's hard to defend the RIM setup, because it's a bit absurd, but it's not nearly as bad as this guy is making it out to be.

Let's take a couple things off the table right away:
> pricing - well yeah i guess that sucks for but now it's free so don't worry about it
> AIR SDK installer - well he can't put this on RIM because this is an Adobe package. honestly is installing an SDK hard for any developer?

As for the rest of his rant, if he just used Flash Builder instead of compiling from the command line he would have quite easily been able to deploy an app to the simulator without any problems. You can get a free license for it from Adobe as well. It's a reasonably ok workflow, and if you've used eclipse before you will have a good grasp of what to do.

Honestly my biggest complaint is how incomplete the simulator seems to be at this point, there is still loads of the API that does not work in the simulator, and last update I got they completely broke sound :(

Re:It's not even that hard

[gaspyy]

I agree with you, and just to make it clearer, I DID compile from commandline and it was very straightforward. As mentioned elsewhere, my app was ported from iOS and Android to Playbook in a couple of hours and within a week it was signed and approved in the AppWorld.

Re:It's not even that hard

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

ou can get a free license for it from Adobe as well

Whoah, you can? How? (I went w/ HTML5 b/c I didn't realize this...)

Re:It's not even that hard

[Rossman]

Well you can either get this, if you qualify:

http://www.adobe.com/devnet-archive/flex/free/

Or you can just download eclipse use that, the command line compiler and SDK are free.

Re:It's not even that hard

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

I knew about the command line tools, but not about the other options - thanks for the info.

Ignorant

[swalve]

Standard gimme gimme gimme crap. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the correct place for userland software the home directory? At least in the *NIX world, anyway. One user can't be going around polluting the whole filesystem with their barely alpha software. What? You're the only user? Then why aren't you root? Or why are you using a multiuser OS?

Listen, smart guy, developing is hard. That's why professionals get paid money to do it. That's why developers who have the patience to jump through the hoops of developing for a yet to be released piece of hardware are rewarded by being at the top of the list and ready to go when it is released.

How easy was it to develop for iOS before the iPhone ever hit the streets? I could be wrong, but I'm betting it was impossible.

RIM makes their money off of being a reliable TOOL for communication. Not by being a toy that you can make calls on if you hold it just right. If your app isn't going to sell enough to make the $200 investment pay off, RIM doesn't want you hanging around stinking up the joint.

Mac OS X, VirtualBox, and the EULA

[tepples]

Or you could just use a VM of a mac

Mac OS X in VirtualBox supposedly violates the EULA of Mac OS X unless you run it on a Mac.

Re:Mac OS X, VirtualBox, and the EULA

[toriver]

Well, if the license says "Apple branded hardware", just affix one of the stickers you got in the Snow Leopard box on your PC... hey instant branding!

Re:Mac OS X, VirtualBox, and the EULA

[tepples]

Psystar tried something like this and lost in court.

Paramount is in the MPAA

[tepples]

Anonymous Coward writes:

I think you must have never left your parents basement to not know Ferris Bueller.

That or boycotting Paramount.

Got one word for this guy: WUSS!

[SmallFurryCreature]

Until you had to pull drivers from install CD's from outofdate versions on a korean site in chinese, to even get a input device working you payed thousands of dollars for the hardware, you ain't got a right to talk.

Oh come on, who here hasn't experienced FAR FAR worse in the past? Fill in a form three times? Ah, you poor baby. Ever had to fax your passport to some backwater place like the US back when all faxes didn't work with each other? Then find out you been trying their BBS because you got an old number? How about having to download 100mb of data on a stand alone PC with a 28.8 modem with only floppies available and no option to install any software for a fix that needs to go life NOW!

How about going into a server room to find the case padlocked by some past sys admin and NOBODY noticed in years, got to love quality hardware. BTW, sparks from an angle grinder do not go well with a dusty environment and electronics... OOPS!

RIM released a BETA that isn't all that convenient and stable... OH NO! Then don't develop for it, don't develop for one of the biggest platform that thanks to PING at least in europe is selling like hotcakes. The kids don't have iPhones, they got RIM and are typing away like mad on those keyboards.

As for limitting the amount of apps, maybe the just don't want their marketplace absolutely flooded with crap. Really, Android market gives me the warm fuzzy feeling of the days of finding software on tucows, but without that sense of high quality and service...

Basically, get of my lawn you whipper snapper. In my day we had to crawl uphill both ways throught ten meter snow and blazing heat to get a floppy that would work once if only it had been the right size for a piece of software that refused to run with any other software on our DOS machines, and we LIKED IT! Made us what we are today.

Bitter.

Re:Got one word for this guy: WUSS!

[Anonymous Coward]

don't develop for one of the biggest platform that thanks to PING at least in europe is selling like hotcakes. The kids don't have iPhones, they got RIM and are typing away like mad on those keyboards.

  Really? I'm in Europe and haven't noticed any of this.
The only RIM products I see people using here are crusty business types on their equally crusty BBs, and that's the image people around here have of RIM, they're something from the past.
And kids love them?
  All I heard from friends and work collegues late last year was how their kids wanted an iPhone or Android phones for Xmas.

Re:Got one word for this guy: WUSS!

[SmallFurryCreature]

Do you travel by public transport? Read up on PING. Rim's are very distinctive with their qwerty keypad that isn't a slideout. But it might depend on income, PING is cheap and I the kids I see are not the type who can afford an iPhone. This is in Holland by the way.

Re:Got one word for this guy: WUSS!

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely agree. This guy is just whining. I've already written several PlayBook apps and it's was one of the easiest things I've ever done. And it cost me nothing.

Re:Got one word for this guy: WUSS!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you find a platform to be a pita, chances are that other developers do so as well. Thus, the application market for such platform will be slightly smaller and as a consequence fewer of its customers will buy it because of its huge app market. Smaller app market means less profitable applications and less dev time for the system. GOTO 20.

Every mobile platform maker likes to think that they are the important one for whom developers can afford to bend over, but the fact is that there can be only so many winners. Currently, RIM doesn't seem to be one of them unless you're looking after some specific set of customers with specific needs.

Oh, and get off my boss's golf course.

Compare to Nintendo

[tepples]

but unfortunately you'll be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Nintendo manages to print money despite its stated policy of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater".

FREE BLACKBERRY PLAYBOOK TABLET FOR DEVELOPERS!!!

[naz404]

Hi guys.

All complaining and whining of that guy aside, I would like to mention that people who develop Blackberry Tablet OS apps right now that get accepted into the Blackberry app world (app store) by March 15 will receive *FREE* Blackberry Playbook tablets.

Looks like dev license fees will be a little hefty after this initial "seed" period, so take advantage now and sign up now for the developer program even if you don't plan to dev in the short term just to take advantage of the free license you'll get now.

For those who don't want to gamble it all on Blackberry Tablet with your time and money, Adobe AIR is an excellent solution as AIR apps are qualified for the ongoing FREE BLACKBERRY PLAYBOOK FOR EACH ACCEPTED APP developer promo ongoing 'til March 15.

AIR runs on Windows, OSX, Linux, Android 2.2+, Blackberry Tablet OS and as Apple iOS native apps (iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch via the Adobe iOS Packager) so your app will have a lot of bases covered. AIR is pretty nice too because Actionscript 3 syntax/structure is pretty much Java now and easy to pick up, and you can also create AIR apps using the free open source Flex SDK, which is pretty much like the JDK except you output .SWF or AIR apps with it. Here's a free PDF ebook from O'Reilly on getting started with Flex.

Here's some stuff to get you started on AIR/Blackberry Tab: 1, 2, 3.

From what I've heard, for each app you make that is accepted in the Blackberry App world, you will receive 1 free Blackberry Tab via a redeemable coupon at Amazon.com and all you will have to pay for is shipping. Hey, free blackberry tablet is free blackberry tablet right? Take advantage now! Cheerios and hope to have helped! :)

RIM is stupid.

[Dr. Evil]

I tried to set myself up to do some development on the Blackberry platform, and gave up too. It seems they want to keep a short leash on the apps. Blackberry has always been about security, control and business. I would imagine that by introducing such a controlled platform, it's not fart-apps which they're worried about, but trojans, rootkits, etc.

I don't know if the strategy will work. History has shown it will not.

What I do know though is that $200 fee locks out all the under-18 developers out of the market, making it a platform at best one where old people sell established ideas to young people. It clearly locks out all the interesting innovation.

I have a Blackberry, work pays for it. I hate it. I feel like there's a second dot-com mobile boom going on and my Blackberry is making me stupid, behind the times and illiterate. I can't even sync the thing with my ical, my personal ldap directory, I can't write Yelp reviews, Facebook is crap, webbrowsing is useless, the service is expensive, it's a POS.

The only thing it can do is corporate email. Everything else is garbage.

Re:RIM is stupid.

[Dr. Evil]

Oh and it does a good job at my personal email and Google maps. Google apps is great.

Re:RIM is stupid.

[metalmaster]

What I do know though is that $200 fee locks out all the under-18 developers out of the market, making it a platform at best one where old people sell established ideas to young people. It clearly locks out all the interesting innovation.

By "innovation", im assuming you mean the thousands of fart apps, hundreds of babe of the day(bikini or nude), and my personal fav "Poop locator." This barrier for entry is going to make apps pricier than on other platforms, but its going to discourage nonsense as well. The only problem i see with this is companies not wanting to port their apps

Re:RIM is stupid.

[Dr. Evil]

"The only problem i see with this is companies not wanting to port their apps"

That's a pretty big problem. Especially when apps are marketed and developed natively on other platforms first.

were you talking about Git?

[JimTheta]

Sometimes the gap between developers and users (even when those users are other developers) can be more of a chasm.

You're talking about Git right?

Hate bait

[Anonymous Coward]

Random guy whining about no-biggy issues. What a big deal! Yeah, I'm sure there is no one complaining about the Android process or Apple process. Oh but this is RIM, an effective name for hate bait.

(Is this what Slashdot has become?)

Re:What? RIM is being obtuse with developers?

[blincoln]

"What? RIM is being obtuse with developers? NO WAY MAN!"

I came here to say this. RIM's "support" of third-party developers (and system administrators, etc.) has always been the worst, which is why there are virtually no decent third-party (or even first-party) applications for their platform.

I had a good laugh when they announced "AppWorld", because I knew there was no way they were going to offer something as mobile-developer-friendly as Apple, Google, or even Microsoft. It's the same level of spin on a crappy product as Qualcomm trying to portray "BREW" as being anything like Java.

I'm also glad to know they still haven't fixed that ridiculous issue with your website where you are prompted for personal information every time you download a file, and there is no way to get the form to remember what you entered 30 seconds ago when you downloaded a different file. Hey, guys, it was doing that six years ago. Maybe you should take a look into it?

Total Whinner

[JavaTHut]

I've made an app using the Adobe Flex Builder Burrito Blackberry sdk and thought it was great. Better than iOS even. Essentially, his argument boils down to saying "they made me use VMWare for a virtual machine and I'm an idiot who can't differentiate the free VMWare Player that I'm given a download link to on the blackberry site from VMWare Workstation, which I'd need to use a trial version of."

I will gladly have to click three separate download links (oh no!) in order to get a more exact desktop emulation experience than be stuck with an emulator that just shows the target device screen resolution and no other changes. Even on Android Emulator I had an issue once where the emulator said everything was great and then running on the device, key information was placed off-screen. Dealing with that was far worse than having to click download 3 times.

This guy should be thankful he's never had to develop for Nokia OVI store. As for Blackberry, they can probably be thankful not to have to deal with this guy anymore.

Re:Total Whinner

[ilsaloving]

Um, you did read the part where he said he was using a Mac and that VMWare Player doesn't exist for OSX?

I guess you skipped over that part. VMWare Fusion is the only OSX product VMWare currently puts out, and it is not free.

It doesn't look like he tried to import the image into VirtualBox which IS free. That might have been a viable option, but as I haven't tried I can't say for certain.

RIM is clearly targeting business

[File_Breaker]

It seems to me the ranter doesn't get that RIM doesn't care about having a mass of junk apps which are usually the result of have a low bar for entry into the app store. Not to say their app store for their phones is amazing (I own a BB Torch that I do love), but RIM is mostly targeting big business and government where when they need an app that's not already part of the system, they want something that works well (well enough if we are talking government) and are willing to pay a significant amount.

Also complaining about all the forms ignores that RIM has to deal with a bunch of export controls because of the encryption algorithms used in their software. While I'm not 100% sure, I do believe that they are required by law to have you put in all of your information for each download. Which is why they ask for all of your information every time you download a new OS image for their phones as well.

I do hope however that they make their development process a bit more streamlined, but I won't be sad if I don't end up seeing 1000 tetris clones or hundreds of other mindless games.

I am still holding off on a tablet purchase until I see the PlayBook alongside the upcoming Android tablet. I've already decided against the iPad after having used my friends' iPads.

I applied for a RIM job once.

[orphiuchus]

But it turned out shitty.

What?

Re:I applied for a RIM job once.

[Anonymous Coward]

But it turned out shitty.

What?

as in "I didn't get the job."

Re:I applied for a RIM job once.

[orphiuchus]

But it turned out shitty.

What?

as in "I didn't get the job."

... yea, why not.

Tool

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope you remembered to ask yourself, "Is this good for the company?"

Prior Experience Attempting to work with RIM

[crog]

In the early 2000s, my firm was trying to work with RIM to develop apps for the Blackberry platform. RIM set the bar very high on accepting partners and our take was that the really didn't want (or felt they needed) external apps developers. This accounts for the paltry set of apps available on the BB in the pre-iPhone days. And those that were available were expensive. They have ambitious plans but I think their corporate arrogance will ultimately lead them to failure. If they haven't arrived already.

Re:FREE BLACKBERRY PLAYBOOK TABLET FOR DEVELOPERS!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yawn. Meanwhile, people who develop iOS apps will receive *FREE* cash from the sky.

WTF? Just a single SDK on the ipad?

[Anonymous Coward]

With the iPad, all I need to do is download a single installer that contains the IDE, the SDK, and the simulator. Youâ(TM)ve decided that itâ(TM)s better to make me download the Adobe AIR SDK, the Playbook SDK, and the Playbook simulator in three separate downloads. Itâ(TM)s not optimal, but Iâ(TM)m sure you have your reasons, right? RIM? Bueller?

WTF?
Dude wait...

Correct me if my wrong but for apple you just dont need a SDK and voila, you need to FIRST have Apple Mac (R), considering that you wanna invest low and buy yourself a mac-mini (currently 699 usd) to start developing its pretty expensive to be and apple appworld developer considering that with RIM i can use my currently using platform and also with RIM i can have more potential to reach enterprise customers (Which will not buy just one single license but hundreds) then is obviously that even that the process sucks its more cheap, could be more profitable and hell yeah i dont need to invest 99 bucks everytime apple want me to upgrade my OS to get the latest SDK for the latest apple device...

RIM is like Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much.

anglocentric popular culture reference (Re:Buller?

[mah!]

This seems to be one of those anglocentric popular culture references - where most of the rest of the world knows, or cares, very little about.
But since most native anglophones seldom speak fluently any other language, it's not easy for them to figure out what is or isn't relevant outside of their countries.
As in "Foreign language education: if ‘scandalous’ in the 20th century, what will it be in the 21st century?" by Eeon E. Panetta.

Barrier to entry is good for the rest of us

[Anonymous Coward]

The author's point is taken, but to be quite frank, good riddance to you and to others like you who don't bother to surmount the "obstacles" that exist for this platform. But as has been mentioned, this is very beta software.

I don't mean to sound crass, but the reality is that you and other developers who don't bother with PlayBook aren't competing with me and my apps that are in AppWorld. So don't bother to write for the platform, I appreciate it, it's less competition for me and those of us to do bother with the platform.

If you've ever done any business strategy reading, "barriers to entry" for a business keeps competition away and makes your product or service that much more defensible.

Re:anglocentric popular culture reference (Re:Bull

[i-linux123]

There are several reasons to this misunderstanding. When writing to, or speaking with, people in your native tongue, the last thing one things about is that the person on the other end might live on the other side of the globe. I had to mention it because the voice in my head that was reading the article sounded annoying. I think author of the article is aware that everyone might not get the reference, and is targeting US readers.

Development and deployment for BB handsets is free

[egork]

I totally hear what the article author is saying about the Playbook.
Just to give BB credit, where it's due, development and deployment for BB _handsets_ is actually free. The only thing you have to pay for is for inclusion into the BB app store. And this, only after the 10th release currently.
For the handsets you need a key to sing your apps if you want to use BB API. The keys registration fee was lifted just recently. To deploy you can put your app on any web-server and share the link for installation.
Unlike iPhone there is no jailbreaking needed for "out of app store" install.
I have just written a BB app and offering it for free under GPL for installation here

Really?

[egork]

If BB platform becomes unattractive for lack of apps and goes belly up there will be nothing to compete for.

Re:Really?

[narcc]

If BB platform becomes unattractive for lack of apps and goes belly up there will be nothing to compete for.

I still don't understand this argument. RIM never really did well in the "consumer" market, the Storm being their most notable flop. Business users, however, have always been their bread and butter, and it's an area where they still outshine the competition.

On the business front, there are tons of top-quality business-related apps. Not that you really need most of them, as the built-in software adequately meets the needs of most users. Add Documents To Go and you've got a nearly complete workstation in your pocket -- with unmatched security, top-quality hardware, award-winning email & messaging, and the best mobile keyboard around. If that wasn't enough, there are tons of other high-quality apps for various purposes that actually make you more productive like EzBillMaker, ProOnGo, numerous CC processing apps, faxing apps, specialized calculators, and more.

Quality over quantity -- that's what matters in the working world. App World also makes it very easy to spot the low-quality apps, with their "star" ratings and quick access to comments, finding a quality app that meets your needs is quick and easy. I've yet to be disappointed with any well-recommended app -- nor have I been unable to find an app to suit my various needs.

Sure, RIM may never win-over the average consumer with their boring hardware and anemic selection of fart apps, but that really isn't important to the core of their market. For getting real work done, RIMs products are still unmatched.

The number of apps is a red-herring -- just a way for the fans of iOS or Android to divert attention away from a competitor that is succeeding in a niche in which their favorite product isn't well suited. I don't really understand why people feel the need to do this -- different products are good at different things. RIM has great business products, Android has great consumer products and a diverse range of hardware, Apple has a couple shiny baubles. It's not like anyone has to "win" or anything. Diversity in the marketplace is healthy and good for everyone.

That said, on the tablet front, it's not a matter of competing in different market segments -- the Playbook is a really amazing product that both business and home users will likely find very attractive. For business users, especially existing BB users, the Playbook has an amazing set of features that make it stand out -- and it's IT friendly, paired to your already-managed BB, IT need do nothing extra. Home users will appreciate the smooth interface (even under heavy multi-tasking), solid hardware, full-web experience (which includes full Flash support), and the ability to use their (BB) phones current data plan. Check out some videos, it's a very impressive device.

I expect Android to catch-up to the Playbook before the end of the year, but Apple users aren't likely to see the iPad advance that far until v3. So I can see why Apple fans might feel threatened by RIM; it's important that their product be (or thought to be) the "best".

Suffice it to say, the death of RIM has been greatly exaggerated. The idea that they're destined to die from a lack of apps is ... just silly.

Re:Really?

[egork]

I am working in a big corp myself. Pretty much everybody who can get an iPhone drops BB.
Only the geeks like me keep the BB. :-) :-(
And for me the reason is twofold:
- I am a data analyst so my email and data really have to be secure.
- And I am a Linux user at home and at work need to have Windows. So no Apple laptop and no use of iTunes too.
My case is really a exception where I work, though.
So no, general office folks don't care about all this stuff and get themselves an iPhone.

Re:Really?

[narcc]

So no, general office folks don't care about all this stuff and get themselves an iPhone.

Isn't that my point, really? Office folks who don't really need to do work on their phone find the BB less attractive. When you need to get actual work done while on the go, the BB is the better option.

I've seen some people run two phones, hoping that their iPhone would become a viable replacement -- and ultimately drop it when they find that it is best suited as an entertainment device and not a work tool. (Attractive for long flights, not so attractive when you need to handle a few documents and manage a lot of email.)

The BB Torch offers a good balance between work and play, but the not-as-good-as-the-Bold slide-out keyboard still leaves serious users wishing for their old Bold or Curve. Touch-screens kill productivity -- and heavy business users learn that lesson quick when they switch to an iPhone or similar smartphone (often, they don't wait for the contract to expire before replacing it with the latest BB.)

That said, the BB isn't as good an entertainment device as other offerings so I would expect "business" users who don't really need or use their phone for anything other than making phone calls and catching the occasional email opting for an entertainment-oriented phone.

amiguous

[timothy]

"Amiguous" sounds like a useful term -- for when you aren't sure if someone's being friendly or not ;)

timothy

So...

[Tridus]

It's *almost* as bad as trying to develop iOS apps as a Windows user?

QNX

[gilesjuk]

QNX is not something many people have experience with and choosing that seemed odd, it's bound to make developing for this device a bit harder.

Re:QNX

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, except that the development tools at issue are either Adobe AIR or an HTML5-like environment that RIM dubbed WebWorks. So QNX really doesn't matter.

Re:FREE BLACKBERRY PLAYBOOK TABLET FOR DEVELOPERS!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not an official response by any stretch, but if you actually read their agreements and FAQ:

- Free vendor registration for your first ten apps
- Limit of one free tablet per vendor
- If they decide your app is too trivial, you may not get a tablet
- If they decide a particular category has too many apps, they may stop granting tablets

Which just leaves the problem that the PlayBook developer tools are the most mangled pile of utter crap I have ever had the misfortune to use. My recommendations: Use pure Adobe AIR as much as possible, avoid the BB APIs and particularly WebWorks like the plague. Have patience with the simulator and it will eventually run for a few minutes without crashing or glitching.

Notarized forms are so minor that I am embarrassed for the people whining about them. But the rest of it? RIM couldn't hire me to write apps using that crap.

they're giving away free playbooks...

[Anonymous Coward]

To developers who make an app for it before its released. I think that is enough incentive to ensure they want people developing for it.

Some Clariifcation

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

I am a developer for the BlackBerry platform; and am also developing a PlayBook app. (There's little reason NOT to - get a free PlayBook out of the deal, AND the app will be compat w/ ipad and android w/ minimal mods, b/c it's HTML5/webkit based). The author does raise many valid points, but I think some clarification is needed on a couple of them. SO here goes...

I do, however, notice that although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge

First, if you register for free you'll never have to pay $200 to register again. ONce you're an app world vendor, you're an app world vendor - period. Second, they do not say this will exist in the future -- they only say that the fees are suspended, and that the fees MAY exist in the future. MOving on...

(paraphrased: I had to fill out personal info three times)

Yes and no. This has long been a painful point, but in the last couple of years RIM has modified it. YES you are presented with the forms three times. But if you check the "remember this info [or whatever]" box, it will pre-fill the form for you. And if you don't, your browser remembers anyway. Obviously this is not ideal (I really should be able to register with this info once) but it's not as painful as he makes it sound either.

Adobe AIR doesn't come with an installer

True. But that's not really RIM's fault. Too -if you're developing an AIR app, you can also download a trial version of Burrito or whatever the environment is -- good for sixty days.

For some reason, it thinks that the optimal place to install software on a Mac is my home directory. Not /Developer, not even /Applications, where 99.99% of software is supposed to be installed.

Now I don't know about Mac, but on WIndows you have the option to install it wherever you want. Outside of that -- and keeping in mind that RIM has little Mac experience unfortunately -- it seems likely that they didn't know about /Developer; and I'd assume you don't want to install a set of non-executable libraries into /Applications so why'd you even mention it?

Oh, I forgot to mention that you also told me I had to download VMWare Fusion to run the simulator

That's probably because on Linux and Windows, VMWare Player is free. I would again chalk it up to inexperience with the Mac platform, but perhaps that's being too generous. Certainly you have a point in that no platform should require you to purchase excessive amounts of software just to develop for it. For example, i'm sure iPhone can be developed on any platform, right? Oh, wait... Ok, snarkiness aside (and slight bitterness - I'd like to develop for iPhone, but will not buy a Mac for the privilege) fact is that for the MAJORITY of people developing, the simulator can be run for free.

Re: running the installer to get an ISO - I agree, that's just dumb.

Re: whining about developer mode. I can see your point here - it seems a bit excessive except when you realize this is the actual image used on the device; which means that teh device itself in all likelihood has a Development Mode that behaves in the same. With a bit of contextual understanding about how developers might want to deploy to an actual device for debugging and testing, this setup suddenly makes a lot more sense.

Command line tools: well, yes. If you don't pay Adobe for development tools, you need to use their free command line tools to build your app. Oh, the horror - expecting a developer to know how to use a shell. My understanding is that the final version of Burrito (adobe's tools) will also provide deployment-to-simulator.

Three additional points to keep in mind:

1) if you're developing an AIR app, you can do 90% of your testing and development in the AIR environment without really need

Re:Some Clariifcation

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

I should also add that those nasty "long commands" that you have to type can be fairly easily tossed into a batch file /script -- you could even make that into a shortcut on your desktop, so you never have to see that icky shell window!

Re:It's not even that hard- Agreed

[Anonymous Coward]

My first comment

Having developed 3 apps for the Playbook and starting on a 4th, I can't understand the original posters comments.
Yes it is Beta code, so there are some rough edges, and yes the signing process is completely screwed up.

But I was pleasently surprised at how quick and easy it was to register and develop my apps (in my spare time)

Now maybe it is easier to develop for iOS and Android (I can't comment since this is my first mobile development task),
but in some ways that actually makes it more appealing to develop for the Playbook, it keeps the riff raff out, and will raise the quality of programmers and hence programs (in theory, in practice I doubt it)

When I went to Waterloo (20 years ago) we had to write far more challenging code, on far less robust platforms, maybe standards have dropped.

RIM's response posted

[Anonymous Coward]

http://devblog.blackberry.com/2011/02/thanks-for-the-open-letter-to-rim-developer-relations/

lol..

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol I found it pretty easy to get started to tell you the truth.. it took me just a night to get everything installed. That is considering I clicked 'No, restart later' at one point which screwed up my install process, so I re-installed all the software again and got it working properly. I then went on to follow their very detailed instructions to get the test app running.

A little background about myself.. I'm in my 2nd year at WLU, this is my first time developing for a mobile platform (never touched Apple or Android yet), I have never used VMWare on my life, and have never used Flash Builder (just Flash). Yet somehow I managed to get it working without a sigh.

I'm excited to get started on building an app as soon as i finish writing my midterm on Monday and get through these boringashell school assignments..

Re:What? RIM is being obtuse with developers?

[Anonymous Coward]

they're trying to but none of their web devs can get the sdk to install

Who didn't see this coming?

[Fallout2man]

As someone who's developed for Blackberry, Android and iDevices am I the only one entirely expecting this? My best guess is that RIM just does not have or know how to find anything resembling a decent API developer. Having developed for their abortion of a Java Development API I can't come to any other conclusion. What other modern device requires you to implement a custom build server just to develop a mobile app compatible for all modern OS versions? What other modern device requires you build your entire user interface in code? Or regularly breaks API forward and backward compatibility with each major release? Please, please, please let Blackberry die like OS/2! I for one will gladly cheer the day RIM closes its doors.