Slashdot Mirror


RIM BlackBerry PlayBook: Unfinished, Unusable

snydeq points out this InfoWorld review of the BlackBerry PlayBook, "an 'unfinished, unusable' tablet from RIM. 'At the core of it all, the design of the PlayBook as a BlackBerry-dependent device was simply a boneheaded decision by executives who hoped a hit product might entice more BlackBerry sales,' Gruman writes. 'Why RIM chose to ship the PlayBook in such a state is unfathomable. The iPad 2 and Xoom have been out for weeks, so there's no heading them off at the pass. Instead, the PlayBook debuted with all eyes on it — but instead of a world-class performer, we got the homeless guy who plays air guitar in front of the mall.'"

42 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. I love how he still gives it a "5.4" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I read the first few paragraphs, and he says he would rather use no tablet at all than this thing -- and it still gets 5.4 from him. Score inflation much?

    1. Re:I love how he still gives it a "5.4" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah but it reads like a review of a dead prostitute, actually just half the body, (where the iPad is the luxury escort service).

      It's like: I can't describe the disgust that washed over me as the severed pelvis fell out of the bloody shipping container, then a detached half a face, and one breast. Maggots had already eaten most of the vulva and the stench of a decaying rodent, along with a sappy green bile oozed from the vagina like some hideous sore.

      I'd give it a 5.4.

    2. Re:I love how he still gives it a "5.4" by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      It seems like a fair rating to me (even if his rating skill isn't very good). The hardware is nice. The OS is well done. The interface is clean, and when you turn on the device, it looks nice. It gives you a feeling of being much more carefully thought out than the Xoom.

      The only drawback is the complete lack of apps. You can't do anything with it. Which is why a person would rather use no tablet, because there is nothing to do with it anyway. That is what gives it a beta feel, but it does have potential if they can ever overcome that problem.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  2. Not Dead on Arrival by pacificleo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Classic case of hubris and " love to hate " syndrome . It has got a good CPU , Support Flash , QNX run on Dalvik VM so there is always a plan B of supporting . Android Apps . I think for version 1 this is a decent device and i have used the pre released unit . Multitasking is good enough and by any count it is better than Xoom . in a world filled with Android and Apple Fan boys its hard to measure anything on a standalone basis .

    --
    somethings are best left unsaid , I am one of those things
    1. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by the+unbeliever · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's DOA because you can't use email, calendars or contacts unless you attach it to your Blackberry phone, which AT&T has already blocked via AppWorld.

      That was a boneheaded move by RIM, and unless they correct that feature then I can't see the Playbook doing very well.

    2. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The review is a bit harsh and from what I read, it does have good hardware and the software has potential. I would agree that RIM seems to have launched it unfinished and incomplete. As expected with a launch of any new product you expect there to some things missing especially since this is the first time RIM has used QNX on a product. I would commend RIM on that aspect of it. I could understand that there are be quirks or bugs with the system. I understand that there are not many apps at the moment. What I don't understand is why RIM would launch a tablet or any mobile device without a calendar, contacts, or an email client. Sure you can use your Blackberry phone to tether to it and RIM says that functionality will be added later but why not just wait? With all the negative reviews so far telling people to wait until RIM fixes these things, potential customers are going to wait anyways. All RIM has done is to give a negative first impression of their product.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Classic case of hubris and " love to hate " syndrome. It has got a good CPU , Support Flash , QNX run on Dalvik VM so there is always a plan B of supporting Android Apps. I think for version 1 this is a decent device and i have used the pre released unit. Multitasking is good enough and by any count it is better than Xoom. In a world filled with Android and Apple Fan boys its hard to measure anything on a standalone basis.

      No, it's a classic case of an Apple competitor rushing out a half-finished tablet in a desperate bid to get into the game. Nobody would be giving Apple this much slack if the iPad had the same deficiencies. And why should we judge the RIM PlayBook on a standalone basis when there is a tablet out there that has set the standard against which to measure? It only makes sense to claim the PlayBook shouldn't be compared to another tablet when you know it would it won't fare very well.

      John Gruber nailed it with this Daring Fireball (http://daringfireball.net/) post from yesterday--

      "I don’t understand why so many reviewers bend over backwards to grade these things on a curve. If the iPad 2 had the problems and deficiencies the Xoom and PlayBook have, these same reviewers would (rightly) trash it, and declare (again, rightly) that Apple had finally lost its Midas touch. These aren’t “beta” tablets. They’re bad tablets. It’s that simple. It’s true that their hardware seems closer to iPad-caliber than their software, but improving software is the hardest part of making products like these. By the time RIM releases “a serious software update or three” the entire market will have changed. The truth is, Motorola, Samsung, and now RIM have released would-be iPad competitors that pale compared to the iPad. Just say it.

      The mass market doesn’t buy, and doesn’t want to buy, products based on what they might become months from now if these companies somehow dramatically improve the software. They buy products for what they are today, out of the box. Motorola and RIM and Samsung are Apple’s industry peers. These are the big leagues, this is The Show. They’re charging customers real money to buy these things. They should be judged by the same standards."

    4. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by bberens · · Score: 2

      Sounds to me like they tried to "pull an Apple" on the tight coupling but screwed it up.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    5. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by dskzero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I don’t understand why so many reviewers bend over backwards to grade these things on a curve. If the iPad 2 had the problems and deficiencies the Xoom and PlayBook have, these same reviewers would (rightly) trash it, and declare (again, rightly) that Apple had finally lost its Midas touch. These aren’t “beta” tablets. (...)"

      This is a lie. People were all over the first iPad despite all the deficiencies, claiming they were not needed (Some of those being implemented in the second iPad). I haven't touched this RIM tablet (and I won't, I think tablets are pointless for me), but the reviewers' bias for Apple is obvious no matter the state of the market.

      --
      Oblivion Awaits
    6. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by blackchiney · · Score: 2

      Besides the camera and lock switch boondoggle can you list what theses deficiences are in the original iPad. I do remember it being able to check email, read calendar, contacts, appstore, and a browser. That covers about 95% of what people want in a tablet.

      In RIMs case I can understand the calendar ommision but email? Really?

    7. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by sglewis100 · · Score: 2

      Classic case of hubris and " love to hate " syndrome . It has got a good CPU , Support Flash , QNX run on Dalvik VM so there is always a plan B of supporting . Android Apps . I think for version 1 this is a decent device and i have used the pre released unit . Multitasking is good enough and by any count it is better than Xoom .

      So it has a good CPU, reasonable support of Flash in the browser... and a future plan to support some Android apps that are pre-screened by RIM, if the developer recompiles them and submits them. And I can't imagine that will be pleasant. The hardware sounds good, the development process sounds atrocious, and there is a decided lack of support for email, calendars and contacts. I'm not claiming my iPad is the best device that will ever exist OMG Apple rules... I'm just saying I want my contacts, calendars and email on my tablet, the same way they are on my phone and the same way they are on my laptop. Expecting people to have that... but only if they have a Blackberry turned on and tethered not only cuts them off from a huge percentage of the market (you know, those guys who don't have Blackberry's), it also probably isn't exactly what some Blackberry phone users wanted. And webmail is nice, but I use my tablet in places where I don't always have Internet access. Plus, already stored contacts come up quicker than logging into a web page and waiting for the screen to refresh.

      in a world filled with Android and Apple Fan boys its hard to measure anything on a standalone basis .

      Perhaps you meant to say "in a world filled with iPads and Android tablets, it's hard to measure a tablet without considering what's already available, in some cases for less money:"

      Sorry, but multitasking and dual core processors aren't enough anymore. The iPad 2 has extremely polished software, a HUGE marketplace of third party apps, more built in functionality for managing your PIM, and while it doesn't come with an office suite, $30 fixes that pretty quickly. But it doesn't play Flash. So if that was your only motivation (accessible Flash), then you can buy a PlayBook.... or a Xoom with seemingly more functionality out of the box.

      You're right... it's going to be hard for Playbook to compete in an established market. That's what happens when you ship later than your competition and don't visibly offer more functionality or a drastically reduced price. It can be done (B&N NookColor, Motorola Xoom), but you can't just ship a tablet and expect ten million in sales (countless Chinese tablets with Android 1.6 and a cheap price tag).

    8. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by sglewis100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is a lie. People were all over the first iPad despite all the deficiencies, claiming they were not needed (Some of those being implemented in the second iPad). I haven't touched this RIM tablet (and I won't, I think tablets are pointless for me), but the reviewers' bias for Apple is obvious no matter the state of the market.

      Perhaps it did enough. It had apps, a calendar, email, contacts, a great web browser, great battery life, a great screen, weighed half of the lightest notebooks, and felt pretty darn fast even without a dual core processor. Built in apps did multitask, third party ones didn't, and push notifications filled party of the gap. But probably the most important thing in all of that is that it had a calendar. And email. And contacts. And you didn't need a tethered iPhone to pull that off. Yes, clearly a year ago, you could ship a product without multitasking and a camera. But today you cannot ship a product without email.

    9. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by samkass · · Score: 2

      "I don’t understand why so many reviewers bend over backwards to grade these things on a curve. If the iPad 2 had the problems and deficiencies the Xoom and PlayBook have, these same reviewers would (rightly) trash it, and declare (again, rightly) that Apple had finally lost its Midas touch. These aren’t “beta” tablets. (...)"

      This is a lie. People were all over the first iPad despite all the deficiencies, claiming they were not needed (Some of those being implemented in the second iPad). I haven't touched this RIM tablet (and I won't, I think tablets are pointless for me), but the reviewers' bias for Apple is obvious no matter the state of the market.

      He said iPad 2, not iPad. This is 2011. People aren't comparing the PlayBook against a product they'd have to own a time machine to buy... compared to the competition today, the PlayBook appears to be a bad device. It's arguable about whether one would want to buy an iPad 1 (if they still made them) or a PlayBook due to the PlayBook's incomplete software, but that's not relevant to the market today.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    10. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by COMON$ · · Score: 2
      WTF would someone buy this unless they had a BB hard-on? I was one of the people eagerly anticipating a debut from BB that would allow efficient document sharing in a business via a private WAN. Instead we saw the death rattle of an industry who lost all sense of innovation and connection to the customer...

      When you are late to a tech game you need to offer something extra, something the market share holders dont have already...this tablet..wow, BB missed a golden opportunity. All they needed to do was create a BB document center server/module for BES and a slate to pair with it just like BBs do. Voila you just won your market back, and securely placed sales for the next 5 years as the only provider of secure electronic documentations to a slate.

      --
      CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
    11. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by peragrin · · Score: 2

      for 90% of Americans you have verizon or AT&T, sprint is only useful inside of city limits.

      Some cities have better verizon coverage, others have better AT&T coverage.

      outside of cities all coverage quickly drops to voice calls only.(I know one parking spot that my signal goes from 3G to edge depending on how which way the wind is blowing.

      there is a pretty stark difference in coverage depending on who is doing the coverage but in the end they are both horrible.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    12. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by peragrin · · Score: 2

      so what the ipad doesn't do flash? have you ever actually used full flash on the xoom? I have and let me say it isn't pretty, works horrible, you can watch the battery meter shrink, but you can play flash videos.

      Adobe is only working on making flash video's play smoothly. if you use a complex flash application or game you can watch the performance hit in real time.

      The playbook will be treated the same as the xoom. a second class flash citizen with out full access to the full flash API.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    13. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 2

      Please, Apple went the exact opposite direction: people were clamoring to let them tether their (wifi) iPad to their iPhone when the iPad first came out and they refused because they wanted the iPad to stand on its own.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    14. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by intheshelter · · Score: 2

      "the software has potential"? Really? Hell EVERYTHING has potential!! Should we let every device maker off the hook when they release a shitty product?

      The question is WHAT did they release? Crap. So they deserve to get slammed for it. You know damn well if Android or Apple released a tablet without mail, which required you to tether to your phone, that people would crucify them. Are RIM users so brainwashed from using horrible Blackberries that they don't see a crappy product because that is all they are used to?

    15. Re:Not Dead on Arrival by Vancorps · · Score: 2

      You mean because Apple wanted to force people to buy the 3G iPad instead. Apple did everything they could to make the higher end iPads look better. I give them credit for PR as apparently many people fell for it.

  3. And they botched the launch, too. by twidarkling · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not enough product shipped to stores (we got 3 64GB models, just enough to satisfy preorders on launch day), they didn't hype the fact that we'd be opening an hour early on launch day for those who wanted to pick up one, they didn't get a demo model out so people could play with it to entice more preorders, didn't get a demo out to stores so staff could learn a bit and show people fun stuff about it, or useful stuff about it, and accessories didn't reach the store for the most part until the day after launch or later. Three mediocre cases, that's all there was available for people to chose from. Seriously one of the worst product launches I've seen pretty much ever.

    --
    Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    1. Re:And they botched the launch, too. by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 2

      Mod the parent 'Funny'. We all know that specs mean everything. Besides, those specs don't "smoke" the iPad. It looks pretty similar other than a smaller screen and better cameras. More RAM doesn't mean much because apps are designed to use much less RAM than what is in the tablet.

    2. Re:And they botched the launch, too. by bberens · · Score: 2

      Apple generally doesn't win by having the best hardware stats.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    3. Re:And they botched the launch, too. by obarthelemy · · Score: 2

      The hardware is OK. The issue is the software. I don't have a BlackBerry phone, and don't plan to get one, so I need a full experience without linkage to a phone. It seems there are a lot a missing/unimplemented features, and a lot of badly done ones.

      This is the case for all tablets, including the iPad, but Apple seems to have both fewer features missing, and to be better at doing the really important ones, and doing them right. Too bad they do their best to neuter the connectivity/interoperability features (no SD Slot ? No USB ? Come on !)

      I really really REALLY don't want to get myself locked into iTunes for apps and content, and it seems there's no real way to use an iPad without doing so, but I haven't yet seen another tablet I think I'd enjoy using. On the software side, Android will probably get mostly there within a year. On the hardware side.. I just spent some time messing around with a Xoom. It feels much bulkier then an iPad2. And the eeePad, which seems better than the Xoom an all counts (including price), is bulkier still....

      I hope non-iOS tablet software, whether Android, BlackBerry, or WebOS, will be feature-complete by next year, and the competition will be on who supplies the best extras, be it hardware or software. We've just got to wait a bit.

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    4. Re:And they botched the launch, too. by beelsebob · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure where you're getting that a dual core 1Ghz ARM beats a 3 core 3.2Ghz PPC, or that even the iPad 2's PVR SGX 543s beat the Xenos GPU. But certainly both of them have as much RAM as the XBox 360.

    5. Re:And they botched the launch, too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not enough product shipped to stores (we got 3 64GB models, just enough to satisfy preorders on launch day), they didn't hype the fact that we'd be opening an hour early on launch day for those who wanted to pick up one, they didn't get a demo model out so people could play with it to entice more preorders, didn't get a demo out to stores so staff could learn a bit and show people fun stuff about it, or useful stuff about it, and accessories didn't reach the store for the most part until the day after launch or later. Three mediocre cases, that's all there was available for people to chose from. Seriously one of the worst product launches I've seen pretty much ever.

      The food here is terrible...and in such small portions!

    6. Re:And they botched the launch, too. by mikestew · · Score: 2

      Then the average user can learn to read stats, I'm a nerd to and when someone ask for my opinion I tell them to look at the stats and then they can tell what to buy.

      That might work when buying a lawn mower, but it's a horrible approach when buying anything that runs software I can do little to change. Looking only at stats one ends up buying a point-and-shoot camera with more megapixels than my DSLR, and thinks it takes better pictures than that DSLR.

      By what your saying the average user should buy what there told to buy, that is the wrong idea altogether.

      No, what I'm saying is that users don't care diddly about nerdy stat sheets. What they do care about is the user experience, specs be damned. And the Playbook, from the sounds of it, has a less desirable UX than its competitors. When the Playbook fails in a spectacular manner, feel free to blame it on "Apple marketing", "iSheep", and "the Reality Distortion Field", because it couldn't have anything to do with the software sucking.

  4. they sure do by us7892 · · Score: 2

    I see far fewer blackberry devices where I work - where they once dominated. This tablet sounds bad. I guess I won't see one of these any time soon.

  5. I read the title differently... by Yuioup · · Score: 3, Funny

    A better title would be:

    RIP BlackBerry PlayBook: Unfinished, Unusable

  6. Also appears to contain typical RIM.. by Junta · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I admit I haven't tracked Blackberry much, but I remember many of us at worked had smartphones that implemented general standards (e.g. becoming a usb mass storage for getting files on and off via usb cable). Meanwhile, the blackberry users were still forced to use weird, proprietary programs to get at the device because RIM wouldn't implement standards. Once upon a time, this was typical, just like Palm's Hotsync, but those days should be long behind us except that RIM props it up.

    Then I read in a review that the playbook does the same BS, requiring proprietary, RIM-only software that only works with Windows and OSX. Most of the world has this figured out, don't see why RIM is still going this route.

    Then I see they decided to tie email/calendaring etc to a blackberry handset with *no* option to do it without it. Further complicating things, it looks like AT&T forbade it on their stuff.

    Even with new shiny UI elements, they are in many ways stuck in their annoying ways. Of course, it's probably no coincidence they are annoying as hell *and* are so popular in the 'enterprise' space.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:Also appears to contain typical RIM.. by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 2

      I admit I haven't tracked Blackberry much, but I remember many of us at worked had smartphones that implemented general standards (e.g. becoming a usb mass storage for getting files on and off via usb cable)

      Derp. My Curve and Bold both used mass storage just fine.

  7. As John Gruber said by mr100percent · · Score: 2

    As John Gruber, of Daring Fireball, said:

    I don’t understand why so many reviewers bend over backwards to grade these things on a curve. If the iPad 2 had the problems and deficiencies the Xoom and PlayBook have, these same reviewers would (rightly) trash it, and declare (again, rightly) that Apple had finally lost its Midas touch.

    These aren’t “beta” tablets. They’re bad tablets. It’s that simple. It’s true that their hardware seems closer to iPad-caliber than their software, but improving software is the hardest part of making products like these. By the time RIM releases “a serious software update or three” the entire market will have changed. The truth is, Motorola, Samsung, and now RIM have released would-be iPad competitors that pale compared to the iPad. Just say it.

    The mass market doesn’t buy, and doesn’t want to buy, products based on what they might become months from now if these companies somehow dramatically improve the software. They buy products for what they are today, out of the box. Motorola and RIM and Samsung are Apple’s industry peers. These are the big leagues, this is The Show. They’re charging customers real money to buy these things. They should be judged by the same standards. Judging these things on a curve is the flip side of my criticism of Walt Mossberg’s iPad 2 review:

    Stating the plain truth, that the iPad 2 has no serious competition as a mainstream consumer device, doesn’t make you biased. It makes you accurate.

    1. Re:As John Gruber said by Antimatter3009 · · Score: 2

      I don't know about this. He's not wrong, per se, but he's missing a key point: these devices do things an iPad can not and will not ever do. And (probably) vice versa. So yeah, my Xoom market crashes on occasion and I have to reopen it, but I also have a bunch of widgets all over my home screen. And while my instability will eventually be fixed, the iPad will never have widgets. Point being, if you assume the iPad and the Xoom (or Playbook) are the same except that one has some problems then his point is valid, but if you see them as different products with their own ups and downs then he doesn't make so much sense. For every downside to the non-iPad there's an upside to counter it. In that context, it doesn't make sense to "trash" these other tablets. They're just better in some ways and worse in others, and the value you place on each of these features/bugs will direct the scores you hand out.

      Note: if you don't see the upsides of the non-iPads of the world as upsides then this can't apply, but then these products were never meant for you anyway. If you don't like widgets and customizability, you probably weren't in the market for a Xoom to begin with, and the same goes for the Playbook and its Blackberry Bridge.

    2. Re:As John Gruber said by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 2

      As for the widgets, well, never is a long time and anything can happen, but it seems highly unlikely.

      Consider all of the major features in the iPhone/iPad that were actively denied or disparaged by Apple, only to pop up out of nowhere at the next press conference.

      - 3G
      - SDK for native applications
      - Enterprise integration
      - GPS
      - Multitasking
      - Cut and paste
      - Probably several I'm forgetting (and never mind all of their about-faces on individual apps like Google Voice)

      Not hard to imagine widgets being next on the list, is it? Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see Jobs or his successor waving a Flash-enabled iPhone on stage this summer, extolling it as an unprecedented advance in magical different-thinkery.

      That's how they've always operated -- everything sucks and is useless/unwanted/irrelevant/uncool, up until it's actually ready to ship, at which point it's suddenly indispensible.

  8. Older email clients supported. by bipedalhominid · · Score: 2

    It does however support Pegasus email client.

    --
    This aint Daytona and you aint Dale Earnhardt. So stop trying to draft on Interstate 40.
  9. Maybe by brokeninside · · Score: 2

    We may do well to remember that the iPhone was the second iTunes branded phone. Apple's first phone was the Motorola ROKR.

    That the ROKR was pants doesn't seem to have hurt Apple's later success with the iPhone. That the first edition of the Playbook is pants doesn't necessarily mean that the product line is dead in the water.

    Now, one can certainly make the argument that given Blackberry's reputation, further generations are unlikely to be significantly better. But that's really a different argument.

  10. I must object... as a homeless guy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    As a homeless guy who plays Air Guitar in front of the mall, I am insulted... I am MUCH better than RIMs Playbook
    (currently using my homeless iPad to post on Slashdot)

  11. Re:phones also suck by Ephemeriis · · Score: 2

    Really.

    I've got my Curve 8520. Emails are absolutely flawless - talking to my gmail.com account while sending emails using my business domain (which is actually using google). Talks to my google calendar well too.

    Over the years, I've had to support a number of folks using various BBs to talk to various email servers.

    Setup was always kind of a pain. Varied a little bit from one version of the software to another... From one carrier to another... But their wizard was always a little cumbersome. And if you didn't do it right you'd get spammed with synchronization messages. And sometimes you'd wind up with a second email address somehow.

    These days I'm just supporting co-workers on an Exchange server. Getting them to talk to the Exchange server securely, using SSL, is a bit of a trick. You have to run through their wizard and intentionally set it up wrong. When it doesn't connect right it gives you the option of specifying your settings manually. Then you can tell it exactly how you want to connect.

    Once you are connected and talking to the Exchange server, even looking at an email message in Outlook will cause the BB to think it's new. So you wind up re-downloading old messages all the time. This has been an issue for a couple years now, and the only consistent solution I've seen is "buy a BES."

    As far as calendar sync goes... Well, it doesn't. Unless you've got a BES (or things changed very dramatically in the last year or so) you'll need to plug your phone in to your computer in order to sync your calendar. This is a huge pain for us, because it means we have to install the BB client software on random computers around the hospital... And configure it... And then folks need to keep track of their USB cables and remember to plug in periodically.

    On my Droid, I just set up a "corporate sync" account. You have to enter the settings manually, because the wizard doesn't work right (why do these wizards never work right?)... And the manual settings button isn't immediately obvious... But at least you don't have to intentionally do it wrong to make it show up. Once the account is set up it'll pull down my email, calendar, and contacts all wirelessly. No need to plug in at all.

    --
    "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
  12. Re:AT&T seems to be the problem? by Carewolf · · Score: 2

    He did bypass the AT&T problem, so he is better than what you describe. Try going to page 2.

    But yeah: There is an insane amount of confirmation bias added on top of several geniune concerns.

    I am starting to think of hardware reviews are like pick-ups, without a good opener, the product is destined to crash'n'burn in reviews, and nobody does openers better than Apple.

  13. Re:phones also suck by Doug+Neal · · Score: 4, Informative

    BES Express is a free product. From an administrator's point of view it's somewhat limited in functionality compared to BES, but from the user's perspective the all the synchronisation and directory integration works as expected.

  14. Re:Well iPhones won't get a chance where I work by LoganDzwon · · Score: 2

    You need to have your iphone users upgrade to iOS 3.0 or newer. Any firmware newer then 2 years old fully supports ActiveSync and policies. Curiously, not all Android phones actually support ActiveSync Policies. Some models simply tell the ActiveSync server they have features they don't. The password spamming behavior your explaining does not happen.

  15. Re:AT&T seems to be the problem? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    ViewSonic 10" G-Tablet is $300

    Who actually makes it, though? Viewsonic has been pushing a lot of rebranded garbage lately...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  16. Re:Kind of Ridiculous Review by wsxyz · · Score: 2

    The Blackberry Bridge being blocked on AT&T is very ridiculous, but writing this review without Blackberry Bridge is even more ridiculous.

    Obviously you failed to read the rest of the review, wherein the reviewer DID install Blackberry Bridge.