Slashdot Mirror
RIM Unveils New OS Based On QNX
New submitter HommeDeJava writes "Research In Motion unveiled a new operating system for its tablet and smartphones at the company's BlackBerry developer conference in San Francisco. Called BlackBerry BBX, the new OS combines features of the existing BlackBerry OS and its recently acquired real-time QNX OS. Could BBX attract software developers and spur interest from consumers?"
I already know the future. Fail, of the epic kind.
sounds like an industrial strength, secure platform that might actually be adopted by governments, enterprise companies, medical, etc. not sure how it will be marketed to education and gaming though, except by showing nice 3d framerates
I agree. Too little, too late. It'll take years for them to turn things around, and they just don't have the time.
Seems to me that that's really the only way to get in the game at this point--make things as easy as possible for developers. Free SDK, free publishing license, and higher payouts for devs. Hopefully RIM has learned a lot from these days (and if you read the followups, it looks like they're making an effort).
Though I've never owned or really even used a Blackberry device, I do wish them well, just like I wish Microsoft well. I don't want the only players to be Google and Apple anymore than I wanted the only players to be RIM and Microsoft. We could use more honest competition in this space.
If you can't convince them, convict them.
I last booted QNX something like 10 years ago...back then it was realtime, unix based (I think?), and relatively promising. I remember it was even more responsive than Linux (which was was more responsive than Windows) ... Anyone have experience programming for QNX? If it's "just another unix" shouldn't porting to it be straightforward?
QNX is a real-time operating system. For programmer convenience some things are unix-like. However unlike Linux and other unix implementations QNX is a *hard* real-time OS, you are guaranteed that things will happen within certain timeframes. QNX is targeting embedded environments, in particular environments that require incredible reliability - for example military and aerospace. QNX is exactly the sort of thing you use when you are building a mars rover.
QNX is probably the best operating system ever. If properly utilized, I could see Blackberry overpowering all other mobile phone manufacturers. I ran it on my main computer a long time ago, and it was one of the best computing experiences I have ever had. If it were F/OSS, I would use it for much more.
Sig: I stole this sig.
I already know the future. Fail, of the epic kind.
I prefer fail of the EEPROM kind.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Apple had a game plan back in 1997 when they got NeXT and with it, Steve Jobs. At first Steve Jobs was only supposed to be there consulting on how to integrate NeXT into Apple. What he saw was that Apple lacked more than an upgraded OS; they lacked focus and execution. Jobs convinced the board that to oust the current CEO. Now mind you, it took 4 years for Apple to incorporate NeXT technology into OS X but the overall plan was started under the former CEO Gil Amelio. I don't believe that Amelio, however, could have done it. He was better at cost cutting than long term vision.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Sounds incredibly unlikely, considering it's ported to ARM, MIPS, PPC, i386, etc.
The sort of fail that can be totally erased by 30 minutes of hard UV is sadly rare these days...
Apple pays 70%.
Suppose RIM were ultra generous and paid 100%.
So long as I sell 43% more on the Apple platform, I'm still making more money.
Put it another way, I'd have to sell 70% of my iPhone sales on the RIM before I made as much.
Ain't going to happen.
Bimbo Newton Crosby, RIM is a corpse. If this would have happened five or even three years ago? they may have had a shot. but the ship has done sailed and from the looks of it the final tally will be Apple #1 with Android trading spots with iOS from time to time, so iOS and Android own 1 and 2, and MSFT buying their way into third place but not having a prayer of taking #2 much less the coveted #1 spot.
With mobile there is always a chance of something coming from out of left field, after all who would have thought 6 years ago that Android would suddenly explode, but RIM just doesn't have it. They don't have the hardware, the designs, nor the buzz, and even the CxO types are all running around playing with their iPhones and HTC Androids, its over. I just wonder who will buy them out for the IP, MSFT or Google? Maybe Samsung?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
BB is still entrenched in Corporate America. There's massive inertia there.
Oh yeah? Is that why RIM's morning general session at its conference had a heavy emphasis on games? From what I can tell, the most recent BlackBerry hardware has been targeted squarely at the teenage/college student market. Apparently BlackBerry Instant Messaging is more popular than SMS in some parts of the UK and Europe. Meanwhile, white collar workers have increasingly been demanding to use their own devices in the workplace; The Economist even did a special report on the trend a week or so ago. You think the general public is buying up BlackBerrys? Nope. It's iPhones they want to use in the office, and once it's the C-level execs asking for it, the IT department won't have much choice but to allow it. Get rid of the BES lock-in and it's game over for RIM.
Breakfast served all day!
Don't get ahead of yourselves.
Let's not forget that Apple came back from a far worse shape than this in the late 90s. It is way too early to say that "they just don't have time".
They better put a move on it, pronto, would be a much more accurate statement.
thats 3 weeks of working McDonalds.
Which is impractical if you're already working McDonald's to afford tuition.
And Windows PCs are free there?
Neither are Linux PCs, but a Linux PC is a lot cheaper than a Mac.
No, but you're pretending they are because 'everyone owns a PC'.
The installed base is such that one is far more likely to own a Windows PC than a Mac. Perhaps I should multiply the expected Mac buy-in by 90% to reflect the 10% chance of already owning a Mac.
A full Windows license alone is ~30-40% of the cost of the entire buyin for mac development.
You don't need Windows to develop for certain popular platforms that compete with iOS.
Anyone under 18 can't enter legally binding contracts in any sane part of the world
I don't know about BlackBerry, but if you own a device running Android OS, you don't need to enter a legally binding contract before you're allowed to load homemade programs onto it. This is one of the differences between Android and iOS.
Key measures are a) profit share and b) share of web browsing c) number of app downloads and total number of (quality?) apps availble; in other words, what matters is how much the user use and can use their phones. Android will overtake Apple in these measures but it is taking much longer. If you think like this Apple is still ahead so far (and only just, and only if you include the iPod touch!).
Incidentally, this shows that WP7 has almost no hope. If you are an app developer you will do an iPhone app and some will do an Android app to show you support "alternative" people. Soon it will be the other way round (in fact I'd say that it's already the other way round in some markets). The inertia you need to overcome the leader is too much. The only reason that Android is succeeding is that Apple left a low end in the market available for them to develop in. Now the market has to be analysed as the 1990's PC market. Apple is Apple. Android is Windows and Windows is OS2, a late entry by an an over-arrogant computing incumbent.
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();