Slashdot Mirror


RIM's Future Hangs On Developer Support For 'New BlackBerry'

alphadogg writes "With its future up for grabs, Research in Motion at its annual BlackBerry World conference next week will focus on simplifying development for its soon-to-be-unveiled BlackBerry 10 operating system. HTML5 is one key technology in that strategy to create a viable ecosystem of applications for a new generation of mobile devices expected to ship by year-end. The simplicity is needed because BB10, based on a real time kernel acquired with RIM's buyout of QNX Software Systems in 2010, is a complete break with the software that runs on standard BlackBerry smartphones. 'It's a bit of a challenge,' says Tyler Lessard, formerly a RIM vice president in charge of the global developer program, and since October 2011 chief marketing officer at mobile security vendor Fixmo. 'There's very little or no compatibility between the old and new operating systems. Existing apps can't be carried forward to QNX and BB 10. The question is, once the BlackBerry 10 smartphones launch, can RIM have an adequate catalog of apps?'"

19 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Doing it wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Embrace Android, become a hardware power house. License BES tech, advertise battery life.

    1. Re:Doing it wrong. by plazman30 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. Layer your services on top of Android and be done with it. Why develop an OS, when a free one is there waiting for you to add to it.

    2. Re:Doing it wrong. by goombah99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed. Layer your services on top of Android and be done with it. Why develop an OS, when a free one is there waiting for you to add to it.

      Why would I buy a RIM when and LG or HTC or Samsung behaved the same? That's a recipe for death. It won't be long before google offers the same enterprise e-mail that rim does. What is the distinguishing feature?

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    3. Re:Doing it wrong. by Sipper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. Layer your services on top of Android and be done with it. Why develop an OS, when a free one is there waiting for you to add to it.

      Yeah, that way you can fragment development based not only on what the hardware manufacturer does to the version of Android shipped with the phone, but also fragment as time goes on with various versions of Android. :-/

      The issue isn't that they didn't go with Android -- the issue is that there's no compatibility between their old OS and their new OS. Historically that kind of departure doesn't usually work out well.

      An example of where this kind of transition works is the migration Apple went through between OS 9 and OS X. OS X shipped with an emulator, "OS Classic", to allow people to run OS 9 applications -- and sometime they later dropped support for this. They also shipped 'Rosetta' to simultaneously support PowerPC and Intel architecture -- and now they're dropping support for that, too. But during the transitions they supported applications, at least for a couple of years. With no similar "transition support", RIM is taking a big risk, and there's a good chance they're going to get burnt, because in terms of application support they're starting from scratch again.

    4. Re:Doing it wrong. by muon-catalyzed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > What is the distinguishing feature?
      Unlike LG, HTC or Samsung, RIM is a North American company, I would still prefer RIM and I want RIM to develop their own OS. Android and Apple-iOS have lots of drawbacks and problems, as a consumer I want more options.

    5. Re:Doing it wrong. by WiiVault · · Score: 2

      To be fair you also have Windows Phone which is debatable better positioned in the future (not by much but MS will spend lots) than RIM, and also WebOS which is looking like where BB will be in 3 years unless RIM gets their shit together.

    6. Re:Doing it wrong. by sonicmerlin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because Android is a laggy, buggy piece of trash that has horrible standby battery drain. Android is antiquated, a pre-iOS junkheap that should have been thrown away the moment iOS was first revealed. MSFT threw away Windows Mobile to develop WP7/8, Palm threw away Palm OS for webOS, RIM the old BB OS for the new QNX OS, and Nokia originally was transitioning away from Symbian for MeeGo. Google is the only one who decided to just rip off Apple as fast as possible by slapping on a touchscreen layer onto their outdated OS, and flip-flopped on Network Neutrality to sign a deal with Verizon to push the Droid brand.

      That's why Android lags, and it's also got horrible battery life.

    7. Re:Doing it wrong. by wisty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If RIM supplies a better enterprise email client / server package, then enterprises will buy it. Just like they used to.

  2. WebOS versus Android Round 2, Fight! by SlashdotWanker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're going to be stuck in the same position that Palm was only 3 years further down the line in technology. QNX is pretty slick but they're going to have to encourage (bribe) developers and keep pushing the way Microsoft has with Windows Phone if they want to have a prayer... Every day they wait on hardware is a slightly smaller chance of any kind of success.

    1. Re:WebOS versus Android Round 2, Fight! by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 2

      In what world is Microsoft pushing Windows Phones? They've got the most pathetic lineup of any platform. A grand total of one (1) phone on Verizon's network.

  3. Re:Could be worse by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    Could be staking their dwindling future on windows phones.

    Seriously, I wonder what the prospects for the windows phone are. My starting assumption is that Microsoft knows they need to succeed in the smart phone game and that this would be a good thing to blow their cash hoard on unless they want to stay a PC software company. So I assume they are going to make some company succeed but may have not made up their minds which.

    The obvious choice is Nokia's headlong commitment to Windows phones. Clearly a willing partner with the manufacturing, distribution and hardware support capability that knows how to work with every phone company. That's good. The down side is perhaps they are and ARM based smart phone. Can they make the leap to Intel? Early reviews say windows RT (arm) is a total half baked disaster. On the other hand reviews of the XOLO (which is intel android) say that the arm emulation is almost flawless. So there is a possibility they could run windows 8 intel but emulate the legacy ARM drivers and programs.

    If they are first to market with the widest distribution of a high power windows 8 then developers will target that devices characteristics. Could be a win. If they try to tough it out on ARM I suspect a big fail.

    Then there is samsung who dabbles in windows smart phones. Samsung either needs to fork Android like amazon did or keep a foot in windows or they expose themselves to whims of google. If they fork it, they can dictate control of the OS to the carriers just like Apple does. Empirically apple iphones are great precisely because Verizon or AT&T is not trying to customize it to maximize their revenue stream.

    But I think neither android or iphone is so great that Microsoft can't succeed given they already have about 100K of developed Apps. Conversely this is exactly why Blackberry has zero chance. No app base means no customers means no developers.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  4. Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure by echusarcana · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Blackberry Ecosystem is such an enormous pain to develop for. Just trying to port over an existing Android app is one roadblock after another: the porting / re-signing tools were flaky. You had to use shitty MS Windows and follow weird badly written signing instructions. Developing natively is probably even worse - I hardly got anywhere with that. And this is all before you get to the market posting requirements.

    In comparison, the Android development environment "just works". Toss Eclipse on Ubuntu, do a couple add-ins, and you are up and running in an hour or two. Very very low cost to develop an application. Clear instructions on what you need to do to get on the market. Amazon was pretty simple as well.

    The banks and government business is the only thing keeping RIM afloat, and that can last a little while, but its a bad business model. RIM deserves to die.

    Have that resume ready, RIM employees. You are going to need it soon.

    1. Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure by kae77 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You mean the Android emulator, with documented situations where it doesn't work? Or you're blaming windows for the problems, which is a Microsoft product? Or developing natively, which hasn't even been fully released yet? You'll have to wait until next week to see the full NDK. I'm no developer, but from what I've heard about Android 'just working' involves supporting hundreds of devices, and plenty of different versions of Android just to get it working. Make no mistake, RIM has not been the easiest to develop for in the past, but they're working overtime to get communication working now. Alec Saunders has made himself completely available to developers to work out problems. Name one other company that gives you that kind of access to people who can make the changes needed. Don't sing the swan song just yet, the bets are still out on this one.

    2. Re:Bad Ecosystem = Business Failure by daniel78 · · Score: 2

      I actually completely disagree... at least in regard to native stuff, java-only on Android isn't so bad.

      For me, native Android dev has (over the past few years) been one headache after another and only recently has it started to approach being in any way user-friendly (though i still use command line tools and makefiles to build native code ,and have to switch to eclipse to develop the required, but wasteful, java wrapper) . There is *still* no native c++ debugger (at least not one provided by google), other than command-line-based gdb (and even that is flaky as hell), which in 2012 is, quite frankly, embarrassing (the latest preview of the adt tools supposedly goes some way to rectify this, but the track record from google on the reliability of new features, hasn't been great). Almost every NDK release has had issues that required me to either debug/hack the build tools, or implement some other workaround.

      As I say, its getting better, but this stuff should have been ready from day 1.

      My recent foray into playbook dev has, on the other hand, been surprisingly good. Expectations weren't high, but so far everything has just worked. Everything ran from Eclipse - compiled and debugged just fine (Even has wifi debugging which was a welcome surprise). The provided libraries seem well thought out and provide access to pretty much all the functionality of the device (compare to android where the NDK provides almost zero access to anything OS related - requiring the frequent use of JNI to call into java code. Android 2.3+ has better features in this regard (though still not great), but it'll be a while before 2.2 is a negligible minority).

      I think RIM certainly has an uphill struggle ahead, but based on my experience, if they fail, it won't be down to poor developer tools.

  5. "...can RIM have an adequate catalog of apps?" by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Answer: does RIM currently have an adequate catalog of apps?

    --

    I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

  6. Re:Legitimate question... by gslj · · Score: 2

    I just got the $200 model of Playbook for myself. I thought it had better hardware than the $200 Android tablets (camera, hdmi connection), less cost than an iPad and is easier to carry in a pocket for reading and so on. The software selection got a lot better through the Android compatability.

    -Gareth

  7. Re:Curious about their future by WiiVault · · Score: 2

    RIM can't afford a billion models and feature sets. They tried that, it led them here. They need a hero phone or 2 and to avoid another expensive PlayBook like flop- despite how nice the device itself is.

  8. Re:question by busyqth · · Score: 2, Funny

    What does "real time kernel" mean?

    It means that the OS can make guarantees about the time of response to events (usually external inputs).
    This is very important for things like antilock brake control systems, not so much for consumer electronics.

    In this case, however, it's helpful because we can be assured that Blackberry OS Version 10 will tank within a guaranteed limited time.

  9. Sorry, RIM... by alannon · · Score: 4, Informative

    As a (former) Blackberry developer, I've decided that I will be doing no more development for their platforms. They pissed away any goodwill I had for them by their crappy tools, crappy support and their ridiculous policies. As an example, in order to become a development partner, which is the ONLY way to get real support from them, you have to sign a license that basically gives RIM rights to use any of your source code that you develop for their platform. Or typically, if you tried to discuss a problem on their support forums, they would allow developers to spend weeks or months trying to figure out a problem before stepping in and say, "Oh, ya, we know about this. It's on our internal bug tracking system," and then close the discussion to new posts. This was often for bugs that had been around for several major API versions, or even from the very FIRST API version.

    Fighting through the mess seemed like it was worth it when it seemed like everybody in the market for the software I was developing had a Blackberry, but now that it's dropped down to almost zero, you want me to invest my time and money into a brand new platform? No, thanks. At this point, I'm content to see you slip beneath the waves and to try to forget you exist. Goodbye.