Slashdot Mirror


RIM CEO Says Company 'Seriously' Considered Switch To Android

zacharye writes "RIM CEO Thorsten Heins's interview with the Telegraph on Thursday made headlines for his admission that the company can't keep up with Apple and Samsung without outside help. But there's another interesting nugget buried within the interview that didn't get quite as much attention: Heins says that RIM took a long, hard look at migrating to Android before deciding to plow forward with BlackBerry 10. Heins said, 'We took the conscious decision not to go Android. If you look at other suppliers’ ability to differentiate, there’s very little wiggle room. We looked at it seriously — but if you understand what the promise of BlackBerry is to its user base: it’s all about getting stuff done. Games, media, we have to be good at it, but we have to support those guys who are ahead of the game. Very little time to consume and enjoy content — if you stay true to that purpose you have to build on that basis. And if we want to serve that segment we can’t do it on a me-too approach.'"

43 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. That *niche* market. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, if it wants a small userbase of executives, it has to accept that small revenue stream comming from those people.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:That *niche* market. by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Blackberry could have survived as the business market's option. The security they once offered was unmatched.

      But now we even see RIM migrating away from what little they are good at by giving away their keys to oppressive governments in order to continue doing business in that country. RIM is feeding itself by cutting off its own appendages.

      I don't think Android is going to catch on in the business world. We just had a new vendor selection at my employer and IOS was chosen because the comfort level with security and malware on the Android platform is lower. (The nuances in that discussion don't matter, the fact is that the market sees IOS as safer than Android. Perception is reality)

      It's unfortunate that RIM decided to commit corporate suicide because the market has lost something that was once good. Consumers now have fewer choices, and that's bad.

    2. Re:That *niche* market. by dkleinsc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We just had a new vendor selection at my employer and IOS was chosen because the comfort level with security and malware on the Android platform is lower.

      Actually, what I can almost guarantee happened is that some executive with no technical background whatsoever said "I love my iPhone, it's so shiny!", and the bit about security and malware was made up to justify that.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    3. Re:That *niche* market. by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nope, the decision was made solely in IT by the desktop/device/network arch staff.

    4. Re:That *niche* market. by tripleevenfall · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I will also add:

      It was once said, "Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM".

      Today, nobody ever gets fired for choosing Apple.

    5. Re:That *niche* market. by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      Yeah.....perception is reality. Perception of security is safety. Let us know how that turns out.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    6. Re:That *niche* market. by alphax45 · · Score: 5, Informative

      RIM can give away the BIS (Blackberry Internet Service - used by a non-corporate person in most cases) keys because those servers are operated by the carriers. BESs (Blackberry Enterprise Servers) are owned/operated by a company and RIM does NOT ever have the keys to give away. So the corporate customers using a BES are safe from the governments that have been the keys, Joe Blow on the street is not.

      --
      K Man
    7. Re:That *niche* market. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      and iOS was found MORE secure?

      Good luck with that...

      I believe it. iOS might not be the best, but it's pretty good when you just want to get business done. It's easy to setup, easy to control, and Apple is pretty good at keeping people/Apps/permissions under control. Plus, every iPhone works pretty much the same regardless of model.

      Some androids are easy to root, some are hard - some are easy to control, some are not. Some models are good, some aren't.

      I personally like Android as a geek and and someone who isn't exactly pro-Apple - but I hated supporting Android and led the push for an easier iPhone/iPad environment. I'd never go back

    8. Re:That *niche* market. by candeoastrum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I will also add:

      It was once said, "Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM".

      Today, nobody ever gets fired for choosing Apple.

      I dont know anyone in business who has chosen Apple for the enterprise so I am not sure how that applies. Consumer devices that they personally own and bring in, yes. I can't think of another scenario where people recommend Apple for servers or clients when its actually purchased by the business.

    9. Re:That *niche* market. by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bull. The very fact that RIM CAN give away the keys to governments (or whoever they like) means their security wasn't very good.

      You don't know what you are talking about.

      They gave away the keys to BIS. That's the service they HOST THEMSELVES used mostly by individuals and small companies who don't want to host their own server. Of course they have the keys for it.

      BES (blackberry enterprise server) is the enterprise service. Enterprises run their own BES on their own hardware under their own control. RIM doesn't touch it. RIM hasn't (and can't) give away the BES keys because the enterprise has them not RIM.

      But complaining about RIM having the keys to BIS is as foolish as complaining google has access to the encryption keys to https://www.gmail.com/

    10. Re:That *niche* market. by MachDelta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only when you're the one holding the keys to the garden...

    11. Re:That *niche* market. by tom229 · · Score: 2

      I seriously died a little inside reading this. You guys should consider firing your entire IT staff.. like... yesterday.

      Almost every company I know of has standardized to android recently. The wide range of price points for their devices is a big drawing factor and with a proper MDM and/or google apps infrastructure they are far more secure than iPhones.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    12. Re:That *niche* market. by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and iOS was found MORE secure?

      Good luck with that...

      Elaborate. Elaborate precisely.

      <necessary preemptive strike against slashdot fanbois>
      And no. I'm not an iPhone fanboi. I'm actually an Android user.
      </necessary preemptive strike against slashdot fanbois>

      Geek, nerds, technocrats, whatever, they should be able to make statements like this immediately followed by a list comparing both platforms, followed by the most objective conclusion possible. Anything else is just hand-waving bull-crap more appropriate for technically-challenged marketing types than for the supposedly tech-oriented crowd that comes to these interweebz realms.

    13. Re:That *niche* market. by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      We just had a new vendor selection at my employer and IOS was chosen because the comfort level with security and malware on the Android platform is lower.

      Actually, what I can almost guarantee happened is that some executive with no technical background whatsoever said "I love my iPhone, it's so shiny!", and the bit about security and malware was made up to justify that.

      Who voted this informative?

      Just about any IT professional.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    14. Re:That *niche* market. by randy+of+the+redwood · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Bravo. Well said.

      Can someone who is better at wordsmithing than I please come up with a meme that says we would all appreciate it if you only post when you actually know something about the subject?

      Sorry to get off topic, but in the past year it seems that the people who post here are more armchair quarterbacks than actually in the field with something intelligent to add. Is this the Reddit crowd coming over here?

      If you have something to add, please do so, but try to include some facts with the post instead of just "IOS is more secure" or "Good luck with that".

      --
      The sun is the same in a relative way, but you are shorter of breath and one day closer to death
    15. Re:That *niche* market. by vux984 · · Score: 2

      I think the point he's making is that the channels aren't "double blind"; e.g. like a hashed-salted password.

      I don't think your password example really fits, but I get your point.

      But he criticised BIS with the phrase "their security isn't very good" while suggesting SSL enabled SMTP/IMAP is "far superior". That is plainly ignorant or dishonest.

      Encrypted IMAP/SMTP certainly isn't "double blind". And unless you are self hosting the mail server, and only send to recipients on that mail server it has FAR FAR more trust issues and vulnerable points than pin-pin messages over BIS.

      So, with that as context, I remain convinced the poster I was responding to had no idea what he was talking about.

      Realistically the only way to do better than BIS is to self-host. BIS is as good as a hosted service can be.

      If we -wanted- a double-blind 3rd party hosted communications channel -- the only way it would ever be truly blind to the host would require an out of band key exchange with your intended recipient -- and that's hard to do.

      And even then the host would know who and when you were communicating. To beat even that then you need out of band key exchange with the recipient, a decentralized p2p service like tor for message transit, and to generate noise traffic on all endpoints to ensure the carriers/ISPs can't pinpoint communications based purely on traffic timing analysis.

      You aren't going to get all that from a simple "hosted service".

    16. Re:That *niche* market. by afidel · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's called a mobile device management platform. There are a variety of options for both iOS and Android (often they support both). Personally I think the future is going to be Android VM's, you'll have a personal profile and a corporate profile, each with their own apps and data and they only thing they will share is the hardware. VMWare already has such a product but it only runs on a small handful of smartphones, I think eventually it will get added to stock Android.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    17. Re:That *niche* market. by PNutts · · Score: 3, Informative

      I hate to post this again but I feel obliged to correct misinformation. The Apple Configurator implements security policies and restricts features and apps. No server required.

    18. Re:That *niche* market. by FireFury03 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I believe it. iOS might not be the best, but it's pretty good when you just want to get business done.

      iOS devices are one of the most problematic devices that we have to support. These are some of the problems we have had with them:

      1. The web proxy server settings are all centralised on the device, which is a really good design. Unfortunately, many (most?) iOS apps seem to ignore them.
      2. Many apps don't support authenticated web proxies.
      3. Of the apps that do support authenticated web proxies, most of them do their own authentication (i.e. you open the browser and get asked to authenticate and can then browse without any more problems... but then you go to another app and have to auth again because the browser and the other app don't share the same authentication credential store. Then you open another app and have to auth *again*.
      4. The iCloud stuff can't handle HTTP errors it didn't expect. If the iOS device tries to contact the iCloud servers and the web proxy returns a 407 (not authorised), the device just blindly tries again immediately (without supplying any authentication credentials). On networks where our customers have decided to severely restrict internet access (we supply systems to schools, who often put up very restrictive controls on their internet connections at certain times of the day), we frequently see the iOS devices hammering away at the proxy with repeated attempts to contact Apple's servers; we're talking hundreds of requests per second for hours on end - the batteries on these dumb devices can't last long with that kind of behaviour.

      Notably, Apple seems to have a general habit of many of these things - much of their OS X software also has terrible support for authenticated web proxies, and iChat has a well known bug similar to (4) that results in it fighting with remote XMPP clients if they return a (legal) response it doesn't like - I tend to see constant network traffic totalling about 3Kbps per paid of fighting clients, and they do it even when not in a conversation.

      Some models are good, some aren't.

      Well, what is "good" often depends on what use you want to put it to. I can point at a lot of devices (running any of the OSes), which I regard as "not good", whilst other people will regard them as "good" because they happen to fit with their usage best. This is the benefit of choice, and is something you don't get with the iOS devices.

    19. Re:That *niche* market. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I will also add:

      It was once said, "Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM".

      Today, nobody ever gets fired for choosing Apple.

      I dont know anyone in business who has chosen Apple for the enterprise so I am not sure how that applies. Consumer devices that they personally own and bring in, yes. I can't think of another scenario where people recommend Apple for servers or clients when its actually purchased by the business.

      Easy, nobody chooses Apple for an entire enterprise, so nobody can get fired for doing it. Now choosing IOS as a standardized phone platform... well I suppose this is no more inappropriate than choosing Microsoft.

      Besides it doesn't matter what platform you use for mobile, if the people setting it up are morons it will be insecure.

      I can remember working a company when my manger rushed over to my desk in a panic, waving his blackberry in my face. "OMG, OMG, our internal development server is open to the public! Do something! Do something, right now!"

      I looked at it, and learned every BB at the company had a giant unsecured backdoor to the internal network, with no additional security or password needed. When I pointed this out I was quashed because the execs could not live without their blackberries. I explained there must be some way for them to see some internal apps and not others, or require some kind of network password. I have no idea if that hole was ever patched.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    20. Re:That *niche* market. by Sylak · · Score: 2

      As far as I know iOS is pretty secure.

      as far as I know, finding an iOS exploit in the wild is one google search for "iOS jailbreak" away...

      And there hasn't been a remote jailbreak exploit for iOS since a Zero Day for iOS 4. Every jailbreak since has required you to have USB access to the device

    21. Re:That *niche* market. by vux984 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Blackberry system ranges from not very secure at all to almost as good as you could get making your own.

      We talking BES or are we talking BIS?

      BES

      The base security model is as good as anything you can do rolling your own server using proprietary software. But the handset management and controls are unmatched. iphone or android + some linux server at the backend with SSL enabled isn't even in the same league. Sure they both do end-to-end email encryption, but that's about where the comparison ends. You cannot lock down and manage ios (or android) to anywhere near the same degree, unless your 'make your own' includes providing your own secure managed handset operating system... Android could be the basis for one but to my knowledge the 'community' has so far only focussed more on defeating carrier restrictions to open the platform up, not to deliver enhanced security and IT policy controls. You can't compare BB/BES to a theoretical open source handset OS that doesn't actually exist. Thus: BES is unmatched.

      BIS
      BIS is better than what you can accomplish with other handsets using a hosted 3rd party solution. The security is just as good as any other hosted solution -- but any two unrelated BIS users can communicate securely with no coordination.

      If your a drug dealer, how do you communicate securely with your contacts? Do you setup a linux server with SSL and then setup accounts for all your customers and distributors?... And run a help desk to provide them support when they have trouble sending messages?

      BIS gave them all that. Admittedly as a hosted service it was always known that RIM in Canada had the keys... and you had to trust them. And kudos to RIM for holding out as long as it did. And by making this a very public argument, RIM may ultimately have given keys to india, but at least the consumers aren't being decieved. Unlike say the secret NSA closet at your local ISP.

    22. Re:That *niche* market. by Ohrion · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately issues 1-3 exist on Android as well. Nearly exactly the same in fact.

    23. Re:That *niche* market. by hobarrera · · Score: 2

      Basically, all that can be cut down to "Bad support for authenticated proxies". Maybe you need to re-evaluate why you need that proxy in the first place. It's not like a non-transparent proxy adds any real value over transparent proxies, and if you want to filter out people from your network, just use 802.1X.

  2. Seriously by postmortem · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You failed as CEO. Google gives you all apps for multimedia, so you don't have to do anything there. But they give you 0 enterprise apps, so that is what you could have done. Its not like corporations are going to pirate your apps and risk being sued.

    1. Re:Seriously by jeffmeden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's an enterprise app like Google Apps is enterprise-ready... You can use it for "Enterprise-like" features but do Enterprises truly use it exclusively? Hell no.

      All RIM would have needed to do was make a suite of apps that look like the old apps they had before (not hard since Android apps don't have hard and fast style rules) and then build a management backend that looked like what they had before, so that admins wouldn't have a huge learning curve when going to a BB/Android hybrid.

      Fear of change is what RIM was banking on, by deciding to do things the way they always had and shunning any alternative. For decision makers that fear is quickly going extinct; today if you don't embrace change then you (like RIM) go extinct instead. That was their downfall, they put all their chips in the "lets just not change" category and didn't realize that change is absolutely inevitable. If they had walked the line, catered to those who still had a preference for the old BB style while allowing change to happen organically, they would have had a niche. As of now, their niche is solely organizations who haven't woken up to change (and those companies are either going to wake up or go out of business. Not a good spot to find yourself.

    2. Re:Seriously by Omnifarious · · Score: 2

      Yes, this is exactly true. They could've taken the Android platform and ran in their own direction with it. They lacked imagination, or perhaps misunderstood the purpose and power of Open Source. That's what they should've done.

      And you're right, when it comes to apps for doing stuff at work, Android isn't that great right now.

    3. Re:Seriously by oakgrove · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Samsung sells all the Android phones because they make the best Android phones. It isn't about "sucking the oxygen", it is about making a better product and people buying that product. And there isn't an "Android world" in the context of what matters here. This is the smartphone world where everybody competes against everybody no matter what OS you are using. Nokia competes against Apple competes against Samsung competes against Nokia and on and on. Using contrived rhetoric to push your anti-agenda is just you being a hater and ignoring reality. As for your Motorola and Nexus 7 blather, do you have any facts to back up your bullshit?

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  3. And you were wrong and are now changing course? by Sir_Sri · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is the space left for where you admit your error and announce a switch to android.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    The content of this space is why you're going out of business. We all understand that it would be very very hard to be competitive against samsung and HTC and so on. But blackberry is now next to irrelevant in the marketplace. And RIM needs a rapid change in direction. Hell, jumping on windows phone 8 is a better plan than clinging to blackberry 10.

    1. Re:And you were wrong and are now changing course? by Vanderhoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And RIM needs a rapid change in direction

      I disagree.

      There's nothing they can do at this point to recover. I use to like blackberry, but your right and now they're just completely irrelevant. To think four years ago Barack Obama was angry because he was told he would have to give up his blackberry after being elected.

      P.S.
      I'm Canadian and nigher for or against Obama. I only mentioned him because I remember reading the news articles discussing his blackberry issue during the last US Presidential election.

    2. Re:And you were wrong and are now changing course? by StuartHankins · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yep absolutely. We standardized on BlackBerry and have our own BES server. All new employees who qualified for a work-provided phone received a BlackBerry. A few of us in IT turned in our BlackBerry devices and bought our own iPhones/Androids.

      Then new salespeople came on board with their own iPhones and Androids and we resisted... then executives started switching to iPhones/Androids and wanted us to set them up. You don't tell them "no". We just released an official internal how-to for setting up iPhones although it won't be supported for everyone until the Exchange 2010 upgrade is complete.

      There are few reasons to consider BlackBerry now. A few things don't work as expected, for instance accepting a meeting request on either iPhone / Android doesn't result in a response to the sender for some reason (using Exchange 2003 anyway). This may all be fixed once Exchange 2010 is in place.

    3. Re:And you were wrong and are now changing course? by Sir_Sri · · Score: 4, Informative

      You mean like people who buy or hold RIM stock? (https://www.google.ca/finance?q=TSE%3ARIM) that's down what, 75% in 12 months. The people who turfed out the founders and CEO?

      The new CEO who's pleading for time with investors? Or the same CEO who realizing how much trouble they are in has had to come out and explain why they didn't go the most obvious route to try and make money? (I will point out that the RIM founders had a completely different plan, that would have moved RIM almost entirely into the infrastructure side of the business and exited the consumer products section).

      gorwing cash horde.

      I think you mean shrinking. As of their Q1 2013 filing (which was just over a month ago) their GAAP was a 520 million dollar loss. Momentum in spite of the iphone got them to 6 months ago. And suddenly they've started to hit a brick wall. Nokia is in essentially the same boat, they had momentum in the sales channel, but no one actually wanted the new product (BB9 or WP7) so when they ran out of stuff people did want they basically hit a fiscal cliff.

      Importantly, the difference between RIM and Nokia is that Nokia *might* have a product people will want to buy 12 months from now, and can plead for cash from microsoft. RIM has nothing that people want, and no one to beg for money from.

    4. Re:And you were wrong and are now changing course? by farble1670 · · Score: 2

      I'm Canadian and nigher for or against Obama.

      what a great world we live in, where people have to announce their non-opinion of the US president lest they be raked over the coals when people interpret their comments and pro or con.

  4. RIM should hang in there... by logicassasin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The last thing the market needs is a choice between only 2 platforms for smartphones. Yes, I know that Windows Mobile is still out there as is Symbian, but because Microsoft took entirely too long to bring Windows Mobile 7 to market and Nokia really didn't push Symbian as hard as they could have (i.e getting a major player like HTC or Samsung to build Symbian based phones early in the game) they're both pretty much niche players now instead of the former powerhouse enterprise/business players they once were. At one point, when you said "Smartphone", you could only have been referring to a Blackberry, Palm, or Windows Mobile/PocketPC based phone with Symbian being the underdog. Even after June 29, 2007, when the iPhone was released, these were still considered to be true smartphones by many in business with the iPhone being the poseur.

    Palm is gone, RIM is facing tough times, and Symbian is nearly extinct. Windows Mobile 7 is not even a part of the public consciousness even though there is still plenty of advertising for it. This is sad since there's plenty of enterprise users out there that don't need/want "Robot Unicorn Attack" or "iApp For More Stupidity" alongside their messaging services.

    --
    Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
    1. Re:RIM should hang in there... by HappyEngineer · · Score: 2

      Whether it's desirable or not, that's the way it is. Everyone has a choice between 2 viable platforms and BlackBerry certainly isn't one of them.

  5. Interesting quote by The+Mister+Purple · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FTFA, Heins remarks:

    "there’s a very stable, slowly growing base of physical keyboard users and most of them are really highly ranked officers"

    So, he points out that the keyboard users are the demographic with the least growth potential AND the least staying potential, and he thinks that's a positive?

    --
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." Feynman
  6. BB10 can already run Android apps...and maybe more by Erbo · · Score: 4, Informative
    The BB10 OS is already capable of running Android apps, as evidenced by the fact that the Playbook can already do so. Out of the box, though, the only Android apps that will run are ones that have been "ported" and show up in their marketplace.

    It is possible, however, by rooting the Playbook, to open it up to full GAPPS capability, including the Google Play Store. RIMM needs to do this for BB10...and then they need to promote the hell out of this capability, saying, "BlackBerry runs all your favorite Android apps...and runs them better!" (Which is true; the QNX kernel of BB10 is far more efficient in an embedded environment than Android's Linux kernel is. This translates into increased battery life.) Karl Denninger has argued that this is the only way for RIMM to avoid complete irrelevance in the marketplace...and the company's performance since he wrote that piece in March seems to bear that out.

    They could go further, too. One enterprising hacker has gotten (some) unmodified iOS apps to run on the Playbook. And it's perfectly legal, because the developer has just created his own implementations of relevant Apple APIs, and, under the ruling in Oracle v. Google, APIs are not copyrightable and Apple can't stop him. RIMM should acquire or license this technology and extend it to work with more iOS apps, and promote the hell out of this capability, too. Imagine being able to run virtually any popular smart phone app on one phone...with better battery life than either Android phones or the iPhone. (QNX beats the iOS Darwin kernel for efficiency, too.)

    If RIMM does these two things, they could go from zero to hero in one fell swoop. If they fail to do either one...well, next stop is probably a bankruptcy court.

    --
    Be who you are...and be it in style!
  7. The price the phone to the users by tekrat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you're building a phone for executives ONLY, then make it a $1000 phone. These are people who drive 911's, M5's, Ferrari, or some other similarly high-end car. If these are the people willing to spend $300,000 for a top-of-the-line supercar, then they certainly should be willing to shell out $1 to 2 thousand for a phone. But it better be the best damn phone there is.

    I mean, if you're paying 2k for a phone, not only should it make the iPhone look like a cheap toy, it should make almost all high-tech items look like cheap toys.

    But the problem is that Apple, Samsung and HTC are all making really, really good hardware, and selling it for $200 -- a tenth of the cost. And for all of RIM's wizardry, they aren't going to beat Apple.

    So, the executive who is paying enormous sums of money for a car is going to look at the Blackberry, then look at the iPhone, and still decide that the iPhone is the better product, even though it's cheaper.

    RIM needs to get their act together and make some really smart decisions. Unfortunately, they are not.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  8. Re:Huh? by compro01 · · Score: 4, Informative

    it's all GPL so you can use as much or as little of it as you want

    You're a little off there. The kernel and other Linux bits are GPL. The Android stuff is under the Apache license.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  9. It's funny by FranTaylor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People talk about problems with android, and yet these problems are precisely where companies like RIM can differentiate themselves, by solving these problems.

    1. Re:It's funny by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 2

      I think there's HUGE potential for a 3rd vendor. Don't treat your customers like they're in an involuntary Facebook profiling network like Google does and don't take on an authoritarian attitude like Apple does. But, the DOs are what's tough. iPhones are great because of the UI, not because fanboys are brainwashed. Android is great because of the openness of development. How you bring all that together isn't exactly easy.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  10. Re:No room to differentiate? by Geeky · · Score: 2

    The Palm Pre managed a touchscreen and a pretty decent keyboard. And a pretty decent OS, for that matter.

    --
    Sigs are so 1990s. No way would I be seen dead with one.
  11. Re:BB10 can already run Android apps...and maybe m by Erbo · · Score: 2
    You're right, of course. I cited Karl Denninger's March posting in my original post; he has posted about RIMM ten times since then, and in each of those pieces he has called on RIMM to open the platform to GAPPS. They have done no such thing, and the stock price continues to dwindle.

    Soon, the only reasonable asset they'll have left will be their patent portfolio...and the best way for one of the other players to acquire that will be to wait and buy it from the bankruptcy judge.

    --
    Be who you are...and be it in style!