Slashdot Mirror
BlackBerry 10 Review: Good, But Too Late?
An anonymous reader writes "Ars has an extensive review of the newly-released BlackBerry 10 operating system. Since it's such a late entry into the market, the tech community has been eyeballing the new operating system with trepidation — would all that time go to waste with a poor offering, or would BlackBerry 10 be a reasonable alternative to iOS and Android? Well, it seems BlackBerry (the company formerly known as RIM) actually put the time to good use. The review finds most of the UI innovations to actually be.. innovative. "BlackBerry took a lot of time to see what the competition is doing, and then it worked to refine its operating system. It essentially had an excellent cheat sheet, filled with everything that has worked wonderfully and all the things that have bombed. That said, BlackBerry still has to mold its product for its two huge core audiences: the business-oriented multi-tasker and the developing smartphone markets. To that end, it has included all of the essential features and apps to appeal to both of those parties. The corporate user has his or her share of content to watch on the train ride to work, games and apps to help keep busy when not entrenched in a meeting, and the perfect Hub for messaging (not to mention the literal split between work and personal environments)." However, the review also notes that the system is not really designed to make people drop their Android or iOS devices, so uptake is going to be slow at best. The question for the platform's success (and the company's) is no longer 'Is it any good? but 'Is it too late?'"
There's also a review of the z10 smartphone itself.
Does it still need a BES server to interact with the corporate environment? Is it still a mess of expensive licensing and support? The first person who walks into my office to show me their shiny new BB10 and wants to get his company e-mail on it is going to be sorely disappointed when he finds out that he just blew $300 and a two year contract on a phone that won't work with our network because there isn't a chance in Hell that I'm spinning up another BES. Not now, not ever again. It was Good Riddance when I finally kicked that crap to the curb.
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Yes, and if were a 'devices' company they would have to charge more, perhaps work with carriers etc., but the part about skinning Android - and putting their effort into that skin, and into getting to market fast - could have been the same.
Amazon has their own appstore, their own push notification service, their own browser, their own payment service, etc. For most of the stuff that matters they made it their own.
Would it have made sense for them to spend an extra year on the stuff their customers will never see?
And in the end, this much touted QNX, which cost RIM so much, doesn't actually sound so great. For example, the battery life is apparently terrible. If I'm not careful to keep my Playbook charged then it is toast (this has happened to several friends). I'm not saying QNX is bad, but it wasn't worth the delay.
The biggest security issues with Android are
#1. manufacturers who don't provide updates (there was a good article from the ACLU in the last few days).
#2. it is simply not a priority for most of its users and the manufacturers, so not much emphasis is put into it.
#3. the open appstore - in my opinion much less of an issue then #1, and #2.
RIM could easily resolve all of these issues. #3 is the hardest because it means creating their own appstore, but that's what we are talking about anyway.
Getting QNX ready took 2 years. How long would it take RIM to create a distribution of Android that addressed these issues.
One reason I'm bummed about the route RIM took is because I would have loved to have seen what RIM could do with Android. Now, instead, we are questioning whether they even have a future.
Finally, you are talking about QNX as some kind'of salvation. I"m hearing a lot of that these days, but when I read the reviews of BB10 I see nothing to suggest that QNX itself will save RIM. The good stuff is the Hub and Blackberry Balance - both of these have nothing to do with QNX. Yeah, it's nice and slick and responsive, but iOS and Android (as of 4.1) are now too.
The only thing I see in the reviews that is really about the core OS is the complaints that the battery life is horrible.
There is this company called Amazon - I guess you haven't heard of them...
"If it was so easy to rework Android the way you suggest company's would be doing it."
Built their own app store, notification system, browser, payment services, user interface, all on top of Android. You should check it out.
" BlackBerry is positioning themselves for the future....not for the now. "
Yeah, unfortunately, companies that don't worry about the 'now' end up not having much of a future. While you are learning about Amazon, you might want to check BB's stock price...
Actually, your sarcastic statement may be more true than you suspect.
Merely skinning another phone company's Android wouldn't do much for Blackberry, or any other phone company. But, if all the stupid shit that has been added on by the phone companies were dropped, and Android were recompiled and built FOR SECURITY - then it just might have been a better Blackberry OS.
You will note, please, that I'm not stating that as a certainty. I'm merely pointing out that Android has been mismanaged by almost everyone, for their own profit. Linux is always a good starting point for a good operating system. But, any idiot with root can destroy the best of operating systems.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I recall the exact same BS coming from Linux zealots a 10 years ago - buy a Zaurus it runs Linux!!! Yes it did and the device was still an expensive, battery sucking, heap of shit compared to a Palm or even a Windows Mobile devices of the same vintage. Palm devices especially were popular not for the prowess of the kernel but because they actually did what they were built for.