I own a work BB Curve and a personal Android phone. I'm also a BES admin. The only thing I can see that Blackberry's have going for them is decent admin control on the BES (remote wipe etc) and good reliable email push, most of which you can get on other devices pretty well with a few apps. By any other measure the Android phone and iPhones totally outclass them. Android has many more apps, BB apps tend to be more expensive and very dully business orientated (financial tickers etc).
The newer BB next gen devices aren't very exciting and the Storm 2 is especially poor. I'd say the BB is a (very) good business email device and that's about it. They were very late to the 3G show, they still sell curves etc without 3G which to me looks very penny pinching and crappy now.
So who's making RIM number one, it surely can't be all just business sales. I wouldn't thank you for one as a personal device, but you do see it. Do people just like the full keyboards for social networking or something?
Or will this RIM advantage disappear as the market for smartphone grows overall and dwarfs the business sales that have put RIM where they are?
I was just thinking he must be the world's naivest man!
After Internet Explorer lock in, closed network protocols (SMB, AD, Exchange, SMB2, Kerberos) , private API's only MS apps can use, Sharepoint only working well on IE, patent trolling on FAT etc etc he can't believe a convicted monopolist wouldn't subvert the hallowed ISO standards process for profit.
Wow, either naive or just thinks MS critics must be motivated by bitterness and jealousy, 20 minutes of googling and a little bit of insight (and not just buying everything MS say as innocent mistakes) would have set him right when it might have made a difference.
Surely MS should go after Google for FAT patent infringement on the Linux kernel in Android. I wonder why not...Google would probably fight and potentially invalidate these patents and that would be the end of this MS revenue stream from everyone.
You are totally correct. Serial is nice and simple and would be perfect IF everyone used the same wiring on the connectors, there was a standard plug (preferably not R-J45, there's a recipe for confusion),there was a standard speed/parity (or a simple negotiation mechanism), people only used simple RX-TX for signalling (which they sadly don't), standardized/simplified flow control (really needed for xyzmodem, some devices insist on HW flow control), I didn't have to have tons of cables (one per device practically). TFTP/HTTP is no use when a device is so dead that the network doesn't work.
I'd settle for a more standardised rs-232 if the world could get there.
To be honest I can't imagine you've ever had to admin too large a setup. If you have, they must be pretty cookie cuttered e.g maybe a web farm. If you have say 100 machines that a lot of which perform unique functions you'd not want to roll out a new OS release annually, just too much stuff changes/breaks.
Or else consider you are an enterprise application developer you have to port/repair your app as libs change with a whole new OS release. And you end up supporting all the old OS versions out there as your customers don't or refuse to switch their OS annually.
In these sorts of environments in businesses you'd never see your home, you'd constantly be repairing broken stuff, that's changed the way it works. I have Fedora on my desktop (to see where RH is going basically, and OK more bleeding edge than Debian) and I'm constantly having to fix stuff the broke with a major release, granted mainly closed source stuff (though not always), but there's a lot of that in business, e.g VMWare, NVIDIA, my sound is screwy at the moment, the NFS server was broken for a while. I'd hate that repeated times 100 odd effecting loads of users. We go through the same pain with a new RH release (though lesser) but at least it doesn't happen very often.
Nothing against Debian, it's great, but in enterprise space the predictability of a 7 year OS release (and a new version of the OS every few years) is a major boon. But long term support doesn't excite unpaid devs enough for it to really happen in the totally free space.
And HP-UX.. Along with Outlook Express on both.
See the Wikipedia page,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for _UNIX
MS promised you could have a standard IE browser across all platforms. However as soon as the Netscape threat was out of the way it was discontinued without warning (good luck if you were a cross platform business that took their advice, MS listens and serves it's customers don't you know). I don't see how MS would treat this any differently. Even if the Linux implementation is open source they just have to load the MS one with patented codecs etc.
Sendmail X may address many of Sendmail's orginal design problems (certainly seems more modular). Or have they blotted their copy book one too many times in most people's eyes.
See http://sendmail.org/sm-X/release-smX-0.1.Beta2.0.h tml
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't realise the iPhone lacked some of these still. Oh well.
The features you mention of the BB though are all present on Android however (except the keyboard is device dependant of course).
I own a work BB Curve and a personal Android phone. I'm also a BES admin. The only thing I can see that Blackberry's have going for them is decent admin control on the BES (remote wipe etc) and good reliable email push, most of which you can get on other devices pretty well with a few apps. By any other measure the Android phone and iPhones totally outclass them. Android has many more apps, BB apps tend to be more expensive and very dully business orientated (financial tickers etc).
The newer BB next gen devices aren't very exciting and the Storm 2 is especially poor. I'd say the BB is a (very) good business email device and that's about it. They were very late to the 3G show, they still sell curves etc without 3G which to me looks very penny pinching and crappy now.
So who's making RIM number one, it surely can't be all just business sales. I wouldn't thank you for one as a personal device, but you do see it. Do people just like the full keyboards for social networking or something?
Or will this RIM advantage disappear as the market for smartphone grows overall and dwarfs the business sales that have put RIM where they are?
Yeah true only nerds care, but you'd hope someone on an ISO file formats committee would be nerdy enough to care about this. It's his job!
I was just thinking he must be the world's naivest man!
After Internet Explorer lock in, closed network protocols (SMB, AD, Exchange, SMB2, Kerberos) , private API's only MS apps can use, Sharepoint only working well on IE, patent trolling on FAT etc etc
he can't believe a convicted monopolist wouldn't subvert the hallowed ISO standards process for profit.
Wow, either naive or just thinks MS critics must be motivated by bitterness and jealousy, 20 minutes of googling and a little bit of insight (and not just buying everything MS say as innocent mistakes) would have set him right when it might have made a difference.
Surely MS should go after Google for FAT patent infringement on the Linux kernel in Android. I wonder why not...Google would probably fight and potentially invalidate these patents and that would be the end of this MS revenue stream from everyone.
You are totally correct. Serial is nice and simple and would be perfect IF everyone used the same wiring on the connectors, there was a standard plug (preferably not R-J45, there's a recipe for confusion),there was a standard speed/parity (or a simple negotiation mechanism), people only used simple RX-TX for signalling (which they sadly don't), standardized/simplified flow control (really needed for xyzmodem, some devices insist on HW flow control), I didn't have to have tons of cables (one per device practically). TFTP/HTTP is no use when a device is so dead that the network doesn't work.
I'd settle for a more standardised rs-232 if the world could get there.
To be honest I can't imagine you've ever had to admin too large a setup. If you have, they must be pretty cookie cuttered e.g maybe a web farm. If you have say 100 machines that a lot of which perform unique functions you'd not want to roll out a new OS release annually, just too much stuff changes/breaks.
Or else consider you are an enterprise application developer you have to port/repair your app as libs change with a whole new OS release. And you end up supporting all the old OS versions out there as your customers don't or refuse to switch their OS annually.
In these sorts of environments in businesses you'd never see your home, you'd constantly be repairing broken stuff, that's changed the way it works. I have Fedora on my desktop (to see where RH is going basically, and OK more bleeding edge than Debian) and I'm constantly having to fix stuff the broke with a major release, granted mainly closed source stuff (though not always), but there's a lot of that in business, e.g VMWare, NVIDIA, my sound is screwy at the moment, the NFS server was broken for a while. I'd hate that repeated times 100 odd effecting loads of users. We go through the same pain with a new RH release (though lesser) but at least it doesn't happen very often.
Nothing against Debian, it's great, but in enterprise space the predictability of a 7 year OS release (and a new version of the OS every few years) is a major boon. But long term support doesn't excite unpaid devs enough for it to really happen in the totally free space.
Eh well the original we had running. UltraVNC Symantec Virus Scanner Acrobat Reader Basically our whole standard setup except the MS stuff.
And HP-UX.. Along with Outlook Express on both. See the Wikipedia page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for _UNIX
MS promised you could have a standard IE browser across all platforms. However as soon as the Netscape threat was out of the way it was discontinued without warning (good luck if you were a cross platform business that took their advice, MS listens and serves it's customers don't you know). I don't see how MS would treat this any differently. Even if the Linux implementation is open source they just have to load the MS one with patented codecs etc.
Sendmail X may address many of Sendmail's orginal design problems (certainly seems more modular). Or have they blotted their copy book one too many times in most people's eyes. See http://sendmail.org/sm-X/release-smX-0.1.Beta2.0.h tml