After recording the SMRpodcast last night, I pulled up and watched the first AT&T BlackBerry Torch commercial because there is an interesting quote in it. “Less an evolutionary leap, more like a triple axel.” The first time I saw this commercial, I just assumed that it was referring to the the Torch. I wonder now, however, if this really is referring to the operating system?
Regular RIMarkable readers know that I wasn’t a big fan of the BlackBerry Torch. I actually returned mine. This wasn’t, however, because I thought the device completely sucked. Quite the contrary actually… I believe that I was expecting an evolutionary leap… Exactly what this commercial says the Torch and the operating system running on it, is not.
So, if BlackBerry 6 isn’t the BlackBerry operating system that is an evolutionary leap, might the company still be working on it? Research on Motion bought QNX back in April and rumors have been floating around that QNX is working on a new BlackBerry OS that will power the upcoming BlackBerry Tablet, and, possibly even the BlackBerry Storm3.
Could it be that BlackBerry 6 is just a stopgap which allows a few recently released BlackBerry devices as well as new and refreshed ones coming out later this year to run the WebKit BlackBerry Browser that RIM promised would be out by this summer and that the real “evolutionary leap“, something I believe RIM absolutely needs to better address the consumer market, is yet to be announced?
What do you think?
What an amazing potential twist that would be…
Since the Blackberry and the Iphone are different birds of the smartphone species with different purposes and a different type of audience and user group. I am perplexed as to why there is any need for competition.
RIM’s biggest problem is hardware. It needs to be dealt with hyper-aggressively…and it just isn’t. Faster processor, more memory and larger screened devices are first up IMO.
As far as OS6 is concerned I have 2 takes:
1. There aren’t any huge issues from the consumer side, so why change it? However, its a pain in the a$$ to develop for (I know) so the app count and quality will remain low.
2. As it is a horrid platform to develop on, sh!tcanning it in favor of a platform that provides all of the consumer side functionality of OS6, as well as iOS and Android, and a more stable, fully featured, robust development toolkit makes a lot of sense. Just one problem: All of those poor developers who have been pulling their hair out using the current dev tools for OS4,5 and now 6 will have to completely re-write their code for a QNX based kernel. That, or RIM better have the ultimate ace up their sleeve: an automated code translation utility from the old OS? to QNX based kernel. Don’t hold your breath…they’ll announce it and then show a half baked product 2 yrs later.
Either way, RIM is damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
I don’t see the glimmer of hope that Rob sees buried between the lines. I wish I could. I need something to hold on to.
I think RIM could get around the existing applications issue by virtualizing OS 5 and allowing it to run as an application on their new OS. OS 5 uses max 512 MB of memory to run and store apps and that is only the newest of the new BlackBerry devices.
Virtualizing would be a workaround, and knowing RIM, it would probably be an implementable option. However, as one who works on developing mobile and virtualized desktop applications everyday, this would only serve to expose the aforementioned hardware performance issues. Virtualization is great from a server management perspective, but only serves to add a layer of latency on the application side…meaning that RIM’s already pitifully slow devices in light of the competition would lag even more.
In the end, they still need to fix the hardware performance and then look to shore up the OS.
If that is the case then the sleeping giant is stirring and we can’t count RIM out. I’m a huge supporter of RIM. I’ve never had a BB go bad on me. I’ve always left my beloved BB for another device only to abandon said device and return to the loving embrace of a BB.
So whatever RIM has in store for us crackberry addicts, I say, bring it on!
There will always be the occasional die-hard holdout for RIM…I get it and applaud your loyalty and if it works for you then great. However, the ‘we’re the big boys on the block/bloated pig theme’ didn’t work out so well for Palm (remember when they were the king and the zealots swore they’d never abandon them? How’d that work out?) or even the Palm’s successor, the iPaq. The mentality revealed in their largesse that says ‘we’ve got XX million subscribers so we’ll never die regardless of how sub-standard our devices are’ is what needs to be changed asap…like yesterday for your sake. While their global units shipped and new subscribers are still up (though didn’t meet their or Wall Street’s expectations) it is the month to month new subscribers in North America that is in free fall and as the early adopter continent it more often than not foretells the future, bleak aspects globally as well.
I held out as long as I could for the Torch, but gave up after reading the reviews and it being an AT&T exclusive. I went with the Droid Incredible on Verizon and have been extremely happy ever since… 😉
RIM, a sleeping giant??? Thanks, I needed a laugh today.
The marketing dept wants you to think that instead of an evolutionary jump in the air, RIM is jumping and throwing in some flair. I think you’re reading too much into the phrase.
Of course RIm is working on the next OS already, they were working on 6 when 5 was just being released, that’s the natural process of most software/hardware manufacturers.
I’d be willing to bet that the launch of the iPhone on Verizon along with the launch of Windows Phone 7 in the U.S. will see the BlackBerry drop from number one to number two if not number three behind iPhone and Android.
They just released an OS that was supposed to be the answer to what Apple did 4 years ago and now you are talking about if this is really the OS or just a stopgap.
I doubt it meant as much as you are reading into it. They, after all, were trying to sell the Torch in an AT&T marketing ad. That there isn’t a RIM ad. As for those comparing it to Palm, well when Palm was on the way down they weren’t being carried by at least one of the big 4 (because they felt the device had issues from early on). There also weren’t this many smaller carriers, and prepaid, offering Palm devices as is the case with Blackberry.
But, I think we can all agree that they need to do something spectacular… and soon. But, the death sentence isn’t happening nearly as soon as some would think. Palm was displaced in corporate by Blackberry. Companies switched over. In the case of Android and iPhone, they are only offering as an additional option (if at all).
I think we may be reading into it too much… i think the commercial is referring to this being less an evolutionary ‘leap’ but more an (evolutionary) ‘triple axle’ — as in greater than just a simple ‘leap’…
I am a Software Engineer and I have written BlackBerry Apps before. It’s easy as punch to write BlackBerry Apps. Alot easier than iPhone Apps (Objective C on iPhone is an extremely tricky language closer to C++). Now that I got your attention let me explain.
The reason iPhone has tons of apps is not because it is easy to code new applications. Nope. It is easy to develop UI because it has a WYSIWYG UI designer. Plus games can count on a great GPU.
Same with Google’s Android. Android is Java.
You see programmers are good at programming in JAVA. BlackBerry is Java. So is Android (granted a spiffy version of it). So why is it Android has more apps? More popular? That’s not the reason. With BlackBerry every single control and UI element needs to be thought about in abstract code and not in a drag n’ drop manner. If RIM would only come out with that, and you would see TONS more apps. FYI they have demo’d an Alpha of this. They know they need it.
The only other painful BlackBerry programming issue is the Connection Manager. Your code has to think about what connection you are on. That’s a little silly and should be fixed.
Now for those who think QNX will require folks to chuck their code are dead wrong. RIM was smart, their language for apps is JAVA. Java can run on QNX just fine. There is nothing wrong with RIM’s Java API’s. All they need to do is port some of that over. Not a trivial task, but once it’s done… Dude it’s JAVA! RIM can have any BlackBerry App load up in QNX. No virtualization or emulation. It will be just as fast as before (better because of QNX kernel).
Also there is nothing wrong with RIM’s userspace layer. Give us a WYSIWYG UI designer and we will fly! RIM’s major OS problem has to do with scalability at the kernel, not userspace. This issue will be fixed by QNX. Some folks don’t get that a computer (smartphone) is like layers. Or it should be that way. RIM did their homework and they can swap out the kernel without affecting their application or “userspace” layer.
I would ask one thing of folks. If you don’t understand Software Engineering and low level stuff like that, don’t make stuff up like alot have been doing.
Lol, I even heard someone call QNX flash based. What’s that about? Just because their car UI layer is FLASH has NOTHING to do with the kernel layer, which is what QNX is famous for.
I can see RIM doing this, and doing it fast. Port the JAVA and C++ stuff over to QNX. Then you can run unchanged your current BlackBerry Apps. Then beef up the hardware and screen resolution. The result? No more memory problems and FINALLY installing software on memory cards. Way better multitasking.
I am telling you RIM is playing their cards right. This is a smart move.
Hey Brian,
I have something that may be of interest to you that I’d like to share outside of this comment thread.
I used your contact us page to shoot you my email… I know I am posting with anon… I am just lazy that way.
I’m an application development manager (former software engineer) who has extensive experience in developing virutalized applications and unless you’ve got enough hardware muscle, all you’re doing with the virutalization is adding a layer of latency. Great, my 10K Blackberry apps can now run on QNX…but with even less performance than before. I know several developers who work on the (3) major platforms (iOS, Android and Blackberry) and by *far* they gripe about RIM’s development platform the most.
The issue with developing for Blackberry isn’t the language…it’s the god-forsaken toolset and the api availability. The toolset/IDE while slightly improved, remains horrid (I was at BB Devcon last year and as usual…lots of great promises on which they’ve drastically under-delivered and over-hyped. SEE “Super-Apps”…try running 2 or 3 of these and watch…….your…….system……bog…..down…..) They pick and choose what API’s to open up and how much, some of which are downright stupifying such as the *still* unavailable profiles api.
I’m not an Apple fanboy (was a BB lifer until Android rescued me with the Incredible), but I know several people who have no issues writing applications for Apple and think Android, Blackberry, etc is horrendous and visa versa. So I rule out those kinds of analogies as its usually a personally preference based on platform choice. To me its less about language and more about a stable, robust toolset and developer support. Which brings me to the final point: if it is so easy “as punch” to write a BB app why is there only 10K available, while there is 200K for the iPhone and approaching 100K for the Android?
The answer is obvious: consumer demand. And that bring us back to the heart of the issue that we both agree on…there is nothing wrong with OS6. It’s the 12 month old hardware (compared to others) that it runs on that is killing RIM. Corporations and IT shops (mine and all I know of included) are either outright purchasing iPhones and Androids, or, as is the case where I work, you can purchase your own device of choice and they’ll pay for the service. I’ve got a device that blows the doors off the Torch (and came out *well* before it) that allows me to get all my corp email and calendaring by syncing with the exchange webmail server and I’m free to enjoy all the benefits of a 1ghz processor, 3.7″ screen, 8gb of memory, 200+ apps installed and on average 20-50 apps/services running in the background polling/pushing data as needed. (And after installing Android 2.2 its like someone poured nitrous into it….the new re-tuned Dalvik VM is a screamer.)
If RIM’s next smartphone doesn’t elicit responses such as “holy crap did you see the new Blackberry!” then they will be in for an ever-more rapidly accelerating decline.
For you and the diehards out there….I’m hoping that doesn’t happen. But for the realists out there, I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t, given the let down that is the Torch and their ‘we’re too big to die’ attitude.
I think we are in agreement in most areas. I agree the toolset is the problem, only I am more specific.My thesis is the lack of WYSIWYG UI editing and the bad connection Manager API (lack there of).
You do have a good point there is also consumer demand. Just like where Windows PC killed Mac in the early years. Reason? PC’s had the games. Steve Jobs did not make that mistake with the iPhone. They have a top notch feature set for game developers. Which I have said before that RIM’s failure to include OpenGL with the Torch, could of been the single most strategic mistake RIM could of done. It will scare away all true game developers now, because they can’t be guaranteed OpenGL on all new Blackberry devices. No OpenGL means no games except side scrollers! If RIM can get the games then I bet you will see way more consumer excitement.
Another reason QNX will really help them out here.
Also I don’t think RIM will use virtualization to get the apps working in QNX. I already state they will port the API’s over to QNX. BlackBerry legacy apps can be as native as RIM wants them to be. If they do what I describe the performance will be just as good if not better on QNX with similar hardware.
But I agree their hardware is bad. They love Marvell CPU’s which are good procs if they would adopt the newest ones. Just today Marvell just came out with a multi-core CPU/GPU that would SCREAM on QNX’s multi-threaded multi-core real-time kernel.
I agree they need to adopt better hardware. We agree. But I don’t think it will matter without QNX. Their old kernel does not scale well on newer hardware.
Brian:
Your post is of interest to me and I would like to hear more and get a better understanding of the technology and the potential. Could you please call me at your earliest convenience to discuss further.
Thanks and Regards,
Stuart Weinberg
Reporter,
Dow Jones Newswires, Contributor to the Wall Street Journal
416-306-2026
stuart.weinberg@dowjones.com
Rob, interesting post. Given the pressures RIM is operating under, I doubt that you are reading too much into such a prominent and deliberately “understated” turn of phrase to launch a major release (only in adworld would “triple axel” be not hyperbolic enough) . If you think about the way RIM’s rivals market, every new release is. . . . insanely transformative. . . . shattering. . . . life-altering. . . . magic. . . . .OMG! . . . .OMG! And that sort of approach, once the pitchman has mastered the red-face test, has generally worked.
So it’s my guess that “triple axel” consciously reflects the interregnum timing of the Torch, probably with respect to the true category evolution to ONX-based OS, and possibly also, to the tablet, and to a handheld release that is designed to be the hand-in-glove to the tablet. RIM, doubtless aware at the time the Torch was released of the impending criticisms of its screen resolution and its processor choice, was also managing expectations (and at that, mostly tech-media expectations – in practical usage, the resolution and the processor speed are largely non-issues), with an eye toward what ultimately occurred a few days ago, when RIM’s restraint was rewarded by the positive market acceptance of its positive quarterly earnings.
When RIM surprisingly integrated its disclaimer of an evolutionary leap directly into its ad campaign, it allowed RIM to disseminate the begged questions — if not now, when, if not Torch, what? That launch ad definitely had the feel of “preparing the grounds” and not just with respect to the lively series of Torch ads that have followed.
Not to crank-off, here, but I do wish you would leave off already, with your mild but persistent Torch trolling. We get already that you were deeply and personally wounded that the Torch wasn’t your sugar-plum pony of a Dunewood special. Look at the lower right-hand side of this article, which feature links to your sunny series of variations on a theme — “Why Dunewood Doesn’t Like the Torch”. It must work for you to get website hits, but its getting kind of silly. I know! Blackberry should be Android! Never mind the financial press and the market reaction, Dunewood says RIM’s positive results are bad!
If you have gotten to the point where you have to clear your throat and disclaim before every post you make about RIM, than unless you are a double-agent, it may be time for you to move to a site dedicated to the one-phone of your current dreams and write and post about that piece of sublime wizardry. That would be a shame, because you otherwise do fine work here. RIM is its ownself, and knows its business and its markets and its customers better than the bloggers. Bloggers are transfixed on the high-end, luxury units almost to the exclusion of objective reality. So you see these dire predictions of doom because the Torch isn’t the whatever, and down a few lines on the same site is another article, where an “old” RIM release, like a Pearl, or a Curve, is coming to a new carrier and is eagerly awaited by a neglected (from the p.o.v. of the media) segment of the market. If you analogize the coverage of cell phones to the similar coverage of pc’s and laptops, that media segment (including the bloggers) is more mature, as is demonstrated by the proportionality of the coverage. Laptop reviewers consider releases in the context of their place in the actual market, and don’t review each new enterprise-directed model against a high-end gamer rig.
A little harsh, no? Rob still uses a Blackberry and is a big advocate, but is just being honest when he’s stated that the Torch is the the best Blackberry RIM has made, but that it falls well short of what the competition is offering. I think if anything, calling a spade a spade, especially on a BB blog just means he isn’t a sycophant. I read more feeds than I care to count, but this is one of the few BB feeds I still read after migrating to Android exactly because he calls it like he sees it…otherwise there are plenty of ‘BB is great! The month over month new subscribers isn’t dropping nearly as bad as the numbers indicate!!’ feel-good blogs to choose from.
High-end luxury units? Really? I paid a whopping $199 for my Droid Incredible. Hell, you can get (2) Samsung Fascinates for $199 right now at Verizon during their buy one / get one which makes it $100 per unit. I realize times are tough, but if you’ve got the money to spend $50, you probably have the money to spend $100 and get a unit that isn’t 6 months behind the curve already….no pun intended….but yes, thoroughly enjoyed… 😉
Perhaps send RIM a few comments like ‘Get off your ass and make some seriously jaw-dropping devices’ is more in order and will likely do RIM more good than banging on Robb for writing what he sees the truth.
Justifiably harsh. It’s not just the heavy-handed critique, its the constant repetitions and variations on that theme, and the working cites back to negative posts in newer articles, as if RD were concerned that we might forget he thinks the Torch rots. Its already tiresome, and I’d submit not a good basis going forward for RD to continue to process ever new development as confiriming his anti-Torch bias.
I could go and bring back examples, but what would be the point? If the RD’s of this world really want to be what they see themselves as (not just trend-setters– but market-makers) then they’re going to have to work a little harder at it. When you punt out things like RD’s recent Top Ten List of why he returns his Torch to RIM, EVERY DAY, like a little old lady withdrawing and depositing the same $5 at her local branch! The ten items are mostly just shadings of RD’s sense of having his handset Christmas morning ruined. It’s underpowered because other devices have more power? Its too small because, even though I can’t say the screen is too small, the specs disappoint me? I like the Droidish units. But I only use 1 phone at a time and for 5 years its been Blackberry, but when I went on a trip I left my phone in the car (oh really, Mr. 1phone?) and then, because I had a Fabu-Droid I didn’t miss the Torch over-much, so I return the Torch to RIM EVERY DAY! Did I mention I am underwhelmed? Not psyched? Not stoked? Not giddy? Under-enthused? About the Torch? Why the list could easily have been Top 20!
Oh just one thing on the evolutionary triple axel debate.
You do know that evolutionary is not revolutionary. I think the argument that RIM was hinting at QNX would hold more water if they said “Less a revolutionary leap, more like a triple axel.”
If they said that then I would agree with the the assertion of leading us down the QNX path. But to me I take “more like a triple axel” to be a leap farther than just a mere “evolutionary” update.
Of course you could argue that means they have something “revolutionary” coming. I know we are word parsing here. But I doubt they were hinting at something.
“if it is so easy “as punch” to write a BB app why is there only 10K available, while there is 200K for the iPhone and approaching 100K for the Android?”
There’s only 10K in App World, but how many are in the other places where you can get BB apps?
Examples:
http://store.rimarkable.com/
http://software.crackberry.com/homeSoftware.asp
http://store.handmark.com/c/33/blackberry-software
http://games.glu.com/game/deer-hunter-3d
I really don’t care about what other people think about the Torch.BB in comparision to all the other devices out there… everything about the Torch.BB works for me without all the glitz and hype, and I am extremely HAPPY with the stablility and security RIM offers on their devices.
Looks like you were dead on with this one. Good call…
A lot can happen between announcement and release, of course, but the Playbook announcement was generally well received and the Blackberry tablet looks well thought out. Even with a Samsung and/or Dell tablet beating the Playbook to the drop, that will provide RIM with some intelligence as to their own device and how well the smartphone-and-tablet pairing works and where the problems lie. So it seems that the Playbook may have a big enough impact toi pull the handhelds’ opsys’s along with it. I know there are unanswered questions about additional memory and battery life for the Playbook. But with the capacity of paired Blackberry smartphones to carry large media cards, will everyone miss having a redundant card on their Playbook? And will a paired Playbook significantly impact the battery life on the smartphone?