Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Mar 2013 15:51 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Thorsten Heins, BlackBerry's CEO: "Apple did a fantastic job in bringing touch devices to market ... They did a fantastic job with the user interface, they are a design icon. There is a reason why they were so successful, and we actually have to admit this and respect that. History repeats itself again I guess ... the rate of innovation is so high in our industry that if you don't innovate at that speed you can be replaced pretty quickly. The user interface on the iPhone, with all due respect for what this invention was all about is now five years old." Ironic, perhaps, that this comes from a BlackBerry CEO, but that doesn't make him wrong - although I'm sure the usual suspects will claim that it does.
Permalink for comment 555815
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: He's right but
by Nelson on Mon 18th Mar 2013 21:02 UTC in reply to "He's right but"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Innovation for the sake of change doesn't correlate with success.


I don't think innovation is immediately rewarded with success, even if it is a tangible improvement, and I point to your following point as direct evidence. There are others.

Innovation needs to be paired with execution to be effective. A poorly delivered good idea is indistinguishable from a bad idea.


Look at the Windows Phone UI. It's definitely different. They tossed out the common conventions in iOS/Android and went a different route. So how did that work out for them? How about Blackerry's playbook? New OS, new interface, complete failure. The success of their new phones remain to be seen.


Is Windows Phone that different? Fundamentally? And is it much different from the new design direction Android is going in?

The industry trend is towards a fierce reduction in complexity and minimalism. If this trend was one that brought with it negativity, we'd see a much worse reaction to Android's recent face lift.

I'm not convinced that Windows Phones are held back by the UI, they generally review extremely well. Windows Phones, BB10, and all others that come after it are limited by a market inefficiency that affects every OS vendor who doesn't carve out an unclaimed niche.


Why is it that we expect our phones to radically change their primary interface whereas we're happy with the WIMP paradigm living on our desktops for 20 years?


I think the entire WIMP angle is just semantic garbage that muddies discussion. As soon as you mention it, you'll get about 30 pedants from OSNews who think they know what WIMP really is and it'll span off into some irrelevant pissing contest. Who cares.

Blackberry needs to make a splash with a new interface because they're coming from nothing. The established players are better off with consistency than frantic UI overhauls at every release.


I don't think BlackBerry will fare better than Windows Phone or other bottom feeding OSes. There is an inherent inefficiency in the system. Carriers are very much the gatekeepers of retail success.

BlackBerry needs to either adhere to the shape that carriers want them to contort themselves in, or find a way to break the mold.

Android got to where it is because its everything an OEM and a Carrier could dream of. A no holds barred dumping ground for their shitware. Look at Windows on the Desktop for an analogous situation.

Reply Parent Score: 3