Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 22nd Dec 2011 18:59 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless I doubt Research In Motion really knew what hit them back when the iPhone launched. I doubt they really knew what hit them when Android steamrolled the smartphone market. And, today, I still doubt they really know what the heck they are supposed to do to turn their sinking ship around. Update: RIM contacted us with a statement on the matter - they state everything in the BGR article is wrong. Read on for the full statement.
Thread beginning with comment 501032
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Worse than iPhone iOS 1.0?
by Codester on Fri 23rd Dec 2011 00:51 UTC
Codester
Member since:
2008-10-24

iOS didn't get multitasking until version 4. Are we to believe that multitasking QNX ported to the BlackBerry doesn't have multitasking?

Symbian had multitasking before iOS.

I have a BlackBerry PlayBook and the OS seems fine to me. You use your finger to select, scroll, etc. It will be interesting to see how long Apple fanboys can claim there is a significant difference between an Apple tablet/phone and a reasonably priced tablet/phone.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Worse than iPhone iOS 1.0?
by tony on Fri 23rd Dec 2011 01:21 in reply to "Worse than iPhone iOS 1.0?"
tony Member since:
2005-07-06

iOS didn't get multitasking until version 4. Are we to believe that multitasking QNX ported to the BlackBerry doesn't have multitasking?

Symbian had multitasking before iOS.

I have a BlackBerry PlayBook and the OS seems fine to me. You use your finger to select, scroll, etc. It will be interesting to see how long Apple fanboys can claim there is a significant difference between an Apple tablet/phone and a reasonably priced tablet/phone.


Apple-haters always rail on the multitasking bit. Apple has its faults, but that wasn't one of them. True multi-tasking for a mobile device was highly overrated.

Even with iPhone OS 1, when you went to the home screen, you didn't "quit" the app, at least not in the way we're used to. The application would suspend, and when it ran again it would be at the same point it was before. True multitasking? No. But it worked great. It also solved a major issue that I had with my previous phone, Windows Mobile 5, which processes could go out of control, eat up battery, and be tough to kill. I don't want a friggin' task manager on my phone. I don't want or need to do process and memory management.

For regular users, this was great. Even for myself, I found it refreshing and far more convienient. Plus, there wasn't a single thing I wanted to do that I couldn't with Apple's "false multitasking".

Reply Parent Score: 1

Codester Member since:
2008-10-24

What does iOS have that makes it worth paying a premium for?

Reply Parent Score: 2

karunko Member since:
2008-10-28

Apple-haters always rail on the multitasking bit.

Haters? Like them or not, facts are facts. Real multitasking had been fairly common on other "less cool" devices.

Plus, there wasn't a single thing I wanted to do that I couldn't with Apple's "false multitasking".

Then you didn't listen to internet radios, use Skype or maybe even good old IRC? Because these were the sort of applications that got disconnected as soon as you switched to the home screen, and the fact that you didn't have to launch them again once you were done is irrelevant: you had to start from scratch anyway.


RT.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Worse than iPhone iOS 1.0?
by SeeM on Fri 23rd Dec 2011 14:20 in reply to "RE: Worse than iPhone iOS 1.0?"
SeeM Member since:
2011-09-10

"The application would suspend, and when it ran again it would be at the same point it was before. True multitasking? No. But it worked great."

Just as in PalmOS. ;) But in palmos it was better. I can start typing a memo and, without saving it, switch to calendar, then again to memo and continue typing.

Reply Parent Score: 1