Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Jun 2012 20:42 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless RIM just announced some pretty disastrous financial results, but in the press release, there's something very telling, and quite worrisome for those of us rooting for the Canadian company: BlackBerry 10 has been delayed until the first quarter of 2013. I don't want to call it at this point, but it ain't looking good.
Thread beginning with comment 524314
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not surprised
by frank on Fri 29th Jun 2012 16:35 UTC
Member since:

*If* there is a deathcount for RIMM, I agree that QNX will probably be spun off and won't die.

I'm not surprised though, that this happened. Perhaps the underpinnings of the OS has some useful architecture, but in practice, there's too much work, not only by internal staff, but also by partners and vendors (hardware and software) to go from the base QNX install (with proof-of-concept applications) to a full-fledged, polished deliverable. QNX as a business, does not have those useful relationships nor the right frame of mind - like Google, Apple or Microsoft to be successful. QNX's approach? "We don't need those relationships, because we'll also support Android applications! By virtue of our architecture, we'll have those relationships through a proxy!" Years ago, they did that also with Linux by supporting X windows. "You can now run all of your X windows applications through QNX!"

We have to recognize that the barrier to entry is higher than it was 5 years ago and a good product cannot be made behind closed doors. I'm sure that Apple, with all of their secrecy, still relies a lot on their partners to develop, integrate and deliver. This is where QNX is lacking against other large OS companies. It is what I experienced 15 years ago when I worked with them.

I don't have insider information, so take this as you will, but I believe that this delay isn't because the hardware engineering or manufacturing planning. I believe that this is a software problem and management didn't have the experience with QNX to know that you can't just plop it into flash and expect it to work flawlessly. They can't expect to get by on the old IDE and toolsets, those might need to be recreated. This is consistent with the experience that every developer who used QNX to build an "all-in-one"/convergence device in the last 18 years ended up.

For the rest of us, I think that we need to learn that technology doesn't exist without the business. The two are intertwined and you can't just say, "QNX is great" without considering how f*cking sh*tty their organizational structure is for any use case that involves partnerships.

Please read my past posts if you want to know more about my viewpoints of QNX.

Reply Score: 1