Linked by Howard Fosdick on Mon 30th Sep 2013 18:26 UTC
In the News So how did Blackberry become a bit player in the smartphone market it invented? Canada's Globe and Mail offers an extensive look in their article Inside the Fall of Blackberry.

According to one insider quoted in the article, the problem wasn't that the staff stopped listening to customers. It was that they never listened to them. The company simply believed that they knew better what their customers needed.

Apple has wildly succeeded by being "out front" of expressed customer needs. But few tech companies hit paydirt when following this hubristic concept. Just look at the "innovative" user interfaces customers haven't asked for and have resisted over the past few years.
Thread beginning with comment 573666
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
drcoldfoot
Member since:
2006-08-25



The Q10/Z10 pair appears to be what RIM's true answer to the iPhone should have been from the start - same OS, same internals, same supporting network but duality of interfaces to suit user preferences.


And THAT's a large reason for their failure. They still tried to tackle the consumer market when they should have stayed in their lane and focused solely on the Enterprise market. Basically, this was a tragic-comic attempt at embracing both markets. They didn't have the app selection of Android or iOS. Nor did they have the backing of their previously burned enterprise clients.

Reply Parent Score: 3

BlueofRainbow Member since:
2009-01-06

In an era when BYOD is becoming accepted by Corporate IT, embracing both markets is a must.

On the Enterprise side, it does not matter how many millions of Apps are there in the ecosystem as only the dozen or so pertinent to the business will be blessed for use and installed on the devices provided. Of course such provided devices would be locked and prevent the installation of any non-business related Apps.

On the Consumers side, number and quality of available Apps, perceived status of the brand/device, familiarity with the user interface, and being unique or following the crowd are all factors for selection. There are many choices and some distinguishing features would have been needed. With "touch" being the hot buzzword (even for desktops), devices bearing real keyboards have a limited future.

Within a BYOD environment, having a single infrastructure supporting all devices becomes mandatory. RIM had an initial edge with their BBM services. Deployement of the Android and iOS "BBM" Apps would have been necessary for success. That idea had unfortunately been killed in early 2012.

All the elements for long-term sustainability were there even if somewhat late to come to fruition. It's unfortunate that a lack of cohesion prevented any seeds of hope to sprout - internally and in the press.

Reply Parent Score: 2