App developers: Ready to be forced to write Blackberry apps?

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by Bert, Jan 22, 2015.

  1. Bert

    Bert Guest

    Blackberry (a Candian company) wants to have the US government force all
    app developers to supply versions of all their apps for the Blackberry.
    It's all about "neutrality," of course.

    http://blogs.blackberry.com/2015/01/blackberry-net-neutrality/

    Therefore, neutrality must be mandated at the application and
    content layer if we truly want a free, open and
    non-discriminatory internet. All wireless broadband customers
    must have the ability to access any lawful applications and
    content they choose, and applications/content providers must be
    prohibited from discriminating based on the customer’s mobile
    operating system.

    Note: mandated. prohibited.
     
    Bert, Jan 22, 2015
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Bert

    Guest Guest

    it's all about desperation.

    they're dead and they know it.
     
    Guest, Jan 22, 2015
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Bert

    DevilsPGD Guest

    I look forward to seeing BBM for Windows x64, PalmOS, and BeOS, at least
    if we want a truly free, open and non-discriminatory internet.
     
    DevilsPGD, Jan 22, 2015
    #3
  4. When taken as it's *written*, not what was/is probably *meant*:
    Complete idiocy!

    There are millions and millions of apps for "mobile operating
    system"s, and there are many more "mobile operating system"s than
    Android, iPhone's and BlackBerry's (and Windows Phone's, which he
    apparently 'forgot'). *But* one needs to have a *clue* to realize that
    reality, which is apparently is too big an ask from this CEO!
     
    Frank Slootweg, Jan 22, 2015
    #4
  5. Not only them, but also all flavors of Windows, all flavors of Linux,
    all Android-like clones, all OSs of all not_dumb_but_not_smart_either
    mobile devices, etc., etc., ad infinitum.

    Case in point: I have a paper-tape of the 1960's era BCS (Basic
    Control System), i.e. a "mobile operating system" and I'm looking
    forward to BlackBerry porting *all* their apps to BCS.
     
    Frank Slootweg, Jan 22, 2015
    #5
  6. Bert

    DevilsPGD Guest

    Or heck, let's just stick to mobile devices. I'm trying to find the iOS
    App Store link for BlackBerry Travel, but so far, no luck.
     
    DevilsPGD, Jan 22, 2015
    #6
  7. Bert

    Alan Meyer Guest

    Agreed, but perhaps Blackberry is pursuing a different course. Maybe
    they don't expect to win the case but are hoping that Google, Apple, and
    Microsoft will just "settle" the case (i.e., pay them money.)

    However I'd think that Google, Apple and Microsoft would rather fight
    than pay Blackberry and set a bad precedent.

    Or maybe this is like the Santa Cruz lawsuit against IBM for supposed
    copyright violations in Linux. It was secretly bankrolled by Microsoft.
    Maybe Microsoft (or some other Apple or Google competitor) is just
    trying to muck with their competition.
     
    Alan Meyer, Jan 22, 2015
    #7
  8. Bert

    Your Name Guest

    Translation: We're a usless bunch of cretins with products nobosy
    wants, and we need the Government to intervene in a last-ditch attempt
    to save our useless business. :-\



    Not even Microsloth were that stupid.
     
    Your Name, Jan 23, 2015
    #8
  9. Bert

    Doc O'Leary Guest

    For your reference, records indicate that
    Clearly the Blackberry CEO is clueless about both technology and double-
    edged swords. As an app developer, it is *BlackBerry* that prevents me
    from compiling my app for their devices. Anyone looking to mandate
    something might just as easily be convinced that BlackBerry should be
    forced to clean-room reverse engineer everyone else’s APIs. Have fun
    paying for that, Johnny, as your company circles the drain.
     
    Doc O'Leary, Jan 23, 2015
    #9
  10. Bert

    Your Name Guest

    "Circles the drain"?? BlackBerry is already gone, they just haven't
    acknowledged the fact yet. Its joining Nokia in the big has-been bin in
    the sky - both companies got what they deserved for sitting
    complacently on their fat backsides and letting the rest of the world
    pass them by, and then whining because they were left behind.
     
    Your Name, Jan 23, 2015
    #10
  11. Bert

    Daniel James Guest

    That's not what Chen is saying. He's saying that open protocols and
    standards should be used so that any device can be made to operate with
    any service.

    He's not saying that an app developer should have to supply versions of
    his apps for all device platforms, he's saying that service providers
    should make it possible for app developers to create client
    applications that enable their services to be accessed by apps running
    on any platform.

    Note that Blackberry already do support running of Android apps on
    their devices, and that they have made their proprietary Blackberry
    Messenger service accessible from other platforms than Blackberry.

    Apparently he wants Blackberry to be able to provide a client for
    Apple's iMessage service so that Blackberries can talk to iPhones but
    Apple won't allow it -- I don't think he's suggesting that Apple should
    provide the app. That doesn't seem unreasonable.

    I don't know what the issue is with Netflix -- from what I read online
    it seems that the Android Netflix app runs on Blackberries (but perhaps
    not very well). I imagine it may be that Netflix don't feel that
    Blackerry is now a sufficiently large market for it to be worth their
    while to develop an app especially for it, and DRM considerations
    probably make it difficult for Netflix to release the information
    Blackberry would need to write their own. Such things are always
    difficult, as the copyright holders probably require DRM to be part of
    Netflix's solution (even though DRM is a provably useless technology)
    and Netflix need to placate them.

    All in all, I think Chen's position is not an unreasonable one. He
    simply wants providers of networked services to be required to make
    their services available in an open way -- which is surely also in the
    interest of the providers of those services, as it ensures that their
    services will be available to the largest possible market.
     
    Daniel James, Jan 23, 2015
    #11
  12. Bert

    Daniel James Guest

    Do not dismiss Blackberry so quickly. They're only dead if people stop
    buying their stuff ... and that will only happen if the buying public
    start believing the outpourings of doom-sayers like yourself, and
    so-called tech journalists who are more interested in writing
    attention-getting copy than presenting a fair appraisal of the merits
    of the company and its products.

    Prom a technical perspective, Blackberry are doing some interesting and
    clever stuff, and doing it rather well. From a commercial perspective
    they are doing less well, largely because of premature and exaggerated
    rumours of their death.

    Give them a chance.
    That's not what Nokia did ... Nokia manifestly didn't sit on its
    backside, but it pursued too many routed forward, and when it couldn't
    decide which of its own entirely admirable and worthwhile product lines
    to follow it threw them both away in a fit of pique and licensed
    Windows. Even then, it didn't sit around, it made about the best
    Windows phones you could (given the inbuilt shortcomings of Windows).

    Nokia got it wrong ... but it certainly didn't sit around doing
    nothing.
     
    Daniel James, Jan 23, 2015
    #12
  13. Bert

    Bert Guest

    Yes it is.
    You missed the part about "application and content layer?" And "ability
    to access any lawful applications and content?" And
    "applications/content providers?"

    Therefore, neutrality must be mandated at the application and
    content layer if we truly want a free, open and
    non-discriminatory internet. All wireless broadband customers
    must have the ability to access any lawful applications and
    content they choose, and applications/content providers must be
    prohibited from discriminating based on the customer’s mobile
    operating system.

    Mandated. Prohibited.
     
    Bert, Jan 23, 2015
    #13
  14. Bert

    Rod Speed Guest

    He's right, for once.
    And they have done that.
    It has happened already, in droves.
    Its never about the merits of the company and its products,
    what matters in that market is what apps are available for
    the product and the reason the CEO is howling is because
    **** all are actually stupid enough to bother with that
    platform anymore, because its obvious its doomed.
    But not enough of that to ensure that enough
    choose their products over the alternatives.
    If they were actually doing that, the CEO wouldn't
    have to howl about no one who matters writing apps
    for his products.
    Very badly in fact.
    Nope, because that operation is doomed, you watch.
    They had their chance, and blew it.
    It is actually with the stupid decision to use Windows Phone.
    Nokia has always done that and that worked out very
    well for them until Apple and Google turned the entire
    mobile phone market on its head and Nokia did nothing
    about that radical change that had happened to that market.
    Their OS had passed its useby date and they knew it.

    It was never going to be able to compete with iOS and android.
    Nokia eventually realised that it had passed its useby date, MUCH too late.
    And that was a terminally stupid choice to make.
    But it was completely stupid to use Windows.
    And have lost the mobile market because they fucked up so badly.
    True, but it fucked up completely.
     
    Rod Speed, Jan 23, 2015
    #14
  15. Bert

    Guest Guest

    the public has already have stopped buying their stuff.

    blackberry's market share is a percent or two and those who buy them
    hate them so much that they return them even when they were free (which
    is how the below happened):

    <http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/04/11/analyst-blackberry-z10-returns-o
    utnumber-sales/>
    Perhaps worse, according to a report from Detwiler Fenton, customer
    returns of the Z10 are actually outnumbering sales.
    the journalists are reporting what has already happened. blackberry is
    for all intents, dead. they're hoping that they might be able to do
    *something* but they keep fucking up.
    nothing premature or exaggerated. they're on their death bed. nobody
    wants their stuff anymore.
    what for? there are *much* better alternatives now.
     
    Guest, Jan 23, 2015
    #15
  16. Bert

    Guest Guest

    he's delusional.

    what advantage is it for a developer to use an open (and possibly less
    desirable) protocol so that a platform with 1% market share can use it?
    the answer is *none*.
    he's delusional.
    the only reason they can run android apps is because they'd be totally
    dead if they didn't.
    he's delusional and it's completely unreasonable, if for no other
    reason that apple would need to open up the encryption so that it could
    interoperate and they won't be doing that any time soon.
     
    Guest, Jan 23, 2015
    #16
  17. Yes, it *is* what he is saying. Your second sentence describes what he
    *should* be saying.

    Some of his text:

    "Therefore, if we are truly to have an open internet, policymakers
    should demand openness not just at the traffic/transport layer, but also
    at the content/applications layer of the ecosystem. Banning carriers
    from discriminating but allowing content and applications providers to
    continue doing so will solve nothing."

    Note "[content/]applications layer", i.e. *applications*, not APIs.
    The "applications providers" in the last sentence is unambigous, i.e.
    he wants the "*applications* providers" to be banned from
    descriminating.

    Another part:

    "Key to BlackBerry's turnaround has been a strategy of application and
    content neutrality. For example, we opened up our proprietary BlackBerry
    Messenger (BBM) service in 2013, making it available for download on our
    competitors' devices."

    I.e. BlackBerry developped the BBM *app* for iPhone and Android and
    that's the kind of thing BlackBerry excepts in return from others, and
    he gives examples of that:

    "Apple does not allow BlackBerry or Android users to download Apple's
    iMessage messaging service."

    Note *"download"*! Since one cannot download "Apple's iMessage
    messaging *service*", he means people can not download an *app* to
    *access* that service. He doesn't say who should write that app.

    Same for:

    "Netflix, which has forcefully advocated for carrier neutrality, has
    discriminated against BlackBerry customers by refusing to make its
    streaming movie service available to them."

    Netflix *cannot* "refuse make its streaming movie *service* available
    to them", it can only 'decide' not to *write* an *app* for BlackBerry
    devices.

    And *very* clear in:

    "Many other applications providers similarly offer service only to
    iPhone and Android users."

    Again "*applications* providers", not "*service* providers".

    If all this is not what he meant, then he should either resign or sack
    the one(s) that let's him utter nonsense like this.

    *If*, he meant what you think he meant, he could just have said that
    these *service* providers should open-up/provide *API*s to allow
    *BlackBerry* to write apps to *access* their *services*. That way it
    would be crystal clear as to what BlackBerry wants (APIs) and what
    BlackBery is willing to do (write apps using those APIs).

    But he didn't write anything even remotely similar to that, did he!?
    carrier neutrality, has discriminated agains

    [...]
     
    Frank Slootweg, Jan 23, 2015
    #17
  18. Bert

    DevilsPGD Guest

    It's not unreasonable, but BBM hasn't done this. There's no API to write
    a BBM client, and it's not platform agnostic, it just happens to have
    clients on a couple specific third party platforms. I still can't
    develop a BBM client for Ubuntu's phone, or my Surface tablet.
     
    DevilsPGD, Jan 23, 2015
    #18
  19. Bert

    Your Name Guest

    People have already stopped "buying their stuff" ... mainly because
    it's crap and 5+ years behind everyone else.


    Nokia got it wrong because they sat on their fat asses and did nothing
    for 10 years. It then tried to rush things and made a total mess of it.
    Then they sold out to Microsloth, who shut down the name and will make
    an even bigger mess of it.

    Blackberry are in exactly the same position and there have been rumours
    about which third-rate company will buy them out and close them down -
    Microsloth being one of them.
     
    Your Name, Jan 23, 2015
    #19
  20. Bert

    DevilsPGD Guest

    The old OS was 5+ years behind, the current OS is not only quite modern,
    but arguably ahead in several ways (for example, name another mobile
    platform that virtualizes enough to enable apps of a foreign OS to run?)

    But what BlackBerry needs now is attention from application developers,
    and that's a tough sell, especially since historically their developer
    relationships have been strained. Less so than Apple, but Apple is
    "different" for a number of reasons.
     
    DevilsPGD, Jan 23, 2015
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.