BlackBerry Forums Support Community

BES admin · 12-19-2005, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

It isn't about taking pictures. Device choice, true 100% hands-off IT administration, additional feature functionality, etc.

Less is more in IMO...

The ability to support many devices and platforms is a double edged sword:

The customer base is volitile. They see a cool device in the market place and they just MUST have it. They don't consult with anyone, they go out and buy it. 3 months later, the "had-to-have toy" sits in the bottom drawer because the novelty has worn off. In this case, the status was more important than the functionality. The end user has absolutely no idea what brought them the functionality they had on their PDA, no matter which they choose. The important thing is to have a policy in place which clearly states what devices are supported.

The nice thing about America is that anyone can make a buck. I don't see anything wrong with capitalizing on the above need to have the latest and greatest toy. Goodlink simply takes advantage of a niche which they fill well.

However, I still maintain that for all the right reasons, BB is a better business tool than Goodlink. I also think that Goodlink is a better consumer tool than BB. Until RIM makes more devices available and Goodlink makes their own device this will remain true.

Good_Guy · 12-19-2005, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BES admin

Less is more in IMO...

The ability to support many devices and platforms is a double edged sword:

The customer base is volitile. They see a cool device in the market place and they just MUST have it. They don't consult with anyone, they go out and buy it. 3 months later, the "had-to-have toy" sits in the bottom drawer because the novelty has worn off. In this case, the status was more important than the functionality. The end user has absolutely no idea what brought them the functionality they had on their PDA, no matter which they choose. The important thing is to have a policy in place which clearly states what devices are supported.

The nice thing about America is that anyone can make a buck. I don't see anything wrong with capitalizing on the above need to have the latest and greatest toy. Goodlink simply takes advantage of a niche which they fill well.

However, I still maintain that for all the right reasons, BB is a better business tool than Goodlink. I also think that Goodlink is a better consumer tool than BB. Until RIM makes more devices available and Goodlink makes their own device this will remain true.

Valid pointsm while I diagree with a couple. First, the "new toy" syndrome. While this was true prior to GoodLink, the fact that GoodLink takes this "toy" and turns it into a business tool is stopping that. Ask the carriers. Devices with GoodLink installed have a dramatically lower churn rate than those without. The fact of the matter is that BB has become a staus symbol, thanks to brilliant marketing. I am not saying that the majority of the BB's that are deployed are not being used by businesses for business needs, however, I wonder how many free devices that came with pizza's or Dockers are still active 6 months after they are purchased. My guess is the new toy, gotta have it syndrome applies much more th BB than it does to any other device in this space. Good has NEVER focused on the consumer/prosumer market. Our solution requires access to the Exchange server with no consumer version available. In addition to that, the devices that support GoodLink are not (currently) priced for the consumer space. BB, on the other hand, is marketed heavily towards the consumer market, albeit by the carriers. Free BB with pizza or 4 tires is not a target at the business market.

BES admin · 12-19-2005, 01:48 PM

I think you misunderstood: I wasn't intending to imply that all non BB devices were the only "toys." I include BB as a must have toy for some people.

As for Goodlink for the consumer... More specifically I mean that people who have non BB devices as personal PDA's can now bring them to work and use, what I consider a consumer gadget, in the workplace. The target for Goodlink is these devices and as such is a target to the Joe consumer who wants to use their new toy at work.

BB isn't exempt from the same analogy, however, I think it is much less likely that a general consumer is interested in the BB as a toy. I know from consulting outside of my regular work that the general consumer believes BB to be a business tool and non BB devices are more for personal use. This is just based on my contact with the non-business customers I have and is certainly not a scientifically gathered statistic. I have a 14 year old neice who wants a Treo because her friends have them, I suggested BB and she had no interest in it. In other words, it's the Treo, not the BB, which has more of a status appeal to teens. This group typically is into fads, and as such, underscores my point about non BB devices.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see Goodlink paired with wireless PDAs as a practical tool for the business world. I think once RIM bails itself out of the mess with NTP, the market will see an increase in sales.

I think of the two in this way:

1. RIM is to the real world what PC's are to the real world: A tool which owns 80% of the market becuase of it's simplicity and acceptance as a business tool as well as a supportable option.

2. Goodlink is to the real world what Macintosh is to the real world: A fad which fits a niche, has a following, and will remain in business if they continue to be innovative.

Some of this is just my Opinion, and as such, is biased heavily towards RIM, but I think there is a lot of truth to it as well.

Good_Guy · 12-19-2005, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BES admin

I think you misunderstood: I wasn't intending to imply that all non BB devices were the only "toys." I include BB as a must have toy for some people.

As for Goodlink for the consumer... More specifically I mean that people who have non BB devices as personal PDA's can now bring them to work and use, what I consider a consumer gadget, in the workplace. The target for Goodlink is these devices and as such is a target to the Joe consumer who wants to use their new toy at work.

I compeltely disagree. I have sold installations of 250, 275, 500 and 450 brand new GoodLink Treos into corporations where the companies purchased them, not where they were brought in from people who had purchased them.

Quote:

BB isn't exempt from the same analogy, however, I think it is much less likely that a general consumer is interested in the BB as a toy. I know from consulting outside of my regular work that the general consumer believes BB to be a business tool and non BB devices are more for personal use. This is just based on my contact with the non-business customers I have and is certainly not a scientifically gathered statistic. I have a 14 year old neice who wants a Treo because her friends have them, I suggested BB and she had no interest in it. In other words, it's the Treo, not the BB, which has more of a status appeal to teens. This group typically is into fads, and as such, underscores my point about non BB devices.

I, again, disagree. All the Hollywood 'stars' with their Blackberries, Oprah's favorite thing, these are NOT business users nor how business users gauge their technology decisions. I have not seen a single promo where carriers are giving away Treo's. I have seen countless where they are giving away Blackberries. Consumer pitch and I dare say, the carriers know their market better than anyone.

Quote:

I'm sorry, but I just don't see Goodlink paired with wireless PDAs as a practical tool for the business world. I think once RIM bails itself out of the mess with NTP, the market will see an increase in sales.

Sales have slowed for the last two quarters and this was without the NTP overhang. Face it, BB was the ONLY player in town in this space and that is no longer the case and will only get worse as new devices, targetted at businesses, not consumers, are released. Nokia is not targetting the consumer with the E61. The Moto Q is not a consumer device. RIMM built the market. Now, there are much bigger organizations that want a piece. They make the hardware and Good makes the software.

Quote:

I think of the two in this way:

1. RIM is to the real world what PC's are to the real world: A tool which owns 80% of the market becuase of it's simplicity and acceptance as a business tool as well as a supportable option.

2. Goodlink is to the real world what Macintosh is to the real world: A fad which fits a niche, has a following, and will remain in business if they continue to be innovative.

Some of this is just my Opinion, and as such, is biased heavily towards RIM, but I think there is a lot of truth to it as well.

The analogy you make regarding Mac is true, althought I am of the opinon you have them backwards. RIMM, with its proprietary solution is the Macintosh. Apple had 60% of the PC market at one time and then got crushed by solutions based upon industry standards.

southwestcomm · 12-19-2005, 02:33 PM

Good_Guy-

What exactly is "propriety" about the BB solution? The devices are Java based - very open standard, and their data flows through their NOC - just like it does for a Good device. Perplexed by this claim and no one from Good - and I have been on two conference calls - can every explain what is meant by this. Thanks.

Good_Guy · 12-19-2005, 03:44 PM

Proprietary in the fact that a single source of hardware, software, and application. You cannot run the BB application on anything but a Blackberry device. You cannot run the BB operating system on anything but a Blackberry device. A BB device without BES or the webmail client is useless. It isn't just Good that presents this:

"RIM provides a proprietary operating system (OS) for the BlackBerry, which makes heavy use of the device's specialized input devices, particularly the thumbwheel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry

"The information is then converted to BlackBerry's proprietary format, Universal Content Stream (UCS), and forwarded over a secure connection to the authorized user's device."
http://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/...ArticleID=7913

"Research In Motion (RIM) recently developed the BlackBerry Connect solution to move BlackBerry technology beyond proprietary handheld devices"
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...0507019890.htm

And from RIMM's own page:
"BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software" means the RIM proprietary software to be installed and used on a single server and used in conjunction with the BlackBerry Solution. The BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software is not licensed under this Agreement.
http://www.blackberry.com/legal/soft_lic_agree.shtml

Though that one may be a stretch.

BES admin · 12-19-2005, 04:04 PM

Well this is a free market, and we are in America. We have the right to disagree. And I think we can both agree on that.

I have to admit that although I have evaluated Goodlink and the Treo, I am much more familiar with Blackberry.

I like the Blackberry and I dislike the Treo. The handheld OS is cumbersome in comparison to a BB.

I think BES is a better tool than Goodlink. There are far more options available on the server side and managing the devices is just plain easy.

I am considered a "decision maker" in my company and will continue to advocate dilligently for the use of BES and against Goodlink. I think anyone who adopts the non BB solution is just plain silly.

Good_guy: I appreciate your insight and maturity in this thread. Although I completely disagree with your point of view, I do respect you for your reasonable demeanor. As much as I would like Goodlink to go the way of the Suzan B Anthony, I am sure you will have a job for a long time to come.

corey@12mile · 12-19-2005, 04:05 PM

Interesting... if RIM is a proprietary architecture and/or product because it doesn't work well with other players... why doesn't Good open source their product, because it's just as proprietary as Blackberry/BES is...

As well... you mention about letting others make hardware and Good make software and such... I think that RIM is doing a pretty good job doing both... The handhelds are arguably tougher than anything Good runs on... They have the OS worked out much better than the OS's that Good is supported on.

Good is a pretty slick product... why doesn't Good go sneak peeks at how to build hardware... this is how Good built descent software right? Looking at RIM's source code?

Sucks that us dumb canucks can do something pretty good eh.

cd.

corey@12mile · 12-19-2005, 04:07 PM

Hey... I got a question for ya Good_Guy... it's a little off topic, but why did John Golob leave? I have had several conference calls with him and then I got an email one day from him telling me he left Good...

He was a VP right? Is this a sign of things to come for Good?

southwestcomm · 12-19-2005, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

Proprietary in the fact that a single source of hardware, software, and application. You cannot run the BB application on anything but a Blackberry device. You cannot run the BB operating system on anything but a Blackberry device. A BB device without BES or the webmail client is useless. It isn't just Good that presents this:

"RIM provides a proprietary operating system (OS) for the BlackBerry, which makes heavy use of the device's specialized input devices, particularly the thumbwheel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry

Can't the Good software be described as the same?

"The information is then converted to BlackBerry's proprietary format, Universal Content Stream (UCS), and forwarded over a secure connection to the authorized user's device."
http://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/...ArticleID=7913

Same as Good.

"Research In Motion (RIM) recently developed the BlackBerry Connect solution to move BlackBerry technology beyond proprietary handheld devices"
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...0507019890.htm

That is one person's use of the word "proprietary".

And from RIMM's own page:
"BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software" means the RIM proprietary software to be installed and used on a single server and used in conjunction with the BlackBerry Solution. The BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software is not licensed under this Agreement.
http://www.blackberry.com/legal/soft_lic_agree.shtml

Since it isn't open source - sure - but is the Goodlink Server open source? So, you fall in the same category.

Though that one may be a stretch.

Not to split hairs but I think it is rediculous for Good to try to use the term "proprietary" when competing with RIM considering, for the most part, the Good solution is the exact same. Good is just as "proprietary" as Blackberry.

Good_Guy · 12-19-2005, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BES admin

Well this is a free market, and we are in America. We have the right to disagree. And I think we can both agree on that.

I have to admit that although I have evaluated Goodlink and the Treo, I am much more familiar with Blackberry.

I like the Blackberry and I dislike the Treo. The handheld OS is cumbersome in comparison to a BB.

I think BES is a better tool than Goodlink. There are far more options available on the server side and managing the devices is just plain easy.

I am considered a "decision maker" in my company and will continue to advocate dilligently for the use of BES and against Goodlink. I think anyone who adopts the non BB solution is just plain silly.

Good_guy: I appreciate your insight and maturity in this thread. Although I completely disagree with your point of view, I do respect you for your reasonable demeanor. As much as I would like Goodlink to go the way of the Suzan B Anthony, I am sure you will have a job for a long time to come.

As I have said, I won't convince the users here and nor will the users here convince me. The discourse, however, has been great. BES /BB is a great product, however, I am of the exact opposite opinion as you. From a management standpoint, the mere fact that GoodLink never requires cradling (outside of a ROM update from the carrier) for any reason would, from an IT management perspective, would be an advantage. Yes, BB has some nice features across the board, but I feel GL brings much more to the table. Again, to use your quote, "Well this is a free market, and we are in America. We have the right to disagree."

Good_Guy · 12-19-2005, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by corey@12mile

Interesting... if RIM is a proprietary architecture and/or product because it doesn't work well with other players... why doesn't Good open source their product, because it's just as proprietary as Blackberry/BES is...

As well... you mention about letting others make hardware and Good make software and such... I think that RIM is doing a pretty good job doing both... The handhelds are arguably tougher than anything Good runs on... They have the OS worked out much better than the OS's that Good is supported on.

Good is a pretty slick product... why doesn't Good go sneak peeks at how to build hardware... this is how Good built descent software right? Looking at RIM's source code?

Sucks that us dumb canucks can do something pretty good eh.

cd.

Not dumb canucks by any stretch.

The entire BB system is proprietary. What can a BB do without BES or Internet connectin? Nothing. What can BES do without a BB device? Nothing. What else does the BB operating system run on? Nothing.

What does a Treo do without GoodLink? Plenty. Or the 6700 from Sprint or any other device GoodLink runs on? Plenty. What devices run Windows Mobile? Alot. Palm? Several. See my point. Proprietary.

Good_Guy · 12-19-2005, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by southwestcomm

Not to split hairs but I think it is rediculous for Good to try to use the term "proprietary" when competing with RIM considering, for the most part, the Good solution is the exact same. Good is just as "proprietary" as Blackberry.

Nope, not at all.

Quote:

"RIM provides a proprietary operating system (OS) for the BlackBerry, which makes heavy use of the device's specialized input devices, particularly the thumbwheel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry

Can't the Good software be described as the same?

Nope. Again, show me another device that runs BB software other than the BB. And don't even try to bring up BB Connect as it doesn't come close the same functionality as BB on BB.

Quote:

"The information is then converted to BlackBerry's proprietary format, Universal Content Stream (UCS), and forwarded over a secure connection to the authorized user's device."
http://www.econtentmag.com/Articles...?ArticleID=7913

Same as Good

Wrong. UCS is a proprietary format that is only used by RIMM.

Quote:

"Research In Motion (RIM) recently developed the BlackBerry Connect solution to move BlackBerry technology beyond proprietary handheld devices"
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2...30507019890.htm

That is one person's use of the word "proprietary".

How is it not proprietary? What other device runs the BB operating system?
Again, what can you do on a BB if you aren't running a BB product (BES or otherwise) on the back end?

Quote:

And from RIMM's own page:
"BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software" means the RIM proprietary software to be installed and used on a single server and used in conjunction with the BlackBerry Solution. The BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software is not licensed under this Agreement.
http://www.blackberry.com/legal/soft_lic_agree.shtml

Since it isn't open source - sure - but is the Goodlink Server open source? So, you fall in the same category.

Though that one may be a stretch.

Hence, my comment that that may be a stretch.

It is widely accepted that RIMM has a proprietary solution. Pro-BB people point to the fact that being proprietary is a good thing becuase of the security availability, yet when it is presented as something less than positive, the same BB folks say that it isn't proprietary. Which is it?

Berry One · 12-19-2005, 06:39 PM

Quote:

I wonder how many free devices that came with pizza's or Dockers are still active 6 months after they are purchased.

I love these Good people. How about 99%? You must know for a fact that $0 blackberry, like $0 high-end phone, comes with 2-3 years contract. Breaking that contract on 6-th month will usually result in penalties as high as full cost of the device plus more.

You know that for a fact yet imply that people dump consumer blackberries after 6 months trial.

Quote:

Good has NEVER focused on the consumer/prosumer market.

Bad for Good. If you can't diversify, you will die.

Quote:

Our solution requires access to the Exchange server with no consumer version available.

Here comes Microsoft with its free of charge add-on to Exchange. It will crush Good and RIM in corporate market like IE crushed Netscape.

Quote:

BB, on the other hand, is marketed heavily towards the consumer market, albeit by the carriers.

True. RIM realized corporate market got too many new players and diversified into consumer market. GoodLink can't.

Quote:

Free BB with pizza or 4 tires is not a target at the business market.

As long as it sells with 3 years unbreakable

contract.

Quote:

The analogy you make regarding Mac is true, althought I am of the opinon you have them backwards. RIMM, with its proprietary solution is the Macintosh. Apple had 60% of the PC market at one time and then got crushed by solutions based upon industry standards.

Here I do agree with you. RIM is like Apple: has tight control over hardware quality, has software tuned for hardware they produce, Java VM for RIM is like BSD for Apple- reliable kernel, and anyone who can program for Java can write software for blackberry. You don't even have to have blackberry to write software for it: free of charge blackberry emulator from RIM will run just fine on your desktop PC.

Yes, RIM is like Apple, and it may as well end up at 5% of mobile market.

GoodLink is more like company that was selling TCP/IP stack for Windows 3.1. What was that company name? What did happen to it when Microsoft released Windows95 with embedded TCP/IP support, providing data connectivity for free?

southwestcomm · 12-19-2005, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by southwestcomm
Not to split hairs but I think it is rediculous for Good to try to use the term "proprietary" when competing with RIM considering, for the most part, the Good solution is the exact same. Good is just as "proprietary" as Blackberry.

Nope, not at all.

Quote:
"RIM provides a proprietary operating system (OS) for the BlackBerry, which makes heavy use of the device's specialized input devices, particularly the thumbwheel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry

Can't the Good software be described as the same?

Nope. Again, show me another device that runs BB software other than the BB. And don't even try to bring up BB Connect as it doesn't come close the same functionality as BB on BB.

True, BB Connect is not the same - yet. First generation Good software was limited as well in functionality.

Quote:
"The information is then converted to BlackBerry's proprietary format, Universal Content Stream (UCS), and forwarded over a secure connection to the authorized user's device."
http://www.econtentmag.com/Articles...?ArticleID=7913

Same as Good

Wrong. UCS is a proprietary format that is only used by RIMM.

Format is just that - format. Would you also state cellular carriers are proprietary in the way in which they handle wireless data? They are different, i.e. GSM, CDMA, TDMA, etc. The format in which the data is handle and transported doesn't make it a bad thing - just the way the technology was written.
Quote:
"Research In Motion (RIM) recently developed the BlackBerry Connect solution to move BlackBerry technology beyond proprietary handheld devices"
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2...30507019890.htm

That is one person's use of the word "proprietary".

How is it not proprietary? What other device runs the BB operating system?
Again, what can you do on a BB if you aren't running a BB product (BES or otherwise) on the back end?

True, up until recently the BB OS only ran on BB devices. So what? RIM chose to be a solution and harware manufacturer. Hence the reason they have been so succesfull and financially strong. As the market place has changed so has RIM. There was a Good device at one time. Why not more of them? Good appears to have taken a different route is all.
Quote:
And from RIMM's own page:
"BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software" means the RIM proprietary software to be installed and used on a single server and used in conjunction with the BlackBerry Solution. The BlackBerry Enterprise Server Software is not licensed under this Agreement.
http://www.blackberry.com/legal/soft_lic_agree.shtml

Since it isn't open source - sure - but is the Goodlink Server open source? So, you fall in the same category.

Though that one may be a stretch.

Not at all. Either the Good solution, just like the BES, is open source or not.

Hence, my comment that that may be a stretch. - Agreed.

It is widely accepted that RIMM has a proprietary solution. Pro-BB people point to the fact that being proprietary is a good thing becuase of the security availability, yet when it is presented as something less than positive, the same BB folks say that it isn't proprietary. Which is it?

I am pro-BB amd never claimed it is a proprietary solution. I believe they have chosen a specific format and software is all. Anti-BB people always toss out the "proprietary" issue.

At least we can agree to disagree?

BES admin · 12-19-2005, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

From a management standpoint, the mere fact that GoodLink never requires cradling (outside of a ROM update from the carrier) for any reason would, from an IT management perspective, would be an advantage.

You are aware that BES/BB is exactly the same in this respect right?

Device activation, software install/distribution, and policy application are all OTA.

Unless I am missing the point, it seems invalid.

BES admin · 12-19-2005, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry One

Here comes Microsoft with its free of charge add-on to Exchange. It will crush Good and RIM in corporate market like IE crushed Netscape.

Before I address this opinion, let me say the following:

I am a Microsoft fan and have been from the beginning. I Administer MANY windows clients and servers. I am the sole Exchange Administrator for ~7000 users for e-mail and Unified Voice Mail. I also manage our BES service. I think an end-to-end Microsoft solution is key to a successful business in many ways.

HOWEVER,

Microsoft is adding a "Feature" to exchange with their Mobile push technology. It is a novel idea and one that has it's place, but I don't think it will ever compare to BES. For that matter, as much as I hate to admit it, it won't be as successful as Goodlink either.

I know first-hand what is currently available in this sense, I run the Exchange server remember, and unless they make it easier to administer it aint gonna become as popular as you think.

Yes it's free, yes it works better than some solutions, but, you get what you pay for. Some companies will use it, but not those who are serious about a large scale wireless solution.

southwestcomm · 12-19-2005, 08:17 PM

Technically the MS Email solution isn't "free". It will only be available on 2003 SP3 I think? So, tehnically, if a company wants they solution will need to upgrade their Exchange to the correct version.

Good_Guy · 12-19-2005, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by corey@12mile

Hey... I got a question for ya Good_Guy... it's a little off topic, but why did John Golob leave? I have had several conference calls with him and then I got an email one day from him telling me he left Good...

He was a VP right? Is this a sign of things to come for Good?

John was in charge of our partner/reseller program. With the advent of the carrier sales model, the reseller program was placed on a back burner, so John felt it was time to take his talents to another organization.

Good_Guy · 12-20-2005, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry One

I love these Good people. How about 99%? You must know for a fact that $0 blackberry, like $0 high-end phone, comes with 2-3 years contract. Breaking that contract on 6-th month will usually result in penalties as high as full cost of the device plus more.

You know that for a fact yet imply that people dump consumer blackberries after 6 months trial.

That was not meant to be my implication. I guess a better way to put it would be how many will go to the full contract. My guess is less than half, and I think that is generous.

Quote:

Bad for Good. If you can't diversify, you will die.

We can, and are, diversifying, but in our core market competencies. GoodAccess, Good Mobile Defenses and unannounced products. We are choosing to diversify in product, not market.

Quote:

Here comes Microsoft with its free of charge add-on to Exchange. It will crush Good and RIM in corporate market like IE crushed Netscape.

While not an enterprise solution, it is FAR from a consumer solution. Not many home users run Exchange at home. True, ISP's do and they may offer push email from MSFT as an optional service, however, this will target RIMM's consumer market. Being that we are not in that space, no fear in that regards at all. I think a better comparison than NS vs IE would be MSFT Search vs Google. MSFT is too late to the party to become a major player in the space.

Quote:

True. RIM realized corporate market got too many new players and diversified into consumer market. GoodLink can't.

Too many new players? Name 3 outside of RIMM and Good. You can't because they don't exist. Visto and Seven are OEM/white box producers, Intellisync is going to become Nokia's consumer email solution, though if I were RIMM, I would have bigger concerns there. There are literally 100's of consumer email players. That market is MUCH more saturated than the enterprise wireless email space.

Quote:

Here I do agree with you. RIM is like Apple: has tight control over hardware quality, has software tuned for hardware they produce, Java VM for RIM is like BSD for Apple- reliable kernel, and anyone who can program for Java can write software for blackberry. You don't even have to have blackberry to write software for it: free of charge blackberry emulator from RIM will run just fine on your desktop PC.

Yes, RIM is like Apple, and it may as well end up at 5% of mobile market.

There are over 26,000 applications available for Palm OS, maybe 8-10 for PPC. Less than 3K for BB. Which system is more open? Comparing RIMM's model to Apple's PC model is not something I would be proud of. To go from 80% (60% in Apple's case) to less than 5% does not bode well for the share holders or the platform.

Quote:

GoodLink is more like company that was selling TCP/IP stack for Windows 3.1. What was that company name? What did happen to it when Microsoft released Windows95 with embedded TCP/IP support, providing data connectivity for free?

Good is more along the lines of any software developer that decided it was better to develop for the Windows OS than the Apple OS. Standards vs locked down, single source solution.

BlackBerry Forums Support Community

BES vs GOODLINK...