View Poll Results: What should HP copy from the UI of the Playbook?

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Look at that Launcher

    3 15.79%
  • Swipe the 'swipe-in' keyboard

    7 36.84%
  • Acquire the 'All singing, all dancing' mode

    4 21.05%
  • Other (mentioned in comments)

    4 21.05%
  • None

    8 42.11%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by samab View Post
    I have already provided the source --- the official closing date of June 2 --- announced by Harman International, who was the parent company that owned QNX.

    RIM/QNX deal was announced one month ahead in time and closed the deal one month ahead in time when compared to the HP/Palm deal. There was no closing faster or slower.

    HP has other operating systems as well beside HP-UX (which is their version of Unix), they also sell OpenVMS. And HP also used to sell their own linux distribution (Secure Linux).
    That still means that RIM had a month ahead of HP.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kupe View Post
    Your math is mixed up:

    RIM: 10 months from QNX purchase to Playbook on the streets (Jun 2010-Apr 2011)

    HP: 12-14 months from Palm purchase to Touchpad on the streets (Jul 2010 - "Summer" 2011 [Summer=22 Jun - 23 Sep])

    No matter how you cut it, HP is lagging behind RIM 60-120 days in this race. So much for all their bountiful resources.
    Last time I check July 2010 to June 2011 is 11 months. I mean, I could be wrong. Also, last time I check -- as I stated July 2010 to April 2011 is nine months. RIM has ten months to get their PlayBook ready. You expect HP to get it done a month sooner then RIM? Then with the RIM having one month in advance, that does mean HP is taking a little bit longer then HP. However, that still does not void the fact that it takes a while to make a good product. RIM was able to push out the PlayBook in about ten months but I still think HP has more features and is a better product (Tap-To-Share being one of those features) and having Beats Audio in the machine.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    Last time I check July 2010 to June 2011 is 11 months. I mean, I could be wrong.
    But since the TP won't be released "until the summer" that means at least June 22 (aka late June, aka nearly July, aka 12 months).

    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    Also, last time I check -- as I stated July 2010 to April 2011 is nine months. RIM has ten months to get their PlayBook ready. You expect HP to get it done a month sooner then RIM? Then with the RIM having one month in advance, that does mean HP is taking a little bit longer then HP.
    Assuming HP releases the TP in those 8 days before the end of June (the earliest possible timeframe for "Planned availability for the summer"), which is <9 days from their 1 year (aka 12 month) anniversary of their Palm purchase, that would make them ~60 days slower than RIM in their ability to perform. But even HP doesn't sound confident in that release date, otherwise why would they cling to a release period that runs out to late September?

    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    However, that still does not void the fact that it takes a while to make a good product.
    Quite true - and it's clear that some companies are able to do this faster than other companies.

    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    RIM was able to push out the PlayBook in about ten months but I still think HP has more features and is a better product (Tap-To-Share being one of those features) and having Beats Audio in the machine.
    Time will tell whether those and the TP's other features comprise a "better product." For now it's just an unsupported assertion.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kupe View Post
    But since the TP won't be released "until the summer" that means at least June 22 (aka late June, aka nearly July, aka 12 months).
    I know officially Summer starts June 22, but they could mean any time in June to Sept. Could be early could be late.
    Assuming HP releases the TP in those 8 days before the end of June (the earliest possible timeframe for "Planned availability for the summer"), which is <9 days from their 1 year (aka 12 month) anniversary of their Palm purchase, that would make them ~60 days slower than RIM in their ability to perform. But even HP doesn't sound confident in that release date, otherwise why would they cling to a release period that runs out to late September?
    Your not understanding what I am saying. July 1st 2010 from April 2011 is nine months. You expect the TP to be ready on the same month Playbook is released. Thats nine months when RIM had ten months. Thats what I am saying.

    Time will tell whether those and the TP's other features comprise a "better product." For now it's just an unsupported assertion.

    What does Playbook add that the other tablets don't have? Don't get me wrong, I actually want the Playbook and I was going to buy one if HP didn't deliver a product I think is better (which in my opinion they did). But even though I like the Playbook it doesn't offer any new feature that the iPad and iPad 2 does not have. Besides flash, of course.

    And also -- RIM is 1-2 months faster then HP. If they release early June -- a little ahead of schedule (which is possible) then its one month, or End of June beginning of July, 2 months. It's also possible HP could be even slower, but I am trying to be a little optimistic like I always am.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by taharka View Post
    Wasn't webOS demoed back in January...of 2009? My apologies if me thinking the demo of the latest version should be much better given the hardware it was demoed on is too crazy for reality. Again, I hope they leverage the speed feature.

    but this is something we all know, and nothing in concern if you ask me since the touchpad isnt even in reviewers hands, so obviously its no where near primetime, so this same statment you keep on posting is irrelevent.
  5. #25  
    in all aspects the Playbook to me is nothing more of a bad copy of the real thing. Most people (in over 12 forums and polls) show more people look to get the Touchpad over the Playbook. Also with the Playbook being 7 inches its not going to be looked at to consumers as a option between a ipad 2, Xoom, or Touchpad just due to the size of it. Understanding Webos is still being optimized, and even using 2.1 on a sprint pre plus it shows which direction there going, and see how cleaner its looking, and asethictly pleasing (like IOS). Again I dont see the Playbook as any kind of major competition at all, and though it will be a solid selling product, RIM will continue to slip period.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    but this is something we all know, and nothing in concern if you ask me since the touchpad isnt even in reviewers hands, so obviously its no where near primetime, so this same statment you keep on posting is irrelevent.
    It is perfectly fine if you find it irrelevant. I, however, disagree. Many keep treating things as though webOS is just getting started when in fact this is supposed to be the third major version. Back in '09 webOS was touted as easily scalabe to a variety of form factors. In all my years of writing enterprise software, when we say something is scalable it does not include a major rewrite when the time comes to scale it. Even during the alpha and beta stages, the performance is equal to or better than the production version. That is because we are tweaking it (and perhaps adding new features) rather than rewriting it.

    I look at the Feb 9th demo and some others and I'm disappointed with the performance.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    in all aspects the Playbook to me is nothing more of a bad copy of the real thing.
    That is the only part i disagree with. The PlayBook is a good device, and is not a "bad copy". But I also think in the end the TouchPad will do better because BlackBerry is not a bigger name then HP. I think people will go for their tablets. But we shall see!! (HP has to get a tablet out though!)
  8. mpfef's Avatar
    Posts
    180 Posts
    Global Posts
    181 Global Posts
    #28  
    The Playbook's fatal flaw IMO is that it requires a RIM phone in order to use the email functions on the tablet (and calendar I think).

    Very stupid.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by mpfef View Post
    The Playbook's fatal flaw IMO is that it requires a RIM phone in order to use the email functions on the tablet (and calendar I think).

    Very stupid.
    LOL, maybe they were copying the Foleo as well.

    I agree with you that it is stupid now just as it was then. However, had the Foleo not been Foleo'd, many Palm faithful would have bought it and I think many BB faithful will buy the Playbook. In both cases, I'm not sure it would have/will go over too well with those outside the fold.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by mpfef View Post
    The Playbook's fatal flaw IMO is that it requires a RIM phone in order to use the email functions on the tablet (and calendar I think).

    Very stupid.
    So you can't check your email without a BB smartphone (with a PlayBook)?
  11. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
    #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    So you can't check your email without a BB smartphone (with a PlayBook)?
    I've seen conflicting reports so I'm not sure what's actually true - it's either

    a) Nothing at all without a BB phone.

    or

    b) The Blackberry phone allows you to access your corporate blackberry account with no real set-up needed and because nothing is held on the actual tablet, there is no need for the corporate IT function to do anything beyond issue a playbook. However, you can also look your personal email (pop, imap, exchange???) on to an app on the device and it's persistent.

    or maybe a mix of the two, I can't find anything definitive on the matter - earlier reports (from jan, early feb) say it's A while some later reports, say that it is B and that it will ship with a native PIM solution or be provided by Blackberry via update.

    Whatever the situation, they haven't done a particular good job at articulating what is actually happening.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    I've seen conflicting reports so I'm not sure what's actually true - it's either

    a) Nothing at all without a BB phone.

    or

    b) The Blackberry phone allows you to access your corporate blackberry account with no real set-up needed and because nothing is held on the actual tablet, there is no need for the corporate IT function to do anything beyond issue a playbook. However, you can also look your personal email (pop, imap, exchange???) on to an app on the device and it's persistent.

    or maybe a mix of the two, I can't find anything definitive on the matter - earlier reports (from jan, early feb) say it's A while some later reports, say that it is B and that it will ship with a native PIM solution or be provided by Blackberry via update.

    Whatever the situation, they haven't done a particular good job at articulating what is actually happening.
    It would be a bad idea to force people to buy a BB phone to use a feature like email. I hope thats not the case.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    It would be a bad idea to force people to buy a BB phone to use a feature like email. I hope thats not the case.
    Which is why I wonder if they are going for the opposite. Get people who already have BBs (still a significant number) to purchase the playbook.

    I don't like the idea of the Playbook being a Foleo (companion device) but I can (sort of) understand it from a "you can get your enterprise data on this device without the enterprise having to support this device" point of view. And it's only in that context that I can understand it (assuming the enterprise already supports BB).
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by taharka View Post
    Which is why I wonder if they are going for the opposite. Get people who already have BBs (still a significant number) to purchase the playbook.

    I don't like the idea of the Playbook being a Foleo (companion device) but I can (sort of) understand it from a "you can get your enterprise data on this device without the enterprise having to support this device" point of view. And it's only in that context that I can understand it (assuming the enterprise already supports BB).
    I agree that would be way to limiting a strategy if that is the case. I would hope RIM's vision is a little wider or maybe they are going to become extinct. (They should be busting *** to get QNX on the phones though since OS6 was a tragic implementation of the "future".
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    It would be a bad idea to force people to buy a BB phone to use a feature like email. I hope thats not the case.
    I'm not sure if this is part of BB's whole "you don't need apps when you have the real web" idea.

    Maybe their feeling is that if you have a strict corporate email, you probably already have a blackberry and if not, your email is probably available via internet.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by taharka View Post
    Which is why I wonder if they are going for the opposite. Get people who already have BBs (still a significant number) to purchase the playbook.

    I don't like the idea of the Playbook being a Foleo (companion device) but I can (sort of) understand it from a "you can get your enterprise data on this device without the enterprise having to support this device" point of view. And it's only in that context that I can understand it (assuming the enterprise already supports BB).
    Thats is possible but not a entirely great idea from them. I mean, BB owners are least loyal out of all smart phone makers. They are more likely to get an iPhone of Android device for their next phone then a BlackBerry. And I am one of those customers who have a BB but will not be buying a new one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Courousant View Post
    I'm not sure if this is part of BB's whole "you don't need apps when you have the real web" idea.

    Maybe their feeling is that if you have a strict corporate email, you probably already have a blackberry and if not, your email is probably available via internet.
    For a company that's praised for their email, not having that feature w/o a phone seems silly to me.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    Thats is possible but not a entirely great idea from them. I mean, BB owners are least loyal out of all smart phone makers. They are more likely to get an iPhone of Android device for their next phone then a BlackBerry. And I am one of those customers who have a BB but will not be buying a new one.
    Could this be an attempt to stop that bleeding? Seems everyone is catching on that having an ecosystem is a big plus.
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    For a company that's praised for their email, not having that feature w/o a phone seems silly to me.
    So is it all email or just corporate email?
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions