Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is the first time I've seen it mentioned that the Storm experienced a 100% return rate. That's mind boggling.
It's also false. I still have two in a drawer at home. We were getting trade ins on upgrades (after 2+ years of use) of Storms while I worked at Verizon. I don't know where they came up with that number. I'd believe 100% of users were dissatisfied, but there was obviously not a 100% return rate. That would mean every phone ever sold came back as a return.
Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
31–40 of 54 posts
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#32I personally hold that RIM failed because it ignored it's winning demographic (government, military, enterprise and business users) and attempted to create a device for the broader consumer market. The Storm was rushed out, as the article says, in part because RIM thought it had to compete where I don't think it had to compete. Now I'm no savvy analyst, but it seems to me like RIM got tricked into picking a fight on…
No, RIM failed because government, military, enterprise, and business users are also normal consumers when not working. Sure, they had great messaging, but apple and google had decent messaging with web browsers, games, and applications
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#33I personally hold that RIM failed because it ignored it's winning demographic (government, military, enterprise and business users) and attempted to create a device for the broader consumer market. The Storm was rushed out, as the article says, in part because RIM thought it had to compete where I don't think it had to compete. Now I'm no savvy analyst, but it seems to me like RIM got tricked into picking a fight on…
No, RIM failed because government, military, enterprise, and business users are also normal consumers when not working. Sure, they had great messaging, but apple and google had decent messaging with web browsers, games, and applications
Enterprise/business is merging with consumer phones.
Their mistake was not getting into the enterprise app market for iOS and Android. They still could since the software sort of sucks still (or maybe my firm is cheap).
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say RIM was superior in messaging, but lost because they kept the platform closed - and inferior in photos and music, which made them lose as a multi-use device.
If only they would have brought BBM to iOS, Android and the rest of the platforms...
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#35On hiring: Q. How did you attract talent to the small city of Waterloo? Jim: We found kids that were excited to come to the BIG city of Waterloo. Small town Valedictions. I love hiring them. Give them two years to mature and they'll knock your socks off.
On the iPhone début: Jim: Perhaps overlooked was the significance of having the exclusive deal with ATT. Steve Jobs used to describe the carriers as the "four orifices" - everything had to go through them. This partnership was far more significant than people realized.
On Blackberry: Q. What phone do you have in your pocket? Jim: I have a Blackberry, I read my newspaper every morning on a Blackberry Playbook. I love them both, and you'll have to pry them out of my cold dead hands if you want me to change!
A few things I wasn't aware of (from Jim): - In it's heyday, RIM (Blackberry) was the fastest growing company 5 years in a row. - There was a patent battle that nearly killed RIM (Blackberry) in it's early days, before they major growth (I would like to read more on this).
Great session.
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#36Their hardware was at the very least competitive with the rest of the market, and I believe they would still have great appeal to the niche of users that prefer physical keyboards today.
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#37Whoever changed the link to the AP article, it is now broken...
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#38I personally hold that RIM failed because it ignored it's winning demographic (government, military, enterprise and business users) and attempted to create a device for the broader consumer market. The Storm was rushed out, as the article says, in part because RIM thought it had to compete where I don't think it had to compete. Now I'm no savvy analyst, but it seems to me like RIM got tricked into picking a fight on…
A low priced Blackberry with a nice keyboard for messaging and a decent camera to go along with the horizontal screen would have staked out an area. Making deals with pay-as-you go groups would have gone into an area Apple didn't go and Blackberry might have dominated. Horizontal screen and camera could be an advantage.
They tried to build an iPhone not a Blackberry.
Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#39Re: Ex-BlackBerry Co-CEO Talks Publicly
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
If only they would have brought BBM to iOS, Android and the rest of the platforms...
Sarcasm tag needed? I think OP makes a good point. If RIM would have cross-platormed BBM sooner, they would of incredibly early to the messaging platform war