

RIM reportedly bails on PlayBook, considers exiting tablet market - sunir
http://www.bgr.com/2011/09/29/rim-reportedly-bails-on-playbook-considers-exiting-tablet-market/

======
Cherian_Abraham
If Amazon Fire succeeds in cannibalizing sales in the low cost tablet range
(Fire being a wrapper for all of Amazon’s digital media products in the
cloud), Playbook stands to offer nothing other than the device. RIM seems like
a company coming more and more across as a company that has no pragmatic
leadership or vision. It is both unable to draw a bead on where the market is
going, or its competitor initiatives, and is increasingly made irrelevant in
the smartphone market.

~~~
IgorPartola
I don't work and have never worked for RIM. However, from what I've read of it
lately, I find it fascinating. From what I can tell, what happened was:

* RIM was a brilliant company with a ton of talented engineers and a few managers. RIM released cool products and became successful.

* RIM instituted a promotion policy based largely on seniority. This ticked off a lot of talented engineers and over the years they started exiting. At the same time it attracted the kind of middle manager who likes this kind of policy.

* RIM became bloated with management (two CEOs? two CEOs!), lost the last shreds of its talented engineers and started spinning out of control. RIM is large, and like any large spinning object, it is hard to tell that it's spinning if you are standing on it. The management cannot tell that they are out of control.

------
bstar77
There have been two recent developments that lead me to believe RIM definitely
needs to get out of this market.

The (obvious) first is the Kindle Fire... This device will succeed and will
cannibalize sales from tablets not called iPad (and maybe the iPad too). Plus
the Fire is virtually the same hardware as the playbook at $200 with a
thriving ecosystem.

The second is the state of Android on the Playbook. It just came to light
(through some very damning articles) that virtually no android apps will work
on this device. The idea was gimmicky and the execution on that idea seems to
be even worse. There's no android utopia here.

I hate to say it, but RIM has no other option than to sit and watch. Maybe
they can maintain a decent niche in the corporate world, maybe not. The
reality is that they are not in control of their destiny. Their survival
depends entirely on what their competitors choose to do.

~~~
technoslut
>RIM definitely needs to get out of this market

If RIM gets out of this market I think they're done. The next generation is
going to be about ecosystems. Apple, Amazon, Microsoft and Google are all
offering seamless access to their data, through their cloud offerings, across
a wide range of devices. More than ever people are going to be using a single
brand or OS just because it is easier, which is what post-pc devices are all
about. There won't be many that will have a RIM phone and have an iPad or
Amazon tablet just because data management will be a pain.

~~~
calebmpeterson
I very much agree with this. The interesting effect is platform lockin because
of unportable data. In the 90s and 00s plaftform lockin was a function of the
availability of software on specific platforms. Now it's data...

Will there be services for porting data between platforms?

~~~
technoslut
>Will there be services for porting data between platforms?

All of these companies, except Google, will do their best to block it until
governments intervene. Even with Google allowing this, it will be extremely
difficult to do so and virtually no one will go through the effort. What if a
third party app you use doesn't exist for the device you want to switch to?

Even in regards to carriers the average user considers it a bigger headache to
switch carriers than to stay where they are, even though they're unhappy.
Humanity, regardless of their plight, having difficulty adapting to change.

~~~
click170
Full disclosure, I live in Canada-land, _not_ the UK.

My perception has been that contracts with telecoms providers is largely a
North American phenomenon, or at least, isn't as prevalent in the UK. IIUC,
pay as you go is the big thing over there.. if only it would catch on here as
well maybe people wouldn't consider it such a pain to switch carriers.

------
raganwald
It seems that Amateur Hour is over.

<http://mashable.com/2011/05/06/playbook-amateur-hour/>

------
joeguilmette
It's almost sad watching RIM flounder and thrash around so sadly. It's kind of
like watching a coworker slowly succumb to dementia.

Although, in an odd way that clashes with the metaphor, it is kind of
enjoyable watching them crash and burn.

~~~
cryptoz
> it is kind of enjoyable watching them crash and burn.

I have very much enjoyed watching their fall...it's a strong case of
schadenfreude. For some reason, their refusal or inability to innovate has me
giddy. I suppose they represent (to me) a large corporation run by old guys
who don't "get it" - and they're failing. Microsoft is in the same boat, but
it's tougher (only slightly) to argue that they are falling.

I'm halfway through this bag of metaphorical popcorn, I hope I don't run out
before RIM dies completely.

~~~
mitchty
Somewhat agree, but more due to my frustration in general with RIM products.
Their user interface was completely abhorrent. If there is at least one thing
that the iPhone ushered in, it was to demonstrate that the ability to use it
without some arcane "click on the wonky button with 9 dots, then go to
settings, obscure word that has nothing to do with fonts, pixel depth or some
other odd entry" path will likely succeed.

I cannot stand using my blackberry to do anything substantial as it just seems
to want to discourage me from using it. I can't imagine how these devices
appear to a non-techie.

~~~
jarek
BTW the button has 7 dots... and buttons on RIM products in general aren't and
weren't wonky.

~~~
mitchty
I couldn't remember how many dots there were, but I'll disagree about my
perceived "wonkiness" of their buttons.

I much much much prefer touchscreens, but thats mainly due to personal
preference and needs to type things like /, diacritics, umlauts, etc...

------
kin
What boggles my mind is how excited about RIM products their CEO is in public
announcements. He did it with the Playbook but even worse he's done in every
time in the past, most notably, with the Torch. He EXPECTED 1 million + sales
opening weekend. Really? Launching on a single carrier (AT&T) sharing with
iPhone and Android devices? And then he was DISAPPOINTED that they only sold
100,000 units opening weekend. Which, actually, I think he was lucky to get.

------
protomyth
I am still amazed a company known for e-mail / communications and loved for
their keyboards decided to copy the "piece of glass" crowd. It just seems like
the play would have been something more akin to the Psion Series 5 instead of
the iPhone / iPad. Concentrating on communications (evolution from e-mail) and
collaboration would have been a better play and more in their abilities.

~~~
cpeterso
Or that they would produce a "business tablet" that can't actually do email or
calendar/contacts PIM without tethering to a BlackBerry. Those features are
what RIM was famous for!

~~~
protomyth
If you could be a fly-on-the-wall of any tech meeting in history, somewhere in
my top 10 would be the one that decided the tethering business. I just don't
understand how no one went "hold up, this is not going to work, the iPad has
e-mail".

~~~
matwood
Someone may have said that and then was likely shouted down by others thinking
that they could use the Playbook to drive sales of their phone division. Still
a laughable decision though.

~~~
tomkarlo
This seems entirely possible. One of the big problems at large companies is
that political clout is often tied to how much revenue your division bring in.
That makes sense, except that whatever group is making the "new/next thing" is
almost always much smaller revenue than the current mature business. So they
lose those kinds of arguments.

~~~
prodigal_erik
Wow. So that's what's behind the innovator's dilemma? Your competitors will
cannibalize the market share of your existing products, when your own staff
could have gotten there first but their part of the organization didn't have
the authority to get away with it?

~~~
tomkarlo
I think it's more complex than that - there's also usually more risk
associated with the newer technology, and it's often lower margin (not in this
case.) So you have this new division saying, we're going to build a product
that cannibalizes our main business, and makes less money per customer... and
that's just not very easy to sell.

So instead, someone who doesn't have your old business comes along and builds
it instead. And you end up either buying them, or fading away.

------
davidandgoliath
Might want to update thread's title in lieu of RIM's response: "strictly
fiction".

------
jmjerlecki
Updated:

RIM calls PlayBook discontinuation ‘pure fiction’

[http://www.bgr.com/2011/09/29/rim-calls-playbook-
discontinua...](http://www.bgr.com/2011/09/29/rim-calls-playbook-
discontinuation-pure-fiction/)

I still call BS. They should become a hardware only company.

~~~
raganwald
I confess this is an Ad Hominem Circumstantial, but what would _you_ say if
you and your channel partners were sitting on a mound of unsold inventory?
You’d talk up the future of the device while discounting the price in the
hopes of quickly clearing the channel without alienating the people you need
to sell your phones. Meanwhile you’d cut production off and when just about
everything is sold, _then_ you officially exit the market.

This doesn’t mean that they _are_ existing the market, just that denying the
rumour doesn’t really prove they’re still 100% behind it.

------
vsl2
There's so much mainstream consumption based not only on the
quality/usefulness of a company's products, but also on the public perception
of that company. Just think about Apple and its ability to turn everything it
touches to gold. It becomes a self-reinforcing cycle unless something drastic
happens to shift the momentum in the other direction (e.g. Netflix now
suddenly is starting to go in the other direction after their recent poorly-
received decisions).

Given RIM's downward momentum in the past couple of years, I don't think its a
surprise to see its latest products do poorly. In the tablet industry, they
needed something that was revolutionary or at least something very very good
in order to have a fighting chance. Releasing something mediocre that lacked
some basic features (native email) that Blackberries are based upon portended
doom. The $500 price point guaranteed it.

Look at the recent launch of RIM's Torch 9850. Received lukewarm reviews at
best (CNN destroys it) amid lots of hype from RIM. Can you guess where this is
headed?

I don't really know what RIM can do to reverse their continuing downfall, but
I think it starts with acknowledging that their proprietary OS is not going to
work and get on the Android bandwagon. Then hope to get lucky with a
blockbuster product.

At least they still have most of Corporate America...for now.

------
martythemaniak
I really to believe the answer to RIM's troubles begins with Jon Rubinstein:

<http://martin.drashkov.com/2011/09/how-to-save-rim.html>

~~~
alanh
I bought a $99 Touchpad.

It is utter shit in every way except how nice a screenshot touting the “cards
interface” looks. No, not just sluggish hardware. Buggy multitouch. Crap
copy/paste. Garbage browser with rendering bugs aplenty (on popular websites,
even). Boring, Linux-like system icons. Each "panel" of system settings
launches a sluggish app. No Dropbox or 1Password apps (cheap shot, but
ecosystem matters).

------
flocial
They basically outsourced everything right? Apple's iPhone was the result of
scaling down what was supposed to be the original iPad (not to mention the
Newton). Amazon's commitment to books and server technology carried over
nicely into the Kindle. I think a large part of the first mover advantage myth
comes from the unquantifiable drive and passion that goes into thinking hard
about a product before a first prototype launches. These companies have a
complete vision that they whittle down and polish to get that first product
out. They have a clear path for the future and the flexibility to adjust
because they've got a head start overcoming obstacles.

I just wonder what their main "vision" was. Seems like they suffered the same
paralysis as Motorola and Nokia. "We make mobile phones" mentality. Did they
just assume that the future was ever thinner profit margins compensated by
sales volume? That people would gladly sacrifice added functionality for added
battery life and the convenience of hardware buttons?

~~~
wlesieutre
I think their vision used to be "Be good at email and good for businesspeople"

At some point, they said "Hey, these touchscreen things are doing pretty well,
let's get into the consumer market." But they had no idea how, and they've
been releasing weak phones on a weak software ecosystem ever since.

On the other hand, if they'd stayed in their original market, I don't think it
would work out much better. Doing enterprise features nicely is great, and
could sell a lot of devices. But Apple's "touchscreen on a little computer"
model is flexible, and all it would take is an enterprise focused software
update from Apple or a few well written apps from a third party.

Competing against Apple's vision and manufacturing skill is going to be
difficult to do, and in the long run I don't see RIM being one of the
companies that manages to do it.

------
click170
As a Canadian, it's difficult to watch them fail so flagrantly, but they
haven't really done enough to succeed so the company deserves it IMO (even if
the low level employees don't).

I do like that there has been talk of their next generation of QNX devices
supporting Android applications, but that seems like but one step in the right
direction, after having taken half a dozen steps in the wrong direction.

------
freshrap6
I wonder if RIM will have a fire sale too now...

~~~
raganwald
Like this?

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3053523>

~~~
freshrap6
It's a start...

------
smackfu
What is the difference between the Playbook and the Kindle Fire, except $300
and a camera and 8 GB of flash?

~~~
kupo
The Playbook is more business orientated (secure QNX OS) but is also on sale
to consumers. The kindle is purely a consumer product.

~~~
cryptoz
> The Playbook is more business orientated

People say this, but I disagree. They shipped with working Flash and no email.
If you look at their actions instead of what reporters and RIM's marketing
team say, I think it's very difficult to call the Playbook a "business
orientated" device.

All of their commercials even boasted about the Flash capabilities and the HD-
movies-that-keep-playing-when-you-multitask-away. Business tablet? Yeah right.

~~~
mcbarry
Not to mention it shipped with Need For Speed preinstalled

------
bigohms
No associative strong content play means nothing to do with that shiny new
piece of glass. Take the and pivot the entire product just to corporate.

------
recoiledsnake
This might be another nail in the coffin.

[http://www.itproportal.com/2011/09/29/rim-changes-stance-
pla...](http://www.itproportal.com/2011/09/29/rim-changes-stance-playbooks-
android-support/#ixzz1ZM1HBzzv)

