

Does RIM Have a Second Act?  - cwan
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,2041117,00.html

======
slantyyz
As much as I want RIM to succeed, it seems to me that they _had_ four key
strengths, of which only one remains:

1 - A reputation for rock solid build quality -- Some of their more recent
phone releases, to me at least, seem to eking out margins by lowering build
quality. I don't have the same view of their build quality that I used to.

2 - A killer physical keyboard -- Unfortunately for RIM, the Android, Windows
Phone 7 and other physical keyboards out there are "good enough" that they're
not enough to keep people on Blackberries.

3 - Push Mail - Google and Exchange do a satisfactory job with this on the
iPhone, Android, etc. that it's no longer an advantage

4 - BBM - This seems to be the last thing they've got going for them. The
messaging is free (a boon for kids) and private (also a boon for kids who
don't want their parents to see who they're messaging with).

To me, it seems like RIM really has an uphill battle to have a strong second
act. They've rested on their laurels way too long, and given some of the
comments made by the co-CEOs recently, it seems like they've got their own
reality distortion field going.

Say what you want about Steve Jobs' reality distortion field, but Apple's
track record (since the second coming of Jobs) is that of releasing products
other companies imitate. RIM can't really say the same. At least not recently.

~~~
omh
I'd agree with those, but add one more that they still (just about) have:
Security.

The encryption and policies you can enforce on a corporate blackberry are far
ahead of what you can do with iPhone or Android, and this means that the more
paranoid companies are comfortable handing them out.

Even this is being eroded as the competitors get "good enough"
encryption/remote wipe though.

------
stevenwei

      PlayBook won't hit stores before the first quarter of 
      2011, but RIM is convinced it has a slumbering tiger on 
      its hands. "It changes the game because we're making 
      mobile fit the Web, not the other way around," says 
      Balsillie.
    
      What does that mean? RIM has figured out a way to squeeze
      a full computing platform into a tablet, which is a bit 
      like fitting the Incredible Hulk into an Armani suit. The
      PlayBook will deliver the entire Web at the same speed as 
      a home computer can, without the need for special apps 
      that repackage and abbreviate mobile content.
    

Read: it can run Flash. Unfortunately I'm not entirely sure that is a
compelling enough selling point for most consumers. Native apps have grown in
popularity because they provide a consistent, polished user experience
specifically tailored to the device. One that is generally unmatched by most
websites (unless they were specifically designed with the mobile/tablet form
factor in mind).

~~~
st3fan
Also note that their first quarter actually starts in may?

~~~
corin_
Q1 in software/hardware release dates is not the same as Q1 in finance, it
litterally means the first 3 months of 2011.

------
alanpca
As one of the largest home-grown Canadian operations in this sector, I hope
that they can again be a dominant company.

Unfortunately, I just don't see this happening. From being blindsided by the
iPhone to not even bothering on catching up with touch-screen phones, it seems
like they have a leadership problem that starts from the top.

~~~
redthrowaway
RIM really only had one idea, and every successful product they've had since
then was an iteration thereof. I don't see them pivoting and becoming relevant
again, especially not with WP7. RIM's looking a lot like Nokia these days. I'd
love to see them succeed, but I don't see it happening unless they have
something major in the works.

~~~
alanpca
Here's something completely outside of the box, but what about Android
adoption? It would immediately bring more developers to their platform by
proxy of Android.

I do think the huge change in OS may be something that their devout users have
a problem with, so it may not be an option.

~~~
redthrowaway
Also, they'd simply become another android manufacturer, and all of the
uniqueness of their products would be lost. They'd be forced to have every
phone with the three buttons and a touchscreen, and would be indistinguishable
from Samsung. That may be a profitable path, but I don't see it happening if
only because of pride. I think it's more likely we'll see Nokia take that
route.

------
code_duck
The Playbook hardware looks impressive to me. The main point the article
makes, though is the important one - software. As a developer, I'm thinking
equally about Android and iOS, and next about Windows Mobile (with a wait and
see attitude). I can't see taking a lot of effort to create apps for RIM's
platform or webOS unless a large audience was assured. With that sort of
chicken-and-egg factor, I'm not sure if there will be enough software for this
tablet to become successful enough to make software for it.

------
joeguilmette
A four year intermission between Act 1 and Act 2 is not a good sign.

~~~
jarek
How long were the intermissions in Apple's play?

~~~
9oliYQjP
At first I was going to answer with "the better part of Steve Jobs' absence
from the company". However, thinking about it a bit longer, I think Apple
started getting into actual trouble after the launch of Windows 95. They had
absolutely nothing to fight back with except marketing, which consisted mostly
of cheap attack ads like these ones:

\- <http://www.micropersuasion.com/2005/08/congrtlnsw95_yo.html>

\- [http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_n-
JrcfOL7Y8/SKHqBnwaUWI/AAAAAAAAAB...](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_n-
JrcfOL7Y8/SKHqBnwaUWI/AAAAAAAAABg/k8baUcgo2Qk/s400/AppleWin95.jpg)

Windows 95 was launched in late August of 1995. Prior to Windows 95, Apple
wasn't exactly the best run company in the world. Their product line-up was an
absolute mess. The Newton was acknowledged by everybody as pretty cool but it
wasn't a resounding business success. However, most people still considered
their products to be the best for desktop publishing and education which were
huge markets at the time. Once Windows 95 was launched however, Apple's act as
the only serious solution for desktop publishing and education was rightfully
ended.

Skip ahead two years and Apple is in serious trouble. People looked at them
the same way they look at RIM today. They were has-beens living on borrowed
time. They were in really really really big trouble as a company. Steve Jobs
took the reigns of Apple as interim CEO in September of 1997
(<http://www.apple.com/ca/press/1997/09/InterimCEO.html>). Roughly 8 months
later in May of 1998, the iMac is announced, and Apple's second act -- one in
which it is an industrial design leader -- begins.

So existence by sheer momentum lasted approximately two years for Apple. I
would say that the iPhone was RIM's Windows 95. Hell, Microsoft has pivoted
and Windows Phone 7 is a great competitor to iPhone. Google's first shot at an
iPhone competitor was also pretty good and took them a little over a year to
match. But RIM? They've let the better part of 4 years pass without matching,
let alone one-upping, the iPhone (and now Android/Windows Phone 7). Momentum
does not last that long.

* edited to fix Win 95 launch date (thanks meric)

~~~
meric
"Windows 95 was launched in late August of 2005."... 1995

