Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Research in Motion's 7-Inch 'PlayBook' Tablet to Target Business Users
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No.. posts like the one I responded too are.
I mean seriously... how many times are we going to have to see "Once again, companyx copies Apple." posts?
They're a bit childish and naive.
Research in Motion today announced a new 7-inch tablet device known as the BlackBerry PlayBook. The business-focused tablet, set for launch early next year, will offer a dual-core 1GHz, Cortex A9 processor, 1 GB of RAM, 1024 x 600 display with capacitive multi-touch capabilities, front (3-megapixel) and rear (5-megapixel) cameras, and support for 1080p video output over HDMI.Pricing and other details are yet to be announced, although the PlayBook will apparently initially be available only as a Wi-Fi models, with the company planning to launch 3G and 4G models in the future. The Wi-Fi PlayBook will, however, be able to tether through BlackBerry phones for access on the go.
Research in Motion has been looking for ways to maintain its prominent position among business users as Apple's iPhone has begun to gain traction in corporate settings. Consequently, the company is placing a strong emphasis on PlayBook's ability to seamlessly integrate with users' existing BlackBerry devices to allow them to easily use whichever device is appropriate at any given time without needing to worry about syncing or duplication of data.
Article Link: Research in Motion's 7-Inch 'PlayBook' Tablet to Target Business Users
You know, I'm not saying that I'm going to give up my iPad for one of these anytime soon, but I've got to say that I'm impressed. Great commercial. If the interface flows as smoothly as what they show in the ad, it looks really good. This is the first competition for the iPad that I think may be able to carve out a fair bit of the action. It remains to be seen how it will be in the real world, but... Well done RIM.
Blackberry Game Changer
wow.... o-rig-i-nal.... They did really innovate there by throwing the dual cameras in. Apple must have not thoug.... oh wait. They knew they could sell MILLIONS of units before having to come out with the iPad MkII with two cameras, thus they could sell millions more units to users who had already bought the Mk I.... Like my daddy always said, "don't hate a shark for being a shark". Does it suck for early adopters...? Yep. Does it make more money for Apple and it's shareholders.... YEP. All I can say is iPad + Mi+Fi + SalesForce, Keynote & Google Docs (editing coming soon) with some remote wiping and software install control (should be available through iOS tools already, never tried it): Sounds like a business ready machine to me!
All that said... more competition is better! At least there is a real contender and now Apple, HP, and BlackBerry can duke it out. I just feel bad for app developers. Looks like three different operating systems iOS, BBOS, and WebOS. Combined with three desktop OS Mac, Win, and Linux (and yes I know many businesses only run linux on their servers) but man that means 9 different development scenarios (more until HTML5 finishes killing Flash...please-o-please...)? ugh.
I agree
wow.... o-rig-i-nal.... They did really innovate there by throwing the dual cameras in. Apple must have not thoug.... oh wait. They knew they could sell MILLIONS of units before having to come out with the iPad MkII with two cameras, thus they could sell millions more units to users who had already bought the Mk I.... Like my daddy always said, "don't hate a shark for being a shark". Does it suck for early adopters...? Yep. Does it make more money for Apple and it's shareholders.... YEP. All I can say is iPad + Mi+Fi + SalesForce, Keynote & Google Docs (editing coming soon) with some remote wiping and software install control (should be available through iOS tools already, never tried it): Sounds like a business ready machine to me!
All that said... more competition is better! At least there is a real contender and now Apple, HP, and BlackBerry can duke it out. I just feel bad for app developers. Looks like three different operating systems iOS, BBOS, and WebOS. Combined with three desktop OS Mac, Win, and Linux (and yes I know many businesses only run linux on their servers) but man that means 9 different development scenarios (more until HTML5 finishes killing Flash...please-o-please...)? ugh.
I agree
Because better specs can only improve the user experience. You like iOS on a cortex A8 it would be far superior on a cortex A9. The specs provide greater flexibility for developers, why accept less when you in theory should get more for the same price if old components are costing apple less. Another thing is future proofing. Why would you want an apple tablet running aswell as another with twice the memory when an ipad with the same memory could run even better? Think true multitasking, expose, 3d transition effects, safari tabs that never get lost no matter how many apps are opened etc...
The ARM processors are all designed to scale speeds anyway so its not like these new procs will reduce battery life. Apple has great battery life because they have two huge batteries I don't think they will remove them, they would probably only increase capacity!
Sure the ipad runs well now but what about when they release iOS6 and everything slows to a halt, just look at the iphone 3g for the reason why specs are important, maybe not for now but the future. Not everyone wants to go out and buy a new tablet every year.
Playbook = very nice, but if there is too much of a reliance on a blackberry companion they could alienate potential other buyers.
Niche?
This looks more like a portable computer than the iPad. Maybe a computer that does iPad stuff, but to be a professional business device it has to unfortunately run MSOffice. So why would you buy this? Price? It's not a business computer so I don't get it. It's just a high-spec 7 inch tablet targeting business users who really want a powerful notebook. I expect to see a big old A/C adaptor with only a few hours on a charge and running hot when you do a lot of multitasking. We'll see. The SDK has just been released and I haven't looked at it. The ultimate success of it will be around the SDK and support for developers.
This looks more like a portable computer than the iPad. Maybe a computer that does iPad stuff, but to be a professional business device it has to unfortunately run MSOffice. So why would you buy this? Price? It's not a business computer so I don't get it. It's just a high-spec 7 inch tablet targeting business users who really want a powerful notebook. I expect to see a big old A/C adaptor with only a few hours on a charge and running hot when you do a lot of multitasking. We'll see. The SDK has just been released and I haven't looked at it. The ultimate success of it will be around the SDK and support for developers.
1. Apple released the iPhone with no SDK well over a year. So option would be to release the device with no SDK. Right now that would not work as well because folks would scream "doom and gloom, the App Store has XXX thousands of apps and don't have any." BB doesn't need 10's of thousands of apps immediately. They just need probably less than a 100 general ones that make the Playbook users productive and mildly entertained in boring airports. Although with probably a few 1000 custom apps that individual companies leverage (either develop in-house , on contract, or are limited targeted distribution. )
2. So if have to release the SDK to people to who you probably want to have interact with businesses so they get the requirements, then they need to be able to talk and show the device to more than a small group of people who have offered up the rights to their first born to be able to even talk about the device.
3. This is a "new" OS for BB ( it is not a new OS to devices ). So there should be some developer lead time on getting ramped up on the tools. Software, beyond giggly iFart apps, takes a while to develop. They'd have to release now to get decent apps when ship.
Releasing the specs now doesn't really give anyone the heads up to release anything else sooner. The engineering pipeline on these tablets is over 12 months in many cases. If they release in 5-6 they still have a six month lead on someone who started from zero. Second, anyone to was already in the business has had access to similar parts for the last 6-8 months so there is nothing "new" here for them either. The price point is the primary issue they can use that is proprietary and it is no where in this announcement. Battery life isn't either. that could be bad or good but the competitors don't know unless they have similar prototypes in their labs.
Likewise if dealing with primarily business procurement you have to give them a heads up on equipment because it won't be approved for purshase if just show up and say "ta da, something new".
I think folks are missing the point. It isn't necessarily the iPad that the Playbook is competing for. In many companies a subset of the road warriors could be given a BB phone (which they already have in many cases) and a BB Playbook (instead of a ultralight business notebook). The phone + Playbook is very likely a lighter traveling bundle than phone + notebok.
If trying to push lightweight notebook loads onto the tablet then 1GB and 2 cores will probably work slightly better. (although will take a hit on batter life.) In normal usage mode probably won't need to turn on both cores so suspect battery life will have a wide range of lifetimes depending upon the wider range of usages.
Sure there is a limited amount of "stop gap" and news-cycle control in annoucing earlier but there are logistic reasons to announce early too. Even Apple has to announce several months beforehand when introducing a brand new line. Their approach of not telling partners in advance has negative effects even Cupertino Kool-aid can't disperse in some situations.
Yeah so?
Whats your point? Companies have playbooks. Its corproate speak. Its actaully a pretty good name I think.
This does look snazzy but i'd like to see it actually functioning on the device.
Microsoft did the exact same thing with the Zune "HD". Sure, it was capable of playing 720p content, but only when hooked up to an HDTV with a $90 dock, and it certainly could not display in HD on its very pretty but low resolution 480x272 screen. 600 is at least within spitting distance of 720. ETA: and at least you get a mini HDMI out here without some absurdly overpriced dock for it.
Some nice specs, to be sure, but some problems too:
1. It won't be out until next year. So don't compare it to the iPad. Instead compare it to iPad 2.0 (whatever that will be, possibly also including a 7" model) which should be out by then. As usual, the competition is fighting past battles while Apple moves ahead.
2. You want to develop for this? You have two choices: 1) HTML5 2) Flash. Gee, the same concept that people slammed Apple for back in 2007.
1. It won't be out until next year. So don't compare it to the iPad. Instead compare it to iPad 2.0 (whatever that will be, possibly also including a 7" model) which should be out by then. As usual, the competition is fighting past battles while Apple moves ahead.
2. You want to develop for this? You have two choices: 1) HTML5 2) Flash. Gee, the same concept that people slammed Apple for back in 2007.
They probably figured this as the best time to announce, before the Christmas noise drowns everything out and before the inevitable iPad revision (and perhaps before Windows Phone 7 noise reaches fever pitch, which is certainly a threat to RIM as well).
Well to be fair Nebula, Apple didn't exactly give people the flash option.
I'll admit it, I'm a rabid Apple fanboy and love my iPad to death but that coverflow (yeah it's a ripoff) interface looks pretty slick. Apple time to step it up and one up them.
I didn't read every thread, but I'm not sure why all the hate, the specs are sweet.
A lot of people want a 7" tablet. It supports flash, that's HUGE for a lot of people. The processor rocks (dual core), 2 camera's , HDMI 1080p out and 1GB of ram. The hardware looks good. 3G and 4G versions coming later, just like the iPad. The iPad didn't have that at launch either.
Also, the OS is NOT the Blackberry OS6 or some variant. It's a QNX based OS (small footprint Unix) that RIM bought in April. I would almost bet it uses Webkit for the browser, just like the BB OS6 does now. The old BB 5.0 and under browser is horrendous.
We just need to see pricing, battery life and how good the touch, touch keyboard and apps are. My only gripe is the 1024x600 but we need to see how it works out.
I doubt they'll beat Apple's elegance and feel, but it looks darn good.
I'm waiting for the iPad 2.
A lot of people want a 7" tablet. It supports flash, that's HUGE for a lot of people. The processor rocks (dual core), 2 camera's , HDMI 1080p out and 1GB of ram. The hardware looks good. 3G and 4G versions coming later, just like the iPad. The iPad didn't have that at launch either.
Also, the OS is NOT the Blackberry OS6 or some variant. It's a QNX based OS (small footprint Unix) that RIM bought in April. I would almost bet it uses Webkit for the browser, just like the BB OS6 does now. The old BB 5.0 and under browser is horrendous.
We just need to see pricing, battery life and how good the touch, touch keyboard and apps are. My only gripe is the 1024x600 but we need to see how it works out.
I doubt they'll beat Apple's elegance and feel, but it looks darn good.
I'm waiting for the iPad 2.
No live demo? If the software was at least half way usable they would have done some kind of demo. Imagine Apple announcing a product without demonstrating it, the tech press would be all over them. They gave a pass to RIM, why?
I pointed out that out too a few pages out, and am still a little bemused by it. I can only guess it's not ready to come out to play(book) yet.
It's probably more pity than anything... Everyone knows they are falling behind but wishes they were able to stay in the game...
Considering their recent releases, I'm surprised you think *RIM* would be the one to make an honest iPad competitor
The Torch wasn't bad. It wasn't great, but it was no Storm. The Bolds are the same as they've ever been: successful and useful for people who need their specific functionality. And RIM continues to make more money than God in enterprise. They know what they're doing, and apart from the aforementioned Storm, generally don't let themselves play catch-up for too long. And when they innovate, they do it on their terms. When it ships we'll see how the OS looks in person, but I'm optimistic.
So, yes, I certainly expected RIM (or Palm pre-HP) to be the entity that made the second real tablet. Who else could, the East Asian Xerox shops?
Well to be fair Nebula, Apple didn't exactly give people the flash option.
Ain't that the truth!
But seriously, if you can only do Flash or Web-based, you are going to get a bunch of apps that are limited to certain types of functionality. You won't get the kind of app store that has a lot of other functionality.
If people are going to slam Apple for restricting Flash, at least have the honesty to note the limitations RIM is putting on the PlayBook.
And hey, a business-targeted device with "play" in the name? OK, I know what a playbook is, but c'mon, is that the best association they can come up with?