The most fascinating part of the article is that he admits his best selling phone is a low end model as evidence of what customers really want. Apparently it didn't occur to him that he's not selling higher end phones because his competitors are eating his lunch in that space.
Funny. How can you be so disconnected that you miss the 10's of millions of devices that have been sold in this space at that level of the corporate ladder.
I don't actually have a touchscreen based phone or a tablet, but I can easily see that people want them because of the numbers that have been sold.
The reason I haven't got one is because my current phone is doing just fine and I like to keep my stuff until it is broken beyond repair before replacing it. Touchscreens vs keyboards are a long-term no brainer decision, buttons are mechanical, touch screens are 'solid state', requiring no moving parts other than the fingers of the operators.
They allow for larger screens and don't require slide-outs or other weak links like that to operate. They'll probably be cheaper in the longer term to manufacture than a keyboard. And they use the most logical interface that we know of, simulating the 'real world' where you press on the thing that you get your 'feedback' from.
Perhaps the same way that Blockbuster CEO, Jim Keyes, was baffled by the success of Netflix, by drinking his own bathwater (hubris and willful blindness to alternative ideas).
I remember when the Palm CEO dismissed the iPhone, and I'm pretty sure that Ballmer has dismissed every single thing Apple has ever done in the press while rushing to get his engineers to copy it.
You can only assume that fortune 500 CEO's are clueless for so long before you start to assume that they're merely disingenuous: They dismiss all of the competition's products and features until they can release their own copies.
You know that RIM is desperately trying to come out with their own touch screen smart phones. But their previous attempts have been disasters.
Looking at the recent Blackberry OS's, it's clear that they aren't putting very significant engineering resources to improving the user experience. It's really too late IMHO unless they have some uber-project on the back burner a la Palm's Web OS.
I was really really interested in applying for a dev position with RIM out here until I actually tried a Tour. Man, what an awful interface. Everything about it just dripped "don't care".
Reading that would make me cringe if I were a RIM investor. Obviously this is a snippet of a keynote, but I wonder if he mentioned apps? Apple and Android will destroy any shot RIM has at the consumer space if they don't get onboard with a sexier product. It may already be too late....
It's sorta true for me, depending on how you read it. A device without a physical keyboard has lower usability, and I really like the RIM keyboard. So given a choice between a device with a physical keyboard and a device with a touch keyboard, physical wins. That doesn't mean touch can't be there too. My Treo used to have touch and a physical keyboard, 4 years ago. I also find a stylus works better than touch for drawing, just like a pencil is better than finger painting. Fat fingering is just a little too literal for me...
Obviously, if you like physical keyboards, I respect your opinion that it's important to you. However, I don't think you can say a device without has lower usability.
What you gain in potential typing ability is offset by either a larger overall device (by volume) or a smaller screen. Both offset the potential increased usability of the keyboard.
Additionally, there is more to usability than simply having keys. In fact, there are some huge usability gains to be had with an on screen keyboard. For example, when typing into an email field, the keyboard changes to specialize for keys important for creating email addresses. Same with fields meant for URLs, or numbers, etc.
> In fact, there are some huge usability gains to be had with an on screen keyboard. For example, when typing into an email field, the keyboard changes to specialize for keys important for creating email addresses.
On an iPhone, this is merely a way to compensate for the lack of real-estate you can dedicate to the keyboard. On a blackberry you have all of these keys accessible as alternates by holding down the ALT key. This includes all of the letters, numbers, backspace, enter, shift keys and these characters: ()_-+@#*/:;;"?!,$.
Typing on a blackberry is much easier and quicker, making it a lot better for email and chat.
I'd personally like to a new blackberry all the same, except the screen would also be a touch screen. Keep the small laptop-like touchpad, though.
First off, the only quote from Lazardis is "famous".
So I'm taking much of this with a grain of salt.
I sincerely hope that if Lazaridis said anything remotely similar to what the article says, that he was actually pointing to the fact that there are multiple ways to get your mobile OS on a larger screen, and a full blown tablet isn't the only one.
With respect to touch-screen popularity, the article says 'touch only' phones. And it is true that many people prefer a click keyboard AS WELL AS a touch screen.
The spin is good, but the underlaying problem is clear. They missed the boat and top leadership seems to be somewhat disconnected to market and reality. To me it reads like another Microsoft and Ballmer story.
I think the iPhone is a lot like the Wii console. Touch screens on phones are somewhat like WiiMotes, it's a novel approach but I do think it's questionable whether touch screen technology has staying power.
One of the biggest signs it is a fad is the inability of competitors to gain significant traction with similar devices. "WiiMote" like accessories for other game consoles has largely fallen flat, and likewise there hasn't been a significant touch screen competitor to iPhone.
Whether you agree or not, just looking at the market trends I don't think having a touch screen or not is going to be a key differentiator in the next big smart phone.
Does anybody but the "waggle sucks" crowd really think Wii-style motion control doesn't have staying power?
I would be surprised if video gaming goes back to being as much of a "niche" thing as it used to be, and shocked if non-motion control gaming became preferred by the mainstream.
Besides, competitors don't have seriously competitive "waggle" devices out yet to compare market success against, and, what's coming doesn't seem to be substantially better than Wii on a level that most people are going to care about.
RIM is rapidly finding it's way into obsolescence. It's still the most "popular" smart phone. But the devices stink by today's standards, and their attempts at an App store and a touch screen have been bombs. Their devices are simply not capable of keeping up with what people want to do on their phones.
I'd wager that they'll come out with an Android device in a year or two before slowly fading into Palm like obscurity.
RIM clearly has some problems with their OS and library of applications, they both suck.
But one thing that's going to stick is their contracts with businesses. Almost every business that deploys devices to their employees issues blackberries, and they make a lot of money off the Business Enterprise Server and integration with Microsoft Exchange.
RIM has only recently emphasized the consumer smartphone market, relative to other companies like Nokia and Apple which have only done consumer the entire time they made smartphones.
Nobody's going to oust RIM in the business market any time soon.
18 comments
[ 6.0 ms ] story [ 51.6 ms ] threadI don't actually have a touchscreen based phone or a tablet, but I can easily see that people want them because of the numbers that have been sold.
The reason I haven't got one is because my current phone is doing just fine and I like to keep my stuff until it is broken beyond repair before replacing it. Touchscreens vs keyboards are a long-term no brainer decision, buttons are mechanical, touch screens are 'solid state', requiring no moving parts other than the fingers of the operators.
They allow for larger screens and don't require slide-outs or other weak links like that to operate. They'll probably be cheaper in the longer term to manufacture than a keyboard. And they use the most logical interface that we know of, simulating the 'real world' where you press on the thing that you get your 'feedback' from.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=280425
You can only assume that fortune 500 CEO's are clueless for so long before you start to assume that they're merely disingenuous: They dismiss all of the competition's products and features until they can release their own copies.
Looking at the recent Blackberry OS's, it's clear that they aren't putting very significant engineering resources to improving the user experience. It's really too late IMHO unless they have some uber-project on the back burner a la Palm's Web OS.
Reading this makes me glad I chose to skip them.
What you gain in potential typing ability is offset by either a larger overall device (by volume) or a smaller screen. Both offset the potential increased usability of the keyboard.
Additionally, there is more to usability than simply having keys. In fact, there are some huge usability gains to be had with an on screen keyboard. For example, when typing into an email field, the keyboard changes to specialize for keys important for creating email addresses. Same with fields meant for URLs, or numbers, etc.
On an iPhone, this is merely a way to compensate for the lack of real-estate you can dedicate to the keyboard. On a blackberry you have all of these keys accessible as alternates by holding down the ALT key. This includes all of the letters, numbers, backspace, enter, shift keys and these characters: ()_-+@#*/:;;"?!,$.
Typing on a blackberry is much easier and quicker, making it a lot better for email and chat.
I'd personally like to a new blackberry all the same, except the screen would also be a touch screen. Keep the small laptop-like touchpad, though.
http://www.electronista.com/articles/10/03/03/device.follows...
I sincerely hope that if Lazaridis said anything remotely similar to what the article says, that he was actually pointing to the fact that there are multiple ways to get your mobile OS on a larger screen, and a full blown tablet isn't the only one.
With respect to touch-screen popularity, the article says 'touch only' phones. And it is true that many people prefer a click keyboard AS WELL AS a touch screen.
If I owned RIM stock, this would be such a trigger point.
I think the iPhone is a lot like the Wii console. Touch screens on phones are somewhat like WiiMotes, it's a novel approach but I do think it's questionable whether touch screen technology has staying power.
One of the biggest signs it is a fad is the inability of competitors to gain significant traction with similar devices. "WiiMote" like accessories for other game consoles has largely fallen flat, and likewise there hasn't been a significant touch screen competitor to iPhone.
Whether you agree or not, just looking at the market trends I don't think having a touch screen or not is going to be a key differentiator in the next big smart phone.
I would be surprised if video gaming goes back to being as much of a "niche" thing as it used to be, and shocked if non-motion control gaming became preferred by the mainstream.
Besides, competitors don't have seriously competitive "waggle" devices out yet to compare market success against, and, what's coming doesn't seem to be substantially better than Wii on a level that most people are going to care about.
I'd wager that they'll come out with an Android device in a year or two before slowly fading into Palm like obscurity.
But one thing that's going to stick is their contracts with businesses. Almost every business that deploys devices to their employees issues blackberries, and they make a lot of money off the Business Enterprise Server and integration with Microsoft Exchange.
RIM has only recently emphasized the consumer smartphone market, relative to other companies like Nokia and Apple which have only done consumer the entire time they made smartphones.
Nobody's going to oust RIM in the business market any time soon.