BlackBerry Forums Support Community

noeffectx · 05-05-2006, 05:57 PM

I can see RIM going to be like a Nokia in the future. making phones for Business Minded only, kids only, boys only, men only, girls only, women only and littlebit for everybody.

strobate · 05-06-2006, 10:54 AM

One thing that hasn't been said yet (I think) is that BlackBerry connect _is_ available for devices that do have cameras, so why not get one of those?

I wonder if RIM will continue making hardware much longer.

Boy Genius · 05-06-2006, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zro

If they do put a camera in a BlackBerry, I can bet that there are going to be places that extend their cell ban to include all BlackBerrys because they don't want to retrain the security staff.

And I don't see how you can say by the end of the year, that's a little quick, even for RIM. Unless you have info that no one else seems to have on these forums.

Zro

Your point is so stupid its unbelievable. Let me ask you this one question, you said places will ban all blackberries because one model has a camera. You name me ONE cellular manufacturer thats product line doesnt include a camera phone, name one and you win, if not case closed I don't ever want to hear this argument again. That would mean NO ONE could have ANY phone in ANY work place that bans cameraphones, great way to limit the productivity of your staff. This top is dead to me.

aristobrat · 05-06-2006, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zro

And I don't see how you can say by the end of the year, that's a little quick, even for RIM. Unless you have info that no one else seems to have on these forums.

Oh, you mean like in the first post of this thread?

Wickwire · 05-07-2006, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guess

coach. They always fly coach for some reason. On my way back from WES last year, i was on the plane with several RIM guys, all flying coach.

RIM on fly's employee's coach unless it is longer than a 14hr flight...

0siris · 05-07-2006, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strobate

One thing that hasn't been said yet (I think) is that BlackBerry connect _is_ available for devices that do have cameras, so why not get one of those?

One reason is security. Blackberry Connect doesn't utilize all of the security functions that are incorporated into (for one example) BES. Then again, if your security needs are that high, a camera isn't exactly in tune with security, either.

There are a lot of people in this thread arguing that they can't understand why a company would limit its market. There's actually a simple reason why it might. I work for a company that does exactly that: US Cellular.

We're a regional carrier. A big one, but still regional. Our corporate philosophy is to have no ambitions as a national carrier because that would have too much impact on our ability to satisfy customers.

Now, you may or may not agree with the philosophy, but purposefully limiting one's market is a valid choice.

If... just if... RIM considers itself a maker of business products, and that's the market it wants to serve first, foremost, and maybe even only, then so be it. There are many companies that have failed because they expanded too far, and lost their focus. If that focus matters to RIM, then they'll stick to where they think they know the market best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by strobate

I wonder if RIM will continue making hardware much longer.

At least for now, I think so. Good question, but right now Blackberry Connect has left out enough functionality that only a proprietary Blackberry Device can do that RIM seems to be keeping itself as the primary device for their wireless software solutions.

strobate · 05-07-2006, 10:49 AM

One advantage of NO BlackBerries having cameras is that security personnel can easily determine the device is (a) a BlackBerry and therefore (b) camera-free.

RIM isn't limiting its market by not delivering a BB with a camera, it's defining it. With BB Connect available for those whose security requirements are not at the same level as the rest of us (and for the Treo platform now too, I believe), RIM is covering its bases. I see its competitino not as other device makers, but rather GoodLink and (gulp) Microsoft.

aristobrat · 05-07-2006, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strobate

One advantage of NO BlackBerries having cameras is that security personnel can easily determine the device is (a) a BlackBerry and therefore (b) camera-free.

Going back to boygenisus' post a few ago, security personnel currently have to determine if every single cell phone that they see is camera-free, so what's the issue with them checking BlackBerrys?

IMO, security folks aren't doing a good job if they're not currently looking at BlackBerrys to verify that there isn't a lense on it anywhere. With the amount of new units that RIM is putting out (amongst the different carriers, I mean -- each one has a different look and feel), for all that the security folks know, there could be one from RIM that currently comes with a camera. Or on the dubious side of life, I doubt it would take anyone with some skills more than a day to figure out how to squeeze a regular camera phone into a BlackBerry shell.

strobate · 05-07-2006, 12:50 PM

I think there's places that would prefer not to have cameras and will try to weed them out and places where cameras are absolutely not allowed, and many of latter are within the beltway and are RIM's most profitable customers. Some security personnel don't have to determine whether cellphones have cameras installed in them--those buildings outright ban cellphones.

I don't understand why RIM would anger its most profitable customers by appeasing what is likely to be its least, namely, consumers, and I don't know how many enterprises that are seriously considering BES would go with GoodLink strictly on the basis of the camera offering. And I doubt it would be more than those for whom the reverse is true.

aristobrat · 05-07-2006, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strobate

I don't understand why RIM would anger its most profitable customers by appeasing what is likely to be its least, namely, consumers

To state the obvious, none of us know RIMs business as well as RIM does.

If they honestly felt that a camera/multimedia device wasn't going to add to their publicly traded bottom line, then we won't see one.

gonavyblue · 05-07-2006, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aristobrat

To state the obvious, none of us know RIMs business as well as RIM does.

If they honestly felt that a camera/multimedia device wasn't going to add to their publicly traded bottom line, then we won't see one.

So its has to be coming. .

aristobrat · 05-07-2006, 09:35 PM

Your original reply was so much better. ;)

gonavyblue · 05-07-2006, 10:15 PM

The Rumour mill was the wrong place to post that.

Soapm · 05-07-2006, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strobate

RIM isn't limiting its market by not delivering a BB with a camera, it's defining it. With BB Connect available for those whose security requirements are not at the same level as the rest of us (and for the Treo platform now too, I believe), RIM is covering its bases.

Exactly, like Bently. If you want good gas mileage or low repair cost you probably don't want a Bently. It's the market they defined for themselves.

As far as security, once BB Connect is popular, one comprimised device could comprimise the entire BB network. I'm not speaking of camera's but I am thinking of streaming audio or what BB's call, "split pipe" connections. Then when the hackers and script kiddies get loose on WM5???

Zro · 05-08-2006, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boygenius

Your point is so stupid its unbelievable. Let me ask you this one question, you said places will ban all blackberries because one model has a camera. You name me ONE cellular manufacturer thats product line doesnt include a camera phone, name one and you win, if not case closed I don't ever want to hear this argument again. That would mean NO ONE could have ANY phone in ANY work place that bans cameraphones, great way to limit the productivity of your staff. This top is dead to me.

There have been a few others here that have mentioned places that won't allow ANY cell phones for fear of cameras.

I personally have been in a government building here locally with my SE T310 (no camera) and was told I could not bring it in because it's a cell phone. I told the guy it didn't have a camera, but he said it didn't matter, cell phones were not allowed inside. My BlackBerry on the other hand was ok.

I'm not saying that every place has a ban this broad, but I have been to at lease one place that has this broad of a ban, and if there was a model of BB that had a camera, I would be willing to bet that I wouldn't have been able to bring mine in either.

Yes it would be nice if security personelle would look at each device to see if it had a camera, or at least listen to the person who says they need it and it doesn't have a camera, but there are places that think it's easier to just say no.

Zro

chrjohns · 05-08-2006, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zro

There have been a few others here that have mentioned places that won't allow ANY cell phones for fear of cameras.

I personally have been in a government building here locally with my SE T310 (no camera) and was told I could not bring it in because it's a cell phone. I told the guy it didn't have a camera, but he said it didn't matter, cell phones were not allowed inside. My BlackBerry on the other hand was ok.

I'm not saying that every place has a ban this broad, but I have been to at lease one place that has this broad of a ban, and if there was a model of BB that had a camera, I would be willing to bet that I wouldn't have been able to bring mine in either.

Yes it would be nice if security personelle would look at each device to see if it had a camera, or at least listen to the person who says they need it and it doesn't have a camera, but there are places that think it's easier to just say no.

Zro

Good example.

aristobrat · 05-08-2006, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zro

I'm not saying that every place has a ban this broad, but I have been to at lease one place that has this broad of a ban, and if there was a model of BB that had a camera, I would be willing to bet that I wouldn't have been able to bring mine in either.

Really?

In those type of places, it's usually the "big guys with political weight" who carry the BlackBerrys. I'd think it'd be more likely that guards would start checking for BBs+cameras than BBs would outright be banned.

Either way, I still feel that RIM has more to make for its shraeholders with the consumer market than it has to lose with niche places like the one you've described.