Feed on
Posts
Comments

BlackBerry Platform

Looking through the set of tools, APIs and advantages for developers of Research In Motion products it is difficult to disregard the care of the platform. Someone may ask: “Have you ever seen a developer who intentionally decreases potential attention to his product?” Of course, the answer is generally – “No”! But. After having a challenge round the iPhone development I can surely say that it is possible. No matter what the reason was but Apple intentionally locked a set of potentially interesting and popular features to regular developers. Thoughts?

  • Paying attention to the quality of the software. Maybe they decided that they can control the quality of the software by giving rights for using private frameworks to individual groups? Wrong decision. It is much more efficient (but more difficult and expensive) to perform at least minimum stability evaluation at the side of content provider (Apple Application Store). Instead of preventing access to important framework they would better to confess and proclaim something like “Do not use Quartz for 2D game development! Use OpenGL!”. Or any other of tons of other confessions they should do.
  • Overwhelming desire of getting as much profit as possible. You definitely can use embedded (but locked into private framework) map component if you become their friend. What you should do to achieve such a title? $?
  • Anxiety about the future. Maybe they afraid to lose their endless stream of bright ideas. In this case they will probably integrate video calls, video recording, mms,… (other tons of things you would like to add goes here). Have you seen a picture illustrating differences between iPhone (2008) and stone (40,000 B.C.)? (Ask Google for “iPhone vs stone”).

Make sense?

In any case, platform understanding comes in at least mouth or two but even after first glimpse at BlackBerry platform I can express it as “I see what to do attract potential users and to occupy the niche”. Business smart phones in North America is more then just interesting ($) target group.

What really attracts attention from the development point is that the whole stack of technologies is based on existing standards. It looks really stable, reliable and safe. This is a really good example of achieving business benefits through architecture based approach. If you decide to build safe device you have to start with the development of safe platform. Someone may argue that it is too simple and obvious to even notice it. But why do so many of us (starting from platform vendors and finishing with developers) make so much wrong decisions, if so?