7 ms·
The biggest issue I have with the movie is it attempts to shoe-horn the RiM story into the same mold as Apple. But RiM was a large company when it began develo
by EncomLab 3y ago
The biggest issue I have with the movie is it attempts to shoe-horn the RiM story into the same mold as Apple. But RiM was a large company when it began developing devices for two-way paging - and the BB was the output of a team of engineers evolving existing products, not some flash in the pan new device developed by one guy in his garage.
Besides, as anyone who has read "Losing the Signal" knows - it was not the devices but the proprietary servers that were the real money makers for RiM. The spectrum providers PAID RiM a monthly fee per user to have RiM servers in their datacenters. It was the loss of that revenue that doomed the company.
- dangus 3y agoI thought that skipping those technical details served the movie well. After all, it’s not a documentary, it’s made to be emotionally engaging and entertaining. It seems to me that the underlying reason that the spectrum providers were no longer willing to pay RIM was because customers wanted to use alternative products that didn’t saddle the carriers with the those extra costs. If Apple and Android hadn’t come around, BlackBerry would have had a lot more leverage.
- rchaud 3y agoYou can't expect a movie adaptation of a non-fiction book to be completely faithful to the original. I love the book but I realize it makes total sense to market the film as the story of Canada's versio of Apple Computer. The Blackberry devices were an icon of the corporate world and Wall Street; like a Rolex, it told the world you were important. It's that image that got Fortune 100 companies to order the things in droves and pay for the expensive servers.