RIM: no open-source BlackBerry OS on the radar
With the onslaught of Android, the Symbian Foundation, and the LiMo Foundation all looking to take their fair slices of the world's mobile market, you might think the pressure would be on the world's closed-source smartphone platforms to give up the goods. A question posed at a recent RIM developer conference suggested that at least some BlackBerry devs would like a crack at Waterloo's inner workings, mainly to get a better feel for its technical underpinnings and help vet it for robustness and security (or so they say) -- but these guys probably shouldn't be holding their breath. The answer from on high was that RIM has an open-source "team" that's looking into releasing the code for some of its development tools, but as for the platform itself, "that's a pretty big leap." With RIM's emphasis on the enterprise, we can see the argument going both ways -- black boxes can be somewhat secure by their very nature, but wouldn't it help to have more eyeballs vetting that stuff?[Via RCR]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
BooGz @ Oct 28th 2008 10:29PM
Im with RIM on this one, for the sake of security, it has to stay closed-source for the time being.
Valicore @ Oct 28th 2008 11:01PM
I agree with BooGz.The Blackberry platform needs to stay CLOSED source because of the fact that more and more devices are coming with open source systems. Blackberry is extremely successful because it focuses on doing a few indispensable mission critical things extremely well, and as much as I despise companies that are closed source and proprietary in my personal life, I prefer the Blackberry closed source for business. It's a hell of a lot better for the IT guys too I think because open source makes it easy for everyone to develop and distribuite, regardless of messy code, or spyware, or any number of things.
derX @ Oct 29th 2008 12:04AM
I, for one, do not want more eyeballs vetting at my blackbox.
I say leave it closed.
rseijas @ Oct 29th 2008 11:34AM
RIM should NEVER go open source. They have the best platform for security/communications going, lots of government contracts, and a lock on the whole thing. If we just hunker down and ride it out, this "open source" hysteria will pass.
Mike B. @ Oct 29th 2008 1:20PM
the UI is customizable enough. There's no benifit of RIM making BB OS open source.
slance66 @ Oct 31st 2008 2:38PM
RIM has this right, and MSFT does as well. Open Source has a role, but aside from budget web-servers, it has never taken hold as the primary platform anywhere, for anything. There's a reason for that. When you but MSFT or RIM, you know who is behind it, who you can hold accountable. With OS, including Android, you have essentially a bunch of guys making improvements in their spare time. Have a critical issue? Who do you call? Firefox is nice, and maybe Chrome will be too, but IE dominates and will keep dominating. Linux is a small player at most, and isn't even growing as fast as MSFT in the server space.
slance66 @ Oct 31st 2008 2:39PM
RIM has this right, and MSFT does as well. Open Source has a role, but aside from budget web-servers, it has never taken hold as the primary platform anywhere, for anything. There's a reason for that. When you but MSFT or RIM, you know who is behind it, who you can hold accountable. With OS, including Android, you have essentially a bunch of guys making improvements in their spare time. Have a critical issue? Who do you call? Firefox is nice, and maybe Chrome will be too, but IE dominates and will keep dominating. Linux is a small player at most, and isn't even growing as fast as MSFT in the server space.