You win, RIM (An open letter to RIM's developer relations)
blog.jamiemurai.com
blog.jamiemurai.com
$200 price to develop with 10 app limit.
Multiple registration forms.
Requiring multiple downloads.
Requiring to purchase vmware fusion.
Installer that just copies an iso.
Having to password protect the simulator.
Bad documentation on how to load an app on the simulator.
The comparative ease with which you can do these things with android and ios.
We recently developed this so speaking from some experience http://appworld.blackberry.com/webstore/content/28561
The bb version took far far longer than the equivalent iOS, simply because of other nonsense such as the pain in the signing process (isthesigningserverdown.com the fact it exists tells you all you need to know). Random exceptions being thrown that have no useful meaning and of course the joy of RAPC throwing errors such as "CreateProcess error=87, Parameter is incorrect" which we eventually found was due to the classpath being too long for RAPC to handle
However once complete the application it is something we are very proud of!
Our apologies:
It looks like you are using an unsupported Operating System. BlackBerry App World was designed to support the following:
Windows
Although you can browse BlackBerry App World with your current browser, some features may not be functional.
To their credit they did let me continue.
http://failblog.org/2011/02/04/epic-fail-photos-blackberry-a...
Why? The answer is quite simple. Their software is shit. Their developer relations is shit. They are competing not vs hardware, but vs hardware + software.
They made great decisions too... lets ship the "Curve" model with such shit hardware and new software it was a downgrade from the previous top BB model (the one with side wheel). Old model = 3 seconds cold boot, new model = 3 minutes. The curve could not run any software that was remotely useful. It turned into a glorified email/phone device. The internet browsing sucked so bad I had no use for it. Not to mention that the hardware could barely handle the rendering.
So with good decisions like that, can you really expect any more out of RIM?
I think it's less important how "good" an SDK is unto itself, and more important how good it is relative to it's competition. In this case you have to compare the Playbook SDK to Apple's and Google's because when developers are making decision about which platform to work with, they're going to be choosing between them.
If RIM's strategy doesn't have some component that involves trying to woo iOS developers to their platform, I predict they will fail.
Finally, the whole smartphone area is ten years old, consumer-focused part of it less than five years old: less than mature, and way less than settled. In another ten years, this all might have turned out to be a silly bubble as Moore's law erases any effective differences between smartphones. Will Apple "fail" when its percentage profit per device and market share falls to current Macbook values?
As I understand, RIM's gonna do all the fulfillment & billing for you in the app store? This is the SDK for an unreleased product? On a new, unreleased OS? On a different architecture than your dev machine? Yeah, it may require some paperwork, and the SDK & dev docs might not be where all their developers' attention currently is.
Actually, the 10 app limit impressed me. I don't want my apps as #13 in middle of 25 variations of the same app from another developer. $20 a product just isn't expensive.
Also, why do you have to use VMWare fusion if it's an ISO? Couldn't you use any of its competitors if it's not in a proprietary file format?
Finally, as for all the 'cryptic commands'... write a shell script. ( http://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/ )
If you want a button, write an applescript app that shows a button & runs the shell script. ( http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.21/21.04/IntroTo... )
(1) Employers often pay for the BB, and the data plan. You're getting access to a lot of users who wouldn't otherwise be customers in the smartphone arena.
(2) As the phones are already part of the business's primary operations, you have some nice opportunities to sell apps that integrate with the business.
Considering that RIM's product isn't even out the door yet, and the specific strengths RIM holds, it's not 100% comparable to the iOS & Android side. You've got the chance to provide something that isn't a (a) fart app; (b) casual game; (c) train schedule; or (d) local wrapper for the website.
Frankly, the superficial weaknesses of the form fillout and download procedure just aren't substantial. That's what, half a day? The next few months are gonna be in the APIs, and the next few years are gonna be in the customer base, app market, maintenance, and support of the app.
The 2nd point is definitely valid, but it's a niche market. I'm not saying ALL developers would abandon RIM, but just that most would. I don't think a major player in the smartphone market can afford to only go after a niche market.
I agree that a lot of the stuff I mentioned is small. But a lot of small problems add up to a big problem. It's well known in the development community that Apple and Google have superiors SDKs in terms of ease of use, as well as tools and APIs. With the Android growth explosion, they will have a much bigger app market, and Apple will probably have the most profitable market for some time to come because Apple customers have demonstrated their willingness to spend money. RIM is going to have to really up their game if they want to lure some of the talented developers away from the other platforms.
Would people using company-provided blackberries - the kind companies love because they can be 'locked down' to the 'enterprise's' needs - even be allowed to purchase apps on their own?
For me personally, I own both Droid and iPhone, and bought lots of apps as well, with my own money. There's no way I will do that on BB.
Completely agree. It's like if email spammers had to pay 1 cent per spam email - spam would go away. With Android as an example, when there's no cost to publish per App, you get a ton of garbage. I think $20/app is a good value to discourage spam.
I haven't used the iOS SDK, but the Android SDK is far from "a pleasure to use". The 3.0 emulator is so unusably slow that it makes it practically impossible for me to adapt my app to the new tablet UI without going insane in the process.
As a side note, I assume it will be this easy with 3.0 as well, so the slow emulator may not be a problem if you have a tablet plugged in. Even with the current emulator, I prefer to just use my phone; it's faster and gives me a better idea of how it really looks and runs.
Use a real device, and the whole process is quite painless.
But is there a honeycomb variant yet? The best I've been able to do reliably is Froyo.
Despite the whiny tone and bizarre "Bueller?" moments, there were a bunch of valid points made. Yes, the amount of forms you have to fill out is ridiculous. Yes, the fact that the simulator .iso has an installer is crazy. With those things, I absolutely agree with you. They're just silly... but they're also not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
It took me less than 2 hours from when I decided I wanted to make a Playbook app to when I had something running in the simulator. You're correct that the iOS SDK is easier to get started with, and it's only a single download... but it's also 3.5 gigs, every single time. I'll take three 100mb downloads over a 3.5 gig download any day.
Ok, as for the cost of things... You only need to pay for VMWare if you're on a Mac, on a PC it's free. I've talked to some guys at RIM about this, and they said they were trying to work out a deal with VMWare to make it free for Mac users as well.
There's no more $200 fee. I don't know why anyone still brings it up. The 10 app limit is a GOOD THING, and keep in mind that you're also getting a 100% free Playbook if you make an app right now, surely that's gotta be worth something.
As for the notary thing, I'm guessing that's because of the free Playbook offer. They don't want to give away 10 Playbooks to the same guy. If you're a company, Apple's process is even more painful. You actually have to snail-mail all your forms in and wait until they get them before you can publish anything.
All the other complaints were just petty. Who cares about the IP address and the password? That stuff takes 2 minutes to figure out.
There are a lots of positives about developing for Playbook that you didn't mention. For example, an interesting (and not well-known fact) is that application updates do not require approval on App World. That's a huge plus over iOS in my book.
Anyway, that's my thoughts on it.
TLDR: You definitely had some good points, but the rest of it got blown WAY out of proportion.
The wording on RIM's site sure made it seem like the $200 fee would be coming at some point, so as a new Blackberry developer, I'm not sure you can fault me for not having the inside track on RIM's policies. If they don't want people to get turned off by the prospect of a $200 fee, I would suggest they take it off their registration page.
Overall, you are correct though. I did mention a lot of little things. But a lot of little problems add up to a big problem, especially when those problems aren't an issue with RIM's competitors. You have to keep in mind that RIM is not operating in a bubble. They are the underdog in a race where Apple and Google are pretty far ahead in terms of developer mind share. If they want to lure developers to the platform, putting out inferior tools and processes is not going to help them at all. The underdog never wins by maintaining the status quo.
And come on Matt, where's the national solidarity? We Canucks gotta stick together! :)
Hah, I know Ferris Bueller, so I get the joke, don't worry, I just thought it seemed redundant after the first one.
I agree that it's way easier to get an app running in the Simulator with iOS development, but to actually test apps on a device, and publish to the App Store, it's an awful process. Apple's been working to improve it a lot in the past year, but it's still pretty painful.
To be honest I think RIM is just trying to make a giant transition. Keep in mind that all the Playbook stuff came from QNX, so I imagine it's a bit of a nightmare merging it all that stuff into RIM's bizarre system. There's a ton of room for improvement, but it actually works quite well once you get it all set up. I think that was part of the idea with the free Playbook offer, trying to make up the gap between themselves and Apple/Google.
RIM's also tapping into the unloved but massive group of Flash Developers out there. You're gonna see a ton of apps from developers that haven't made apps before. These are developers for whom the App Store really isn't an option. A ton of the apps will be total crap (just like on the App Store), but there'll be some gems too. Having used the device myself, I can safely say that the hardware and the OS are solid, and so if the apps are good too, RIM will be doing very well, and the process will only get better.
Point taken about the untapped market of Flash developers. Honestly I hope RIM can turn it around. Like I said, they're the #1 supporter of my university and they support the local economy in a big way. The things I hear from friends who work there though don't give me a lot of hope. The impression I get is that the front line developers share a lot of same concerns that I do.
Me: As an independent developer I can afford neither to become incorporated, nor to get a notary signature. Could you explain the reasoning behind this?
RIM: We require our vendors to be 18 years of age or older. This is why we require a notary form.
Me: Is there not a way of proving that I'm over 18 other than spending £200 on a lawyer? I could send you a copy of my drivers license?
RIM: We do not except photocopies unless they are notarized. You can try a local bank or family doctor to see if they will notarize your documentation.
Me: OK, but what you ask for is a certified notary i.e. someone legally authorised as a notary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary). Are you saying that this is not actually the case?
RIM: Correct, we would prefer a certified notary but sometimes it is difficult for people to find them so we make exceptions.
Hopefully helpful to someone. Having dismissed PlayBook development altogether, from what I've learnt since my blog post (http://rizergames.com/blog/2011/02/11/developing-for-playboo...), I might be tempted to give it another go, although the number of things that don't actually work on the simulator is still a massive hurdle.
- Luke
bq. Previously we required Individuals to provide us with a notarized document to validate their identity. While this is still an option, we will now begin accepting a scanned copy (front and back) of any official Government Issued Identification. This document must clearly show your Full Name and Date of Birth. bq.
Actually, just a few months ago when renewing an Apple Developer Connection membership, they asked me to do the exact same thing.
To their credit, I emailed, summarized my history with ADC, bitched a little bit, and someone took care of it the next day.
edit: typo
Think of it as a $20 fee for app review, bought in blocks of 10.
Genius.
This is the reason why shortcuts (not making well integrated system) always fail.
It's a shame because most of our customers use Blackberries but it's just not practical for us to support Blackberry on our mobile apps.
Disclaimer: I work for a possible competitor.
"5.1 Application Revenue Fee
Vendor shall pay to RIM thirty percent (30%) of Application Revenue..."
RIMs web signup download process needs to be cleaned up, and the Mac installer thing was a bit weird, but I thought the docs were straightforward, and only took me a couple mins to get the sample app deployed.
My gosh.. A command line program to remote install to the vm image! At least there is a full intel compiled image, and not some buggy emulator.
You can also build decent apps using HTML and JavaScript, much like webos.
Is it just me, or has the HN crowd deteriorated to "enterprise-ey bad, apple good"
There is a lot of opportunity in this platform, but not for consumer apps. They will be very prevalent in business environments, and the os is damn responsive.
I can't comment on the BlackBerry tools (nor the iOS ones, as I don't own a Mac), but although Eclipse+ADT isn't the most elegant solution, it does seem to work fairly well, and didn't take too long to set up.
Obviously a free PlayBook would have been nice, and I would like to have gotten in at the ground-floor of a new platform, but RIM does have to take steps to ensure it's easier for developers to do what they do best - develop, not fight fires in the registration or set-up processes.
I got the legal bullshit from Apple too. Seriously, it had to be notarized, I had to send Apple docs that had some kind of embossed type seal (I'm surprised they didn't require it in wax) like I was delivering a proclaimation from the King in the 12th century.
Most of the listed issues still exist for "legacy" BlackBerry development, plus about 100 other things that we could go into (e.g., still no way to do HTTP without having to worry about 6000 different connectivity methods and managing them all is up to each and every app).
Edit: This page looks new, at least it lists all the downloads in one place: http://us.blackberry.com/developers/tablet/adobe.jsp
My name on my forms did not match the name on my credit card when I paid for my Apple Developer account. A short time later Apple deactivated my account and left it in that state until I could provide them with notarized proof of my identity. That is not terribly unusual, as far as I am concerned.
Here's a commemorative new logo for RIM: http://go.danielodio.com/blackberry
DROdio
I'm an iPhone developer who signed up with the program as soon as it became available and I can tell you: Becoming an iPhone developer was a major PITA. It started with the registration (Apple let you wait for weeks after you purchased the membership), then with taxes formalities (as a non us-citizen I had to call the I.R.S. and get a w8-ben number ... mix a polish name with a german address and an overseas phone call and you get a really fun time). Oh, and I had to print out all my contracts, sign them and send them via snail mail to some Apple subsidiary in Texas.
And then the fun just started - I spent days getting all the provisioning profile stuff working (only to get my app to run on my device). Uploading the finished app to the store was another story (there was no build & archive & submit 3 click way - you had to build the distribution package yourself).
Considering RIM has just started their developer program for their playbook I'd say that the blog post is exaggerated. The only thing that I think he's right on is the 10 app/$200 limit ...
I think it took me about an hour the first time, and it takes maybe 10 minutes to generate the certificates and profile after you do it a few times.
yeah, if those were available/not just plain wrong when the program started.
Also, yes, everything was love and kittens for North American devs, but the process was (and still is) a major PITA for devs outside of NA.
It's important to remember though that RIM isn't competing for developers with the Apple of 3 years ago. They're competing with the Apple (and Google) of today. As a developer who's time and sanity is valuable, I'm going to have a hard time justifying the added frustration, when there are other options that are much simpler, and have much more profitable markets to sell apps to.
- $200 per registration fee is waived for now. In fact its been waived for over a year now.
- 10 app limit is not enforced either.