RIM处境不妙，或将步诺基亚后尘

在科技世界，迟到往往会带来致命后果，即便对业界最大牌的公司来说也是如此。华尔街和消费者没耐心和时间来等待创新停滞、落后太远或者无力快速纠正的公司。

多次决策失误的后果已经对全世界最大的手机厂商诺基亚造成报应(参阅电子工程专辑报道：诺基亚大势已去，苹果Android谁接力？)，诺基亚目前正在飞速衰落。

现在同样的事也发生在RIM这家曾凭借黑莓手机获得赞誉现在却步履蹒跚的公司身上。本周，专家们在商业媒体上揣测着这家公司的未来。看上去不太妙。

分析师呼吁调整管理层，他们中的有些人调低预期、有些人甚至不再关注RIM。RIM的股价开始动摇，甚至有消息说激进的股东正试图卖掉公司。

如果你关注进化中的智能手机与平板市场就不会对RIM的遭遇感到惊奇。不利的市场因素明明白白的写在这里，其中包括：

1.消费者想要能与苹果iPhone和iPad相媲美的创新产品——就别提超越了。

2.投资人希望厂商能够拿出可信、有竞争力的产品，获得更高的营收和更大的市场份额。

3.人人都希望定价能和其它平台的设备对等，特别是现在Android平台已经在快速赢取欧洲和亚洲的消费者。

4.操作系统的功能性将成为对市场反应至关重要的因素。

尽管RIM正将黑莓Bold智能手机和PlayBook平板电脑等新产品推向市场，分析师依然不认为这些产品足够创新，能维系公司的发展。

Rodman & Renshaw公司分析师Ashok Kumar在最近的研究中提到了RIM，说这家公司需要“一次飞跃”才能追赶上来。Charter Equity分析师Ed Snyder则说RIM联合首席执行官Jim Balsillie和Mike Lazaridis已经尽了自己最大的努力，拿不出新点子。哎！

你可以说我认为另一家大牌科技公司可能覆灭的看法有些疾世愤俗。但这已经变得很平常，或许RIM、诺基亚以及其它公司是活该。如果不能开发出人们想要的东西就等着别的公司上位吧。在自己的成就下休憩是20世纪的行事风格。你最近干了些什么？这是我不断提出的问题。

也就是说我已经清楚地看到了事情的另一面。业界通过创造下一个人人都想要的小玩意而兴旺发达，但实现这一目标的工作远比看上去更复杂。工程、供应链、产品营销、执行方向等方面都需要像上好油的机器一样结合才能将成功的平台和设备类型带给市场。

如果我们都知道这些的话，为什么总会有公司滑下去？这是只是简单的适者生存还是说业界有更深层的、没人愿意谈及或修正的问题？

点击参考原文：RIM：Is the Party Over？

《电子工程专辑》网站版权所有，谢绝转载

{pagination}

RIM：Is the Party Over？

In the tech world, coming late to the party can have near-fatal consequences for even the biggest names in the industry. Consumers and Wall Street no longer have time and patience for companies that stop innovating, lag too far behind market leaders, or have little ability to quickly correct course.

The consequences of multiple missteps are already playing out at Nokia Corp., the world’s largest handset manufacturer. The other day, Bolaji Ojo wrote about how the OEM has spiraled into something far beyond a funk.

The same thing is now coming around to RIM, a top-tier OEM that gained fame for its BlackBerry phones but now is seriously faltering. Throughout the business press this week, experts are speculating about the future of this troubled stalwart. And, it doesn’t look at all good.

Analysts are calling for a change in executive management; some have lowered expectations; and some have even dropped coverage. RIM's stock value has tumbled, and there's even talk of shareholder activism to push the company toward a sale or some other big-time shake-up.

If you’re following what's happening in the evolving smartphone and tablet markets, you won't be too surprised to hear why RIM is the latest OEM getting sucker-punched. The competitive market factors are written on the wall in plain view. They include:

Consumers want innovative products that match -- never mind beat -- what Apple already has delivered via its iPhone and iPad.

Investors expect companies to come up with credible, competitive products that will reap higher revenues and bigger market share.

Everyone expects pricing to be in line with other devices, particularly the aggressive Android platforms winning consumers in Europe and Asia.

Operating system functionality will be a make-or-break factor when it comes to winning any sort of accolades.

Even as RIM brings new products to market, including the BlackBerry Bold smartphone and the PlayBook tablet, analysts aren't convinced those products will be innovative enough to keep the company swimming.

Rodman & Renshaw analyst Ashok Kumar, in his recent farewell research note on RIM, said the company needs a "quantum leap" to catch up, according to a post in The Deal, titled "RIM teeters on the edge of obsolescence." And Charter Equity analyst Ed Snyder has been quoted as saying that co-CEOs Jim Balsillie and Mike Lazaridis have taken the company as far as they can, are stuck in the past, and don't have new ideas. Ouch!

It's fair to say I’m cynical about the possible toppling of yet another big-name tech company. This scenario has become fairly common, and maybe RIM, Nokia, and others have gotten what's coming to them. Play ball and develop something people want, or move over and let someone else step up. Resting on your laurels is so 20th Century. What have you done lately? That’s what I keep asking.

That said, I do clearly see the other side of the coin. While the industry thrives on the idea of innovating, producing, and delivering the next must-have gizmo, the actual work it takes to meet this goal is much harder than it looks. Engineering, supply chain, product marketing, executive direction, and a host of other function areas have to work together like a well oiled machine to bring any winning platform and form factor to market.

If we all know that, why do we keep hearing about companies falling off the map? Is it just a question of survival of the fittest, or are there deeper problems in the industry that no one wants to talk about and fix in a meaningful way?