> RIM was a hardware company, not a software company. Hence a phone is a phone, and should not be a camera (1 of the CEOs said it?) So was Apple. Other than th

> RIM was a hardware company, not a software company. Hence a phone is a phone, and should not be a camera (1 of the CEOs said it?) So was Apple. Other than their brief attempt at licensing MacOS, they were and still are a hardware company at heart. > I don't have any specific insight into the Wifi stack but most BBs up to that point have in-house designed cellular modems. They were maintaining their own modem implementations? That's quite a feat. > As for talent wise, shrug. You can't blame people for preferring Cupertino over Waterloo-Kitchener. Although I would say that over 1/5 of the employees at RIM's campus were co-op students. Was compensation even remotely comparable? Having 20% of the company be interns is... rather unusual.