RIM Acquires Torch Mobile; Torches Windows Mobile Versions

[Jon Westfall]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.wmexperts.com/rim-purchases-torch-mobile-iris-browser-windows-mobile-will-be-discontinued' target='_blank'>http://www.wmexperts.com/rim-purcha...be-discontinued</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Word dropped this morning that Torch Mobile, makers of the Iris Browser, had been purchased by Research in Motion. That's great news for BlackBerry fans, who have been in dire need of a browser for, well, ever. However, this is bad news for Windows Mobile. We just heard back from Torch Mobile spokesman George Staikos, and the response is unequivocal: 'The company will no longer continue developing for Windows Mobile or Windows-CE.'"</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/ppct/auto/1251222284.usr7.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>I just can't help but think that if another large company in the mobile market, such as one that may also be chronically dogged as anti-competition, were to do this, people would be outraged. But since it's RIM, I suspect no one will make much of a fuss. Pity to see a WM browser alternative bite the dust over purely financial reasons.</p>

[jdmichal]

This makes me sad, as I was quite happy with Iris on my old phone. Luckily my new one has Opera Mobile, which I use instead.

I've held for a long time that a lot of these other companies are just as bad as Microsoft ever was in regards to monopolistic practices. It's just OK for them because they're not market leaders.

http://forums.thoughtsmedia.com/f379/old-argument-redux-apple-should-license-osx-92213.html#post701180

http://forums.thoughtsmedia.com/f384/t-iphone-upgrade-94067.html#post708769

[frankenbike]

I may have to get out of Windows Mobile simply because they can't do anything that all of their competitors can get away with, because it would be anti-competition. How Apple perennially gets away with patently anti-competitive behavior is beyond me. Not that I want WinMo to emulate that, but it would be nice to have a fast integrated OS that comes with a first class browser that I can use for web mail without having to get 5 third party apps because none of them do it all.

[Dyvim]

Of course others would cry foul if MS did it. When you have a monopoly, it is illegal to use your monopoly to help gain a competitive advantage in another market (e.g. Microsoft trying to use their monopoly on desktop OS to give them an advantage in the browser space). That's the law.

Since RIM doesn't have a monopoly, they can use their presence in one market to achieve a competitive advantage in another. Stinks for WM users who use (or might have used) Iris, but it's not illegal.

I think that Apple should be considered as having a monopoly in the mp3 and possibly the digital music download markets and therefore should be held accountable for anti-competitive actions in other markets (e.g. smartphone market), but currently that's not the case.

[doogald]

*sigh* I hate to bring up the history, but Microsoft signed a consent decree with the FTC in the early 1990s, agreeing not to bundle functionality within their operating system software that did not exist already in the OS at the time, and then proceeded to do just that with Windows95 and Windows98 (with IE). Thus far, neither Apple, RIM nor Google have been accused nor convicted of antitrust actions by the DOJ or FTC. Yet.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

Interesting excerpt, showing Microsoft's hubris at trial:

A number of videotapes were submitted as evidence by Microsoft during the trial, including one that demonstrated that removing Internet Explorer from Microsoft Windows caused slowdowns and malfunctions in Windows. In the videotaped demonstration of what Microsoft vice president James Allchin's stated to be a seamless segment filmed on one PC, the plaintiff noticed that some icons mysteriously disappear and reappear on the PC's desktop, suggesting that the effects might have been falsified. Allchin admitted that the blame for the tape problems lay with some of his staff . "They ended up filming it -- grabbing the wrong screen shot," he said of the incident. Later, Allchin re-ran the demonstration and provided a new videotape, but in so doing Microsoft dropped the claim that Windows is slowed down when Internet Explorer is removed. Mark Murray, a Microsoft spokesperson, berated the government attorneys for "nitpicking on issues like video production." Microsoft submitted a second inaccurate videotape into evidence later the same month as the first. The issue in question was how easy or hard it was for America Online users to download and install Netscape Navigator onto a Windows PC. Microsoft's videotape showed the process as being quick and easy, resulting in the Netscape icon appearing on the user's desktop. The government produced its own videotape of the same process, revealing that Microsoft's videotape had conveniently removed a long and complex part of the procedure and that the Netscape icon was not placed on the desktop, requiring a user to search for it. Brad Chase, a Microsoft vice president, verified the government's tape and conceded that Microsoft's own tape was falsified.

When the judge ordered Microsoft to offer a version of Windows which did not include Internet Explorer, Microsoft responded that the company would offer manufacturers a choice: one version of Windows that was obsolete, or another that did not work properly. The judge asked, "It seemed absolutely clear to you that I entered an order that required that you distribute a product that would not work?" David D. Cole, a Microsoft vice president, replied, "In plain English, yes. We followed that order. It wasn't my place to consider the consequences of that."

Thankfully, those days seem to be over for Microsoft.

As for Iris, I tried it out, and it was ok. But I can see that being an independent company developing for WM can be a tough game these days.

[CeluGeek]

I'm upset because Iris was the only usable browser that supported the Shadow's navigation wheel. OperaMobile doesn't work with the wheel and IE Mobile is still an insult. Besides the potential privacy issue, I can't stand the JAVA-ish looking UI of Skyfire.

Good news for BlackBerry users - bad news for WinMo users, especially those of us with non-touchscreen phones who have less software options. :(

[jdmichal]

Doogald,

I appreciate your thoroughness, but I just want to point out: I'm not saying that Microsoft was not guilty of all that. Rather, that so is practically every other major company in these realms, and in some cases in ways much worse than Microsoft ever was.

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

But the problem was, MS was in a position of great power. That's a key point for many anti-competitive laws. RIM's hold on the smartphone market is nowhere near that of Windows on the desktop market.

The anti-competition laws have to allow a certain amount of freedom, including some questionable acts. Else businesses and their allies are going to cry foul.

[whydidnt]

While I agree Microsoft would probably get some heat for this, you really can't blame RIM for making this decision. I think it's doubtful IRIS was ever going to generate postive income as a stand alone solution competing against the preinstalled IE and Opera.

The good news is there is another webkit based browser on the horizon, the dorothybrowser which is currently in beta. I've tested it and it's missing some features right now but renders fast and shows great potential.

[Djblois]

But the problem was, MS was in a position of great power. That's a key point for many anti-competitive laws. RIM's hold on the smartphone market is nowhere near that of Windows on the desktop market.

The anti-competition laws have to allow a certain amount of freedom, including some questionable acts. Else businesses and their allies are going to cry foul.

Actually that is wrong - anti-competitive laws have nothing to do with Market Share. They are solely based on Acts therefore if a Company like Microsoft (that has 80% of the market share) is doing something that is considered illegal then a company like Apple (who only has 10% of the market share) is doing the same thing then they are breaking the law also. The only issue is no one brings the complaint up against companies with little market share and the Justice Deparment of any country very rarely does it on their own accord.

[TKETZ196]

I think it is terrible that this software went under and bought out by blackberry. I liked IRIS Browser, but i felt on my device it was buggy and ran slow. I really like Skyfire a lot. The fact that it is the only mobile web browser to support any type of plugin (flash, silverlight, etc) without the user installing anything is a huge plus in my book. It is much lighter than IRIS Browser on my device and it a lot less buggy and more responsive. It is not memory hungry like IRIS browser is (but i bet it runs great on newer devices).

Don't feel too blue about this. There are other great alternatives i came across the net, such as Dorothy Browser and Fennec (Moziilla mobile browser in case anyone was not familiar with it). Bolt is another one as well, but i am not sure if that is user downloadable or if it is just availble to OEM's.

Dorothy Browser is a closed beta for now, but i bet it is gonna be opened soon enough. It is another browser based on Webkit, much like IRIS Browser, so i assume functionality will be similar.