Log in

View Full Version : Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 Service Pack 2 Now Available, Windows Mobile Users Left Waiting


Jason Dunn
10-19-2005, 05:13 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/default.mspx' target='_blank'>http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/default.mspx</a><br /><br /></div>Microsoft has just released Exchange 2003 SP2 to the Web for download, and there will no doubt be thousands upon thousands of installs of this software today. Many people like myself have been asking our hosted Exchange providers when they'll be implementing SP2, but most of us are forgetting one very important thing: SP2 is useless to Windows Mobile users until we get upgraded software on our devices. And we have no idea when, or even if, that will happen.<br /><br />Here's how it works: in order to get the true push email that SP2 is touting, you need to have a Windows Mobile 5 device with a piece of software on it called the MSFP. MSFP is <i><b>not</b></i> a part of Windows Mobile 5 shipping today, so even if you have a brand-spanking-new device, you don't have the software you need to take advantage of SP2. Here's the <i>really</i> painful part: the distribution of MSFP is once again being left up to the OEMs/carriers. That means that we'll likely see a similar pattern emerge: some will release it a few months from now, some will delay it for many months, and some will never release it and instead hope people will upgrade to new devices. I truly hope I'm proven wrong, but in the history of Windows Mobile I've yet to see an OEM or carrier put the needs of their customer first. The best thing we can all do is start emailing/phoning the companies that sold us our Pocket PCs and ask them when they'll release the MSFP. Let's make some noise!<br /><br />Microsoft has ceded too much control to the fickle OEMs/carriers, and not created a strong enough technical infrastructure to allow pure Microsoft updates to occur. Windows Mobile 5 has made some steps in the right direction, but there's still far too much OEM custom-code required for many of these updates. Until Microsoft can make Windows Mobile devices as easy to update as our desktop computers, it will never live up to the name "Windows".

klanum
10-19-2005, 06:12 PM
One thing I think is good unless I'm mistaken is that we can still activesync with Exchange and have the tasks now sync'd as well with SP2. Or is that a function of having WM5 on my IPAQ hx4705 too?

rnbarrett
10-19-2005, 06:17 PM
Microsoft has billed WM5 as an OS that can receive patches without having to flash the entire ROM. Perhaps this, along with strong user feedback, will convince the carriers to deliver the MSFP update(?) without requiring the purchase of a new device.

Are there ANY devices shipping today (anywhere in the world) with MSFP? I would have expected the iMate/Qtek products that have recently launched with WM5 to have this. What about the Sprint 6700?

Phillip Dyson
10-19-2005, 06:25 PM
This is one of my biggest frustrations with the Windows Mobile. Every version we wait with bated breath to see what new improvements are added and every version its the same story. "Here are some new features to help us sell new devices. Sorry for those of you who already use Windows Mobile, we don't have any fixes for you. Better luck next time."

Perhaps we should start salivating over whats coming at the end of the next 36 month cycle.

Jason Dunn
10-19-2005, 06:32 PM
Microsoft has billed WM5 as an OS that can receive patches without having to flash the entire ROM.

Yes, but the MSFP is too big to be distributed that way - that's my understanding at least. Also, anything that touches the radio/communications part of a device usually requires carrier certification. It's likely going to be easier with Windows Mobile 5 to get a patch directly from Microsoft for Windows Media Player 10 Mobile, but something like MSFP will require much more work on the part of the OEM/carrier.

Are there ANY devices shipping today (anywhere in the world) with MSFP? I would have expected the iMate/Qtek products that have recently launched with WM5 to have this. What about the Sprint 6700?

To my knowledge, no, none at all. That's what makes this issue so painful - it's not Exchange SP2 that's the problem, it's the lack of MSFP.

MikeB
10-19-2005, 06:54 PM
Thanks Jason for posting this, I had just installed exchange SP2 and was getting ready to try to set up push e-mail on a new WM5 device - you just saved me a bunch of time and frustration wondering why it would not work. I was thinking WM5 was already equipped for this.

inteller
10-19-2005, 07:07 PM
holy crap this is stupid. Its time for MS to exercise some of its classic heavy handedness and tell manufacturers to do as they say.

And when the manufacturers say "well, we'll just go to Palm" microsoft can scoff and say "Hah, go right ahead, Palm is our bitch now...now start installing these updates!"

KTamas
10-19-2005, 07:16 PM
UPDATE: According to a reader on HowardForums who listened to the Exchange SP2 Live Webcast that just occurred, the Microsoft Messaging Security Feature Pack will be provided as a single download to be installed on your device. Whew! And I thought, here goes another hard reset!
from here (http://www.beyondthetech.com/blogs/kjam/)

Phillip Dyson
10-19-2005, 07:16 PM
holy crap this is stupid. Its time for MS to exercise some of its classic heavy handedness and tell manufacturers to do as they say.

And when the manufacturers say "well, we'll just go to Palm" microsoft can scoff and say "Hah, go right ahead, Palm is our b*tch now...now start installing these updates!"

As much as I agree with you (Not necessarily the b*tch part), its not a matter of the carrier going to another OS platform. They could simply not carry the devices. I don't the smartphone market is that large to hit their bottom line to dramatically. Except maybe in the business lines.

MS needs the carriers more than they need MS. Theres still the Palm Treo and Blackberry. And Nokia would love to fill in the gap with Symbian smartphones.

Ed Hansberry
10-19-2005, 07:18 PM
holy crap this is stupid.
:clap:

Janak Parekh
10-19-2005, 08:18 PM
One thing I think is good unless I'm mistaken is that we can still activesync with Exchange and have the tasks now sync'd as well with SP2.
Unfortunately, I don't think so. From what I've heard task sync is a MSFP feature. As it stands there isn't even a task option in AS on WM2003 devices. I'd love to be wrong, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Edit: I'm wrong. :D See Jason's post below.

--janak

Jon Westfall
10-19-2005, 08:33 PM
There is an option on the JasJar for "Tasks" when setting up MS Exchange Server sync. I'll play around with it later and see if it works with an SP2 exchange server.

Jon.

DarkHelmet
10-19-2005, 08:45 PM
"Don't give me that do goody good b*&amp;s%#t!"

Making noise to the OEMs is not helping. The first line people at most companies are drinking the corporate kool-aid and telling all customers, large account and small like, to suck-it-up and plunk their $39 for the upgrade.

Oh, and lest anyone think I am a partisan - they're all doing it - ViewSonic, Toshiba, AudioVox, HP, Dell, etc.

I have to laugh when I hear someone mention the 36 month development cycle - in my limited (ha!) experience PPCs are now obsolete within 9-12 months of delivery from the OEM.

So, I'll stop whining and go back to work to earn my $$ for my next upgrade (should Dell decide to offer it).

Jason Dunn
10-19-2005, 08:48 PM
I was thinking WM5 was already equipped for this.

Microsoft has done a really poor job of qualifying what Exchange SP2 requires on the device end, and because they're so eager to beat Blackberry, they're not being very honest about the fact that no device on the market today can work fully with what SP2 has to offer. :?

Jason Dunn
10-19-2005, 08:49 PM
One thing I think is good unless I'm mistaken is that we can still activesync with Exchange and have the tasks now sync'd as well with SP2. Or is that a function of having WM5 on my IPAQ hx4705 too?

Task sync requires Windows Mobile 5, but not the MSFP.

Phillip Dyson
10-19-2005, 09:27 PM
Task sync requires Windows Mobile 5, but not the MSFP.

Thats a bit of a relief. Coming from POP mail, I can survive without the Push Email, though it would be nice.

Atleast those who upgrade can expect something.

Edit: Perhaps this is why some of the WM Phone Editions aren't coming out til later this year? Or early next year in the case of the WM Treo?

Terry
10-19-2005, 10:06 PM
And when the manufacturers say "well, we'll just go to Palm" microsoft can scoff and say "Hah, go right ahead, Palm is our b*tch now...now start installing these updates!"

True, but the real competition is Blackberry. Until the PPC can accept push just as nicely, it won't gain the casual business user.

Interestingly, as previously reported, the Treo folks have announced they are licenisng RIM software...

This just get weirder... 0X

Jason Dunn
10-19-2005, 10:15 PM
Edit: Perhaps this is why some of the WM Phone Editions aren't coming out til later this year? Or early next year in the case of the WM Treo?

Bing! I think that's exactly the reason.

andbrown
10-20-2005, 12:15 AM
Mike Calligaro has a good blog post discussing this issue:

http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2005/10/06/477999.aspx

andbrown
10-20-2005, 12:24 AM
Microsoft has done a really poor job of qualifying what Exchange SP2 requires on the device end, and because they're so eager to beat Blackberry, they're not being very honest about the fact that no device on the market today can work fully with what SP2 has to offer.

This is simply false. We have been and continue to be upfront that MSFP is a feature pack, not a part of WM 5.0, and that Direct Push is the result of MSFP + Exchange SP 2. For example:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/business/5/default.mspx

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/business/strategy/wm5exch03.mspx

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/jun05/06-06SFPWindowsMobilePR.mspx

tj21
10-20-2005, 12:53 AM
This is simply false. We have been and continue to be upfront that MSFP is a feature pack, not a part of WM 5.0, and that Direct Push is the result of MSFP + Exchange SP 2.

No offense Andrew but when pretty much every Pocket PC / Windows Mobile site has a long conversation today about people who are confused about push e-mail on SP2 then, by definition, Microsoft has done a poor job of informing the public on this. It may not be entirely their fault but there are very few people who understand exactly what's required for push e-mail or how (or if?) we'll be able to get this feature pack. As a highly touted feature of Windows Mobile 5.0, this is a major disappointment to me as a new K-Jam owner.

andbrown
10-20-2005, 12:59 AM
No offense Andrew but when pretty much every Pocket PC / Windows Mobile site has a long conversation today about people who are confused about push e-mail on SP2 then, by definition, Microsoft has done a poor job of informing the public on this.

That's fair criticism. While we consistently communicated the separation of WM 5.0 and MSFP, if many people misunderstood, then we need to figure out better ways to get the message out.

However, to say that Microsoft is being "dishonest" because of a perceived fear of a competitor is simply untrue.

Phillip Dyson
10-20-2005, 01:25 AM
However, to say that Microsoft is being "dishonest" because of a perceived fear of a competitor is simply untrue.

I'm not ready to say that MS outright lied about anything, but everything that could loosely be classified as a marketting oppurtunity emphasized that push email was benefit of WM5.0

That includes what I can recall from memory about the conference where WM5.0 was officially announced.

Perhaps the written press releases said so. I haven't ready or seen any of them and I'm probably the typical consumer. But I can't recall anyone ever saying anything along the lines of:

With WM5.0, plus Exchange SP2, and MSFP to be released later you can have true push email in the palm of your hands.

I think the marketting department could have been more clear if they wanted to but it just wouldnt have sounded as exciting.

ikesler
10-20-2005, 06:22 AM
I think the marketting department could have been more clear if they wanted to but it just wouldnt have sounded as exciting.

I think you just hit it on the head..... as a 6700 user, on it now, this is not what I was thinking was needed for the push mail. granted I am a typical consumer, but power user, I thought the sp2 was what we were waiting for. Now I have to "hope" that my OEM releases something else as well.... that is a shame and wasn't very clear. Oh well, another early adopter story.... :(

***excessive quoting deleted by moderator JD***

Jason Dunn
10-20-2005, 06:26 AM
However, to say that Microsoft is being "dishonest" because of a perceived fear of a competitor is simply untrue.

There's outright lying, and there's being intellectually dishonest by emphasizing one part of the truth over the other. I'm talking about the latter. In all of the hoopla about SP2 and push email, the fact that no device on the market today can support it simply wasn't mentioned often enough. If you don't believe me, just look at all the responses in this thread. The marketing folks wanted to be able to say "Look, we're as good as Blackberry, we have real push!" when the reality is that it will take 6+ months before the majority of current Windows Mobile 5 owners will have the software they need for the solution that is touted as being "here".

barky81
10-20-2005, 06:58 AM
There's outright lying, and there's being intellectually dishonest by emphasizing one part of the truth over the other. I'm talking about the latter. In all of the hoopla about SP2 and push email, the fact that no device on the market today can support it simply wasn't mentioned often enough.

Actually, I believe that Microsoft has outright lied. Worse, I think they have been going around re-editing documents to remove or obfuscate previous statements that don't gibe with the current "gotta have MSFP" storyline.

Don't believe me, www.microsoft.com/exchange/downloads/2003/sp2/overview.mspx+Cache+mode+enforcement+with+added+flexibility&amp;hl=en]compare (http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:_XAxLiRLiA4J:[url) this google-cached copy[/url] of the original SP2 announcement to the new edited one on MS's site today.

In particular the following paragraph was deleted (it originally followed the description of the "direct push heartbeat"):

"Licensees of the Exchange ActiveSync protocol (such as palmOne, Motorola, Nokia, Symbian) can take advantage of these improvements through updates to their messaging applications or devices. The roadmap for those devices is owned and managed by the licensee."

Also, check out Sami Khoury's original description (http://blogs.technet.com/exchange/archive/2005/06/07/406035.aspx) of "direct push", including the comments, particularly this one by Sami (http://blogs.technet.com/exchange/archive/2005/06/07/406035.aspx#406766). Sami also says this in one of his footnotes: "The ActiveSync protocol is proprietary but Microsoft has begun licensing to third party vendors like Motorola, Nokia, PalmOne, and Symbian. Given that, the choice of devices that allow for high-fidelity synchronization with Exchange is no longer limited to those running Windows Mobile operating systems."

Now whether, based on subsequent deals with Palm (maybe MS bought them and we just don't know...), nokia, etc., or for some other reason...Direct Push has been recast as WM5+MSFP Only and MS has been removing references in SP2 materials.

Still think MS has always said the same thing about SP2 and MSFP? Then explain how DataViz is already shopping around a Symbian client (http://www.dataviz.com/eforms/betaprograms/roadsync/rs_start.html):

"New SP2 Features!
The RoadSync Technology Preview incorporates direct push synchronization and Remote Wipe capabilities which will be added in Exchange Server 2003 Service Pack 2 (SP2). Please review the following descriptions for more information."

They are offering both direct push on Symbian and Remote Wipe!?!?!?! Supposedly available today!

Now, again, how is that possible if it HAS to be WM5+MSFP?

Additional language from DataViz's press release of 10/11 (http://www.dataviz.com/solutions/enterprise/press_release.html?id=133):

"This public preview supports Symbian OS based UIQ smartphones. The following new features will be available with RoadSync for UIQ when installed in combination with the Exchange Server 2003 Service Pack 2:

· Seamless Direct Push Technology.

Support for Direct Push Technology ensures that the device automatically receives new e-mail and other PIM data from a company's Exchange Server. RoadSync uses an HTTP connection with industry-standard SSL encryption to securely push e-mail, calendar and contact notifications to and from the device.


Remote Wipe Security Feature.
Through central device management tools included with Exchange Server, IT managers can trigger a remote wipe that removes all of the Exchange data from the device. This new security feature will help to ensure corporate data is not compromised when devices are lost or fall into the wrong hands."

Paragon
10-20-2005, 06:58 AM
That's fair criticism. While we consistently communicated the separation of WM 5.0 and MSFP, if many people misunderstood, then we need to figure out better ways to get the message out.

Hey Andrew,

Do you know what would make this all go away, and clear up any confusion? If MS, right now, would state a target date as to when the MSFP will be released. How it will be released. Who is going to provide it to me? How will I load it onto my device, a ROM flash, or an installed update. I've read eleventy million scenarios today alone. Given that info, everyone would likely relax.

Dave

aroma
10-20-2005, 02:28 PM
In particular the following paragraph was deleted (it originally followed the description of the "direct push heartbeat"):

"Licensees of the Exchange ActiveSync protocol (such as palmOne, Motorola, Nokia, Symbian) can take advantage of these improvements through updates to their messaging applications or devices. The roadmap for those devices is owned and managed by the licensee."




Sami also says this in one of his footnotes: "The ActiveSync protocol is proprietary but Microsoft has begun licensing to third party vendors like Motorola, Nokia, PalmOne, and Symbian. Given that, the choice of devices that allow for high-fidelity synchronization with Exchange is no longer limited to those running Windows Mobile operating systems."



"New SP2 Features!
The RoadSync Technology Preview incorporates direct push synchronization and Remote Wipe capabilities which will be added in Exchange Server 2003 Service Pack 2 (SP2). Please review the following descriptions for more information."

They are offering both direct push on Symbian and Remote Wipe!?!?!?! Supposedly available today!

Now, again, how is that possible if it HAS to be WM5+MSFP?


All of this information is all still valid and fine. SP2 on the Exchange server enables the new features (i.e. Direct Push) on the server side. To take advantage of these new features, a client, wether it be Palm, Symbian, or Windows Mobile, has to be able to support these new features. In the Windows Mobile world, the only devices that will support these new features are Windows Mobile 5 devices with the MSFP update installed. That doesn't mean that other 3rd party licesees can't support and take advantages of these features offerened in Exchange 2003 SP2.

It's not that it HAS to be WM5 + MSFP, it's that in the _Windows Mobile World_, you have to have WM5 + MSFP.

aroma
10-20-2005, 02:45 PM
True, but the real competition is Blackberry. Until the PPC can accept push just as nicely, it won't gain the casual business user.


Of course there are solutions out there for Windows Mobile, that work as well as (or better than, in my opinion) Blackberry. I personally use GoodLink, and it works wonderfully. Problem again is perception. In most of the business world, it seems that "Handheld Mail" = "Blackberry", just like "PDA" or "Mobile Device" = "Palm".

barky81
10-20-2005, 04:27 PM
All of this information is all still valid and fine. SP2 on the Exchange server enables the new features (i.e. Direct Push) on the server side. To take advantage of these new features, a client, wether it be Palm, Symbian, or Windows Mobile, has to be able to support these new features. In the Windows Mobile world, the only devices that will support these new features are Windows Mobile 5 devices with the MSFP update installed. That doesn't mean that other 3rd party licesees can't support and take advantages of these features offerened in Exchange 2003 SP2..

Hey, what would be really great is if someone from Microsoft would (1) simply post something that says that (instead of deleting the stuff that used to say it); or even (2) responded to any of the many direct inqueries asking that very question.

What else would be great? If someone from this site, given its close relationship with the Windows Mobile folks, could simply find the person or persons at MS that can dispel this confusion. Sounds simple, no?

***excessive quoting deleted by moderator JD***

barky81
10-20-2005, 04:41 PM
Microsoft has done a really poor job of qualifying what Exchange SP2 requires on the device end, and because they're so eager to beat Blackberry, they're not being very honest about the fact that no device on the market today can work fully with what SP2 has to offer.

This is simply false. We have been and continue to be upfront that MSFP is a feature pack, not a part of WM 5.0, and that Direct Push is the result of MSFP + Exchange SP 2. For example:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/business/5/default.mspx

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/business/strategy/wm5exch03.mspx

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/jun05/06-06SFPWindowsMobilePR.mspx

Can you make a similarly clear, definitive statement as to the ability of other devices (non-WM5) to utilize Direct Push? What is required from the Exchange Activesync licensees?

In particular, I point out that the PalmOS appears to have been specifically targeted to PREVENT the implementation of Direct Push; I can only assume that this has been a deliberate political decision (and probably the knife's edge negotiation point in the Palm/MS "merger").

The original SP2 documents have been re-edited to eliminate the specific references to the EAS licensees access to Direct Push; and for some (unexplained :devilboy: ) reason, DataViz has dropped all future support for SP2/DirectPush on the PalmOS platform--Essentially releasing a stripped down version that offers less functionality that the Treo's builtin VersaMail client...while going forward with it full-blown Symbian client.

So if Symbian devices are able to use Direct Push today (and that appears to be what DataViz is saying...), how come it's such a problem for WM5? And why have things been orchestrated in such a way as to prevent Palm devices from being able to do likewise?

AZMark
10-20-2005, 04:44 PM
Another problem with the Mfgr. is responsible for sales and updates, is the sales part!

Sprint, Cingular etc reps are the ones going out selling devices. To large corporate accounts the sales theme has been WM5 = Push email.

Microsoft MVP's can say anything they want on the subject. It has no bearing on the product offered, or how it is presented. A WM5 phone can be offered by Sprint with the promise of push email, THEN offer no update THEN pull the phone off the market and what can MS do? Nothing.

They can say "If all these wonderful things we planned would have come true and the magic fairy waved her wand you would have had push email" but the fact is they better nail it into the backend so strong that it will work, work on all devices from all outlets, or RIM will still rule in this area.