iPhone 2.2 fails to address enterprise needs

[onlydarksets]

Some good points - until the iPhone gets secure, it will not see widespread adoption in the enterprise.

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/infoworld/20081123/tc_infoworld/118360_1

The iPhone 3G and its iPhone 2 OS propelled Apple's leading-edge mobile device into serious contention as a business smartphone. And the iPhone 3G is one of the best -- if not the best -- mobile 2.0 device out there for overall use. But Apple missed when it came to business functionality, leaving a space that the RIM BlackBerry Storm, Palm Treo Pro, and Google Android-based T-Mobile G1 are all trying to fill. Unfortunately, the iPhone OS 2.2 update (which also applies to the iPod Touch) released this weekend doesn't address the gaps in what business users need from the iPhone. That may give the new BlackBerry Storm a real chance to push the iPhone out of the enterprise, at least as a standard sanctioned device.
...
What the iPhone 2.2 update doesn't do is fix the shortcomings that are sure to give businesses a reason to keep the iPhone at arm's length. There's still no on-device data encryption. Passwords are limited to four-digit numeric PINs. You can't synchronize notes or set up calendar items with the same scheduling controls as in Exchange. You can't cut and paste data. To me, those are basic business capabilities that the iPhone simply should have. Never mind the other enhancements that I wish the iPhone had (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/infoworld/tc_infoworld/storytext/118360/29986930/SIG=12rs9tfaj/*http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/07/24/30TC-iphone-enterprise-flaws_1.html?source=fssr) in order to make it the "no question about it" choice for business smartphone users.

[Vincent Ferrari]

I just don't see the iPhone as a strong enterprise contender. I think that's a market that everyone else has pursued to death and Apple is just wading into it enough to make the CEO types who want the phone a viable alternative.

For the moment and for the forseeable future, I think RIM owns that market. It may change, but it's going to take a long time for that to happen. Apple designed the iPhone for regular people not enterprise folks. It's not the target demo.

[onlydarksets]

Whether he meant it or not, Jobs has mentioned it as a goal. It's ironic, too, because the only way Apple is going to make significant inroads into IT anytime soon (think servers more than desktops) is through the iPhone. He literally has Apple's foot in the door.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Whether he meant it or not, Jobs has mentioned it as a goal. It's ironic, too, because the only way Apple is going to make significant inroads into IT anytime soon (think servers more than desktops) is through the iPhone. He literally has Apple's foot in the door.

Eh. I'm not so sure that's their focus right now. The iPhone is the first smartphone ever (and I'm not counting phones like the N95 that can sync with a computer; think more Windows Mobile / BlackBerry type devices) that was designed from the ground up for consumers, not business folks. Even the Pearl, RIM's attempt at capturing the consumer market, was just a different form factor of the same OS they've been running for almost 5 years already.

Apple has some enterprise connectivity and features, but that's more to placate a CEO type who might want the iPhone and not the BlackBerry the company already offers. I'm guessing it's kind of a "just enough" thought. "Just enough" so they can function, but still not really an enterprise-class device.

Is it a goal? Maybe down the line, but I think they'd be foolish to ignore what they've done with the iPhone: turn average people onto the Mobile Web and e-mail on their device. Besides, their consumer focus has catapulted them to #2 in only a year and a half so why screw too much with that strategy now?

[onlydarksets]

Not go offtrack, but the N95 isn't a smartphone? Most everyone would disagree with that (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=n95+smartphone). However, Nokia has had its own challenges in the enterprise.

Back to your point, these goals are not mutually exclusive. The enterprise features are almost all behind the scenes - it wouldn't take a paradigm shift. IT spending (http://searchcio.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid182_gci1326114,00.html) almost doubles consumer technology spending (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2007_Jan_10/ai_n27109987) - you know Jobs wants a piece of it. At the current pace, that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

The beauty of the Storm is that it gives executives a "cool" option with very little learning curve and no fighting with IT. Once Apple does get its enterprise plan on track, I am sure they will have success. In the interim, though, they are just making it that much harder by letting other companies (especially RIM) cut into the featureset the iPhone would offer.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Not go offtrack, but the N95 isn't a smartphone? Most everyone would disagree with that (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=n95+smartphone). However, Nokia has had its own challenges in the enterprise.

I would disagree with it also, which is why I didn't actually say it. What I said was "not counting" not "it isn't." I was talking about the hardcore Windows Mobile / BlackBerry smartphone market which Symbian is not really a part of. The N95 is above all else a phone. Blackberry and Windows Mobile devices are mostly PDA's which is why I drew a distinction.

Back to your point, these goals are not mutually exclusive. The enterprise features are almost all behind the scenes - it wouldn't take a paradigm shift. IT spending (http://searchcio.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid182_gci1326114,00.html) almost doubles consumer technology spending (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2007_Jan_10/ai_n27109987) - you know Jobs wants a piece of it. At the current pace, that isn't going to happen anytime soon

Of course he wants a piece of it, but it would distract the focus of the iPhone at least for now. As I said I think it's a goal, just not an immediate one. So far they're ahead of a few other smartphone vendors so why change strategies now? They've already proven you don't need the enterprise to take over a market. Give them time; it's coming.

The beauty of the Storm is that it gives executives a "cool" option with very little learning curve and no fighting with IT. Once Apple does get its enterprise plan on track, I am sure they will have success. In the interim, though, they are just making it that much harder by letting other companies (especially RIM) cut into the featureset the iPhone would offer.

Eh. RIM didn't exactly hit this one out of the park and considering their release cycle is 8-12 months (in some cases, like the Pearl, as long as 18-24 months) we won't see another similar device to the Storm for awhile now and its major problem, the keyboard needing to be blasted to register a keypress, isn't going to be fixed by software.

RIM is going to be just fine and it'll still dominate the enterprise market which it already is, but people who are set on the iPhone are not going to settle for a Storm unless they're dead-set against AT&T or Apple.

[onlydarksets]

Eh. RIM didn't exactly hit this one out of the park and considering their release cycle is 8-12 months (in some cases, like the Pearl, as long as 18-24 months) we won't see another similar device to the Storm for awhile now and its major problem, the keyboard needing to be blasted to register a keypress, isn't going to be fixed by software.
I'm not sure why you keep bashing the Storm - the reviews I've read have said it's a pretty good phone. Here's a meta-roundup (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/3358750/BlackBerry-Storm-hands-on-Review-of-reviews.html). Until demonstrated otherwise, my assumption is that it is a good phone.

RIM is going to be just fine and it'll still dominate the enterprise market which it already is, but people who are set on the iPhone are not going to settle for a Storm unless they're dead-set against AT&T or Apple.

Or they get their phone through work and IT won't support the iPhone because it lacks the enterprise features they require, but the Storm does (e.g., my wife).

[Vincent Ferrari]

I'm not sure why you keep bashing the Storm - the reviews I've read have said it's a pretty good phone. Here's a meta-roundup (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/3358750/BlackBerry-Storm-hands-on-Review-of-reviews.html). Until demonstrated otherwise, my assumption is that it is a good phone.

I've already demonstrated otherwise; see my post from Saturday afternoon. Engadget and Gizmodo's reviews were taken out of context; Engadget's bottom line called it, at best, a "close but no cigar" device and Gizmodo was forgiving but cautious about the big deal keyboard and made some basic mistakes about the OS itself making me wonder if they even played with it (No RIM device has office document editing out of the box). PC Magazine bashed the hell out of it and Time Magazine called the screen frustrating (Again, see my post from this weekend). Almost every review out there called it "meh" and "okay."

That's not a good device in my estimation, but your definition of "good" varies from mine I guess.

I'm not bashing it, just not pointing out how great it is. Based on the reviews I've read, it's mediocre at best. I'll withhold judgment until I have one in my hands this week, but so far, I'm not exactly seeing a lot of gushing going on.

[Pony99CA]

The iPhone is the first smartphone ever (and I'm not counting phones like the N95 that can sync with a computer; think more Windows Mobile / BlackBerry type devices) that was designed from the ground up for consumers, not business folks.
I'm not so sure about that. While the iPhone was probably designed for consumers, I think Windows Mobile might have been initially designed for both consumers and business people.

Windows Mobile evolved from Pocket PC which evolved from Windows CE Palm-Size PCs which were designed to compete against Palm devices. Are you saying Palm was not designed for consumers?

Also, Windows Mobile has consumer features included, such as a media player and games.

I suppose you can argue that the Pocket PC OS wasn't originally intended to be a phone OS, which is probably true, but that's because smart phones didn't even exist in 2001 or so. I don't know much about the history of Nokia, but the first smartphones that I saw were based on the Palm (an old Kyocera) and Pocket PC (a Toshiba Pocket PC phone) systems.

I'm also not getting your point about the N95 "that can sync with a computer". Windows Mobile devices can sync with computers, too, using ActiveSync/Windows Mobile Device Center and Outlook. That's how I use mine. It's flexible enough for a home user without Exchange support and powerful enough for a business with Exchange, push E-mail and security policies.

Now if they could just get a good update system in place. ;)

Steve

[Pony99CA]

The N95 is above all else a phone. Blackberry and Windows Mobile devices are mostly PDA's which is why I drew a distinction.
That depends on which version of Windows Mobile you're talking about. The WM Professional/Pocket PC Phone system is primarily a PDA with phone support. However, the WM Standard/Smarphone system was designed as a phone first (no touchscreen, one-hand friendly, etc.). That's one reason earlier versions were missing a lot of features that the Pocket PC originally had (Office support, copy/paste, notes, etc.).

RIM is going to be just fine and it'll still dominate the enterprise market which it already is[....]
Are you sure about that? Until earlier this year, Windows Mobile was #2 in smart phone sales behind Nokia (and ahead of RIM). I don't know how many of those WM devices were truly enterprise devices and not consumer devices (like mine), but I think Windows Mobile is a big player in the enterprise, too.

Steve

[doogald]

That depends on which version of Windows Mobile you're talking about. The WM Professional/Pocket PC Phone system is primarily a PDA with phone support. However, the WM Standard/Smarphone system was designed as a phone first (no touchscreen, one-hand friendly, etc.). That's one reason earlier versions were missing a lot of features that the Pocket PC originally had (Office support, copy/paste, notes, etc.).

Earlier versions? I have a WM 6 smartphone and there is no copy/paste. I do not think that there are notes, either, though I actually use Evernote myself for that so I haven't really missed it.

And I am pretty certain that Microsoft was aiming for the enterprise market with Windows Mobile from the get go, with any consumer purchases just icing on the cake. Pretty much the complete opposite of the iPhone, actually. But that's just my opinion.

[Vincent Ferrari]

And I am pretty certain that Microsoft was aiming for the enterprise market with Windows Mobile from the get go, with any consumer purchases just icing on the cake. Pretty much the complete opposite of the iPhone, actually. But that's just my opinion.

Glad I'm not the only one who saw it that way.

[Pony99CA]

Earlier versions? I have a WM 6 smartphone and there is no copy/paste. I do not think that there are notes, either, though I actually use Evernote myself for that so I haven't really missed it.
WM 6 isn't current. ;) My understanding is that WM 6.1 Standard added a limited copy/paste. I use Vito's CopyPaste on my WM 6 Standard Motorola Q9m.

As for notes, I added that during editing, so maybe no WM Standard device includes text notes (my Q9m has them, but I think that's a Motorola additon), but I think WM Standard devices may have Voice Notes.

And I am pretty certain that Microsoft was aiming for the enterprise market with Windows Mobile from the get go, with any consumer purchases just icing on the cake. Pretty much the complete opposite of the iPhone, actually. But that's just my opinion.
We have differing opinions then. However, I cited reasons for mine. What makes you believe that Windows CE (from which Windows Mobile evolved) wasn't aimed at both consumers and businesses?

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Glad I'm not the only one who saw it that way.
I'm sure you're not the only person who believes that. ;) But please answer the question I asked -- do you believe Palm was intended for business users or both consumer and business users? As Palm-Size PCs were Microsoft's response to Palm, if Palm devices were intended for more than just business users, it's only logical to believe that Palm-Size PCs were, too.

Yes, Microsoft has focused more on businesses lately (removing WiFi syncing, adding management tools, etc.), but we're talking about the inception of the platform.

Here's another reason that I believe Windows CE/Windows Mobile was geared for both consumers and businesses -- you're allowed to sync with more than one PC (even if that feature is buggy :rolleyes:). It seems obvious that Microsoft intended these devices to be used both at home and at work.

Steve

[doogald]

We have differing opinions then. However, I cited reasons for mine. What makes you believe that Windows CE (from which Windows Mobile evolved) wasn't aimed at both consumers and businesses?

From the beginning it was priced high and included Exchange Server support. I think Microsoft was clearly after enterprise customers looking for vertical, mobile support in a light, instant-on package. I always recall that PsPCs/Pocket PCs were priced a bit higher than corresponding Palm OS devices.

But, again, that's the way I see it.