How Microsoft Intends to Regain Lost Ground In Mobile Territory

[Darius Wey]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-264314.html' target='_blank'>http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-264314.html</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Microsoft has made some stumbles in the mobile world, but a strategy shift made more than a year ago will soon pay dividends, the company's top Windows Mobile executive said in an interview with CNET News. Andy Lees, the executive brought over from the server unit a year ago, said that Microsoft's efforts to make sure that its mobile software could run on a wide range of phones resulted in an operating system that failed to take advantage of advances in hardware. "We aimed to go for a lower common denominator," Lees said. Microsoft was also limited by the origins of Windows Mobile, which was developed to power handheld computers that neither connected to a network nor handled voice. "We started out when we were in PDAs (personal digital assistants) and then a phone got strapped to the back of the PDA," Lees said. The company also failed to recognize that phones--even those that were used for business--were still as much personal as they were professional."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com//ppct/auto/1233199530.usr2.png" /></p><p>The first four paragraphs of the <a href="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-264314.html" target="_blank">CNET/ZDNet article</a> accurately highlight some of Windows Mobile's flaws, and why the once-venerable smartphone operating system, at times, appears feeble next to relative newcomers, iPhone OS, Android, and webOS. But it's not all doom and gloom for Microsoft. According to Andy Lees, we'll see some breakthroughs over the next 18 months, with the first set expected as soon as mid-February as Microsoft takes the stage at <a href="http://www.mobileworldcongress.com/" target="_blank">MWC</a>. Lees hinted at an increased reliance on the cloud, the need to improve the core of Windows Mobile in order to keep up with the competition, and a closer relationship with OEMs (which we can only hope translates to more frequent and more consistent updates for all consumers).</p><p>Is this the right approach? Sound off in this thread.</p>

[johnm]

18 months is a long time to wait. MS Mobile is just too slow at following market trends and too deaf to customer complaints and suggestions. Heck even from within MS they don't listen, I tried and gave up. The push towards the smartphone platform and away from pocketPC phone was a big mistake in my opinion. Also people have been screaming for browser and other improvements since 2000 - where are they?

Part of the problem at MS (my opinion anyway) is that they focus too much on dog fooding. They live in a world where everything is Microsoft only. Currently you get seriously abused if you use an iPhone on campus. A few years back you got beat up for using Google. Heaven forbid you get caught using a Mac (unless you're in the Mac group of course). The problem is that if you put on blinders you don't know what is going on in the market and with your competition. Remember Balmer saying he would never let his kids use an iPod? If you've never used an iPod how can you know how bad the Zune sucks?

Employees there, as a general rule, have no idea what the competition is. They live an breath MS products. Back when I worked on Windows we had a Friday dev talk where someone brought in and demoed the latest version of OSX. People were shocked. There were literally audible gasps and open mouths across the room. All the time I was thinking, "How can they not know this? Don't they visit the same sites I do? Aren't they curious geeks like myself?" I have lots of stories like this. Don't get me started on browser tabs, Gmail and Google maps, but I digress...

I have friends that work in the mobile group and I wish them the all the best, but so far I'm not hearing anything from them worth getting excited about. I think management has it all backwards. If I were in charge over there, I would give EVERY SINGLE Windows Mobile developer, PM and manager an iPhone. I would make them live with it 24 hours a day, and tell them "Now go and make something better than this!"

As for me, I'm moving on.

[wolfzell]

I have been thinking about Windows Mobile and iPhone in the last days and in the end I concluded that the disadvantage of WM noted above (lots of different hardware configurations) might prove as an advantage in the medium term.

Think about the technical properties of the iPhone and the huge software infrastructure that gets built around it right now.

In 2-3 years Apple will need to introduce new technologies to the iPhone to keep it up to date, for instance just think about a higher screen resolution. Then they will experience the same trouble that WM had for a long time, since then they will have differing hardware platforms too and all those thousands of tiny applications will somehow have to take care of that.

So as long as the iPhone does not change in significant ways, Apple's approach will work fine, but that means that they can not simply change fundamental features of the iPhone without opening the same can of worms (hardware incompatibilities) that WM has to deal with since years.

It has been the same thing with Apple's desktop PCs. As long as they have been a closed system, they were nearly perfect. In the moment as the multimedia approach of PCs started, they had to open up the closed system and there they encountered the same problems as Microsoft had for a long time. So that was when the Macs started to get their share of problems too.

I am very curious how Apple will solve this dilemma with the iPhone. This will get interesting.

bye
Wolfgang

[emuelle1]

"The company also failed to recognize that phones--even those that were used for business--were still as much personal as they were professional."

I think this sums it up for me. I remember when WM2003SW and ActiveSuck 3.8 could sync through wi-fi, but that feature was removed in WM5 and AS4 because Microsoft's "Business customers" saw it as a security issue. Removing that feature was a major inconvenience for those of us who weren't "business customers" even if we used our devices for work purposes.

I don't think Microsoft really understands who it's customers actually are for any of it's products. For a long time, I believed that Windows Media Player/ the Microsoft Zune were being marketed to those gyrating silhouettes from the iPod commercials rather than to real people.

[j2inet]

I think this sums it up for me. I remember when WM2003SW and ActiveSuck 3.8 could sync through wi-fi, but that feature was removed in WM5 and AS4 because Microsoft's "Business customers" saw it as a security issue.

It wasn't just seen as a security issue. It was a security issue. Business users expressing concern wasn't a factor. Information transmitted through ActiveSync over IPwas unencrypted. The problem would be present even if you were syncing over an ethernet cable connected to your router. Mike Calligro, of the Windows Embeded team (the team that develops Windows CE. Windows Mobile is derived from CE) took on the subject in 2006. ActiveSync was never intended to work over WiFi. It had been made to work over Ethernet for devices that were directly connected to a computer via an ethernet cable. Since it was working over IP when WiFi was added to devices it just automatically worked. It was designed as a protocol for devices that are physically connected.

If you ould like to perform wireless syncing use Bluetooth. It is more secure.

The protocol also didn't identify devices, so if I were on your network I could make my computer look like it was your device and trick your device into sending me all of your contact information.


Here are some excepts from his explanation.

From Windows Mobile Team Blog : WiFi Did You Do That? (http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2006/11/08/wifi-did-you-do-that.aspx)


I’m sure that I won’t come out of this one unscathed. The people affected by this are really angry. And, though I didn’t have anything to do with the decision, I’m guessing that you’re going to take your frustrations out on me anyway.

The official (and true) reason has always been stated as “We removed it for security reasons.” But, judging from the number of angry comments I see posted here, that explanation hasn’t really convinced anyone that it was a good idea.

Desktop ActiveSync over WiFi was sending all your contacts, calendar, and email data over the internet without doing anything to keep people from reading it. If that doesn’t strike fear into your heart, let me add the second reason. When a device connects over desktop ActiveSync we don’t do enough to make it prove that it’s really your device (we don’t “authenticate” well enough). So, yes, when you had WiFi enabled on desktop ActiveSync, people on the internet could watch what you sent and then use that information to pretend to be your device. If they were successful at this, they could convince the your desktop to start sending your information directly to them.

So why did you implement it in the first place?

ActiveSync started out as a way to plug your device directly into your PC over a serial port. Yes, it’s that old (many PCs don’t even have serial ports anymore). There was no need for any sort of security here, because the only way to do this was to physically connect two machines. If you had control of both machines, you’d already compromised whatever security was there.

At some point, PCs and Pocket PCs started getting USB ports. So we modified desktop ActiveSync to talk over USB. But we mostly did it by pretending the USB port was a serial one and sending the same kind of data over it. At some later point we started seeing Compact Flash network cards. We thought, “Hey, that’s another way we could connect to ActiveSync,” and built in the ability to sync over Ethernet. Not too many people used it, though, because it didn’t make too much sense to plug Ethernet cables into your mobile device. Later on, though, WiFi arrived. In the end, WiFi is just a wireless way to do Ethernet, so it pretty much automatically worked with what we had already built.

It’s not really Sync over WiFi that we removed. We removed Sync over Ethernet. It’s just that WiFi needed Ethernet Sync to work.

[Cattle-Dog]

I actually thought it was fairly encouraging. Well, as encouraging as it can be without any real details. I know that Microsoft is capable of making some killer UI's (Zune, Media Center, Surface...). Here's hoping that there next major mobile UI is worth the wait and of that caliber.

The parts I found of most interest was their recognition that low end hardware and the mobile carriers were holding them back.

[Bob Anderson]

I am trying to be optimistic - Microsoft has the resources to do it right - now it is a question of whether they have the leadership to pull it off.

The discussion here about the ActiveSync via WiFi reminds me of why my optimism may be dashed. I'm not a security expert, but what the WinMo team said makes sense - there was a security loophole - but the lesson here in my mind is that Microsoft didn't react to what users wanted: Sync via WiFi!!! I missed it and I know others did too. It was cool to enter my home and synch, without having to be right next to the computer to use Bluetooth. So, why don't they build a new infrastructure that does SECURE WiFi synchronization? It can't be that hard, compared to some of the other things they have done with the platform over the years.

It's like the "close programs" button (a/k/a "X") ... for a very LONG time the community has said, "give us an option to TERMINATE a program" and Microsoft just makes excuses. If your users want it, quit spending time explaining why they don't need it, and JUST DO IT!

So, I'll give Microsoft 18 months - but at the end of 18 months - as I've said at PPC Thoughts before, let's get something revolutionary, not evolutionary. In the meantime do interim things like really push the beauty of Live Mesh and other cloud based initiatives. Give the community something positive to talk about!!!

[whydidnt]

First off it's good to hear an executive at MS actually admit they made mistakes. The sad part is the mistakes admitted to have been pointed out many times before now, and just now they seem to be getting it.

2nd, he indicates they've been working on changes for some time now, but then goes on to say it's going to be 12-18 months more before we see anything. In tech terms that's too long. Unless they are doing a giant leapfrog of the market, things they are planning today will be old news by the time it gets released.

I like that he indicates they are going to be working more closely with manufacturers, but note that there isn't any indication of discussions with carriers to stop stripping features from the devices or to get them to stop preventing OS upgrades in a prompt manner. In the US, this will continue to be an obstacle to success.

For me to get back on the bandwagon they are going to have to deliver a premium experience, that isn't compromised because they are concerned that manufacturer XYZ doesn't want to spend the $ on memory, screen real estate, etc. They need to put strict hardware requirements in place, at least for a segment of the market. For example if I buy a fancy new phone with a VGA scree, the core OS and programs all need to be VGA, not pixel doubled - the OEM has to make sure the screen is big and easy to use, they have to enable hardware graphics acceleration, etc. In other words, Microsoft needs to ensure the entire experience is a good one, not just that their software runs on 10 million different devices.

[whydidnt]

It wasn't just seen as a security issue. It was a security issue. Business users expressing concern wasn't a factor. Information transmitted through ActiveSync over IPwas unencrypted. The problem would be present even if you were syncing over an ethernet cable connected to your router.

So instead of removing a valuable feature, how about adding the necessary encryption to make it secure? The problem is over time, it has become very easy for Microsoft to throw away valuable features. It's almost like they look at an issue, and the way to fix a problem is removing features. I never heard a reasonable explanation for removal of category sync, as another example.

[j2inet]

So instead of removing a valuable feature, how about adding the necessary encryption to make it secure?

He addresses that question too under the heading "Then fix it." It is also addressed several more times in the comments area.

There's lots more interesting explanations on attributes of windows mobile in the Windows Mobile and Windows Embeded team blogs. It won't make any one feel better about not having a desired feature but it's always nice to know. One of my favourite ones is "The Emperor has no Close (http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2006/10/05/The-Emperor-Has-No-Close.aspx)" which explains why the X button doesn't close apps.

[Rocco Augusto]

Currently you get seriously abused if you use an iPhone on campus. A few years back you got beat up for using Google...

Now all I can think about is Ballmer and Gates going all West Side Story on everyone :D

[whydidnt]

He addresses that question too under the heading "Then fix it." It is also addressed several more times in the comments area.


Well, the way he addresses it is to say it was too big of a project and they had other priorities. Again, like many other niceties we enjoyed, they decided it was in the "too hard" pile. Now I know businesses have to make decisions all the time based upon cost/benefit, and I would guess Microsoft asked themselves the question, if we invest in WiFi sync, will we sell enough additional licenses to justify the cost? It doesn't mean I have to like it though, and it may have been an additional reason for me to stick with the platform, since no one else seems to offer this now either (darn cloud :p:p).

[Bob Anderson]

There's lots more interesting explanations on attributes of windows mobile in the Windows Mobile and Windows Embeded team blogs. It won't make any one feel better about not having a desired feature but it's always nice to know. One of my favourite ones is "The Emperor has no Close (http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2006/10/05/The-Emperor-Has-No-Close.aspx)" which explains why the X button doesn't close apps.

You know, I remember that article from way back when, but when I saw the link I decided to re-read it. Two thoughts emerged after reading it and some of the comments:

1) Wow... if Microsoft spent half as much time listening to users and just giving them what they want, how much better the press would be on WinMo devices! and
2) When I read a comment like: (from The Emperor Has No Close post)

Friday, June 20, 2008 8:20 AM by LA
I've gotta say, when I bought my T-mobile Dash this week, I decided to ignore the complaints about Microsoft Mobile. For the most part, I'm glad I did. But I absolutely hate having to open the task manager every time I want to use my camera because I don't have enough memory to do so. It's irritating and wastes my time. Why would I want to have games or contacts running in the background, when now all I want to do is take a picture? I'd much rather wait an extra second or two for an app to load again 5 minutes later when I need it again, than keep it running in the background the whole time, doing nothing. The only way I can quit apps on this phone is through the task manager.

It just makes me question the whole logic of Microsoft's decision! I've had the same thing happen with my XV6800 - I try and launch the camera and it says "not enough memory"!!! WHAT - I thought this thing was smart enough to figure that stuff out on it's own!!! (OOPS, no, I have to go close stuff!)

Again, I'm going to give Microsoft some time - I'm going to try and remain optimistic that leadership is going to give up on the "we know best" and listen to what their customers want. IF they do this, they will RULE the mobile territory. If they don't, well, there will be a lot of people moving on to something else.

[Macguy59]

Reducing the pool of devices (if it happens) or rather, restricting the hardware specs might allow MS a little wiggle room to innovate. But if the leaked shots of WM 6.5 are accurate the UI designers need to come out from underneath the rock.

[Perry Reed]

I'm glad to see that Microsoft finally realizes that they have a problem, but I worry that it may be too little, WAY too late! Especially if they're not really going to change much for another 18 months. They might as well give up now!

That said, I've been compiling my own little wish-list of things I'd want to see on my next phone and I'll share it with you all here:

• Fast data connection, able to be used while voice is used.

• Speaker, handset, Bluetooth. Actually, the handset use could be eliminated if the others are solid.

• GPS, including eGPS. My phone should know where it is all of the time.

• Spatial recognition, like a Wii controller. Accelerometers or similar. Proximity sensors. The phone should know if it is next to your face, vertical or horizontal, pointing at another device with which you want it to interact. Perhaps this would work in conjunction with the Bluetooth near field stuff.

• Voice interaction, two way. I tell it what I want and it talks back to me. I don't mind if this uses a connection to a server somewhere to make it work, as long as it's accurate and fast.

• Smart interaction. It should know (via GPS) where I am and (via my schedule) where I'm supposed to be. And act on it. Vibrate only while in meetings, send "I'm running late" messages, etc. (like the Palm Pre is rumored to do, according to James at jkontherun.)

• The ability to seamlessly connect to a full size keyboard and screen, like RedFly only better (with app support).

• A hard drive. If you can squeeze 160 GB into an iPod, why not my phone? Even if it adds a bit of thickness, it's worth it.

• Two cameras, including one for videoconferencing, and a GOOD one -- with zoom and a flash -- for picture taking.

• HTML email. With Exchange, Google, Windows Live (or Skynet or whatever it's called) full two-way synchronization.

• Ideally, full Outlook synchronization, with color categories, tasks, etc. And it should have a screen similar to the Outlook To-do Bar that combines flagged messages, tasks, and upcoming appointments.

• A solid browser. Of course.

• Touch-optimized, but with good handwriting recognition, too. Like a Tablet PC.

• A good note-taking and information-gathering tool, like OneNote or similar. Should make good use of the camera and voice, too.

• The OS and applications should be available and upgradeable independent of the phone carrier and the device manufacturer (OEM). The end-customers should be considered and their opinions given more weight relative to the OEMS and carriers.

• In a perfect world, the phone would handle both my work and personal data, and keep them separate! I'd have both work and personal email, contacts, and an integrated calendar that shows me events from both. And it would sync with the corporate back-end (likely Exchange) and whatever I use for my personal stuff.

[Pony99CA]

It wasn't just seen as a security issue. It was a security issue. Business users expressing concern wasn't a factor. Information transmitted through ActiveSync over IPwas unencrypted. The problem would be present even if you were syncing over an ethernet cable connected to your router. Mike Calligro, of the Windows Embeded team (the team that develops Windows CE. Windows Mobile is derived from CE) took on the subject in 2006. ActiveSync was never intended to work over WiFi. It had been made to work over Ethernet for devices that were directly connected to a computer via an ethernet cable. Since it was working over IP when WiFi was added to devices it just automatically worked. It was designed as a protocol for devices that are physically connected.
First, thanks for the link. That's one article I hadn't seen before.

However, if you have a secured WiFi network (WEP, WPA, whatever), your data was being sent encrypted. (Yes, WEP is now easily crackable, but that's another issue.) What reasonable business is running their WiFi network unencrypted?

And, if your connection is encrypted, it's going to be hard for somebody to spoof your device.

As I've always suggested, they should have made an Administrative privilege that would disable LAN syncing. That way businesses could turn it on and consumers could leave it off.

And, as another user pointed out, that doesn't explain removing Backup/Restore and Category Sync from ActiveSync. (Well, technically, it's still there -- if you have a WM 2003 SE or earlier device -- so why disable it for WM 5 and later devices?)

Steve

[Cattle-Dog]

Its only encrypted between the device and the wireless access point. So it hits the internet as clear data.

[Rob Alexander]

He addresses that question too under the heading "Then fix it." It is also addressed several more times in the comments area.

There's lots more interesting explanations on attributes of windows mobile in the Windows Mobile and Windows Embeded team blogs. It won't make any one feel better about not having a desired feature but it's always nice to know. One of my favourite ones is "The Emperor has no Close (http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2006/10/05/The-Emperor-Has-No-Close.aspx)" which explains why the X button doesn't close apps.

Yeah, he addresses that question. He says, "There are a number of things we can do to fix it, including adding encryption and authentication. All of them, however, are a ton of work that needs to get prioritized against all the other things we need to do in ActiveSync."

In other words, we don't care what you think. We're going to spend our time giving you features you don't want, and removing additional features you do want, instead of giving you the features you really want.

And he talks about the close button too, but his premise is wrong from start to finish. He characterizes us as wanting to 'have to' manage our own memory. That's not at all true, but their poor memory management requires it of us anyway. So, from the users' point of view, it's not a matter of who manages the memory, it's a matter of whether when we have to close apps because the device has slowed to a crawl, or because something won't startup, can we easily close those running program or do we have to go through half a dozen steps to find the command buried deep in the menus? It just doesn't work the way he says it does. And even if it did, there would still be legitimate reasons to close certain apps (see some of the examples in the comments below the blog) easily. Again, he's saying the same thing as with the Activesync over wi-fi issue. Your needs don't matter to us.

I'll be the first to admit that the things I am reading in this article sound like all the right things to say. Recongnizing their mistakes, acknowleging that phones are personal (even when owned by a business), the need for high-end hardware, etc. But MS has spent too long making every version of WinCE/Palm-sized PC/Pocket PC/WM worse than the previous one in one or two important ways, even as they give us one or two new features we like (and half a dozen that no one cares about) for me to take these statements at face value. Don't talk about doing great new things, MS, just do them.

[johnm]

Now all I can think about is Ballmer and Gates going all West Side Story on everyone :D

Nice one! Actually when it comes to Balmer all I can think about his him jumping up and down soaked in sweat screaming things like "developers, Developers, DEVELOPERS!". I've bumped into him a couple of times in Bellevue and each time I experienced a momentary wave of panic. -Some people are afraid of clowns, and I...

[j2inet]

Some things on my wish list:

More independence from the Carriers

No carrier bloatware preinstalled

Longer Active support from the OEM

We would actually be able to receive all the updates done to Windos Mobile in a Year

Better Graphics Support
Large VGA Screen - like what was on the Toshiba e800
A better implementation for WiFi networking
Assurance the phone will one day be upgraded to Windows Mobile 7

[Cattle-Dog]

I wouldn't mind if my Touch Pro (Fuze) was updated to 6.5, but I actually hope it is not updated to 7.0. I want 7.0 to be a new class of hardware and software.

Perry, have you tried Voice Command? I love it and would not have a phone without it. As I am driving down the road with my headset in my ear, it'll read me emails, text messages, I can check my calendar, I can call any contact or any number, I can hook my phone up to my radio and voice control media player...


Some things I'd like to see by a 7.0 release are:

Capacitive touch screen
Capacitive touch screen compatible stylus
Abandonment of the soft keys and standard drop “up” menu’s and it’s related bottom bar
I’d like a new “System” hardware key to be created on the side of the device

This would bring up any application related menus in a finger friendly overlay
Would provide alternate gesture commands, IE a swipe up may bring up a launcher (or a replacement for the Start Menu!) instead of the normal page up, swipe down would give you a list of running tasks that you can switch to or close, etc.

Getting rid of scroll bars
VGA should be the minimum resolution (at least for Mobile Pro)
3D acceleration mandatory along with mandatory minimum performance
The system bar at the top should be made 20% bigger to be more finger friendly (still a net gain in screen real-estate by the deletion of the bottom bar)
While we are tweaking the system bar, lets chuck the monochrome and blocky status icons.
Integrate Voice Command and Mobile Live Search so I can say “Find Italian Restaurants near my current location” and then it would start reading restaurant names and location back to me
And of course to only cost $199 without a contract. :D

[Pony99CA]

Some things I'd like to see by a 7.0 release are:

[...]

Abandonment of the soft keys and standard drop “up” menu’s and it’s related bottom bar

I thought that one of the goals of WM 7 (Photon) was to finally converge WM Standard with the Classic/Professional versions. While you might be able to get rid of soft keys on the touch screen version (although I'm not sure where you're suggesting menus go), you'd either have to make the scheme the same on WM Standard or ruin the goal of convergence.


Getting rid of scroll bars

Not only would this break convergence with WM Standard, it loses one of the most useful features about scroll bars -- they display your relative position in the document. So they're scroll indicators as well as scroll bars.

Make them thinner if you want (like on WM Standard) and have them widen if you tap them or start to scroll, but don't get rid of them.

As long we're talking about what should be done in WM 7, you might want to read Windows Mobile New Year's Resolutions (http://thoughts.svpocketpc.com#THOUGHT_WM7_RESOLUTIONS) (it's kind of lengthy).

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Its only encrypted between the device and the wireless access point. So it hits the internet as clear data.
Why would it hit the Internet at all? If you're in the company's building, it would hit the LAN unencrypted, but I hope the company has a firewall.

Or are you saying that WiFi syncing works even remotely? Could I actually sync with my home PC from Starbuck's? I never tried remotely syncing like that.

Steve

[j2inet]

Why would it hit the Internet at all? If you're in the company's building, it would hit the LAN unencrypted, but I hope the company has a firewall.

Those that would infringe on one's information can exists on either side of the firewall. Because of the weak authentication used in the protocol one could connect to a machine, present themselves as the owner's device, and have access to copy and alter informaion. Note that this scenario doesn't involve a device; it's an exploit of the protocol.

Or are you saying that WiFi syncing works even remotely? Could I actually sync with my home PC from Starbuck's? I never tried remotely syncing like that.

It would work. The address only needed to be resolvable and accessible. That's part of the reason that I've tried to stick with calling it "ActiveSync over IP" instead of "ActiveSync over WiFi" or "ActiveSync over LAN." The protocol did not distinguish the type of network connection being used or whether it was a WAN of LAN address.

As I've always suggested, they should have made an Administrative privilege that would disable LAN syncing. That way businesses could turn it on and consumers could leave it off.

Mike talked about why they didn't make it something that can be turned on and off (search the page for the phrase "Loaded gun" to find the paragraph ). If a business has interest in the functionality that could have been provided by ActiveSync over IP they should look at System Center Mobile Device Manager. It provides the ability to manage several aspects of data and settings in addition to enforcing security policies, wiping data from a lost device, and updating/installing software on the device theough Windows Update Services.