At my job I got the IT manager to replace the BlackBerries our IT staff use with Treo 700wx's, the manager loves direct push and the ability to do more IT things that he couldn't do on the BlackBerry.
"Direct push" is also slower on the mail delivery than RIM's BES.
- actually at my workplace where we are running Exchange 2003 SP2, my MSFP enabled WM5 device can receive messages anywhere from 3 to 30 seconds before my wired Outlook client.
Im guessing you have Outlook 2003 running in cached exchange mode, right? If so, Outlook in "connect" mode is quicker than that.
At my work, the instant I get something on my 'connected' Outlook, its on my BB.....on my 'cached' laptop Outlook, it takes 3-30sec as you indicated.
Im guessing you have Outlook 2003 running in cached exchange mode, right? If so, Outlook in "connect" mode is quicker than that.
No, not necessarily. Direct Push is insanely fast if you've got a good signal. I've used several different clients, including noncached, and the Pocket PC reliably gets the message at the same time if not before the desktop.
Anyway, when we're down to seconds, the point is moot, is it not?
Anyway, when we're down to seconds, the point is moot, is it not?
No. Everyone knows if device X gets an email in 1.3 seconds, it is WAAAaaAaaaAAAAaaay better than one that takes 2.1 seconds, even though no one her has actually bothered to time it. Anecdotal evidence is much more fun than real evidence or practicality.
Ketchup, you need to catchup (sorry, couldn't resist). As others have stated, that's the old way of doing "push."
We have both WM5 devices and BB devices where I work. I receive my email on my WM5 device a few seconds before my co-workers with BB devices receive the same email.
To all: my results were using Exchange 2003 Enterprise SP2 on Windows 2000 Server (no SSL on this server, so the GAL lookup tool would not work), and a WM5 device that did not have the MSFP available for it. (Samsung i730) This was what I had found in this configuration and is acurate for this configuration.
However, I just got a Verizon VX6700 (this morning) and will be testing that out starting today and see how my results differ. I'm hoping the delivery is faster. It is WM5 & has the feature pack.
If this does everything the article is about, I have a viable alternative for my users.
To all: my results were using Exchange 2003 Enterprise SP2 on Windows 2000 Server (no SSL on this server, so the GAL lookup tool would not work)
You mean, you're not using SSL for Server ActiveSync? If so, I would suggest you set up SSL for security's sake. You can self-sign certificates for free with the tools included with Windows 2000 Server (the Certificate Authority, in particular). The only "catch" about self-signing is that you need to copy the certificate onto the device and install it, but I do that and it works great.
Does anyone know of a push email application you can load on your PC that can push any POP3 email to a PocketPC/WinMobile deivce and doesn't need Exchange or RIM? I think this would be cool.
Does anyone know of a push email application you can load on your PC that can push any POP3 email to a PocketPC/WinMobile deivce and doesn't need Exchange or RIM? I think this would be cool.
No, although some carriers have rolled their own solutions. Verizon, for instance, has Wireless Sync; I believe it can poll your POP account every 5 minutes. (Note that this uses their servers as a push intermediary.)
If a corp support Outlook Web Access and upgraded to Exchange 2003 SP2, it should support MSFP by default (unless IT guy switched it off by unknown reason). Both OWA and MSFP works on same IIS path secured by HTTPS. If you are an OWA user, you can try MSFP and it usually works!
1.3 or 2.1 seconds, I wonder who care about that 0.7 seconds different? As long as the e-mail is received within 3 seconds, everyone is happy with a simple and cheap solution. If you dial a number on your phone, did you care about that 0.7 seconds? Did you notice it? As long as the call is getting connected within 3 seconds, I see no reason why 1.3 is WAAAAAAY better than 2.1 (it's better, but not that extreme). No one even bother to benchmark which phone can connect to the network faster, right?
I read a blog and it say a month of 24/7 MSFP costs slightly more than 1MB of data, without e-mail content. I think MS is working hard on lowering bandwidth as many ppl at MS should be using MSFP now, it save money in their pocket too.
POP3 do not support push, and there is no way to build it except with an intermediate server. But I guess some clever guys are making server-based solution for POP3 push-mail.
I wasn't sure if it existed. I have a server that pushes Pop3, including gMail. I timed it against my friends RIM device and I beat it almost every time. I wasn't sure if I should finish it and package it for resale if there were a bunch of other applications already on the market. It can handle muitiple devices and email accounts at the same time.
Push eMail Without Exchange
Linear Mode
