09-25-2002, 12:00 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device market
http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/19492.html
Lot of interesting tidbits in this article, which wraps up "While Palm once held promise of becoming the Microsoft of handheld computing, it may have to settle for becoming the Apple Computer Corp. as Microsoft replicates its dominance in the PC world."
Microsoft has a larger strategy in the mobile device space that goes beyond the PDA in your hand. Microsoft has a whole server infrastructure behind the Pocket PC accessible through Mobile Information Server, SQL Server and other server products, each carrying a hefty price themselves and additional client access licenses for each unit the enterprise connects to these servers, which in turn spurs sales of developer software, desktops, Office suites, etc. It is a vicious cycle that MS is enjoying all the way to the bank.
Like it or not (I happen to love it due to the insanely simple interoperability of their software) Microsoft has a very strong position that the enterprise market looking for mobile devices simply cannot ignore. Palm wants some of that action. "Palm also introduced a service, which will be available Oct. 28, for delivering corporate e-mail securely to its wireless devices." Hmmm... sound familiar? Wait until you hear the name. Tungsten Mobile Information Management Server, or MIMS. You can read more in their FAQ (Acrobat Reader required). Notice too that it is a "service." Yup. That's right. Monthly fee. I haven't seen too many IT departments going ga-ga over subscribing to things.
The question is, can Palm get this software in their enterprise customer's hands? I firmly believe the key to the success of a Mobile Device platform is dependant on the enterprise. Sure, some people just need a basic PIM, and Palm does fine in that arena, at least in volume if not profit. Enterprises, however, need more power, connectivity and interoperability. Palm OS 5 gives Palm Powered PDA's much of that power. Tungsten MIMS gives some of that connectivity and operability, but it is a totally separate server product. Exchange 2003 will have MIS from Microsoft totally integrated. Do you think the IT room is going to want to install a separate product for mobile devices? Maybe if they are running Lotus Domino or Novell Groupwise, but an increasing majority of groupware in corporate environments is Exchange. Pocket PCs also support Terminal Server/Citrix Server out of the box and SQL Server using SQL Server CE on the device.
It is going to be very interesting to see if Palm can get their foot in the door. For 5 years, MS has been on this track. For 5 years Palm has been talking Microsoft's strategy down and dismissing it on strong sales of the Palm III and Palm V. All the while, Palm has been working on their own server product. Just like sound, color, voice recording, fast processors and other things, Palm has been saying "You don't need that. Well, you don't need it until we have it."  Thanks to Foo Fighter for the link.
|
| |
|
|
|
09-25-2002, 12:34 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 143
|
|
ASP Model
OS 5 and Palm's new line-up are a reaction to demand and not in keeping with the Zen of Palm thing. Some people need multimedia and such and others just want it. I still sell more Palm's than PPC's to individual consumers based on the price tag primarily. Many of my buyers barely see the advantage of Palm over paper let alone the value of the extra power a PPC brings to them. The benefits are easy to state, but hard to get people excited about when they see the large price tag and long (keep in mind we're in an immediate gratification world) learning curve.
It looks like Palm's glimpse into Extend Systems brought forth some fruit after all. From a subscription standpoint, I think the model Palm is trying to emulate is the ASP model ala USi. We saw what happened to USi -- bankruptcy. They are still the poster child for the ASP, but I don't see much hype out there to go to leased software these days. Avantgo is also trying to carve out a niche in this area with little success as well.
It's almost like someone at Palm is saying "Let's see how we can just drive this once successful company into the ground with the biggest and loudest bang ever!"
|
| |
|
|
|
09-25-2002, 03:32 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 89
|
|
Re: Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device marke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Microsoft has a larger strategy in the mobile device space that goes beyond the PDA in your hand. Microsoft has a whole server infrastructure behind the Pocket PC accessible through Mobile Information Server, SQL Server and other server products, each carrying a hefty price themselves and additional client access licenses for each unit the enterprise connects to these servers, which in turn spurs sales of developer software, desktops, Office suites, etc. It is a vicious cycle that MS is enjoying all the way to the bank.
|
Ed, this comes across as pure FUD. Was that your intention? To say that everything Microsoft has done is good and everything that Palm plans to do is bad?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Like it or not (I happen to love it due to the insanely simple interoperability of their software)
|
That statement strikes me as insane. I don't even know where to begin with that one. Wow.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Microsoft has a very strong position that the enterprise market looking for mobile devices simply cannot ignore. Palm wants some of that action. "Palm also introduced a service, [....]
Notice too that it is a "service." Yup. That's right. Monthly fee. I haven't seen too many IT departments going ga-ga over subscribing to things.
|
Perhaps you've never heard of .NET - also known as software by subscription. Microsoft is moving the company toward subscription-based products. They even announced back in 2000 that Office would be subscription based. Customers were so "ga-ga" over that that it hasn't happened. Yet they continue to push forward with .NET because they need subscription revenue to retain their dominance. That doesn't make the concept right or wrong, but it's interesting that you mock the idea when it comes from Palm.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
The question is, can Palm get this software in their enterprise customer's hands? I firmly believe the key to the success of a Mobile Device platform is dependant on the enterprise.
|
The old Enterprise argument again. The Enterprise is the key to dominance in every market it seems. Is that how Dell dominates in PCs? Or HP in inkjet printers? Or Nokia in mobile phones? Some products are successful because they target the individual consumer, not corporations. The "Mobile Device platform" from Microsoft's point of view is the expensive back-end infrastructure. The handheld device and the OS are just tools to sell a complete package. If something else, like the tablet PC, takes off in the corporate world they could let the Pocket PC wither on the vine.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Do you think the IT room is going to want to install a separate product for mobile devices? Maybe if they are running Lotus Domino or Novell Groupwise, but an increasing majority of groupware in corporate environments is Exchange. Pocket PCs also support Terminal Server/Citrix Server out of the box and SQL Server using SQL Server CE on the device.
|
OK, I agree with you that MS absolutely dominates in this market and they are steamrolling over the competition. And that overall integration is the key. Palm, or anyone else in this space, has a huge mountain to climb. RIM got some initial success in this market, but it was more mindshare based on publicity and trendiness than actual market success. If Palm had had this product two years ago things would have been different.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
It is going to be very interesting to see if Palm can get their foot in the door. For 5 years, MS has been on this track.
|
You mean the last five years?!?! Huh? If you are talking about the Windows CE handhelds I don't understand what you mean. Do you remember the first HPC's with double-tapping and the constant hourglass? That was part of an enterprise strategy? Maybe you mean the large keyboard-equiped $900 models. Abandoning the owners of those devices was an interesting strategy. I'll grant you that MS has steadily improved their product and that today's PPC2002 devices are excellent. But to say that they have had a successful strategy over the last five years is ridiculous. They have lost licensees, abandoned platforms and customers, and put out bad products enabling Palm to rest on its laurels and retain dominance.
Microsoft has a mobile strategy now and the products and momentum to succeed, but they haven't won yet. And your revisionist history and this idea about the "insanely simple interoperability of their software" is a fantasy.
By the way, I found an interesting article on the history of WindowCE written by Jason in 1999. Check it out:
http://www.pocketpclife.com/issues/i...derful001.html
You're right, Ed. Look at all the mobile strategies they have had. Pulsar, WinPad, Pegasus, several iterations of Pen Extensions for Windows, and now the Tablet PC. Belly up to the bar, folks. Platforms for everyone!
Scott
|
| |
|
|
|
09-25-2002, 04:56 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Re: Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device marke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scottmag
By the way, I found an interesting article on the history of WindowCE written by Jason in 1999. Check it out:
http://www.pocketpclife.com/issues/i...derful001.html
You're right, Ed. Look at all the mobile strategies they have had. Pulsar, WinPad, Pegasus, several iterations of Pen Extensions for Windows, and now the Tablet PC. Belly up to the bar, folks. Platforms for everyone! |
Don't inaccurately use my article against us Scott - if you had read the article fully, you'd know that Pulsar and WinPad never existed in the public domain, and Pegasus was Windows CE 1.0, which is the precursor to what Pocket PCs are using now.
As to the rest of your comments, I can only wonder why you come to this site if you hate Pocket PCs so much. :? If you crave conflict, take up boxing. :wink:
|
| |
|
|
|
09-25-2002, 06:37 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 89
|
|
Re: Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device marke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn
Don't inaccurately use my article against us Scott - if you had read the article fully, you'd know that Pulsar and WinPad never existed in the public domain, and Pegasus was Windows CE 1.0, which is the precursor to what Pocket PCs are using now.
As to the rest of your comments, I can only wonder why you come to this site if you hate Pocket PCs so much. :? If you crave conflict, take up boxing. :wink:
|
OK, I'll be more clear. Or less verbose.
Pulsar, WinPad, and the rest of the stuff that never saw the light of day are evidence that MS did not have a mobile strategy, they had several aborted strategies. And Windows CE 1.0 and every version before the modern PocketPC was, IMHO, a joke. Thus I disagree with Ed's assertion that MS has employed a successful strategy in the mobile space that is destined to dominate.
Ed is one of my favorite people to disagree with because he spins it better than Microsoft's own PR department could. He could be Ballmer's speechwriter on some of this stuff. On the other subjects, like the evil media conglomerates, he's dead-on. So I find it fun to agree completely with some of his stuff (don't tell him that though) and then disagree completely with the next.
As for hating PocketPCs, I can't see where you are getting that. I love my Mac, but despite all the things Apple is doing right, I disagree with the zealots who think the Mac is somehow going to take over the market. And because I am not afraid to criticize Microsoft when they do something wrong I am branded an MS hater.
Oh, well. No conflict was intended. I just felt like going on record disagreeing. Ed, I hope that you did not take any of that as a personal attack.
Now, as for Foo Fighter. You used to be the counter balance to Ed on the Palm stuff. Now you just feed him anti-Palm / pro-PPC propaganda. Where's the old Ed-Foo ying-yang? *sigh*
Scott
p.s., I love PPC users. I LOVE PPC USERS! Show me the money!
|
| |
|
|
|
09-25-2002, 07:43 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Re: Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device marke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scottmag
Pulsar, WinPad, and the rest of the stuff that never saw the light of day are evidence that MS did not have a mobile strategy, they had several aborted strategies. And Windows CE 1.0 and every version before the modern PocketPC was, IMHO, a joke. Thus I disagree with Ed's assertion that MS has employed a successful strategy in the mobile space that is destined to dominate.
|
HUGE difference between a strategy and the implementation of it. And CE 1.0 and Winpad/Pulsar go back before 5 years ago that I refer to. CE 2.0 and the PDA style devices started coming out 5 years ago and that is what I refered to when I said 5 years ago. Not 7 or 10 years ago.
It did take until 2000 for the PPC to come out which is much more popular than previous offerings, but that is a better execution on the same strategy, not a new strategy.
|
| |
|
|
|
09-25-2002, 09:27 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,466
|
|
Re: Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device marke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scottmag
You used to be the counter balance to Ed on the Palm stuff. Now you just feed him anti-Palm / pro-PPC propaganda. Where's the old Ed-Foo ying-yang?
|
I still am. But here I play a different role...the role of antagonist. This is not a multiplatform community (as the name implies) so I see no need to engage in the same point/counterpoint platform debates that commonly took place at PDABuzz. *sigh*...ah sweet memories.... :cry:
I no longer visit PDABuzz. Now I do most of my argumentation on Ars Technica's forums.
|
| |
|
|
|
09-25-2002, 09:52 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 516
|
|
Palm's announcement lacked some necessary details, but based on what I've read (through some additional digging), I wanted to clarify some things (some of which could turn out to be wrong):
1) Palm's MIMS is more than just email. It handles calendar (appointments) and to-do lists. It also appears as though it may handle scheduling meetings. Some or all of this may be possible via MS' solution as well.
2) I could be wrong, but I believe the only "service" aspect of this is that you have to pay a monthly service charge to Cingular for use of the Mobitex network if you use this solution via a Palm i705. If you're using this via Palm m515's equipped with 802.11b, I don't believe there would be any ongoing service charges. I'd be pretty surprised if Palm charged an additional service fee over-and-above the standard i705 unlimited service fee, since you'll no longer be using their servers. If anything, it ought be offered at a discount (though given the recent news of the Zire which offers less features for the same amount of money as the m100, it probably will cost the same).
It's worth noting that I think it's a shame (and a complete miscue on Palm's part) that they dropped the MyPalm service. It probably needed some tweaking, but it could have offered this same sort of feature set which would have been perfect for i705-equipped consumers. It would have essentially been in direct competition with the upcoming Danger device (but with a much larger head-start). The MIMS solution is good and necessary for the enterprise who need connection to their Exchange servers and have security concerns about their data passing through Palm's proxy-servers, but the former solution would have been perfectly fine for consumers. The only other change Palm needs to make is to offer a version of the i705 with a built-in thumbboard (perhaps modifying the form-factor of the device in the process). FYI, another waste of a good thing on their part has been WeSync. Fortunately, it's still alive but they've pretty much done nothing with it other than modify and scale it down to produce DualDate (but I won't start in on that rant).
Regarding ScottMag's comments, I have to agree (surprise, surprise) with much of what he said. MS abandoned the eVB concept and the Compact Framework is still in beta, leaving many of those early-adopting corporations sitting around twiddling their thumbs while they wait for a stable release of a RAD tool for all of those handhelds (which they supposedly bought en masse). In the mean time, MS-driven excitement about Tablets and the recent bSquare device details (in conjunction with a notable lack of MS-activity on the PPC front) certainly leaves me wondering if the PPC is part of MS' long-term future at all.
Scott
|
| |
|
|
|
09-26-2002, 02:18 AM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 725
|
|
Re: Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device marke
Well, god help me scottmag, but I actually agree on most of your points (and yes, I've taken my temp. several times). Except...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scottmag
Perhaps you've never heard of .NET - also known as software by subscription. Microsoft is moving the company toward subscription-based products. They even announced back in 2000 that Office would be subscription based. Customers were so "ga-ga" over that that it hasn't happened. Yet they continue to push forward with .NET because they need subscription revenue to retain their dominance. That doesn't make the concept right or wrong, but it's interesting that you mock the idea when it comes from Palm.
|
In all fairness what Microsoft is doing is saying "We would like you to subscribe (because it's better for their business model) but we won't force you" There will still be a non-subscription based office package and as for .NET, a lot of people confuse .NET with .NET My Services. Using .NET to develop programs and running those programs requires no additional subscription fee. As for .NET My Services, they really barely even exist anymore.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scottmag
The old Enterprise argument again. The Enterprise is the key to dominance in every market it seems. Is that how Dell dominates in PCs? Or HP in inkjet printers? Or Nokia in mobile phones? Some products are successful because they target the individual consumer, not corporations. The "Mobile Device platform" from Microsoft's point of view is the expensive back-end infrastructure. The handheld device and the OS are just tools to sell a complete package. If something else, like the tablet PC, takes off in the corporate world they could let the Pocket PC wither on the vine.
|
Actually yes. Dell does still make the great majority of their money from enterprise customers and so does HP. I don't necessarily disagree with your point (that you can also make money targeting consumers) but as far as computer technologies go I think targeting consumers is limited.
|
| |
|
|
|
09-26-2002, 02:23 AM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 725
|
|
Re: Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device marke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn
As to the rest of your comments, I can only wonder why you come to this site if you hate Pocket PCs so much. :? If you crave conflict, take up boxing. :wink:
|
This attitude around here really bothers me I have to tell you. You don't have to be a Microsoft drone (e.g. love EVERYTHING they do) to like PocketPCs and be interested in PocketPC news. I've now owned PocketPCs for the majority of my PDA life and I still think a lot of what MS has done is just plain stupid. Why shouldn't I be able to say so without being harrassed as an antagonist?
Which brings me to...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Foo Fighter
I still am. But here I play a different role...the role of antagonist. This is not a multiplatform community (as the name implies) so I see no need to engage in the same point/counterpoint platform debates that commonly took place at PDABuzz. *sigh*...ah sweet memories.... :cry:
|
Well, hopefully you'll hang in there. Fight for your right to antagonize! Seriously, this place, and any discussion board, is a lot more entertaining and informative when there are multiple view points and I think everyone who feels "left out" around here should remember that they're actually doing the place a favor.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Foo Fighter
I no longer visit PDABuzz. Now I do most of my argumentation on Ars Technica's forums.
|
Yeeesh, you really have gone geek if your hanging out with the ARS guys  (Although they do have a great Seti@home team)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
