10-30-2006, 01:00 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
How Is Microsoft Direct Push Better Than The Blackberry?
"I thought long and hard not about the contents of this article, but about the title. While sure to generate some controversy, this is what I believe to be the case. My personal opinion is that the current implementation of Direct Push overall is better than RIM�s Blackberry device where it comes to push mail access on Microsoft Exchange. In fact, I consider Direct Push to be superior to any of the other offerings on the market when it comes to using Exchange as a backend mail server."
This article looks at scalability, implementation costs, security, operating costs and a few other issues. If you are considering switching to Windows Mobile devices for your portable email, you should check this article out.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 03:47 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 100
|
|
Is there anything out there that compares the bandwidth requirements of Direct Push vs. Blackberry? I'm sure it's out there but I haven't been able to find anything.
The reason I ask is because, after moving to a Wizard with GoodLink over the summer, my bandwidth usage has skyrocketed (10x more). Now, this isn't a problem when I'm in the US, but it creates hassles when I'm out of the country and being charged an exorbitant 1.95 cents/kilobyte for data usage.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 05:12 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 9
|
|
While the article was written pretty poorly, I would have to say this comment is spot on:
Quote:
|
On the enterprise level, I would consider both BES and Direct Push to be on equal standing in terms of ease of setup. However, having used Blackberry devices before, it must be commented that they are on the most part, rugged with a rock stable operating system. Perhaps it might have to do with the absence, on the most part, of destabilizing third-party software. But the fact remains that once setup, the Blackberry generally just refuses to stop working.
|
I have power cycled my blackberry less than 10 times the entire time I have had it (about 1 year in total)....cant same the same for my PPC (without phone features mind you).
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 05:12 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9
|
|
From what I've seen, "Direct push" is not.
The Exchange server sends and SMS message to the device and then the device uses that as a trigger to retrieve the messages from the server. (if you doubt this, set it up and then check your "text message" usage for your carrier.)
The only real "direct push" is when sending a mail from the device. Then it goes directly to the server with no interim SMS message. There is also no native Global Address Book lookup function. (I get around this by copying the GAL to my Outlook Contacts and letting that sync)
"Direct push" is also slower on the mail delivery than RIM's BES.
I run our network and we have a Blackberry Enterprise Server that has 60 Blackberries on it. Doing a test of sending and receiving messages, the Blackberry devices are always faster, sometimes by several minutes.
Direct push speed is somewhat dictated by the carrier's text message system and how fast it can get the "new mail" notification to the Windows Mobile device.
Here in the US, Verizon Windows Mobile devices come with "Wireless Sync" that does kind of what the BES does and it's free. Of course there are limitations like the lack of Global Address Book lookups.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 05:39 PM
|
|
Thoughts Media Review Team
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 599
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ketchup
From what I've seen, "Direct push" is not.
The Exchange server sends and SMS message to the device and then the device uses that as a trigger to retrieve the messages from the server. (if you doubt this, set it up and then check your "text message" usage for your carrier.)
|
No, that is the old way that Exchange did "direct push".
With Service Pack 2 on Exchange and Windows Mobile 2005, you get true direct push of email.
If you haven't got SP2, or you haven't got WM2005, you will be using the older method but that is not direct push in the context of this article.
--Philip
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 06:31 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ketchup
From what I've seen, "Direct push" is not.
The Exchange server sends and SMS message to the device and then the device uses that as a trigger to retrieve the messages from the � Of course there are limitations like the lack of Global Address Book lookups.
|
neither of these statements are accurate with Exchange 2003 SP2 and an MSFP enabled WM5 device. with an MS power toy, WM2003/WM5 can do the GAL lookup too.
SMS as "push" was not a great way to handle it and MS fixed the issue.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 06:55 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 61
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ketchup
"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.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 07:07 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ketchup
"Direct push" is also slower on the mail delivery than RIM's BES.
|
agreed. I think the "slowness" ve BES may be related to ActiveSync doing more than just email when it syncs. doesn't matter to me. 3 seconds from the time the email hits the server until I get thee"ding" on my device. could care less if it was faster than that.
- 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.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 08:15 PM
|
|
Theorist
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 278
|
|
Until MS is able to (i) get the right info. in front of the IT people and SysAdmin people and (ii) change the mindset of IT departments generally, that there are secure, efficient and cost effective alternatives to the BB / BES platform, the comparison and issus is moot.
I was forced to return my HP 69xx because my IT department would not allow me access to the Exchange server to AS "over the air". They cited their familiarity with the BES and lack of familiarity and concerns with bandwith and security of the MS solution.
It may be as good if not better, than the RIM solution, but in the "real world" MS needs to do a much better job of working with the people on the ground (i.e. IT departments) to get this information across to the people that make the decisions (and not just to gadget people / early adopters like myself)
|
| |
|
|
|
10-30-2006, 08:20 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 56
|
|
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
