Microsoft still assumed to take over mobile device market

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/19492.html">http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/19492.html</a><br /><br />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."<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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. <a href="http://www.palm.com/enterprise/products/mims/">Tungsten Mobile Information Management Server</a>, or MIMS. You can read more in their <a href="http://www.palm.com/enterprise/products/mims/tungsten_mims_faq.pdf">FAQ (Acrobat Reader required)</a>. 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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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 <i><b>we</b></i> have it." <img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" /> Thanks to Foo Fighter for the link.

[MikeUnwired]

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!"

[scottmag]

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?


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.


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.


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.



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.



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/issue199904/wonderful001.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

[Jason Dunn]

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/issue199904/wonderful001.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:

[scottmag]

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!

[Ed Hansberry]

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.

[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?

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.

[Scott R]

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

[ThomasC22]

Well, god help me scottmag, but I actually agree on most of your points (and yes, I've taken my temp. several times). Except...


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.


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.

[ThomasC22]

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...


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.

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)

[Ed Hansberry]

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?

If that is all you do, move on. Life is too short. :wink: You don't though. You generally engage in rational discussion.

Well, I can't get past this hysterical comment. "The Enterprise is the key to dominance in every market it seems. Is that how Dell dominates in PCs? Or HP in inkjet printers?" :lol: I may spin, but I understand what I'm spinning. :lol: :lol:

[MikeUnwired]

I'm not here to bash or not bash Palm. I think they are trying to create a solid solution for a mobile communications tool that is more robust in some areas and very specialized in other area. They are positioning to be more than the typical data-enabled phone -- a specialized tool not "just" a PDA -- and less than a PC. They could have a good tool or they could have the answer to the question that no one asked -- or maybe land somewhere in the middle.

Businesses are looking for mobile solutions that inable their workers to do their jobs without a bunch of other distrations (games, personal apps, etc.) I can see the day where the handheld unit is stripped of all but the OS and then specific apps are loaded for the mission-centered work a company is looking to mobilize.

This is not to say that Microsoft is unable to do this, but, at this point they are trying to position their PPC OS and the related hardware as a laptop replacement of sorts -- with broad and useful functionality.

Win CE is more customizable as the PPC sub-set has certain hardware and function requirements that the CE OS doesn't carry. Developers can strip away or ignore certain PIM features in CE devices that they can't in PPC units.

The perfect PDA is not the one with the most juice under the hood, best screen or software library -- it's the one that gets the job done for the owner.

Microsoft may very well come out on top of Palm at some point, but, things will change as they have in the past and someday, somewhere, Microsoft will be a nothing but a footnote to some future product.

[scottmag]

Here's my view of the whole enterprise vs. consumer market. In some product categories the enterprise market leads and influences the consumer market. MS windows is an example of this. Individuals wanted their home computers to run the same programs they used at work so they bought Windows PCs for home. In other markets the consumer will lead the enterprise. I believe handhelds/PDAs are one of these markets.

Employees are content to have their company give them a laptop computer because its too expensive to buy for themselves and it mostly sits on the desk anyway. But a device that is inexpensive, personal, and fits in the pocket is another matter. Individuals would prefer to choose their PDA (among those that would even want one). Palm's enterprise strategy has been to have individuals bring their personal devices into work and backdoor it into the enterprise market. IT departments have to come to terms with employees carrying electronic devices that can connect to the company network and hold sensitive information. I'd say this was a winning strategy for Palm except for one thing - Microsoft. Microsoft is pushing hard to integrate the PocketPC platform into the back-end infrastructure and make it the choice of the IT group. Then the company will dictate which handheld devices are allowed and force standardization on PocketPC. Ultimately I'd put my money on MS winning that head-to-head battle. But the individual employee is left out of the decision-making process here.

Nearly everyone reading this owns and uses a PocketPC that they bought themselves. It's your personal device. It might not be as small and light as you want. The battery might not last as long as you want. But it has the software that fits your personal needs and does lots of great things.

Now how would you feel if your company gave you a PocketPC that you were required to use, just like the company computer? It might not be the latest and greatest, but it would be a decent model. It wouldn't be chosen on specs or the latest technology but rather on a vendor relationship. And like the company computer you would be forbidden to load any of your own software on it. Suddenly that PocketPC is not very personal. Since it doesn't carry your personal data and programs along with the company's, its faults become more glaring. You wouldn't tolerate the size and weight so much if it was the company's device you had to carry around.

Mobile phones are another example. Like many people I carry a mobile everywhere I go on business and use it extensively for work. The company pays my bill, but it is my phone. I can't imagine a company giving me a phone of their choice and mandating that I carry it. I think that the emerging smartphone market will be completely consumer driven because individuals/employees will not carry "personal" devices that are chosen by their employer.

So, yes, the enterprise market is vitally important and yes, Microsoft has the upper hand there. Ed is absolutely right that about Microsoft's strong position, but I differ that it means strength in "mobile devices." I'd argue that it is strength in mobile data access and the back-end infrastructure controlling that data. That does not necessarily translate into control of the mobile device itself. Microsoft, even totally controlling a company's infrastructure, could not dictate that only desktop computers can connect to the LAN. Companies would rightly say that they choose laptops and Microsoft had better accommodate them. OK, that's farfetched but my point is that Microsoft could not overcome industry-wide demand for allowing connectivity to certain devices. If major companies told MS that they decided to allow PalmOS devices access to company data because their employees were willing to purchase the devices themselves and 50% owned them already, MS would have to accommodate those devices in its mobile strategy.

Bottom line is that I see no success for Microsoft or any corporation mandating employees carry and use personal devices like handhelds or phones.

Scott

[Ed Hansberry]

Bottom line is that I see no success for Microsoft or any corporation mandating employees carry and use personal devices like handhelds or phones.
You apparently aren't seeing the devices UPS, FedEx and thousands of companies are using in their mfg facilities from companies like Symbol and Intermec.

And many companies mandate cell phones - salesmen, critical personel, etc. Add email and messaging capabilities to that and you have a smartphone.

PDAs and smartphones aren't for people in the office. They are for people away from the office or their desk.

[scottmag]

Bottom line is that I see no success for Microsoft or any corporation mandating employees carry and use personal devices like handhelds or phones.
You apparently aren't seeing the devices UPS, FedEx and thousands of companies are using in their mfg facilities from companies like Symbol and Intermec.

The UPS guy just came to my door and he had nothing in his hand except my son's birthday present. Last time I saw him with an electronic device it was that large brown tablet.


And many companies mandate cell phones - salesmen, critical personel, etc. Add email and messaging capabilities to that and you have a smartphone.

PDAs and smartphones aren't for people in the office. They are for people away from the office or their desk.

But, you just said, "using in their mfg facilities" earlier. Of course PDAs and smartphones are for people away from their office. What UPS, FedEx, etc. are using "in their mfg facilities" are industry-specific tools. They may run on WindowsCE, but they are not a replacement for your personal PocketPC. I'm not going to split hairs here, you understand my point.

At my last company I carried a company-issued pager. Every field sales person carried a cell phone but they were not mandated. Imagine the lawsuit after an employee gets into a car accident while talking on a company issued phone.

Maybe I'm thinking too much about my own white-collar experience. I do see people in trucking and transportation, for example, carrying Nextel phones. Those are certainly company-issued. The thing is they often also have their personal phone hanging from their belt.

So I'll give you that one. In certain industries, or for certain types of workers, companies do seem to be providing phones. Let's explore that, because you'd like to extrapolate some future success for the MS smartphone platform form this. The smartphones will be communication tools like an ordinary phone but will also have advanced data-handling features and access to important corporate data from the field. That conjures up a certain type of employee to me that doesn't wear a toolbelt or use a walkie-talkie. That may be a bad preconception on my part.

Who do you think is the target employee type for an MS smartphone? The guy fixing my airconditioning carrying a company-issued Nextel phone could have some need for accessing data or reporting from remote locations. Is he a target candidate? Or is it, as I tend to believe, the hard-charging suit-wearing sales rep? Or the executive always on the go?

I'll make a generalization here and tell me what you think of this. White-collar = uses own phone. Blue-collar = carries company-issued device (phone, PDA, etc.). Is that fair?


Scott

[Ed Hansberry]

The UPS guy just came to my door and he had nothing in his hand except my son's birthday present. Last time I saw him with an electronic device it was that large brown tablet.
They use a device similar to http://www.symbol.com/products/mobile_computers/mobile_pdt8000.html - UPS has brown ones though. It may have PPC or WinCE on it, and usually has a wand to scan packages in. In neighborhoods, they often leave it on the truck scanning it out there. At our company they bring it in and scan the items off of the trucks inventory as we sign for them since we usually get several packages a day. They also enter the new items we are sending out.

See http://www.symbol.com/news/pressreleases/pr_logistics_pepsi.html too.

As for white collar vs blue collar. Lets wait and see what wireless does. This is what MS has been waiting for and is part of their Mobile INformation Server strategy. I still contend the future is not in $100 organizers. So, by the way, does Palm. That is why they moved to OS5 and created their MIMS server product. Seems Palm finally agrees with MS. Now it is to see who implements better. Which was the gist of my post in case you missed it.