Slashdot Mirror
Corporate IT Hanging Up on Apple's iPhone
WSJdpatton writes "iPhones can be used for email, but many businesses don't plan to sync them with internal systems used to power Blackberries and Microsoft mobile devices. Employees eager to use the cool new gadget, however, may pressure IT departments to support iPhones even if it means incurring more costs and changing policies. The WSJ reports: 'Incompatible technology has become an increasing problem for businesses as hand-held email and phone devices are evolving into minicomputers that can do such things as download music, take pictures and surf the Web. In the past, businesses have been unwilling to support certain devices, like those with cameras, for instance, because of concerns employees could use them to document company secrets. But these tensions would be magnified if the iPhone is as popular as Apple is hoping and some analysts expect.'"
"Businesses probably shouldn't rely on proprietary communications technology, because people will bitch and moan when they discover that it is, in fact, proprietary"
Film at 11.
while I do question its usefulness as a real business tool compared to a blackberry, I think the security risk question is overly hyped. I think having web access so I can use a personal webmail account to send whatever I want out to anyone I want unfiltered by IT or corporate security[different from network security] is a bigger risk to my employers trade secrets.
I also think that there really needs to be an open standard for interaction with the servers these devices need to talk to so that one server can talk to anybodies pda/phone. I know I don't want to implement different software for each different model of cell phone.
thats right, I rarely use capitals. deal with it. but don't mistake my laziness for stupidity
WTF. Corporate IT is fucking weird. The iPhone is POP3/IMAP and SMTP
What's so "nonstandard" about that?!
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Seriously, an IT department should support a set list of systems, not everything a user brings to work and wants to use - thats how costs spiral out of control (as noted in the FA) and also how IT eventually gets blamed for the cost overruns et al.
And the Calendar is what? The Contacts/addressbook is what? The Todo list is what format? The notebook is what format?
This is actually a big issue. It's physically easier for me to sync my two phones manually, that is, to manually write down and type in contact details between my addressbook, my business and personal phones.
Thankfully to the developers, there is OpenSync: http://www.opensync.org/ . Pain in the arse to set up at the moment but very much going in the right direction.
Deleted
Give me a break, there are enough valid criticisms on the iPhone but don't give me this bullshit. My run-of-the-mill phone can play music, but I never use it for that -- it's too much of a hassle. And Windows Mobile sucks. It really does. Maybe that's not objective, but it's my final conclusion.
There are features I wish it had, there are things I think Apple could have done better (Cingular) but to say the iPhone is a been there, done that device is missing the mark by a wide shot.
A solution already exists for this. It's existed for years - it certainly predates Exchange's current popularity.
It's called IMAP. Over SSL (or a VPN tunnel for outside access). You can even set up Exchange to support IMAP, and bingo - basic email access works for more or less everyone. Of course, you lose the integrated calendars stuff, but that's a sacrifice you may have to make.
I don't see how a long-standing industry fact, i.e. that corporate IT departments are unable/unwilling to support an infinite range of hardware options until there is reason enough to do so - gets turned into an inflammatory article dissing the iphone. The fact is, not too long ago IT departments weren't interested in dealing with Blackberries either. When the workers realized how useful they were the IT departments were convinced the new challenge was worth it, and life went on.
I don't see the iphone becoming a corporate toy immediately, but if enough corporate-types adopt the iphone (presumably because it's useful or makes their lives easier) then IT will come around.
Thanks Zonk for the predictably inflammatory headline. Might I suggest something like, "Corporate IT departments would rather commit suicide than support non-Windows hardware." You're already only one step away.
If this were Usenet, I'd killfile the lot of you.
That's one way of looking at it, and certainly a valid perspective. But the other way of looking at it is that Apple makes devices that do very specific things and they aim to be the best at what they do. In the example of the iPod, since you brought it up, I actually own a video-capable iPod but I have never used the feature except once or twice for the novelty when it was brand new. Likewise, I have no desire to listen to the radio -- that's exactly why I use an iPod. It can do a number of other things I don't need, and don't really care about. I like it because it's very good at its primary function of being an MP3 player and does so in style. The rest is fluff and I couldn't really care less about it.
As for the points you make about the iPhone, I agree it's unfortunate that there is no true SDK for third-party software. The rest I consider superfluous. Java, Flash, GPS, those tiny qwerty keyboards? Those are the last things I'd look for in a modern phone. If it allows me to efficiently work with my mail and calendar on the go and occasionally access the web, that's what I want and what I think the majority of users want. Any site that requires more than this I wouldn't even want to try using on a phone-like device.
What I am arguing against is not being feature complete, but rather feature creep. I want the devices I use to be capable of doing the tasks for which it was intended and do them well. It seems to me that piling on other secondary features just diminishes the product's ability to perform its primary functions. Devices that try to do everything tend not to be very good at any of those things. Honestly, I think it's just a red herring to claim about things like a lack of GPS and Java on a cell phone. Those are not central to its function of being a portable communications device, and don't matter for most things.
Lest you think I am trying to make myself feel better about blowing money on an iPhone, I'll say right now that I'm not getting one because they're too expensive. I just like the philosophy of having a clearly defined set of tasks for a product and sticking to that, making sure that it is best at what it does. :)
You are probably trying to be ironic, but removing features is not exactly the worst idea a cell phone manufacturer might have, given the current state of smartphones. My P990i's feature list spans pages upon pages, yet most of these features are useless since they are so obtuse, confusing and complicated. The iPhone has a lot less features, but I trust that I will actually be able to use them without crashing the damn thing, reading the manual, or spending half an hour going through menu items.
One reason is that most businesses have to comply with Sox, PCI, etc..... Many Open Source software has just not been certified by the compliance bodies and won't necessarily pass an audit. To most organizations, being compliant/passing an audit is far more important that user convenience or flexibility.
Even if certification of the technology/software/app is not required by the compliance body, proper documentation is. A good deal of off-the-shelf commercial solutions come with that documentation, or at least make it available. This is not the case in the open source world. Yes- I am fully aware that a lot of (good) open source software has more documentation (by users) than the commercial stuff, but this is not the business specific documentation the organization would need for compliance.
I ma a huge open source fan- I fight this battle at work pretty often.
Quick example- Qualys and Nessus. There is not much Qualys does that Nessus doesn't/can't. But, try to pass a PCI audit with a Nessus scan. Heck- the PCI DSS 1.1 even comes right out and suggests Tripwire for 10.5/11.5- no open source equivalent is even mentioned.
Repant. Thy end is sheer.
The same was said about the Mac GUI, the Mac 3D accelerated interface and the iPod.
apple's going the right way about this. It's a clear, color screen that has an easy to use interface and can be used with a single hand.
The revolutionary part is that it's easy.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
those tiny qwerty keyboards? Those are the last things I'd look for in a modern phone [...] If it allows me to efficiently work with my mail and calendar on the go and occasionally access the web, that's what I want
how do you plan to work efficiently with your mail on the go without a qwerty keyboard?
Sure a tiny one is a hell of a lot slower than a full size keyboard, but it's a hell of a lot faster than typing on a standard phone.
I don't need a qwerty keyboard to read email.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Like it or not, the corporate IT e-mail "standards" are Lotus Notes/Domino and Microsoft Exchange now.
Blackberries and Windows Mobile Smartphones already work with those standards, but the iPhone does not.
I'd imagine those features will be on the long list of improvements for iPhone 2.0, though, along with a lower price and more storage space.
Let's face it, in most companies it'll work like this:
If the CEO gets an iPhone, the IT suddenly has a high priority action item to make sure it works with the corporate messaging system.
If any VP gets an iPhone, the IT will have a low priority action item to get it working.
If anyone else gets an iPhone, they'll be told it violates the corporate IT policy and they need to use something else for corporate messaging.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Buying decisions in corporate environments - not just IT - are very rarely based on any objective reasons, though the good salesman brings in a slide or two with some that can be used if the need to justify the decision ever comes up.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
There is a class of software called "device management" that functions like the provisioning software you'll find on most corporate PCs. It does things like
Automatic deployment (or revocation) of software and configuration settings.
Encryption of sensitive data.
Remote kill switch if it is lost or stolen, and "self-destruct" if there are repeated failed access attempts.
The iPhone, due to its lack of support for third-party software, has none of this.
There's a reason why products like RIM's Blackberry are popular with corporate. They WORK. It just works. Little support need, no messy configuration by the end user, it just works. Lose a device? The administrator can wipe the device remotely. On-device encryption. Integration with corporate email and corporate IM software. Ability to communicate device-to-device via IM without relying on the corporate backend systems. And actual push email. Not sms-triggered, or any other goofy stuff I've seen over the years.
To support corporate, Apple needs to provide a proper SDK so the companies that make multi-platform mobile syncing software can write to it. There's no other way to deal with the calender and contact list syncing and other features.
But, once again, Jobs' Stalinist view of technology (it'll set you free, but only in the way he defines freedom) isn't going to bend at all. Remember, it's not about working well with others, folks, it's about what YOU want, and the universe should reshape itself to you, and anyone who tells you differently is just trying to keep you down (geez, maybe a Scientology comparison would work as well). Unless you work at Apple, and then it's about what Steve wants, of course.
Historically, the Blackberry Enterprise Server (or a Desktop Redirector) was needed because BlackBerries ran on the Mobitex network. So, you'd basically use BES to mount your exchange server, securely route email through a proprietary protocol to BB's central servers, which would then distribute it to the wireless network.
I'm not 100% on how the current GPRS/EDGE or CDMA systems work, but I believe it's the same centralized model, which is why BlackBerry has network-wide outages from time to time.
It seems that this model has been hard to replicate because programming plug-ins for Exchange and other corporate email systems isn't exactly child's play. It's not THAT hard, but many of these mobile device companies don't know how to build teams to create software like this (otherwise, why haven't they?)
Apple and Yahoo! , on the other hand, are adopting the draft IETF Push-IMAP standard, since GPRS/EDGE devices basically can ride on an IP network. It eliminates the middle-man of BES.
The roadblocks I can see here are:
- it's not a ratified standard yet, which means single-source implementations will be the only guarantor of interop
- supporting Exchange, Lotus, etc. with a plug-in that doesn't kill their native IMAP functionality
- ensuring that the Push-IMAP exchange is secure
This latter point is important -- many corporate email systems are *not* available over the Internet, they're only on VPN. I gather they only added BlackBerries when they were demonstrated that it would be a secure transmission to the central RIM servers & device itself.
But, in the end, it's quite likely they'll make this happen by late 2008.
-Stu
It's not just e-mail (which should be an easy fix as many have pointed out). The iPhone will come with a web browser. People want to access the intranet with their phone, only to discover that nothing works because their corporate IT drones developed everything with active-x or .net, locking everyone into IE 6 or later and a Windows box.
Enduser flashable firmware? For the iPhone? Given the "SDK" debacle?
"Send your phone to Apple for a firmware update"? Given the whole phone/SIM lock thing? Yeah, I think sending your phone to Apple for three weeks is an acceptable way to extend functionality.
It's not always that easy...