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.'"
if so, why don't we seen businesses demanding open standards used when they make the buying decisions ? is this uninformed people being in charge or what ?
incompatibilities are biting businesses for awfully long time, but we still have
Rich
I think there is a big danger here of trying to leverage open standards into this sort of situation, by force. As an IT department who has to manage this sort of thing, if you enforce "open standard" communication, you end up locking out all the devices that don't use it. Which may be fine for zealots, but you try explaining to the boss that he can't use his Blackberry / iPhone / whatever, that he has to use some pissy featureless block of crap, simply because it interoperates in a way you like. I'm sure he wouldn't be too keen to have to tell another company they have to send stuff in ODF as well, because they can't read .doc.
After all, "open standard" is just the standard one body has picked, as opposed to any other standard. The purpose of an IT support team is to provide support to the whole organisation - to help them get the best out of their equipment and resources. So go with the industry leader, the product that gives the users the features they want. Interoperability is nice, but *not* as important.
It's not something that has to be inherently proprietary, though, and complete reliance on it is silly (even if you provide a push-notification mechanism, it's still sensible to provide POP or IMAP-based access as well). If people want to pay data charges for continual access to their e-mail, let them.
Realistically, why isn't there an open standards/source-based push e-mail system out there? Strikes me as an odd part of the chain to be missing.
I wonder if Kannel does something like this, actually...
The reason I don't want to support an iPhone is that there no method for me to brick the device like I can with a Blackberry. Or at least no method that Apple has promoted. So when an Executive is out having a little too much to drink and leaves their mobile device in the cab, it can be locked away from prying eyes.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
What, like IMAP-IDLE?
The iPhone must already must be a success. Otherwise, why would their be so much effort to distribute so much FUD?
Why would I not be able to check my corporate email with an iPhone? According to Apple it will have the Safari web browser built-in, and I could browse the web. I could even check my email using the corporate outlook website (which BTW is one of the only ways to check mail away from the office). And I don't have to ask permission on what device or web browser to use to access the website.
People must be envious of Apple users lately. I can't go a day without reading an article here on slashdot that was spawned out of obvious envy for the platform. I can't blame them since nothing generate page hits like a good old-fashion holy war. Oh and don't get me started on how many "I'm not buying an iPhone" comments that are being posted (even more as I type this comment!).
So you're not buying an iPhone... I don't care. I'm not running out to buy one either, but I'm sure there are people who are and more power to them. Now if I was really into IPods, I might consider purchasing an IPOD with 8GB it would put me back $250, and to buy a new unlocked phone with bluetooth is $250.. or I can get a iPhone for the same cost (of course I would have a stupid 2 year contract). Sure it's a flimsy argument, but who am I to tell other people how to spend their money. Personally, I think the iPhone is a fine product in its own right, and probably worth every penny. At least more likely than any of the $999 and higher mobile PC spawned from Sony or (gasp) Microsoft's Origami project.
Besides I wasted similar amounts of time and money on a Zaurus, Palm Pilot, PSP, and other gadgets that I thought would be fun to have around. I don't remember anyone being as vocal about not buying any of them. Hell, the Zaurus was recommended solely on the premise that it ran Linux.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
If you're correct, and the iPhone can't sync its calender OTA, it's dead to me, and probably a lot of other business people as well. The 100% touchscreen interface is already suspect -- it looks well designed, and easy to use, but I dread trying to type an email on it. I'm willing to carry a really bulky, balky, Windows device (Cingular 8525) just for the keyboard. The iPhone looks nice, but it appears to be too passive for most hardcore phone users.
Dude, I think I can see my house from here.
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
</fanboy>
Conversely, I bought a video iPod specifically for the video functionality. I take telecourses at the college I work at, so I get them on DVD and watch them during lunch or while I'm traveling somewhere (walking or riding the bus). Makes my semesters significantly easier.
It is correct to state that the iPod excels because of how little it does. What it does, it does well. It's simple and straightforward. It does what I want it to, and doesn't do all the junk I don't need. In short, it is efficient, and that is what appeals most to me.
Sure iPhone supports POP and Imap, but that is not enough. Shared calendars and contact lists as well as public folders are important to mobile users.
Evolution supports exchange server by using data published from OWA. It works rather nicely and is the best way to connect a Linux machine to Exchange server. Apple could have used this method to get minimum exchange support.
Yup they could have done it, but Steve and company decided not to. We are a half Mac half PC shop and we will not be replacing our Motorola Qs with iPhones since they don't completely support Exchange server.
It is a design decision that will cost Apple corporate and personal sales. I'm certain more than one executive, that has to have the newest shiny toy, will be ultra pissed when he finds out his great new iPhone will not sync his calendar, contacts, or public folders over the air.
-ted
I work in the IT Department of a very large US based company.
I find the chances of them allowing access to our systems to be very slim.
And frankly the opinions of our employees don't really play much of a part in any kind of decision making process when it comes to IT or security.
Even when it has come down to specific blackberry models we would would without hestiation tell people that we had no intention of supporting their device, we never would, and no amount of pleading would change that.
Of course saying that, I think that many of the iphone features are fantastic and potentially very useful in a business enviroment.