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.
Companies who've locked themselves in to a proprietary email system can't change when a new (and potentially better) product is available.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
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
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.
The corporate "standard" is Microsoft Enterprise Windows Email Exchange Protocol Vista Ultimate Edition 2007, not one of those pesky "open" standards that anyone can implement. Only communists use POP and IMAP, you know.
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.
Or use Exchange, and then not have to make any sacrifices at all. Businesses don't want to lose the competitive edge they have, so cutting back on functionality, especially functionality as important as group calendars, is a deal-breaker. Exchange isn't re-inventing the wheel, it's clearly better than the solution you suggested, functionality-wise at least. I'm not trolling for MS or anything, it's just that companies don't give a rat's ass about F/OSS (often to their detriment) - they look at feature lists.
It seems obvious to me that the point was that the iPhone's appeal lies in its style, UI, etc., rather than in a laundry list of features.
Yup, Apple has redefined how you make a product. It's not about the features it has, but rather those it doesn't have.
What makes the iPod attractive is that it's not durable, doesn't have replaceable batteries, FM tuner, and for a long tmie couldn't play videos (everybody swore it won't play video since that's kinda the benefit of using an Apple product). The shuffle doesn't have screen and doesn't have sequential playback ability.
iPhone is great since it doesn't have SDK, keyboard, 3G camera and mobile internet, doesn't have Java, and again doesn't have replaceable battery, doesn't have GPS. Safari doesn't have Flash, unlike many other phones, which is a great thing.
And of course, all Apple products are expensive, since it's really hard to not have so many things in a product. The other companies just resist to the pressure and put all kinds of stuff in their products, that's why they're so cheap.
Confused?
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.
I hear they'll be releasing a version more targeted at Corporate IT - called the itPhone.
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
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. :)
First of all, a couple of inaccuracies in your comment:
Yes, it does.
Maybe you meant "3G mobile internet and a camera"? It certainly does have a camera, and it does have mobile internet over GPRS and WiFi.
Other than that your points are largely valid, although I think you missed the point of the comment you replied to. Loading devices with features without thinking of the user interface renders those features pretty much unusable, so you're better off without them.
The whole point of the lack of a keyboard is that you gain more screen real-estate when you don't need the keyboard. If you do a lot of texting this will be most of the time and the iPhone probably isn't for you. If you don't, all the other things you do on your phone become much easier. Remember, just because the lack of a keyboard doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean it won't appeal to anybody. Full QWERTY keyboards on smartphones sure as hell don't appeal to me.
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.
iPhone works with POP and IMAP. They found a couple of IT drones who hadn't bothered to find out what was involved in supporting the iPhone, and just assumed that they'd have to jump through the same hoops that RIM requires.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
John Gruber has an article about this, for those interested.
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.
Make Slashdot readable! See journal.
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.
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.
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
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...
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.
The iPod does not work like the iPaq at all. You don't use a stylus to write or tap on the screen, you type with your thumbs. The difference is that you type on a keyboard shown on the screen instead of on actual little buttons. The people who have used it say it takes a bit of getting used to, but works pretty much like an actual small querty keyboard.
By the way, I've used a Palm and a P800 for a long time, and I enjoyed the text recognition very much. Not as good as an actual keyboard (which my P990i has), but way better than most other cell phone text entry systems.
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
"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.
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.
Allowing IMAP-S on an existing MS Exchange server requires about five minutes in the administration interface. It does not necessitate eliminating Outlook's MAPI, or whatever other proprietary protocols you choose to run.
Of course, it does require a security model based on something other than, "Our server is secure, because hackers could never compromise Outlook!"
The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
Cut back on picking your nose, that ought to help a bit.
-30-
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.