Sheesh, might as well have a tatoo on the forehead:

“I don’t get it.”

You’re probably right about security keeping the iPhone off corporate networks for some time into the future. And wireless tehcnology being not as bad as it seems to us regular consumers. But the fact of the matter is, Apple can design a business phone if they want. And yes, it is might be consumer-oriented at this point, but that doesn’t mean they can’t fix it and make it better. But you’re right, it does mean Apple has to get serious about the enterprise.

But to claim it’s just a pretty UI just means you’re like all the handset makers out there who think all you have to do is slap features on a phone and get it out and it’s “as good” as the iPhone.

They are “genetically” incapable of making a user interface that can match the iPhone. They are engineers. And products designed by engineers are like the proverbial camel being a horse designed by a committee.

They will need to take a few wacks at it before they’ll be able to compete with the iPhone. But of course, some people will proclaim any piece of junk as just as good as the iPhone, simply out of hatred for Apple. But in the meantime, Apple will be making better phones. The iPod naysahers in 2001 said it would never fly. I see history repeating itself. To this day, some people claim that not having an FM radio on an iPod makes it inferior!

The next couple years are going to show just how bad phone makers are at comprehending the value of user experience. Maybe they’ll catch on, but only if they actually hire some real designers who have veto power over board members at Motorola, Nokia, Sony, etc. And yes, I know that’s backwards to how it works now. Thus my skepticism.

  0

Perhaps your IT department is more “forward-thinking” than many others, but just because you want to run your iPhone on the corporate network doesn’t change the reality for most companies. The iPhone is a pretty UI; nothing more. CEO’s will NOT sacrifice network security for a pretty toy, unless it plays nice with everything else. Further, the solution has to be ubiquitous, consistent and supported – no “open source” garage-ware is going to suffice for the enterprise when it comes to wireless device management. At&t, a year from now, will be just another monolithic wireless carrier with many of the same problems it has today. They will also be at a point where the surge in new iPhone customers has subsided and they will be looking for a new revenue source…

At&t’s “faster” network is no faster (worse, if you are looking at latency) than Verizon’s and Sprint’s. They have some serious catching up to do in coverage area, that’s for sure. And do you think the competition will be sitting on their hands this whole time, crying in their milk because they didn’t sign up to be Steve Job’s gimp?

Apple won’t the company to give it to them. In two decades, Apple has failed to capture the interest of corporate IT departments, either from a lack of desire or a lack of direction in that arena. I just don’t see the iPhone – a purely consumer-oriented device – being some kind of golden key that unlocks the doors to the enterprise IT departments.

RIM is more likely to tap into a huge pent-up corporate demand with Enterprise-friendly VoIP integration embedded into the device (and more importantly, back-end). The goal – Seamless handoff between corporate wireless and cell networks – all with end-to-end encryption and device policy control. And ask most corporate types that deal with wireless (and data) carriers the absolute LAST company they would ever want to deal with when it comes to playing nice with an Enterprise IP-PBX system? Oh yeah, At&t. (Admittedly, VZW is probably second worst in that realm).

Yes, it is IT’s job to find solutions, and I can say, unequivocally, that the iPhone isn’t an enterprise solution. It isn’t even close.

The US trails Europe and Asia in some areas when it comes to wireless, and is sufficiently equivalent in others. The simple fact that the FCC did NOT mandate GSM as an air interface actually has driven wireless data innovation at a faster pace than it likely otherwise would have occured. The 3GPP based (in large part) their next-gen wireless standards on progress made in data and lessons learned by US-based CDMA carriers (and vendors, like Qualcomm). These advancements only came about as quickly as they did because the US-based carriers were allowed to try something “different” – something most European carriers claimed could never work.

…

  0

AT&T will be laughing all the way to the bank a year from now when their faster network becomes ubiquitous and iPhones are much speedier and feature-laden than they are now. And if AT&T has the nerve to continue to allow Apple to help them innovate, then they will reap the benefit of thinking different(ly).

IT people are all too often the tail wagging the dog. It’s their job to find solutions, not dictate policy for their own convenience. CEOs are going to fall in love with the iPhone, and IT departments are going to be tasked with implementing iPhone access.

Apple already is working on an Exchange solution (as if Exchange isn’t already some boondoggle that’s been foisted on corporate America). And they will also no doubt have a solution for wiping the iPhone remotely. Apple, after all, controls the hardware and the software. How hard can it be to create a corporate iPhone just for that purpose? And one without a camera, too!

An IT person where I work has already shown some foresight by saying if those two things are taken care of, they will be happy to add iPhones to Blackberries and Windows Mobile phones to our world-wide corporate network.

It’s not like Blackberries and WM Phones are all that great to begin with.

  0

  0

  0

The choice to buy a non-subsidized/non-feature-crippled device, has always been there.

  0

  0

Even Gartner is telling corporate America to steer clear of corporate e-mail on the iPhone. And to back that up with real world evidence, I know of at least 5 CSO’s that already told their CEO that until the iPhone can be managed like a BB from a BES server, it aint gonna happen on their watch.

Maybe if BG hadn’t left the conference in Orlando too soon, he’d realize that there is more to RIM than just the BB’s.

  0

Look at RIM’s distribution model (carriers are partners and they sign up as many as possible because their core technology is common and is network agnostic) and the fact that they have 300 carriers in over 100 countries. Apple’s model is to sign up one carrier in each country. The numbers just don’t add up to Apple significantly affecting RIM in the short run. Even if Apple signed up with carriers that had 50% market share in their respective countries, RIM would still grow significantly. Oh, and this process will take some time, especially if Apple really is getting a pound of flesh from the carrier.

So I love the spirited debate, but the truth is value added device makers like Apple (slick interface, full web, media, etc) and RIM (guaranteed email, wireless policy settings, remote wipe, PBX integration (now that’s something that no one is talking about!)) will thrive while the rest of the field will languish until they too provide compelling end user value.

Don’t sell RIM or Apple stock if you have it and buy more when they sell off – these trends will be around for a while and that pie of smartphone users really IS expanding. I smell an emerging duopoly! WORD!

  0

“… Forget the hype for a second surrounding the iPhone…I know many people that use Exchange servers in their company that would switch at the drop of the dime if the iPhone had true Exchange support.”

—-

Here’s the problem with that statement, BG: users may want to switch to an iPhone upon support of Exchange, but corporate IT-types generally know better than to allow it. The iPhone has to get the blessing of the corporate IT department, which is very unlikely for the foreseeable future. One of the main reasons the Blackberry is so well liked by business is not just the Exchange integration, but the just-as-important security and policy control. Apple may find to a way to do oma/direct push integration with Exchange, but I don’t foresee a security “wrapper” on the iPhone OS that allows corporate control of the device down to the component level (like BES). The existing Windows mobile platform has a bare-bones version of this, and that’s a big reason it hasn’t chipped away at RIM anymore than it has in that space. WM6 and Exchange 2007 improve on it, but in the corporate world, these kinds of upgrades come s-l-o-w-l-y. Apple has never chosen to play nice with corporate IT, and frankly, either doesn’t know how or doesn’t care. Until they – or a third party – figure it out, they won’t be singing the same tune as Blackberry (crappy OS and all) when it comes to enterprise e-mail.

This doesn’t even mention the $500+ price tag (vs $100 or less for a bberry in quantity), the locked-to-Apple activation system, and really doesn’t speak to the nightmare that At&t has become to deal with in general. Couple those issues with the return-to-Apple service and battery (wtf?) replacement, and no CIO or VP of IT that wants to keep his/her job is going to approve it for large-scale deployment.

That’s my $0.02…

  0

Hip-Hip-Horray! RIM gets a little pressure to really build a better device (and the Nokias/Motos/SEs/HTCs/Pantechs of the world too). RIM needs to spend some of their billions on marketing, and R&D, if they want to act like a real company.

Hip-Hip-Horray! RIM and the others have to finally address their reliance on carrier subsidies, and stop sucking on Ma Bells teat. Build products that are worth the money and people will pay for it.

Hip-Hip-Horray! AT&T should be kneeling on it’s knee for what Apples been able to do for them in such a short time (if rumors that as many as half the people who bought iPhones are new or switching). And if rumors of wireless MS-ActiveSync are true, AT&T should get down on both knees, because once that happens, corporate America is surely going to buy lots and lots of iPhones.

  0

1 – RIM has been garnering for the untapped consumer smartphone market. About 6 months ago or so, that market was wide-open for business. This included a market that was ready to pay $400-600 for a new device, such as the BlackBerry Pearl or T-Mobile Dash (HTC Whatever) or the BlackBerry Curve, etc. Apple really hit this market hard and heavy and I will say that they have definitely made the most appealing consumer market smartphone device to date.

2 – In terms of corporate support and ventures, Apple is well-aware of their next stop on the SmartPhone Train Depot, already pumping up various personnel in corporate-oriented sales and engineering teams for THIS revision of the iPhone.

3 – With the previous said, it doesn’t appear these teams really know much about corporate business. I’m not really sure what their penetration success has been into the corporate and government markets, so perhaps I’m way off-base, but something tells me I’m not. I’ll leave it at that.

4 – @Rob, I agree almost whole-heartedly.

5 – @CB, carrier dictation and domination in the United States has had only a marginal impact on why we’re so far behind. This doesn’t plague just the wireless market, so one could contend that not only our ‘holier than thou’ approach to global economic dominance (of which we’re slipping), in addition to competition within a free enterprise model, has ultimately put us in the middle of the pack when it comes to new technologies adoption. Arguments can be made many ways, but I don’t think it necessarily has to do with the carriers and their leadership teams.

  0

  0

the teco needds to get real.

the iphon issue

The iphone makes you enslaved to apple an itunes
an is completly web driven lik the danger sidekick an all it’s apps are webbased.
what happens when you loos your web srvice
NO/ phone serice

BB’s appz can run without srvice as they ar stored on the devices memory.

bassile has a point

  0

The current RIM consumer devices (and future) will most likely cost no more than $300 with a contract (and lower with internet specials, mail-in rebates, instant rebates etc.) Price plays a big role in many a consumer’s mind (one of the reasons the pearl has had continued success *reference “make $75 buying a pearl”*). Setting aside the features, the price alone (with contract) is enough limit the potential customers the iPhone can attract.

There is still plenty of consumer pie to go around for the pearls, curves, sidekicks and other multimedia/messaging devices. Why fight over one 1 slice? there’s still 11 other slices to go around. ;0)

  0

So what is so great about what Apple has “achieved”? Taking the service provider out of the game will only get you, as Jim said, “a commodity pipe” where the telcos fight for the “next big thing” leaving all other competition to the dogs. And that is a BAD thing for consumers.

  0

  0

  0

“Just wait till the iPhone supports full Exchange integration with push email, the boys up North will really be shaking in their mountain boots.”

You over-estimate Apple’s ability to penetrate the corporate market. I don’t doubt that Steve will try to bring better Exchange support to the iPhone, but it will have next to zero impact to RIM or any other smartphone maker holding market share in that area. Apple is a consumer electronics company first and foremost and always will be. Just look at the numbers for the Xserve.

  0

  0

NOT!! Their marketing and technical departments could get on with how to better market the At&t branding on new handsets. Plus how many people already renewed contracts that were former At&t wireless or Suncom customers recently and brought the iphone just because it was the iphone?

What did At&t actually do? Cater to the sale of a phone that was originally made to cater to its’ network and not one overseas. How many manufacturers do we have otherwise that do this in the U.S.? Why hasn’t RIM released any 3G devices through it’s biggest carrier/customer to help promote the network. It has for Sprint and Verizon. Even giving them 3G plus the ability to go worldwide now. Still no 3G love for At&t. At&t was smart for a change and went with someone that marketed them as well as a great network able to sell a phone that carries a brand name just as strong or stronger than Nokia, Samsung, Rim, etc. But At&t this time is the premier network for the device. Apple is a perfectionistic company behind the iTunes brand, so they are gonna work with At&t to make sure this phone works well also on At&t’s network. As this phone shines so does At&t.

Think about this is not a device another carrier overseas released first. It’s a GSM device that was released right here at home first and, they are the droolers for a change. We for the first time got to buy an unsubsidized device and, they had to wish they could get one. And its’ not a CDMA device that has to be greatly changed. Just needs to be sold for overseas use.

Thanx At&t and Apple. The American phone like baseball, apple pie, hot dogs, and chevrolet.

Sorry, you missed your chance to return to the spotlight Verizon.

At&t was a smarter choice anyways Apple. Tweak and debug for At&t and it will be world friendly unlike a CDMA device.

Posting from an 8525. Writing this makes me wanna go out and buy an iphone, ha ha.

  0

  0

  0

  0

Jibi has summarized the downside of the iphone well. I bet Apple fixes two or three of the four issues. HTC and Blackberry will still have better keyboards.

Iphone is pulling the other companies to make better products – for sure. So the customer wins. Thanks, Steve.

  0

  0

  0

Every BB user is so over sensitive on every iphone comment. Relax and benefit from Apple breaking the Industry Model.

  0

If you own some stock, take your gains. Thank me in 3 months when they report.

And Rob, from our perspective, we should be rejoicing. Carrier domination is why the US cellphone industry and device choice is so awful, this is the first thing that has the potential to change that as both Josh and BG correctly point out.

  0

They gave out dividends. BGR also posted something on it.

  0