Tablets are probably really good for some groups at any company. However a Windows tablet that can be locked down, or joined to a AD domain, wiped if lost, forced to have a password policy etc, might be a better choice for a dominant Windows company. At a small media company was very lax IT, the iPad is probably better.
Except that windows tablets have been epic failures for the last decade or so. I own a few and there's no comparison to the ipad in terms of usefulness.
In terms of useful security none of those appear to matter in terms of stopping real attacks. In terms of theft, FDE is more useful than remote wipe since if you're stealing for data you can block the reception of the wipe command.
In any case iPad has password policies, remote wipe, etc. You don't need to join it to AD since it's a slave rather than primary device. Access to your enterprise will be via IPSec VPN gateway and ActiveSync. You don't have FDE but you can have secure enterprise apps developed that provide encrypted havens for data.
A Win7 tablet will be far more vulnerable to exploitation than the iPad IMHO.
It's clear you have no idea what you are talking about. It is not the contractors being dinosaurs. It is the government they deal with that is the dinosaur in the equation.
Military Defense contractor can have a extremely risk-adverse mindset... normally scientist-types do experiments with a hypothesis and then testing the hypothesis. Well, it's turned into a "can't fail or we lose" mindset.
So, it's an unfortunate combo of Govt/Contractor Dino Thinking.
Not in your workplace, but articles like this show that yours is not a 100% held opinion.
We have car companies writing up bills of sale on the lot. We have restaurants putting their menus and ordering software on ipads. We have hospitals using paperless charting via remote access directly into the main computer systems and so on
I use an ipad every day at work. It holds script pages, story boards, costuming designs. I can get and receive messages from other units as needed. I can create the call sheets for tomorrow, capture maps and driving directions, email it all out to the appropriate folks. And so on.
Textbook companies are going ebook at increasing rates making the ipad perfect for students. Which is why schools are offering the ipad in place of their traditional free laptop. I wouldn't be shocked if in a year or two, Apple's Back to School can be applied to an ipad just like you can upgrade your touch etc.
Westlaw is on the ipad via safari and they will likely do an app soon to capture the folks that find the current experience less than. Blacks has an app already etc. So even those lawyers are finding ways to use an ipad.
It's a brave new world and folks need to realize this and stop thinking old school. We scoffed and laughed at Captain Picard and his PADD but guess what, Apple has given us that very tool (and yes it is more a Picard than the big ugly Kirk version)
Articles like this also show why all those so called 'ipad killers' are going to fail. They are too late to the game. Coming out in November and December when the ipad has been going strong since April is just killing themselves. The market is soaked with ipads and will soon be saturated. Especially since these other guys can't give a firm date. Only a handful of places are so behind the times or anti Apple that they will wait it out (the military and relateds being the main one in this group).
Thanks for all of the details on how you (and others) are using the iPad. It's giving me some interesting ideas...
People are so cocksure of the iPad and its future. It will be a sucsess however the iPad will have less time before its "Android" starts out selling it...
...Think DVD players. I remember when Sony was the player to get, at some point you did not care what label was on the DVD player and the lowest priced player that met your needs got your money.
Good point... even BlueRay has come down to the $100 for a cheap one. I was excited by the prospect of buying one for $299 (when the person in line in front of me got the last of the "cheap" ones). I waited and the prices continue to go down.
So far though, the 7" (sold in Japan something or other) tablet that read about recently was still $550 to $625 range. Price is one measurement, as we all know, features and usability are key as well... At first I was disappointed by the iPad using iOS -- until I used it and realized the ease of use factor. But, I'm still having to work around how to get files on to it since iPad doesn't have a traditional file system.
Except that windows tablets have been epic failures for the last decade or so. I own a few and there's no comparison to the ipad in terms of usefulness.
In terms of useful security none of those appear to matter in terms of stopping real attacks. In terms of theft, FDE is more useful than remote wipe since if you're stealing for data you can block the reception of the wipe command.
In any case iPad has password policies, remote wipe, etc. You don't need to join it to AD since it's a slave rather than primary device. Access to your enterprise will be via IPSec VPN gateway and ActiveSync. You don't have FDE but you can have secure enterprise apps developed that provide encrypted havens for data.
A Win7 tablet will be far more vulnerable to exploitation than the iPad IMHO.
Windows tablets of yesterday are not what will be coming out. HP slate like devices, and for corporate use, whole device encryption. Someone steals it they cant read it. Turn it on and it will get the remote wipe command.
Good point... even BlueRay has come down to the $100 for a cheap one. I was excited by the prospect of buying one for $299 (when the person in line in front of me got the last of the "cheap" ones). I waited and the prices continue to go down.
So far though, the 7" (sold in Japan something or other) tablet that read about recently was still $550 to $625 range. Price is one measurement, as we all know, features and usability are key as well... At first I was disappointed by the iPad using iOS -- until I used it and realized the ease of use factor. But, I'm still having to work around how to get files on to it since iPad doesn't have a traditional file system.
It's clear you have no idea what you are talking about. It is not the contractors being dinosaurs. It is the government they deal with that is the dinosaur in the equation.
It's clear you are talking out your arse. I'm in the bidness. While I don't work for one of those contractors, I work with several of them in R&D and worked with a couple even more closely while I was on Acitve Duty.
It's not the government rules that are their problem. It's the IT High Priests working two or three levels below the CIO.
Leaders almost always have risen above their early career biases and want to do what's best, but they rely on the staff to generate the Business Cases and Courses of Action. A staff member with a bias or an axe to grind has an incredible amount of leverage in a conservative organization when they control what makes it to he CIO's primary deputy. And defense contractors are about as conservative a set of organizations as exist on this planet, with lots of folks willing to blindly follow the corporate chain of command.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
techfan beat me to the reply.
Too bad his reply was trite and uninformed. I'd be careful signing up to what someone else says when they are dragging you out on thin ice with them.
Quote:
Those companies do OK with technology innovation, but their business process innovation is pretty much tied to the requirements set by the government.
Nothing of the sort. Uncle Sam doesn't care how they handle internal business administration as long as the process is legal. All the real cool stuff is really being generated by small companies. Then when an idea starts to catch a General's or Admiral's eye and the small company needs to do the next phase demo on a shoestring budget, the big boys buy them out and make a great high budget smoke and mirrors demo chasing after major contract returns. Not much work done which isn't very derivative happening in Boeing or Lockheed anymore. Sure Skunk Works and Phantom Works are still around playing with relatively cool presentation fodder, but they really aren't stretching the art of the possible anymore.
Quote:
And then every congressman wants a piece of the pie for their district making it impossible for a single company to become more efficient because they have to work with 20 other companies in 20 different states, each with different technology infrastructure. Making paper the only common denominator for data exchange.*
* Ok, a bit of an exaggeration, but you get the point.
This last part is totally really minor if you are talking about IT infrastructure. The rest was solved handily by XML dialects a half decade ago, but the solution is resisted because it is too powerful and allows a dangerous reduction in long term technology lock-in.
Windows tablets of yesterday are not what will be coming out.
Given Ballmer's recent statement about tablets, Win7 isn't going to provide the ease of use that the iPad does for touch computing. Translation? The same mish mash of decent products (One Note) and unaltered applications on Win7 tablets that will make them the same epic failure that XP tablets were.
Unless the Office team is fully engaged into making Office touch optimized (and not just touch enabled) windows has no real competitive advantage as a corporate tablet.
Quote:
HP slate like devices, and for corporate use, whole device encryption. Someone steals it they cant read it. Turn it on and it will get the remote wipe command.
Remote wipe and device encryption are two different things. Given that the HP slate is vapourware it doesn't have whole device anything and win7 doesn't have full disk encryption natively.
Right...you DO realize that the iPad has a functioning cisco IPSEC client and Android...well not so much without rooting and jumping through hoops given the current built in functionality is borked. See the related open issues with Cisco IPSEC and Android
If enterprise was high priority for Google, stuff like this that was broken in 1.6 would be fixed by now.
So essentially, you're comparing capability that does exist with stuff that doesn't exist or is broken and saying it's not a viable for a "serious IT" staff to consider. You also seem completely unaware of the features that iOS does have or you wouldn't highlight them as must have features because it's already in there.
It's not the government rules that are their problem. It's the IT High Priests working two or three levels below the CIO.
Heh...I'm guessing you weren't navy or marines because NMCI users probably think somewhat differently. And DIACAP is not much fun either.
But defense contractor IT shops are dinosaurs hiding behind security as a scapegoat from doing anything outside their comfort zone (read Microsoft enterprise solutions).
The fact that Lockheed Martin has a tactical app store and their MONAX product for secure 3G comms means zero to someone who doesn't want to believe that iOS devices can be made secure.
You quote the iPod, sure there is nothing that competes with that infrastructure when it comes to MP3 players but that is yesterday.
Android is getting there fast and in some areas faster. Google is going to release their music/app store in October? From the video I saw you will manage your account, its content and your devices from the cloud or web browser, no iTune required. Also Windows Phone 7, October?, will use have a new app store, basically Zune store with apps. The Zune also does not need a USB to computer connection today. From what I have read Windows Phone 7 will only sync with cloud data and not to a computer, ActiveSync style. Both are examples of how the other guys have woken up and now are closing in on Apple. As Andy said on Macbreak Weekly, "the iPhone enjoyed 3 years of lead time, the iPad has maybe 10 months".
Yes Android is doing some interesting innovation which it should - as a formerly open source platform it was well-positioned to do this. However, the only thing that is driving Android right now is the fact that Google offers it for free to the handset makers and allows the carriers to do what they please with it. Perhaps you are too young to remember - but the halcyon days of carrier dominance and the stingily metered out features they offered previously on phones is a good indication of where this is going.
Google is not changing carrier culture - Apple is. Which means that Android is slaved to whatever the handset makers do and what the carriers allow. And like it or not, Google, the carriers and handset makers keep a weather eye on Apple to see what the next innovation will be, and then just build out a little bit better. DId you notice that only LG initially embraced the same style of touchscreen technology that Apple announced? It wasn't until Apple began making serious inroads into the smartphone handset segment that everyone else (including Google/Android) jumped into the touchscreen interface. So the carriers are not interested in going head-to-head with Apple with the Android OS- they only want to drive contracts and phone sales and if they can do that using a "free" OS, then so much the better. Have you seen the uptake in marketshare of Froyo? Nothing near STILL to 1.5 and 1.6 - which comprise the majority of the installed Android base. And lets think about the handset makers - they have R&D departments as well, and can build fine devices with "free" Android - oops, wait - not entirely free now is it? HTC has to pay license fees to Microsoft now don't they? How many more handset makers will have to pay out licensing fees?
Will WinPhone 7 have the moxy to regain their marketshare from Android, RIM and Apple? If the Zune effort is any indication, not likely. Worse Microsoft's culture is broken, according to my friends inside, and not getting much better even after the several shake-ups that they have attempted. The only piece of Microsoft kit (outside of the branded keyboards and mice) that has been demonstrated recently successful (at last) in the consumer marketplace is the XBox platform. I see no signs that Microsoft actually "gets" the consumer smartphone market segment. I really want to be pleasantly surprised, but have serious doubts. Especially after the Danger cloud failure. With RIM having its yearly network failures for the benefit of Blackberry users, there isn't a whole lot of consumer interest in being cloud reliant. I have vested interests in the success of both Microsoft and Google, but I see very serious flaws that are potentially crippling to their platforms.
I have stated previously and do so again now: Android is a means to an end for Google. Once they achieve that end Eric Schmidt will have no qualms about retiring Android or spinning it off to back the next venture - likely to be ChromeOS. Android was a stop-gap measure because Chrome wasn't ready for handheld primetime yet. Google needed a foot in the door for mobile marketing and Android was that foot. ChromeOS will be easier to manage, less hardware dependent (and thus able to ride the best horses in the race to the bottom and still win), and allow deeper integration of Google services and access to you.
We build on what we learned yesterday bettieblue in order to build bigger and better. You need to step back from your platform preferences and look at the situation with a less jaundiced eye - and look at the whole picture not just the bits that interest you or support your opinions.
Heh...I'm guessing you weren't navy or marines because NMCI users probably think somewhat differently. And DIACAP is not much fun either.
But defense contractor IT shops are dinosaurs hiding behind security as a scapegoat from doing anything outside their comfort zone (read Microsoft enterprise solutions).
The fact that Lockheed Martin has a tactical app store and their MONAX product for secure 3G comms means zero to someone who doesn't want to believe that iOS devices can be made secure.
You guessed wrong. And almost all those nasty NMCI NIPRNET rules are driven by what a bunch of EDS sysadmins and VP bean counters think makes their job easier and more profitable. Then those get pitched as enterprise cost saving/security measures and eventually get codified in instructions after a Flag officer is convinced. But that last part only happens because the staff weenies either A) don't know what is really going on; or b) See the restrictions as useful ass covering and job simplification.
Been there. Watched that t-shirt get made. Know EXACTLY what happened in the 15 minutes before the original contract was signed. You would cry, and no I won't tell you because I don't know you face to face.
And please make sure you direct your second line of comments at the right poster. I never said anything about insecurity being a reason for not using modern equipment and software. But when you only quote me at the top, it looks like you are directing it at me. You appear to be responding with that second topic to techfan's posts.
I have stated previously and do so again now: Android is a means to an end for Google. Once they achieve that end Eric Schmidt will have no qualms about retiring Android or spinning it off to back the next venture - likely to be ChromeOS. Android was a stop-gap measure because Chrome wasn't ready for handheld primetime yet. Google needed a foot in the door for mobile marketing and Android was that foot. ChromeOS will be easier to manage, less hardware dependent (and thus able to ride the best horses in the race to the bottom and still win), and allow deeper integration of Google services and access to you.
We build on what we learned yesterday bettieblue in order to build bigger and better. You need to step back from your platform preferences and look at the situation with a less jaundiced eye - and look at the whole picture not just the bits that interest you or support your opinions.
ChromeOS won't use much from Android, it can't because of how ChromeOS is architected under the hood. And in reality it's missing a ton of important stuff if you give a whit about actually implementing security at the OS level. It's turning into Linux-lite with no Linux GUI, just a Chrome Gui that's really just the Chrome Browser.
... just because some of us really want an SD slot in the device and more RAM does not mean we think Apple or the iPad is doomed.
SD Slot is already included in the iPad ecosystem as part of the Camera Connection Kit so I don't understand why you are complaining about iPad not having it when it already does as well as a USB slot. Please don't say that because you have to plug in the adaptor for it that doesn't count because it does. It's NEVER going to be built in because not everyone needs it.
You guessed wrong. And almost all those nasty NMCI NIPRNET rules are driven by what a bunch of EDS sysadmins and VP bean counters think makes their job easier and more profitable. Then those get pitched as enterprise cost saving/security measures and eventually get codified in instructions after a Flag officer is convinced. But that last part only happens because the staff weenies either A) don't know what is really going on; or b) See the restrictions as useful ass covering and job simplification.
Been there. Watched that t-shirt get made. Know EXACTLY what happened in the 15 minutes before the original contract was signed. You would cry, and no I won't tell you because I don't know you face to face.
Sure, and while I wasn't there for the sausage making it still is a gov't policy that impacts what can get deployed on a NMCI platform and the costs associated that got pushed to the program offices/app developers to get certified and the installations for seat support. Don't expect NMCI approved iPads any decade soon. On the tactical side we have a lot more latitude.
Been around the block also and have some have-to-laugh-or-I-would-cry stories to trade too but that's not here or there.
Quote:
And please make sure you direct your second line of comments at the right poster. I never said anything about insecurity being a reason for not using modern equipment and software. But when you only quote me at the top, it looks like you are directing it at me. You appear to be responding with that second topic to techfan's posts.
My point was that the folks you deal with and the corporate IT folks ARE two different beasts. The latter being more like EDS folks and option B above. The folks you deal with give you stuff like MONAX. The corporate IT folks will tell you that you can't do secure wireless despite the fact that its already been done.
My point was that the folks you deal with and the corporate IT folks ARE two different beasts. The latter being more like EDS folks and option B above. The folks you deal with give you stuff like MONAX. The corporate IT folks will tell you that you can't do secure wireless despite the fact that its already been done.
Never disputed your overall flavor of organizations. techfan on the other hand thinks it's all the fault of government rules, without understanding anything about how those rules were made in the first place. When you want to change some part of an organization, it helps to understand who the enemy actually is and how to neutralize them. It can be done.
On to MONAX I'll dispute that theres anything substantial innovative in that from Lockheed. A) All the hardware innovation in it was done by a couple small conrtractors and some academic research labs on SBA contracts and demonstrated over several field experiments before Lockheed ever had/(bought) the program/(small contractors). [Well, either that or Lockheed just copied the program after seeing the field experiments, but I know of at least three field experiments that scaffolded comms tech almost exactly like that. Then the money turned 6.4 and the researchers moved on.] Only then it was done with older cellular technology, Lockheed ported it to 3G and claimed the product as their own. Then Lockheed, to their credit, smartly added a App store clone which itself isn't even innovative, Apple was just the first to get the consumer interface software somewhere north of sucky.
Oh, and I'm not complaining that Lockheed bought the stuff/companies. That's just how it works. But I can't see giving them innovation credit when they sit back and watch other companies in the crucible, then only cherry pick and buy the ones that have an established road to a vertical market. If you don't have enough of your own corporate skin in the game to be a little scared of not having enough successes, you don't have a sustainable innovation culture.
When you want to change some part of an organization, it helps to understand who the enemy actually is and how to neutralize them. It can be done.
When you're wearing a green badge and they're wearing a white badge its harder. Like you said, we don't know each other or I could tell you some t-shirt stories.
I think the fairest thing to say that every organization; government, commercial, academic, etc; has elements of tech folks that obstruct progress for various reasons not always supported by the facts. It sometimes makes it exceedingly frustrating to deliver useful advances for the guys and gals at the pointy end. Fortunately, they are a small minority...although they do seem to cluster together at times.
Comments
Tablets are probably really good for some groups at any company. However a Windows tablet that can be locked down, or joined to a AD domain, wiped if lost, forced to have a password policy etc, might be a better choice for a dominant Windows company. At a small media company was very lax IT, the iPad is probably better.
Except that windows tablets have been epic failures for the last decade or so. I own a few and there's no comparison to the ipad in terms of usefulness.
In terms of useful security none of those appear to matter in terms of stopping real attacks. In terms of theft, FDE is more useful than remote wipe since if you're stealing for data you can block the reception of the wipe command.
In any case iPad has password policies, remote wipe, etc. You don't need to join it to AD since it's a slave rather than primary device. Access to your enterprise will be via IPSec VPN gateway and ActiveSync. You don't have FDE but you can have secure enterprise apps developed that provide encrypted havens for data.
A Win7 tablet will be far more vulnerable to exploitation than the iPad IMHO.
I'm not sure I understand how the rules are any different from the ones for an iPhone?
The iOS is a proven OS... as Apple said in their initial presentation... 75 million people know how to use it. Makes a big difference.
I wasn't certain that iOS was the way to go with the iPad... until a few moments later.
It's clear you have no idea what you are talking about. It is not the contractors being dinosaurs. It is the government they deal with that is the dinosaur in the equation.
Military Defense contractor can have a extremely risk-adverse mindset... normally scientist-types do experiments with a hypothesis and then testing the hypothesis. Well, it's turned into a "can't fail or we lose" mindset.
So, it's an unfortunate combo of Govt/Contractor Dino Thinking.
Not in your workplace, but articles like this show that yours is not a 100% held opinion.
We have car companies writing up bills of sale on the lot. We have restaurants putting their menus and ordering software on ipads. We have hospitals using paperless charting via remote access directly into the main computer systems and so on
I use an ipad every day at work. It holds script pages, story boards, costuming designs. I can get and receive messages from other units as needed. I can create the call sheets for tomorrow, capture maps and driving directions, email it all out to the appropriate folks. And so on.
Textbook companies are going ebook at increasing rates making the ipad perfect for students. Which is why schools are offering the ipad in place of their traditional free laptop. I wouldn't be shocked if in a year or two, Apple's Back to School can be applied to an ipad just like you can upgrade your touch etc.
Westlaw is on the ipad via safari and they will likely do an app soon to capture the folks that find the current experience less than. Blacks has an app already etc. So even those lawyers are finding ways to use an ipad.
It's a brave new world and folks need to realize this and stop thinking old school. We scoffed and laughed at Captain Picard and his PADD but guess what, Apple has given us that very tool (and yes it is more a Picard than the big ugly Kirk version)
Articles like this also show why all those so called 'ipad killers' are going to fail. They are too late to the game. Coming out in November and December when the ipad has been going strong since April is just killing themselves. The market is soaked with ipads and will soon be saturated. Especially since these other guys can't give a firm date. Only a handful of places are so behind the times or anti Apple that they will wait it out (the military and relateds being the main one in this group).
Thanks for all of the details on how you (and others) are using the iPad. It's giving me some interesting ideas...
People are so cocksure of the iPad and its future. It will be a sucsess however the iPad will have less time before its "Android" starts out selling it...
...Think DVD players. I remember when Sony was the player to get, at some point you did not care what label was on the DVD player and the lowest priced player that met your needs got your money.
Good point... even BlueRay has come down to the $100 for a cheap one. I was excited by the prospect of buying one for $299 (when the person in line in front of me got the last of the "cheap" ones). I waited and the prices continue to go down.
So far though, the 7" (sold in Japan something or other) tablet that read about recently was still $550 to $625 range. Price is one measurement, as we all know, features and usability are key as well... At first I was disappointed by the iPad using iOS -- until I used it and realized the ease of use factor. But, I'm still having to work around how to get files on to it since iPad doesn't have a traditional file system.
Except that windows tablets have been epic failures for the last decade or so. I own a few and there's no comparison to the ipad in terms of usefulness.
In terms of useful security none of those appear to matter in terms of stopping real attacks. In terms of theft, FDE is more useful than remote wipe since if you're stealing for data you can block the reception of the wipe command.
In any case iPad has password policies, remote wipe, etc. You don't need to join it to AD since it's a slave rather than primary device. Access to your enterprise will be via IPSec VPN gateway and ActiveSync. You don't have FDE but you can have secure enterprise apps developed that provide encrypted havens for data.
A Win7 tablet will be far more vulnerable to exploitation than the iPad IMHO.
Windows tablets of yesterday are not what will be coming out. HP slate like devices, and for corporate use, whole device encryption. Someone steals it they cant read it. Turn it on and it will get the remote wipe command.
Or go Android...
http://www.neowin.net/news/samsung-g...l-video-teaser
Good point... even BlueRay has come down to the $100 for a cheap one. I was excited by the prospect of buying one for $299 (when the person in line in front of me got the last of the "cheap" ones). I waited and the prices continue to go down.
So far though, the 7" (sold in Japan something or other) tablet that read about recently was still $550 to $625 range. Price is one measurement, as we all know, features and usability are key as well... At first I was disappointed by the iPad using iOS -- until I used it and realized the ease of use factor. But, I'm still having to work around how to get files on to it since iPad doesn't have a traditional file system.
http://www.neowin.net/news/samsung-g...l-video-teaser
It's clear you have no idea what you are talking about. It is not the contractors being dinosaurs. It is the government they deal with that is the dinosaur in the equation.
It's clear you are talking out your arse. I'm in the bidness. While I don't work for one of those contractors, I work with several of them in R&D and worked with a couple even more closely while I was on Acitve Duty.
It's not the government rules that are their problem. It's the IT High Priests working two or three levels below the CIO.
Leaders almost always have risen above their early career biases and want to do what's best, but they rely on the staff to generate the Business Cases and Courses of Action. A staff member with a bias or an axe to grind has an incredible amount of leverage in a conservative organization when they control what makes it to he CIO's primary deputy. And defense contractors are about as conservative a set of organizations as exist on this planet, with lots of folks willing to blindly follow the corporate chain of command.
techfan beat me to the reply.
Too bad his reply was trite and uninformed. I'd be careful signing up to what someone else says when they are dragging you out on thin ice with them.
Those companies do OK with technology innovation, but their business process innovation is pretty much tied to the requirements set by the government.
Nothing of the sort. Uncle Sam doesn't care how they handle internal business administration as long as the process is legal. All the real cool stuff is really being generated by small companies. Then when an idea starts to catch a General's or Admiral's eye and the small company needs to do the next phase demo on a shoestring budget, the big boys buy them out and make a great high budget smoke and mirrors demo chasing after major contract returns. Not much work done which isn't very derivative happening in Boeing or Lockheed anymore. Sure Skunk Works and Phantom Works are still around playing with relatively cool presentation fodder, but they really aren't stretching the art of the possible anymore.
And then every congressman wants a piece of the pie for their district making it impossible for a single company to become more efficient because they have to work with 20 other companies in 20 different states, each with different technology infrastructure. Making paper the only common denominator for data exchange.*
* Ok, a bit of an exaggeration, but you get the point.
This last part is totally really minor if you are talking about IT infrastructure. The rest was solved handily by XML dialects a half decade ago, but the solution is resisted because it is too powerful and allows a dangerous reduction in long term technology lock-in.
Windows tablets of yesterday are not what will be coming out.
Given Ballmer's recent statement about tablets, Win7 isn't going to provide the ease of use that the iPad does for touch computing. Translation? The same mish mash of decent products (One Note) and unaltered applications on Win7 tablets that will make them the same epic failure that XP tablets were.
Unless the Office team is fully engaged into making Office touch optimized (and not just touch enabled) windows has no real competitive advantage as a corporate tablet.
HP slate like devices, and for corporate use, whole device encryption. Someone steals it they cant read it. Turn it on and it will get the remote wipe command.
Remote wipe and device encryption are two different things. Given that the HP slate is vapourware it doesn't have whole device anything and win7 doesn't have full disk encryption natively.
Or go Android...
http://www.neowin.net/news/samsung-g...l-video-teaser
Right...you DO realize that the iPad has a functioning cisco IPSEC client and Android...well not so much without rooting and jumping through hoops given the current built in functionality is borked. See the related open issues with Cisco IPSEC and Android
http://code.google.com/p/android/iss...rs&cells=tiles
If enterprise was high priority for Google, stuff like this that was broken in 1.6 would be fixed by now.
So essentially, you're comparing capability that does exist with stuff that doesn't exist or is broken and saying it's not a viable for a "serious IT" staff to consider. You also seem completely unaware of the features that iOS does have or you wouldn't highlight them as must have features because it's already in there.
It's not the government rules that are their problem. It's the IT High Priests working two or three levels below the CIO.
Heh...I'm guessing you weren't navy or marines because NMCI users probably think somewhat differently. And DIACAP is not much fun either.
But defense contractor IT shops are dinosaurs hiding behind security as a scapegoat from doing anything outside their comfort zone (read Microsoft enterprise solutions).
The fact that Lockheed Martin has a tactical app store and their MONAX product for secure 3G comms means zero to someone who doesn't want to believe that iOS devices can be made secure.
Image Link:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/monax/index.html
You quote the iPod, sure there is nothing that competes with that infrastructure when it comes to MP3 players but that is yesterday.
Android is getting there fast and in some areas faster. Google is going to release their music/app store in October? From the video I saw you will manage your account, its content and your devices from the cloud or web browser, no iTune required. Also Windows Phone 7, October?, will use have a new app store, basically Zune store with apps. The Zune also does not need a USB to computer connection today. From what I have read Windows Phone 7 will only sync with cloud data and not to a computer, ActiveSync style. Both are examples of how the other guys have woken up and now are closing in on Apple. As Andy said on Macbreak Weekly, "the iPhone enjoyed 3 years of lead time, the iPad has maybe 10 months".
Yes Android is doing some interesting innovation which it should - as a formerly open source platform it was well-positioned to do this. However, the only thing that is driving Android right now is the fact that Google offers it for free to the handset makers and allows the carriers to do what they please with it. Perhaps you are too young to remember - but the halcyon days of carrier dominance and the stingily metered out features they offered previously on phones is a good indication of where this is going.
Google is not changing carrier culture - Apple is. Which means that Android is slaved to whatever the handset makers do and what the carriers allow. And like it or not, Google, the carriers and handset makers keep a weather eye on Apple to see what the next innovation will be, and then just build out a little bit better. DId you notice that only LG initially embraced the same style of touchscreen technology that Apple announced? It wasn't until Apple began making serious inroads into the smartphone handset segment that everyone else (including Google/Android) jumped into the touchscreen interface. So the carriers are not interested in going head-to-head with Apple with the Android OS- they only want to drive contracts and phone sales and if they can do that using a "free" OS, then so much the better. Have you seen the uptake in marketshare of Froyo? Nothing near STILL to 1.5 and 1.6 - which comprise the majority of the installed Android base. And lets think about the handset makers - they have R&D departments as well, and can build fine devices with "free" Android - oops, wait - not entirely free now is it? HTC has to pay license fees to Microsoft now don't they? How many more handset makers will have to pay out licensing fees?
Will WinPhone 7 have the moxy to regain their marketshare from Android, RIM and Apple? If the Zune effort is any indication, not likely. Worse Microsoft's culture is broken, according to my friends inside, and not getting much better even after the several shake-ups that they have attempted. The only piece of Microsoft kit (outside of the branded keyboards and mice) that has been demonstrated recently successful (at last) in the consumer marketplace is the XBox platform. I see no signs that Microsoft actually "gets" the consumer smartphone market segment. I really want to be pleasantly surprised, but have serious doubts. Especially after the Danger cloud failure. With RIM having its yearly network failures for the benefit of Blackberry users, there isn't a whole lot of consumer interest in being cloud reliant. I have vested interests in the success of both Microsoft and Google, but I see very serious flaws that are potentially crippling to their platforms.
I have stated previously and do so again now: Android is a means to an end for Google. Once they achieve that end Eric Schmidt will have no qualms about retiring Android or spinning it off to back the next venture - likely to be ChromeOS. Android was a stop-gap measure because Chrome wasn't ready for handheld primetime yet. Google needed a foot in the door for mobile marketing and Android was that foot. ChromeOS will be easier to manage, less hardware dependent (and thus able to ride the best horses in the race to the bottom and still win), and allow deeper integration of Google services and access to you.
We build on what we learned yesterday bettieblue in order to build bigger and better. You need to step back from your platform preferences and look at the situation with a less jaundiced eye - and look at the whole picture not just the bits that interest you or support your opinions.
Heh...I'm guessing you weren't navy or marines because NMCI users probably think somewhat differently. And DIACAP is not much fun either.
But defense contractor IT shops are dinosaurs hiding behind security as a scapegoat from doing anything outside their comfort zone (read Microsoft enterprise solutions).
The fact that Lockheed Martin has a tactical app store and their MONAX product for secure 3G comms means zero to someone who doesn't want to believe that iOS devices can be made secure.
Image Link:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/monax/index.html
You guessed wrong. And almost all those nasty NMCI NIPRNET rules are driven by what a bunch of EDS sysadmins and VP bean counters think makes their job easier and more profitable. Then those get pitched as enterprise cost saving/security measures and eventually get codified in instructions after a Flag officer is convinced. But that last part only happens because the staff weenies either A) don't know what is really going on; or b) See the restrictions as useful ass covering and job simplification.
Been there. Watched that t-shirt get made. Know EXACTLY what happened in the 15 minutes before the original contract was signed. You would cry, and no I won't tell you because I don't know you face to face.
And please make sure you direct your second line of comments at the right poster. I never said anything about insecurity being a reason for not using modern equipment and software. But when you only quote me at the top, it looks like you are directing it at me. You appear to be responding with that second topic to techfan's posts.
I have stated previously and do so again now: Android is a means to an end for Google. Once they achieve that end Eric Schmidt will have no qualms about retiring Android or spinning it off to back the next venture - likely to be ChromeOS. Android was a stop-gap measure because Chrome wasn't ready for handheld primetime yet. Google needed a foot in the door for mobile marketing and Android was that foot. ChromeOS will be easier to manage, less hardware dependent (and thus able to ride the best horses in the race to the bottom and still win), and allow deeper integration of Google services and access to you.
We build on what we learned yesterday bettieblue in order to build bigger and better. You need to step back from your platform preferences and look at the situation with a less jaundiced eye - and look at the whole picture not just the bits that interest you or support your opinions.
ChromeOS won't use much from Android, it can't because of how ChromeOS is architected under the hood. And in reality it's missing a ton of important stuff if you give a whit about actually implementing security at the OS level. It's turning into Linux-lite with no Linux GUI, just a Chrome Gui that's really just the Chrome Browser.
... just because some of us really want an SD slot in the device and more RAM does not mean we think Apple or the iPad is doomed.
SD Slot is already included in the iPad ecosystem as part of the Camera Connection Kit so I don't understand why you are complaining about iPad not having it when it already does as well as a USB slot. Please don't say that because you have to plug in the adaptor for it that doesn't count because it does. It's NEVER going to be built in because not everyone needs it.
You guessed wrong. And almost all those nasty NMCI NIPRNET rules are driven by what a bunch of EDS sysadmins and VP bean counters think makes their job easier and more profitable. Then those get pitched as enterprise cost saving/security measures and eventually get codified in instructions after a Flag officer is convinced. But that last part only happens because the staff weenies either A) don't know what is really going on; or b) See the restrictions as useful ass covering and job simplification.
Been there. Watched that t-shirt get made. Know EXACTLY what happened in the 15 minutes before the original contract was signed. You would cry, and no I won't tell you because I don't know you face to face.
Sure, and while I wasn't there for the sausage making it still is a gov't policy that impacts what can get deployed on a NMCI platform and the costs associated that got pushed to the program offices/app developers to get certified and the installations for seat support. Don't expect NMCI approved iPads any decade soon. On the tactical side we have a lot more latitude.
Been around the block also and have some have-to-laugh-or-I-would-cry stories to trade too but that's not here or there.
And please make sure you direct your second line of comments at the right poster. I never said anything about insecurity being a reason for not using modern equipment and software. But when you only quote me at the top, it looks like you are directing it at me. You appear to be responding with that second topic to techfan's posts.
My point was that the folks you deal with and the corporate IT folks ARE two different beasts. The latter being more like EDS folks and option B above. The folks you deal with give you stuff like MONAX. The corporate IT folks will tell you that you can't do secure wireless despite the fact that its already been done.
My point was that the folks you deal with and the corporate IT folks ARE two different beasts. The latter being more like EDS folks and option B above. The folks you deal with give you stuff like MONAX. The corporate IT folks will tell you that you can't do secure wireless despite the fact that its already been done.
Never disputed your overall flavor of organizations. techfan on the other hand thinks it's all the fault of government rules, without understanding anything about how those rules were made in the first place. When you want to change some part of an organization, it helps to understand who the enemy actually is and how to neutralize them. It can be done.
On to MONAX I'll dispute that theres anything substantial innovative in that from Lockheed. A) All the hardware innovation in it was done by a couple small conrtractors and some academic research labs on SBA contracts and demonstrated over several field experiments before Lockheed ever had/(bought) the program/(small contractors). [Well, either that or Lockheed just copied the program after seeing the field experiments, but I know of at least three field experiments that scaffolded comms tech almost exactly like that. Then the money turned 6.4 and the researchers moved on.] Only then it was done with older cellular technology, Lockheed ported it to 3G and claimed the product as their own. Then Lockheed, to their credit, smartly added a App store clone which itself isn't even innovative, Apple was just the first to get the consumer interface software somewhere north of sucky.
Oh, and I'm not complaining that Lockheed bought the stuff/companies. That's just how it works. But I can't see giving them innovation credit when they sit back and watch other companies in the crucible, then only cherry pick and buy the ones that have an established road to a vertical market. If you don't have enough of your own corporate skin in the game to be a little scared of not having enough successes, you don't have a sustainable innovation culture.
When you want to change some part of an organization, it helps to understand who the enemy actually is and how to neutralize them. It can be done.
When you're wearing a green badge and they're wearing a white badge its harder. Like you said, we don't know each other or I could tell you some t-shirt stories.
I think the fairest thing to say that every organization; government, commercial, academic, etc; has elements of tech folks that obstruct progress for various reasons not always supported by the facts. It sometimes makes it exceedingly frustrating to deliver useful advances for the guys and gals at the pointy end. Fortunately, they are a small minority...although they do seem to cluster together at times.