- Could you please show us road-maps for HP, Dell, RIM, Palm, and MS?
- I remember processor roadmaps that were given to Apple by Motorola and IBM... Yeah not very reliable.
- Apple still supports early versions of OS X on their website, click on Apple's Support-tab, on the LHS you'll see a drop-down menu where you can select "Mac OS X 10.2 and earlier"
By "support", people don't mean Apple still has documentation posted. If that was the case, 010 year old printers are still "supported" by HP. "Support" means "For how much longer can we expect Apple to release securtity and stability fixes for an OS". Right now, Apple's mantra is basically "We may release updates to previous versions of the OS for security issues", but they don't tell you for how long. They rarely, if ever, offer support with bug fixes. Once 10.5 came out, 10.4 is basically dead to them.
As for computers, I remember shopping for some for the office at Dell several years ago. They had listed on their site specifically how long a specific model was planned on being offered, so companies could determine whether to invest in that. So, if you knew you had 100 computers to buy over the course of a year, you could actually standardize on a model knowing that, 10 months from now, that model was still going to be available, and with the same specifications.
Apple has no corporate policy in this regards. You get what you get. If your company doesn't plan on updating to 10.5 for at least 12 months, don't plan on buying any new macs in that time, as you can't get them with 10.4, and most likely won't even run that OS.
I have spent a bunch of energy trying to connect the dots between the consumer-developer-enterprise-investor-Apple big picture over the past several weeks (from an entrepreneur and enduser perspective), reviewed a bunch of online analyses and watched the video of the event.
I would summarize Apple's strategy as the Microsoft playbook (win the hearts of developers) meets the Cisco playbook (become a solutions company by intimately understanding the needs of big customers fine-tuned for the 'just add water' dynamics of the internet age.
In other words, I am a believer. To see why, check out my post:
The iPhone software developers kit (SDK) introduced by Apple on Thursday is proof the company is determined not to replicate mistakes made during the onset of its Mac platform, investment bank Piper Jaffray said Friday.
It depends on what mistakes they're talking about. While they may be trying to have a large developer community, I don't recall hearing stories in the 80's of all these developers who wanted to make apps and Apple wouldn't let them. In fact, they offered great deals on hardware/software for developers back then.
However, it seems Steve is falling into the ol' habit of his control issues. YMR that Steve liked the Mac because it wasn't user-servicable. I think he balked at the Mac II line because of the whole "Adding memory, cards, etc" thing (was this what got him canned???).
Yet, here we are with the iPhone, and everything about it is controlled by Apple. Want to make an app? You have to go through Apple. Why? I can't think of any other reason except control and $$$. I don't buy the "30% is just to cover our costs" slogan. They could've just allowed people to install whatever apps they wanted (even have them go through iTunes to get them on there). But Apple wanted a piece of the pie, and can only get that if they control how you get the apps on there.
And while they say 'free' software won't cost, and you can get the SDK for free, I don't think you can get your free software on the App store unless you pay to become a 'developer'. (they'rer very fuzzy on this). So they still get your money. I guess everything is going this way. First it was game boxes. Now it's iPhones and iPods. Soon any software for the Mac will require a stipend paid to apple.
People hate on Verizon because of the restrictions they place on their phones, but I don't see Apple doing this much differently (except you're paying them, not AT&T).
Oh where, oh where did all the whiners go?? Oh where, oh where can they be???
Apple is beginning to take away reasons for whiners to whine??!! It can't be!
I'm sure there is still someone out there that will refuse to buy from this greedy, monopolistic corporate armpit until Apple comes out with a 16-core, 3TB, 10g, Neural-link-interfaced, superslim iPhone for $29.99 and free upgrades for life.
Great move Apple! Thanks for ignoring all the whiners and throwing them back into their parent's basement. Your stealth lab really came out with great stuff! I knew all along that you had some serious stuff going on.
As a full-time software engineer, I eagerly await getting my hands on that SDK.
But for the whiners, you'll still always find a reason to whine. Don't let progress get in your way. After all, I'm sure Apple is trying their best to accomodate you (NOT!).
Actually, with regard to iPhone, Apple has been reasonably non-secretive about their plans. They pre-announced the product itself, including the model/price/feature set and some detail of the carrier model, and the plan for subscription accounting and software update. They pre-announced the SDK...
Yet they were secretive about their SDK until it was 'released', which apparently required a whole special event and everything (wow, if the beta SDK gets a special event, what is the final release going to get? A national holiday?).
And if you look back, their pre-announcements are too vague to be worth anything. Wow, they were going to release an SDK! Amazing! Unfortunately, you had no idea what it would entail until this week. The iPhone announcement was cause for buzz, but left many questions unaswered. They still don't release change-logs/bug fix lists with their product updates, which some people would find useful (unless you just think Apple's blanket "fixes several issues and improves reliabillty and stability" statements actually help.
But are IT people going to just trust that Apple is being open with the iPhone now (supposedly), and so will in the future? I doubt it. There's too much history of awful enterprise support to just think the company will magically change. And Apple isn't helping their cause, when just last month they let the xRAID disappear without a word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill
What's more, by claiming the "Apple is too secret" mantra, you're making a sweeping assumption that simply cannot be supported in fact. That is to say, simply because of how Apple has operated in the past with Macintosh, or iPod, or whatever, therefore it "shall" be going forward with iPhone and the enterprise. Not necessarily so, and I say time will bear out that Apple is serious about establishing iPhone in the enterprise.
Yeah, how dare he make a sweeping assumption based on the fact that's how Apple has handled EVERY product they've had over the last 10 years!
Although, the problem is they are still secretive about the iPod, Macs, OS, etc. You'd think they'd make a company-wide sweeping policy change, rather than just say "OK, we'll do business as usual most of the time, but we'll be different with the iPhone."
Yet they were secretive about their SDK until it was 'released', which apparently required a whole special event and everything (wow, if the beta SDK gets a special event, what is the final release going to get? A national holiday?).
And if you look back, their pre-announcements are too vague to be worth anything. Wow, they were going to release an SDK! Amazing! Unfortunately, you had no idea what it would entail until this week. The iPhone announcement was cause for buzz, but left many questions unaswered. They still don't release change-logs/bug fix lists with their product updates, which some people would find useful (unless you just think Apple's blanket "fixes several issues and improves reliabillty and stability" statements actually help.
But are IT people going to just trust that Apple is being open with the iPhone now (supposedly), and so will in the future? I doubt it. There's too much history of awful enterprise support to just think the company will magically change. And Apple isn't helping their cause, when just last month they let the xRAID disappear without a word.
Yeah, how dare he make a sweeping assumption based on the fact that's how Apple has handled EVERY product they've had over the last 10 years!
Although, the problem is they are still secretive about the iPod, Macs, OS, etc. You'd think they'd make a company-wide sweeping policy change, rather than just say "OK, we'll do business as usual most of the time, but we'll be different with the iPhone."
This has to be the most paranoid thread I've seen (and that's saying a lot.)
Exactly what is your gripe? That apple didn't post to AppleInsider every 20 minutes with SDK status?
That they skillfully leverage and (yes, control) public enthusiasm about their products to their advantage? Should they have just dropped it in a brown bag on a waterfront at midnight?
I really would love to see how massively successful a corporation run by your principles would be.
Now that I'm more than satisfied with what Apple will be providing, I may go ahead and purchase it now (25th anniversary coming up), knowing that come June or soon after, many apps will be available.
Don't forget that you will be charged for the v2.0 upgrade come June if you own a Touch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB
Should they have just dropped it in a brown bag on a waterfront at midnight?
This has to be the most paranoid thread I've seen (and that's saying a lot.)
Exactly what is your gripe? That apple didn't post to AppleInsider every 20 minutes with SDK status?
That they skillfully leverage and (yes, control) public enthusiasm about their products to their advantage? Should they have just dropped it in a brown bag on a waterfront at midnight?
I really would love to see how massively successful a corporation run by your principles would be.
I agree. Interesting also how many times that something that Apple has been erroneously reported to have said is coming gets chastised when it doesn't come about.
Equally interesting is that all the dissing as shown here are by the same guys who dis Apple/Jobs/Mac/iPhone/iPod ever day. Day after day after day.
I really think that it is about time we took our site back, i.e., ignore these guys completely. No matter how much or how well we attempt to communicate with reason, they continue to spread dispel lies, half-truths, innuendos, etc. Their only retort is to increase their load of crap. Lets let them wallow in it by themselves.
- Could you please show us road-maps for HP, Dell, RIM, Palm, and MS?
- I remember processor roadmaps that were given to Apple by Motorola and IBM... Yeah not very reliable.
- Apple still supports early versions of OS X on their website, click on Apple's Support-tab, on the LHS you'll see a drop-down menu where you can select "Mac OS X 10.2 and earlier"
You ever hear of Windows 7 - Microsoft's next OS. Its probably 3-5 years away. Do a google search, you will find some early screenshots. I doubt you find any 10.6 images or even info out there.
I think it's very important to point out that the SDK itself is complete; it's NOT a beta. The iPhone 2.0 software update is in beta, and includes the new firmware with the App Store and enterprise capabilities + the complete SDK. Scott Forrestal said in his presentation that the SDK is the same one Apple has been using to create iPhone apps.
Again, the SDK itself is complete; it's NOT A BETA.
Did you watch the QT of the SDK announcement? If not, you should.
I'm certain that time will prove you wrong on your assertions.
I have not yet watch the keynote. I will though.
Historically, Apple wrote off the enterprise and the enterprise knows this. Their lack of any business sales strategy, their focus on consumer computers/gadgets, misdirected business software (FileMaker Pro and WebObjects) all contributed to this.
Now we are expected to believe Apple is going to get serious about the enterprise because of the iPhone.
Quite frankly, the SDK should have been made for Windows as well. If Apple is truly serious about the enterprise they need to do this (while they are at it, they also need to license out Mac OS X Server). I work in IT in an all Windows shop. People outside of IT don't realize how embedded the business world is with Windows...
I see the initial cost of iPhone development very prohibitive. You need to buy a iPhone, Mac, XCODE training (if there is even such a thing), maybe a XSERVE for deployment testing. Seems quite of a lot money just to test out an idea. You better have one hell of an idea.
Microsoft is pushing their Windows Mobile platform on your choice of hardware that interfaces very nicely with Visual Studio, .NET, Windows 2003 Server and other related enterprise products (e.g., SQL Server, Exchange, etc.).
Really? I can't see too many enterprise customers giving Apple any real consideration.
Apple has never taken business customers seriously with the Macintosh or Mac OS X. That is why they have failed and continue to fail in business.
Is Apple going to provide enterprise customers with a real road make for their future products or make them wait for Macworld like we do? Can you imagine a major enterprise player placing an order for 25,000 iPhones only for Apple to announce iPhone 2.0 two months later at MacWord 2010? HP, Dell, RIM, Intel, Palm, MS, etc. provide such roadmaps to its customers.
Dave
Dave,
It's the iPhone software that is being updated to version 2, not the iPhone. It's a software upgrade. From your posting, it sounds like you think that iPhone 2 is a new iPhone? That's coming, but this is all about upgrading the features of the existing hardware.
How is RIM's Push email system different compared to iPhone's direct Activesync Exchange support? What are the advantages of using RIM's architecture AKA the Blackberry Enterprise Server which connects to your company's exchange server and their network operations center?
I assume if they are both truly "Push email", both methods then have to somehow notify the phone of new email through the cellular carriers data network, which is then downloaded. How does this work in the Blackberry model and how does that contrast with the ActiveSync model? And Why does Blackberry's model reduce power consumption on the device?
You ever hear of Windows 7 - Microsoft's next OS. Its probably 3-5 years away. Do a google search, you will find some early screenshots. I doubt you find any 10.6 images or even info out there.
How can Windows 7 screenshots help you plan to purchase your next computer? Furthermore, Microsoft allowed many PC manufacturers to claim they were Vista enabled when in reality they weren't.
Let's compare that scenario with Apple's announcement of OSX, it worked with the iMac as announced by SJ.
Historically, Apple wrote off the enterprise and the enterprise knows this. Their lack of any business sales strategy, their focus on consumer computers/gadgets, misdirected business software (FileMaker Pro and WebObjects) all contributed to this.
Now we are expected to believe Apple is going to get serious about the enterprise because of the iPhone.
Quite frankly, the SDK should have been made for Windows as well. If Apple is truly serious about the enterprise they need to do this (while they are at it, they also need to license out Mac OS X Server). I work in IT in an all Windows shop. People outside of IT don't realize how embedded the business world is with Windows...
I see the initial cost of iPhone development very prohibitive. You need to buy a iPhone, Mac, XCODE training (if there is even such a thing), maybe a XSERVE for deployment testing. Seems quite of a lot money just to test out an idea. You better have one hell of an idea.
Microsoft is pushing their Windows Mobile platform on your choice of hardware that interfaces very nicely with Visual Studio, .NET, Windows 2003 Server and other related enterprise products (e.g., SQL Server, Exchange, etc.).
Can Apple compete with this?
$300 for Enterprise SDK
$500 for Mac Mini (if you want to do it on the cheap)
Besides being inexpensive there is a huge financial benefit at the pace applications can being easily created and dispersed. Xcode natively understands C and Java of which any large company will have access to these programmers. There will be very little additional instruction to make an iPhone app. The built in simulator, well constructed SDK page and free iTS video podcasts will make the transition simple.
As mentioned in other threads, the cost of licensing other OEMs' SDKs are considerably more expensive to obtain. This is extremely aggressive on Apple's part and is the "killer app" that will make all the other "killer apps".
Besides, Macs in the enterprise and iPhones in the enterprise are completely different animals. To consider what Apple said in regards to Macs to hold true for the iPhone years before its existence doesn't make sense.
Oh where, oh where did all the whiners go?? Oh where, oh where can they be???
Apple is beginning to take away reasons for whiners to whine??!! It can't be!
I'm sure there is still someone out there that will refuse to buy from this greedy, monopolistic corporate armpit unit they come out with a 16-core, 3TB, 10g, Neural-link-interfaced, superslim iPhone for $29.99 and free upgrades for life.
Great move Apple! Thanks for ignoring all the whiners and throwing them back into their parent's basement. Your stealth lab really came out with great stuff! I knew all along that you had some serious stuff going on.
As a full-time software engineer, I eagerly await getting my hands on that SDK.
But for the whiners, you'll still always find a reason to whine. Don't let progress get in your way. After all, I'm sure Apple is trying their best to accomodate you (NOT!).
Why would they even want to? You IT guys think the whole computing world revolves around you and that every electronics vendor on earth is beating down your door to sell you something. The fact is Apple made 50% of Microsoft's income with 5%-7% of the market share PLUS Consumer devices.
Apple will make the iPhone appealing to the enterprise and sell lots. They may not displace RIM, but RIM has only sold what 12 million handsets? There must not be an infinite market of enterprise customers who give employees devices.
As far as letting any hardware run OS X Server, that's just plain stupid. Apple did not develop Server to take market share, it's for selling hardware.
So to all you IT pros, get over yourselves, there is a huge world out there beyond your little cubicle. Put the keyboard down and get out and see for yourself, it's in color even! Apple will thrive regardless of what the IT community mindset says.
It's funny people think things they don't have yet, but could be put onto/into what they do own, should be free.
Explain this to me.
If I want more power in my car = $$$
If I want a better stereo in my car= &&&
If I want to ADD features to my car (as in made to order) it will cost more than the base price (which is what you are paying for when you buy your iPod/iPhone)
New Stuff = New Money
It's like Apple has built you a car and they are adding more power/ better speakers, etc. You will have to pay, but at least you don't have to buy a whole new car.
I get the feeling some people would rather Apple came out with an all new iPod with even more features. Thus making their old one obsolete and they have to buy an all new one.
I think I'd rather pay for an upgrade than have to buy an all new device every time a new feature is implemented. But hey, my friends say I'm crazy. Maybe that why they always seem to want what I have.
Sorry I am not well spoken and my thoughts drift in and out. But y'all complainers need to think more positive. If you can do it better, THAN DO IT!!
Sorry I am not well spoken and my thoughts drift in and out. But y'all complainers need to think more positive. If you can do it better, THAN DO IT!!
You make good points. I think most kids these days are so used to stealing software and media that the limitation of their self imposed entitlement offends them when they have to jump through hoops to steal it.
How is RIM's Push email system different compared to iPhone's direct Activesync Exchange support? What are the advantages of using RIM's architecture AKA the Blackberry Enterprise Server which connects to your company's exchange server and their network operations center?
Here is how both approaches work to my knowledge (if I am wrong somewhere, please correct me):
Microsoft (Direct Push)
1. Device initiates a TCP connection to server server. Among other things it sets a heartbeat interval.
2. Server holds the TCP connection until the heartbeat expires (TCP IDLE)
3. If no new mail arrives before the heartbeat expires the device sends "ping" (small data packet) to reset the timer
4. if new email arrives before the heartbeat expires, the server will notify the device
5. The device then pulls the email off the server using the Active Sync Protocol
If the network connection is dropped any time (e.g. device was turned off) the server waits until the device initiates a connection. If there is newer mail since the last sync the server notifies the device and it then initiates an Active Sync. Active Sync is reliable and can handle interrupted transfers.
This is similar to the IMAP IDLE.
Blackberry:
The basic difference here is that the carrier needs to support a local NOC. This is why you have specific Blackberry pricing with your carriers. The BES Server monitors the Exchange Server and when new mail is detected it sends it to the NOC (usually the BES is connected over a VPN tunnel to the NOC).
Once mail it as the NOC it informs the device that new messages are waiting. This needs to be supported by the carrier you are using. The message send to the Blackberry is similar to receive a text message or notifying a phone about an incoming call. The the message is send to the Blackberry. This is similar how two-way pagers worked which are the root for Blackberries. As said it needs to be supported by the carriers to some extent.
What about bandwidth and battery life?
The less information is exchanged the longer the battery will hold. Blackberries are very efficient here. But they always require a NOC infrastructure for it and a carrier that is connected to the NOC.
Also there is a significant difference in transmitted bytes when using Microsoft's Direct Push compared to the RIM solution when attachments are involved. This has something do to with the fact that the Blackberry doesn't really download attachments compared to Microsoft's Direct Push, where the information is always downloaded to the device (or at least in part until you want to download the full message). Therefore comparing bandwidth of the two approaches is not really fair. Also the additional BES server handles know file formats different.
Blackberries use a proprietary protocol and Microsoft uses SSL. Also Blackberries use UDP and not TCP. All this reduced the network overhead. But again we are talking bytes here. With EDGE and 3G this doesn't make a big difference. The TCO of Blackberries rise as mobile data communication get cheaper and faster.
The longer battery life is more theoretical. In real life it is totally negligible as the data packages for the pings and the initial server communication are very very small.
The downside is that a NOC infrastructure is essential for Blackberries. Which means single point of failure, dependent on a specific vendor, security implications (these are IMHO huge) etc.
With Direct Push you are not dependent on a specific vendor or carrier. You simply rely on your own infrastructure and any available network infrastructure. If it is WLAN, Internet, land line, a cellular net it doesn't matter. In the end it is a TCP connection from and to the device and the medium used doesn't matter.
Also Direct Push could make use of NOCs in a similar way to RIM but doesn't require one. If cellular carries support Direct Push in their networks (handing the heartbeats for example) the advantage of Blackberries are gone regarding the signaling of new messages. But you don't require one which makes it easier to adopt the technology, especially for small and medium sized businesses as well as the individual.
In addition you can implement Active Sync and Direct Push very efficient in a Device to optimize data usage. The implementation in the existing WM devices is far from optimal.
It remains to be seen how Apple implements Direct Push and Active Sync and what might be implemented on the carrier side as well. I am sure there will be in-depth reviews and comparisons in late Summer.
Comments
- Could you please show us road-maps for HP, Dell, RIM, Palm, and MS?
- I remember processor roadmaps that were given to Apple by Motorola and IBM... Yeah not very reliable.
- Apple still supports early versions of OS X on their website, click on Apple's Support-tab, on the LHS you'll see a drop-down menu where you can select "Mac OS X 10.2 and earlier"
By "support", people don't mean Apple still has documentation posted. If that was the case, 010 year old printers are still "supported" by HP. "Support" means "For how much longer can we expect Apple to release securtity and stability fixes for an OS". Right now, Apple's mantra is basically "We may release updates to previous versions of the OS for security issues", but they don't tell you for how long. They rarely, if ever, offer support with bug fixes. Once 10.5 came out, 10.4 is basically dead to them.
As for computers, I remember shopping for some for the office at Dell several years ago. They had listed on their site specifically how long a specific model was planned on being offered, so companies could determine whether to invest in that. So, if you knew you had 100 computers to buy over the course of a year, you could actually standardize on a model knowing that, 10 months from now, that model was still going to be available, and with the same specifications.
Apple has no corporate policy in this regards. You get what you get. If your company doesn't plan on updating to 10.5 for at least 12 months, don't plan on buying any new macs in that time, as you can't get them with 10.4, and most likely won't even run that OS.
I would summarize Apple's strategy as the Microsoft playbook (win the hearts of developers) meets the Cisco playbook (become a solutions company by intimately understanding the needs of big customers fine-tuned for the 'just add water' dynamics of the internet age.
In other words, I am a believer. To see why, check out my post:
Mobile reasons for optimism:
http://thenetworkgarden.com/weblog/2...e-reasons.html
Cheers,
Mark
The iPhone software developers kit (SDK) introduced by Apple on Thursday is proof the company is determined not to replicate mistakes made during the onset of its Mac platform, investment bank Piper Jaffray said Friday.
It depends on what mistakes they're talking about. While they may be trying to have a large developer community, I don't recall hearing stories in the 80's of all these developers who wanted to make apps and Apple wouldn't let them. In fact, they offered great deals on hardware/software for developers back then.
However, it seems Steve is falling into the ol' habit of his control issues. YMR that Steve liked the Mac because it wasn't user-servicable. I think he balked at the Mac II line because of the whole "Adding memory, cards, etc" thing (was this what got him canned???).
Yet, here we are with the iPhone, and everything about it is controlled by Apple. Want to make an app? You have to go through Apple. Why? I can't think of any other reason except control and $$$. I don't buy the "30% is just to cover our costs" slogan. They could've just allowed people to install whatever apps they wanted (even have them go through iTunes to get them on there). But Apple wanted a piece of the pie, and can only get that if they control how you get the apps on there.
And while they say 'free' software won't cost, and you can get the SDK for free, I don't think you can get your free software on the App store unless you pay to become a 'developer'. (they'rer very fuzzy on this). So they still get your money. I guess everything is going this way. First it was game boxes. Now it's iPhones and iPods. Soon any software for the Mac will require a stipend paid to apple.
People hate on Verizon because of the restrictions they place on their phones, but I don't see Apple doing this much differently (except you're paying them, not AT&T).
Apple is beginning to take away reasons for whiners to whine??!! It can't be!
I'm sure there is still someone out there that will refuse to buy from this greedy, monopolistic corporate armpit until Apple comes out with a 16-core, 3TB, 10g, Neural-link-interfaced, superslim iPhone for $29.99 and free upgrades for life.
Great move Apple! Thanks for ignoring all the whiners and throwing them back into their parent's basement. Your stealth lab really came out with great stuff! I knew all along that you had some serious stuff going on.
As a full-time software engineer, I eagerly await getting my hands on that SDK.
But for the whiners, you'll still always find a reason to whine. Don't let progress get in your way. After all, I'm sure Apple is trying their best to accomodate you (NOT!).
Actually, with regard to iPhone, Apple has been reasonably non-secretive about their plans. They pre-announced the product itself, including the model/price/feature set and some detail of the carrier model, and the plan for subscription accounting and software update. They pre-announced the SDK...
Yet they were secretive about their SDK until it was 'released', which apparently required a whole special event and everything (wow, if the beta SDK gets a special event, what is the final release going to get? A national holiday?).
And if you look back, their pre-announcements are too vague to be worth anything. Wow, they were going to release an SDK! Amazing! Unfortunately, you had no idea what it would entail until this week. The iPhone announcement was cause for buzz, but left many questions unaswered. They still don't release change-logs/bug fix lists with their product updates, which some people would find useful (unless you just think Apple's blanket "fixes several issues and improves reliabillty and stability" statements actually help.
But are IT people going to just trust that Apple is being open with the iPhone now (supposedly), and so will in the future? I doubt it. There's too much history of awful enterprise support to just think the company will magically change. And Apple isn't helping their cause, when just last month they let the xRAID disappear without a word.
What's more, by claiming the "Apple is too secret" mantra, you're making a sweeping assumption that simply cannot be supported in fact. That is to say, simply because of how Apple has operated in the past with Macintosh, or iPod, or whatever, therefore it "shall" be going forward with iPhone and the enterprise. Not necessarily so, and I say time will bear out that Apple is serious about establishing iPhone in the enterprise.
Yeah, how dare he make a sweeping assumption based on the fact that's how Apple has handled EVERY product they've had over the last 10 years!
Although, the problem is they are still secretive about the iPod, Macs, OS, etc. You'd think they'd make a company-wide sweeping policy change, rather than just say "OK, we'll do business as usual most of the time, but we'll be different with the iPhone."
Yet they were secretive about their SDK until it was 'released', which apparently required a whole special event and everything (wow, if the beta SDK gets a special event, what is the final release going to get? A national holiday?).
And if you look back, their pre-announcements are too vague to be worth anything. Wow, they were going to release an SDK! Amazing! Unfortunately, you had no idea what it would entail until this week. The iPhone announcement was cause for buzz, but left many questions unaswered. They still don't release change-logs/bug fix lists with their product updates, which some people would find useful (unless you just think Apple's blanket "fixes several issues and improves reliabillty and stability" statements actually help.
But are IT people going to just trust that Apple is being open with the iPhone now (supposedly), and so will in the future? I doubt it. There's too much history of awful enterprise support to just think the company will magically change. And Apple isn't helping their cause, when just last month they let the xRAID disappear without a word.
Yeah, how dare he make a sweeping assumption based on the fact that's how Apple has handled EVERY product they've had over the last 10 years!
Although, the problem is they are still secretive about the iPod, Macs, OS, etc. You'd think they'd make a company-wide sweeping policy change, rather than just say "OK, we'll do business as usual most of the time, but we'll be different with the iPhone."
This has to be the most paranoid thread I've seen (and that's saying a lot.)
Exactly what is your gripe? That apple didn't post to AppleInsider every 20 minutes with SDK status?
That they skillfully leverage and (yes, control) public enthusiasm about their products to their advantage? Should they have just dropped it in a brown bag on a waterfront at midnight?
I really would love to see how massively successful a corporation run by your principles would be.
Now that I'm more than satisfied with what Apple will be providing, I may go ahead and purchase it now (25th anniversary coming up), knowing that come June or soon after, many apps will be available.
Don't forget that you will be charged for the v2.0 upgrade come June if you own a Touch.
Should they have just dropped it in a brown bag on a waterfront at midnight?
This has to be the most paranoid thread I've seen (and that's saying a lot.)
Exactly what is your gripe? That apple didn't post to AppleInsider every 20 minutes with SDK status?
That they skillfully leverage and (yes, control) public enthusiasm about their products to their advantage? Should they have just dropped it in a brown bag on a waterfront at midnight?
I really would love to see how massively successful a corporation run by your principles would be.
I agree. Interesting also how many times that something that Apple has been erroneously reported to have said is coming gets chastised when it doesn't come about.
Equally interesting is that all the dissing as shown here are by the same guys who dis Apple/Jobs/Mac/iPhone/iPod ever day. Day after day after day.
I really think that it is about time we took our site back, i.e., ignore these guys completely. No matter how much or how well we attempt to communicate with reason, they continue to spread dispel lies, half-truths, innuendos, etc. Their only retort is to increase their load of crap. Lets let them wallow in it by themselves.
- Could you please show us road-maps for HP, Dell, RIM, Palm, and MS?
- I remember processor roadmaps that were given to Apple by Motorola and IBM... Yeah not very reliable.
- Apple still supports early versions of OS X on their website, click on Apple's Support-tab, on the LHS you'll see a drop-down menu where you can select "Mac OS X 10.2 and earlier"
You ever hear of Windows 7 - Microsoft's next OS. Its probably 3-5 years away. Do a google search, you will find some early screenshots. I doubt you find any 10.6 images or even info out there.
Check out Intels:
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archi...070328fact.htm
Again, the SDK itself is complete; it's NOT A BETA.
Did you watch the QT of the SDK announcement? If not, you should.
I'm certain that time will prove you wrong on your assertions.
I have not yet watch the keynote. I will though.
Historically, Apple wrote off the enterprise and the enterprise knows this. Their lack of any business sales strategy, their focus on consumer computers/gadgets, misdirected business software (FileMaker Pro and WebObjects) all contributed to this.
Now we are expected to believe Apple is going to get serious about the enterprise because of the iPhone.
Quite frankly, the SDK should have been made for Windows as well. If Apple is truly serious about the enterprise they need to do this (while they are at it, they also need to license out Mac OS X Server). I work in IT in an all Windows shop. People outside of IT don't realize how embedded the business world is with Windows...
I see the initial cost of iPhone development very prohibitive. You need to buy a iPhone, Mac, XCODE training (if there is even such a thing), maybe a XSERVE for deployment testing. Seems quite of a lot money just to test out an idea. You better have one hell of an idea.
Microsoft is pushing their Windows Mobile platform on your choice of hardware that interfaces very nicely with Visual Studio, .NET, Windows 2003 Server and other related enterprise products (e.g., SQL Server, Exchange, etc.).
Can Apple compete with this?
Really? I can't see too many enterprise customers giving Apple any real consideration.
Apple has never taken business customers seriously with the Macintosh or Mac OS X. That is why they have failed and continue to fail in business.
Is Apple going to provide enterprise customers with a real road make for their future products or make them wait for Macworld like we do? Can you imagine a major enterprise player placing an order for 25,000 iPhones only for Apple to announce iPhone 2.0 two months later at MacWord 2010? HP, Dell, RIM, Intel, Palm, MS, etc. provide such roadmaps to its customers.
Dave
Dave,
It's the iPhone software that is being updated to version 2, not the iPhone. It's a software upgrade. From your posting, it sounds like you think that iPhone 2 is a new iPhone? That's coming, but this is all about upgrading the features of the existing hardware.
Mark
How is RIM's Push email system different compared to iPhone's direct Activesync Exchange support? What are the advantages of using RIM's architecture AKA the Blackberry Enterprise Server which connects to your company's exchange server and their network operations center?
I assume if they are both truly "Push email", both methods then have to somehow notify the phone of new email through the cellular carriers data network, which is then downloaded. How does this work in the Blackberry model and how does that contrast with the ActiveSync model? And Why does Blackberry's model reduce power consumption on the device?
You ever hear of Windows 7 - Microsoft's next OS. Its probably 3-5 years away. Do a google search, you will find some early screenshots. I doubt you find any 10.6 images or even info out there.
Check out Intels:
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archi...070328fact.htm
How can Windows 7 screenshots help you plan to purchase your next computer? Furthermore, Microsoft allowed many PC manufacturers to claim they were Vista enabled when in reality they weren't.
Let's compare that scenario with Apple's announcement of OSX, it worked with the iMac as announced by SJ.
I have not yet watch the keynote. I will though.
Historically, Apple wrote off the enterprise and the enterprise knows this. Their lack of any business sales strategy, their focus on consumer computers/gadgets, misdirected business software (FileMaker Pro and WebObjects) all contributed to this.
Now we are expected to believe Apple is going to get serious about the enterprise because of the iPhone.
Quite frankly, the SDK should have been made for Windows as well. If Apple is truly serious about the enterprise they need to do this (while they are at it, they also need to license out Mac OS X Server). I work in IT in an all Windows shop. People outside of IT don't realize how embedded the business world is with Windows...
I see the initial cost of iPhone development very prohibitive. You need to buy a iPhone, Mac, XCODE training (if there is even such a thing), maybe a XSERVE for deployment testing. Seems quite of a lot money just to test out an idea. You better have one hell of an idea.
Microsoft is pushing their Windows Mobile platform on your choice of hardware that interfaces very nicely with Visual Studio, .NET, Windows 2003 Server and other related enterprise products (e.g., SQL Server, Exchange, etc.).
Can Apple compete with this?
$300 for Enterprise SDK
$500 for Mac Mini (if you want to do it on the cheap)
Besides being inexpensive there is a huge financial benefit at the pace applications can being easily created and dispersed. Xcode natively understands C and Java of which any large company will have access to these programmers. There will be very little additional instruction to make an iPhone app. The built in simulator, well constructed SDK page and free iTS video podcasts will make the transition simple.
As mentioned in other threads, the cost of licensing other OEMs' SDKs are considerably more expensive to obtain. This is extremely aggressive on Apple's part and is the "killer app" that will make all the other "killer apps".
Besides, Macs in the enterprise and iPhones in the enterprise are completely different animals. To consider what Apple said in regards to Macs to hold true for the iPhone years before its existence doesn't make sense.
Oh where, oh where did all the whiners go?? Oh where, oh where can they be???
Apple is beginning to take away reasons for whiners to whine??!! It can't be!
I'm sure there is still someone out there that will refuse to buy from this greedy, monopolistic corporate armpit unit they come out with a 16-core, 3TB, 10g, Neural-link-interfaced, superslim iPhone for $29.99 and free upgrades for life.
Great move Apple! Thanks for ignoring all the whiners and throwing them back into their parent's basement. Your stealth lab really came out with great stuff! I knew all along that you had some serious stuff going on.
As a full-time software engineer, I eagerly await getting my hands on that SDK.
But for the whiners, you'll still always find a reason to whine. Don't let progress get in your way. After all, I'm sure Apple is trying their best to accomodate you (NOT!).
GREAT post! Smack.
Can Apple compete with this?
Why would they even want to? You IT guys think the whole computing world revolves around you and that every electronics vendor on earth is beating down your door to sell you something. The fact is Apple made 50% of Microsoft's income with 5%-7% of the market share PLUS Consumer devices.
Apple will make the iPhone appealing to the enterprise and sell lots. They may not displace RIM, but RIM has only sold what 12 million handsets? There must not be an infinite market of enterprise customers who give employees devices.
As far as letting any hardware run OS X Server, that's just plain stupid. Apple did not develop Server to take market share, it's for selling hardware.
So to all you IT pros, get over yourselves, there is a huge world out there beyond your little cubicle. Put the keyboard down and get out and see for yourself, it's in color even! Apple will thrive regardless of what the IT community mindset says.
Explain this to me.
If I want more power in my car = $$$
If I want a better stereo in my car= &&&
If I want to ADD features to my car (as in made to order) it will cost more than the base price (which is what you are paying for when you buy your iPod/iPhone)
New Stuff = New Money
It's like Apple has built you a car and they are adding more power/ better speakers, etc. You will have to pay, but at least you don't have to buy a whole new car.
I get the feeling some people would rather Apple came out with an all new iPod with even more features. Thus making their old one obsolete and they have to buy an all new one.
I think I'd rather pay for an upgrade than have to buy an all new device every time a new feature is implemented. But hey, my friends say I'm crazy. Maybe that why they always seem to want what I have.
Sorry I am not well spoken and my thoughts drift in and out. But y'all complainers need to think more positive. If you can do it better, THAN DO IT!!
Sorry I am not well spoken and my thoughts drift in and out. But y'all complainers need to think more positive. If you can do it better, THAN DO IT!!
You make good points. I think most kids these days are so used to stealing software and media that the limitation of their self imposed entitlement offends them when they have to jump through hoops to steal it.
How is RIM's Push email system different compared to iPhone's direct Activesync Exchange support? What are the advantages of using RIM's architecture AKA the Blackberry Enterprise Server which connects to your company's exchange server and their network operations center?
Here is how both approaches work to my knowledge (if I am wrong somewhere, please correct me):
Microsoft (Direct Push)
1. Device initiates a TCP connection to server server. Among other things it sets a heartbeat interval.
2. Server holds the TCP connection until the heartbeat expires (TCP IDLE)
3. If no new mail arrives before the heartbeat expires the device sends "ping" (small data packet) to reset the timer
4. if new email arrives before the heartbeat expires, the server will notify the device
5. The device then pulls the email off the server using the Active Sync Protocol
If the network connection is dropped any time (e.g. device was turned off) the server waits until the device initiates a connection. If there is newer mail since the last sync the server notifies the device and it then initiates an Active Sync. Active Sync is reliable and can handle interrupted transfers.
This is similar to the IMAP IDLE.
Blackberry:
The basic difference here is that the carrier needs to support a local NOC. This is why you have specific Blackberry pricing with your carriers. The BES Server monitors the Exchange Server and when new mail is detected it sends it to the NOC (usually the BES is connected over a VPN tunnel to the NOC).
Once mail it as the NOC it informs the device that new messages are waiting. This needs to be supported by the carrier you are using. The message send to the Blackberry is similar to receive a text message or notifying a phone about an incoming call. The the message is send to the Blackberry. This is similar how two-way pagers worked which are the root for Blackberries. As said it needs to be supported by the carriers to some extent.
What about bandwidth and battery life?
The less information is exchanged the longer the battery will hold. Blackberries are very efficient here. But they always require a NOC infrastructure for it and a carrier that is connected to the NOC.
Also there is a significant difference in transmitted bytes when using Microsoft's Direct Push compared to the RIM solution when attachments are involved. This has something do to with the fact that the Blackberry doesn't really download attachments compared to Microsoft's Direct Push, where the information is always downloaded to the device (or at least in part until you want to download the full message). Therefore comparing bandwidth of the two approaches is not really fair. Also the additional BES server handles know file formats different.
Blackberries use a proprietary protocol and Microsoft uses SSL. Also Blackberries use UDP and not TCP. All this reduced the network overhead. But again we are talking bytes here. With EDGE and 3G this doesn't make a big difference. The TCO of Blackberries rise as mobile data communication get cheaper and faster.
The longer battery life is more theoretical. In real life it is totally negligible as the data packages for the pings and the initial server communication are very very small.
The downside is that a NOC infrastructure is essential for Blackberries. Which means single point of failure, dependent on a specific vendor, security implications (these are IMHO huge) etc.
With Direct Push you are not dependent on a specific vendor or carrier. You simply rely on your own infrastructure and any available network infrastructure. If it is WLAN, Internet, land line, a cellular net it doesn't matter. In the end it is a TCP connection from and to the device and the medium used doesn't matter.
Also Direct Push could make use of NOCs in a similar way to RIM but doesn't require one. If cellular carries support Direct Push in their networks (handing the heartbeats for example) the advantage of Blackberries are gone regarding the signaling of new messages. But you don't require one which makes it easier to adopt the technology, especially for small and medium sized businesses as well as the individual.
In addition you can implement Active Sync and Direct Push very efficient in a Device to optimize data usage. The implementation in the existing WM devices is far from optimal.
It remains to be seen how Apple implements Direct Push and Active Sync and what might be implemented on the carrier side as well. I am sure there will be in-depth reviews and comparisons in late Summer.