So, it looks to me that of the rivals that Nokia faces (Apple, RIM, Android and Palm, assuming the Pre takes off), they all have operating systems written from the ground up to run smart phones, three of them in the last few years. (Sorry, WinMob, check back when v.7 comes out.)
So how does Nokia configure the aging Symbian OS to compete? They can move UI elements around, sure, but is it possible that they are facing their "OS 9/NeXT" moment, where if they don't break compatibility and come out with something entirely new, they simply won't be able to go head to head with newer systems? Or am I underestimating the flexibility of Symbian?
BTW, in a nod to the thread topic, I think this line of thought applies to RIM, as well. They'll have a tough time keeping their phones current, if they have to continuously build on a code base that was never intended to function as a full computer OS.
Great post and on the mark. I agree that Nokia has to poop or get off the pot. They have to decide to buy and OS or build one from ground up and doing this in one quick hurry. I would love to see the iPhone OS running on a real phone. The possibilities would be almost endless.
I am not a programmer so I can not say for sure how flexible Symbian is in the long run. From one side, developers say that it is dead while others say there is plenty of life left but it needs to be tweaked and to stop with the one size fits all. I think Nokia did this with S60. They decided to drop all those other flavors and went with only one (S40) if you are counting.
I agree with you about RIM. They are in the same situation. Apple was absolutely brilliant in their timing and execution with the release of the iPhone OS.
since the Iphone supports all the ActiveSync functions like remote wipe, what would you need to do in order to give your IT department the ability to wipe your iphone remotely if they wanted?
Dude,
Don't believe this story. There is no way, a govt agency is allowing people to bring their personal devices onto a govt network.
I would earn the well deserved title of "fanboy" if I went into a Nokia thread and began talking about the iPhone when the point of the thread had nothing to do with the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns
Next time post the disclaimer: "No talking about other phone brands allowed in this thread" and I will know the rules of the game.
Yes it is the return the old Sapporbaby. How long will it take for you to get rebanned, and make a re-return?
Once again you prove the point of: It is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it. I was not banned. I told the mods to disable my account. Go ask them and see for yourself. Damn, it really has to suck being you.
I whole heartely disagree with this analyst for several reasons for Enterprise use.
While the enterprise can use the iPhone, several limitations create issues for securing and locking down such devices:
*I cannot encrypt the iPhone end to end (currently). I can password protect some stuff, that's about it. Blackberry Enterprise Server allows me to encrypt the phones and completely control their environment. Exchange ActiveSync alone doesn't allow me to do this. I still can use third party tools with WM to lock down the device or provide encryption.
*I completely cannot control the user environment. I cannot prevent users from installing crap onto their iPhones. You don't want users installing crap onto their phones when the phones are company property. This is just not good best practices to do that.
*Remote Wipe and full sync capability requires Exchange Server 2007 SP1 or small business server 2008 w/ Exchange SP1. MANY companies run on on Exchange 2003 SP2. Upgrading an enterprise from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007 is no easy task and is quite expensive. We currently run on SBS 2003 w/ Exchange SP2. Works very well for push calender, contacts, e-mail using WM phones. We have 4 WM phones and 1 Blackberry. Eventually we will move to SBS 2008 when Blackberry Professional becomes completely compatible with Exchange 2007 and SQL Server 2008 (Blackberry Pro is a limited edition or BES that doesn't provide full encryption and doesn't allow more than 31 users). The main issue with upgrading from Exchange 2003 to 2007 is that Exchange 2007 REQUIRES the 64 bit version of Windows Server 2003 or Windows Server 2008, because Exchange 2007 is 64 bit only. This is actually really necessary now because large Exchange databases with hundreds or thousands of users need allot more than 4GB of total ram. If you have the 32 bit version of Exchange 2003 and wish to move to the 64 version then you have a major upgrade hurdle; this is especially true if you are running Small Business Server 2003.
iPhone ActiveSYNC will work on Exchange 2003, but with far less functionality than compared to a WM phone or a Blackberry.
*mixed environments may provide an issue; say you have 3 iPhones and 4 Blackberrys. You cannot use Blackberry Professional because it doesn't completely support Exchange 2007 SP1, which is required for the iPhone full functionality. You must then upgrade (currently) to BES, which is a hella allot more expensive than Blackberry Professional.
*Apple still doesn't have an end to end solution to run push e-mail, calendar, contacts, tasks, notes etc using OSX Server. Supposedly they are working on a solution.
*I cannot insure a phone. As a company accountant with hundreds of employees I would be pretty pissed if our company had to shell out hundreds of dollars for new phones if the things just stopped working out of warranty, was lost or stolen. This policy of AT&T and Apple is stupid and limits iPhone sales tremendously. They're too afraid of Jailbreaking.
* The battery is soldered (Original) and/or hard (iphone 2nd generation) to replace. Having a user have to wait several days for a new phone, that cannot be insured from AT&T btw, is unacceptable. Apple's answer to the battery issue is to pay around $100, wait 2 weeks and pay a fee to "borrow" a phone. This is not acceptable because not every area has an Apple store. I'm not going to have an end user attempt to replace their battery themselves from an aftermarket kit. If I have an HTC WM phone or a Blackberry I can have the user stop by a specialty store, a Best Buy, Verzon store or worse comes to worse I can have a battery overnighted to them. The non-user replaceable battery is the dumbest thing to have on a cell phone. ONLY APPLE DOES THIS to frustrate users into buying a new phone or to extract large profit margins from battery replacements or to create "clean lines".
*The plans suck. That may be just my opinion, but let's take a look at it from the Bean Counter (accountant's) perspective. For $99 a month I get 900 minutes, the required data plan and 200 text messages. AT&T corporate probably does provide a volume discount, but this information is not disclosed on AT&T's site. For $99 a month I get Sprint unlimited everything, including Exchange ActiveSYNC. I can run hundreds of HTC WM phones for far cheaper per month than AT&T and I don't have to worry about users overaging their cell phone accounts (for heavy users). If we are talking about many white collar workers, they will probably need heavy access to data, voice and (maybe) text messaging services.
Unlimited on the iPhone is $150 a month before taxes (text, minutes, data).
for less usage Sprint has AT&T beat hands down too. $59.99 a month for light users @ 450 minutes a month with data, text, picture mail etc etc
*AT&T sucks or isn't well liked. This is opinion, but their are many iPhone users who complain about AT&T's network speed and availability. Not saying that Sprint or Verizon are great either, but they're more established networks. Sprints EVDO revision A kicks the crap out of HSPDA 3G used on GSM networks.
These issues, with at least the battery, insurance for the phones and encryption/lockdown need to be solved before widespread adoption is done. Remember we are talking about corporate data usage; corporations don't care or need to run to the iPhone so that their users can download some app to read the ski reports.
I responded properly to that post. You were making the point that Nokia was STILL number one. I pointed out the fact that they are losing marketshare rapidly, ergo, they might NOT be number one for much longer.
As you stated that Nokia was available around the world, I also pointed that they dropped out of the Japanese market.
I responded properly to that post. You were making the point that Nokia was STILL number one. I pointed out the fact that they are losing marketshare rapidly, ergo, they might NOT be number one for much longer.
As you stated that Nokia was available around the world, I also pointed that they dropped out of the Japanese market.
Nothing wrong with my response.
Ah, okay. I got cha. I am not so jade like many Nokia fans nor even the Appleistas in this forum to think that market share is exclusive. Nokia will lose shares as will RIM, as will Apple, as will they all. Apple will keep their base, Nokia will as well. It is simple naive to think that with all of the new entrants in the field to think Nokia will continue to sit on a 60% market share. I will put forth that no one will over take them, but they will not enjoy the position that they had before. Still, once again, you have millions of people that do now want an iPhone. These are easy pickings for Nokia, RIM, SE, etc.....
Ah, okay. I got cha. I am not so jade like many Nokia fans nor even the Appleistas in this forum to think that market share is exclusive. Nokia will lose shares as will RIM, as will Apple, as will they all. Apple will keep their base, Nokia will as well. It is simple naive to think that with all of the new entrants in the field to think Nokia will continue to sit on a 60% market share. I will put forth that no one will over take them, but they will not enjoy the position that they had before. Still, once again, you have millions of people that do now want an iPhone. These are easy pickings for Nokia, RIM, SE, etc.....
We have to distinguish between smartphone share, and overall share.
I believe that Nokia's smartphone share is now closer to 40%.
Good article. I still think that Nokia will lose market share (smartphones only) simply because of the new players. This is natural. As I said before and will say again, it will be interesting to see how things shake out once Nokia drops the N97 and Apple release 3.0, as well as the other guys. Once the dust clears I suspect Nokia will still be on top separated by only a few percentage points between the rest of the pack.
Also, considering that we are speaking about smartphones only, my question is: "why doesn't Apple have an even larger share if the iPhone is the Jesus Phone?" I go back to my original statement that there are millions of people that simply do not want one and this something that Apple will struggle to overcome, while providing an advantage to the other phone makers.
Aside form the whole "copy-paste", security issues he pointed out there is one MAJOR drawback that will prevent the iPhone from becoming mainstream like the Blackberry. And that is.... BATTERY LIFE. The iPhone battery life is outrageous. It lasts on average 1/4 the life of a blackberry under heavy use. That is simply unacceptable in a corporate environment.
Please refrain from posting comments like ?but you have power at your desk? and ?get a car charger?. Corporate America needs a device that can function like a PC (email, calendar, internet, etc) in a mobile environment which the iPhone has but simply cannot offer the juice to perform these tasks in one work day. The fact of the matter is, if you?re at your desk all day to keep the iPhone plugged in you have a thing called a PC to use.
I love the iPhone, I own one; but I also own a ?personal? Blackberry because I work in the corporate world where I need to be connected to this environment 24/7. The iPhone cannot offer this capability for me like a Blackberry can.
There was never any expectation that everyone would buy an iPhone or that Apple would over take Nokia. No one has that expectation.
Apple's own stated goal was for 1% of the worldwide phone market and that goal has been met. RIM only holds 1.9% of the worldwide phone market. What makes the difference is that Apple and RIM hold 3% of prime real estate in the most profitable part of the market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns
Also, considering that we are speaking about smartphones only, my question is: "why doesn't Apple have an even larger share if the iPhone is the Jesus Phone?" I go back to my original statement that there are millions of people that simply do not want one and this something that Apple will struggle to overcome, while providing an advantage to the other phone makers.
This is only true of BB that operate on the CDMA network, even then the battery life isn't that much better. BB on 3GSM like the iPhone don't have any advantage in battery life.
Battery life also depends on how much you use the device. People spend orders of magnitudes much more time on the internet with an iPhone than with BB devices, internet significantly decreases battery life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris4851
Aside form the whole "copy-paste", security issues he pointed out there is one MAJOR drawback that will prevent the iPhone from becoming mainstream like the Blackberry. And that is.... BATTERY LIFE. The iPhone battery life is outrageous. It lasts on average 1/4 the life of a blackberry under heavy use. That is simply unacceptable in a corporate environment.
Was 40% is now down below 37% like Symbian was above 50% and is now in the 40's.
If anyone is going to knock Nokia off number one it's Samsung, the i8910 Omnia HD absolutely blows the N97 away feature wise and will come with a choice of Symbian S60 v5 or WinMo based models, one of the pitfalls of announcing a phone and starting the hype 7 months before release for Nokia is that competitors have plenty of time to surpass their features.
Samsung have tried with limited success to break into business area with their Blackjack series.
In response to an earlier post:-
Enterprise arrange their own insurance for handsets and they also negotiate their own phone plans, you can't possibly extrapolate a business with five handsets to one with thousands.
This is only true of BB that operate on the CDMA network, even then the battery life isn't that much better. BB on 3GSM like the iPhone don't have any advantage in battery life.
Battery life also depends on how much you use the device. People spend orders of magnitudes much more time on the internet with an iPhone than with BB devices, internet significantly decreases battery life.
Not necessarily true. I can not take any phones into my work areas so my iPhone and my E71 sit outside in a non-classified area. At the end of the day, the iPhone is down considerably more than the E71. It is the way it is. The iPhone is a battery hog.
Aside form the whole "copy-paste", security issues he pointed out there is one MAJOR drawback that will prevent the iPhone from becoming mainstream like the Blackberry. And that is.... BATTERY LIFE. The iPhone battery life is outrageous. It lasts on average 1/4 the life of a blackberry under heavy use. That is simply unacceptable in a corporate environment.
Please refrain from posting comments like “but you have power at your desk” and “get a car charger”. Corporate America needs a device that can function like a PC (email, calendar, internet, etc) in a mobile environment which the iPhone has but simply cannot offer the juice to perform these tasks in one work day. The fact of the matter is, if you’re at your desk all day to keep the iPhone plugged in you have a thing called a PC to use.
I love the iPhone, I own one; but I also own a “personal” Blackberry because I work in the corporate world where I need to be connected to this environment 24/7. The iPhone cannot offer this capability for me like a Blackberry can.
Well, that's true of "classic" BB devices, which run slow processors on a limited OS, but as soon as you step up to more consumer friendly models (Pearl, Curve, Storm) the battery life plummets.
So, yeah, if RIM intends to freeze hardware development for its business users, they can hang on to battery life. After all, my last free "just a phone" phone had great battery life as well.
But that's not going to be an option. Like it or not, phones like the iPhone have changed the playing field. Desktop class browsers, advanced media functionality, and a suite of sophisticated apps, all wrapped up in an intuitive touch screen UI, is rapidly becoming the norm. Those things aren't luxuries or toys, just as squinting at tiny displays or fumbling with a stylus are somehow indicators of "professionalism."
Yes, battery life is important, but battery life is just one of the many tradeoffs mobile hardware manufacturers must consider, just as RIM's latest offerings have shown.
Comments
So, it looks to me that of the rivals that Nokia faces (Apple, RIM, Android and Palm, assuming the Pre takes off), they all have operating systems written from the ground up to run smart phones, three of them in the last few years. (Sorry, WinMob, check back when v.7 comes out.)
So how does Nokia configure the aging Symbian OS to compete? They can move UI elements around, sure, but is it possible that they are facing their "OS 9/NeXT" moment, where if they don't break compatibility and come out with something entirely new, they simply won't be able to go head to head with newer systems? Or am I underestimating the flexibility of Symbian?
BTW, in a nod to the thread topic, I think this line of thought applies to RIM, as well. They'll have a tough time keeping their phones current, if they have to continuously build on a code base that was never intended to function as a full computer OS.
Great post and on the mark. I agree that Nokia has to poop or get off the pot. They have to decide to buy and OS or build one from ground up and doing this in one quick hurry. I would love to see the iPhone OS running on a real phone. The possibilities would be almost endless.
I am not a programmer so I can not say for sure how flexible Symbian is in the long run. From one side, developers say that it is dead while others say there is plenty of life left but it needs to be tweaked and to stop with the one size fits all. I think Nokia did this with S60. They decided to drop all those other flavors and went with only one (S40) if you are counting.
I agree with you about RIM. They are in the same situation. Apple was absolutely brilliant in their timing and execution with the release of the iPhone OS.
since the Iphone supports all the ActiveSync functions like remote wipe, what would you need to do in order to give your IT department the ability to wipe your iphone remotely if they wanted?
Dude,
Don't believe this story. There is no way, a govt agency is allowing people to bring their personal devices onto a govt network.
You seem to forget that Nokia's been losing significant marketshare around that whole world. They even pulled out of Japan entirely.
Nokia is retrenching. As long as they rely on Symbian, they're a lost cause.
Would you like us to wait for you to catch up?
Next time post the disclaimer: "No talking about other phone brands allowed in this thread" and I will know the rules of the game.
I would love to see the iPhone OS running on a real phone. The possibilities would be almost endless..
Yes it is the return the old Sapporbaby. How long will it take for you to get rebanned, and make a re-return?
Once again you prove the point of: It is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it. I was not banned. I told the mods to disable my account. Go ask them and see for yourself. Damn, it really has to suck being you.
While the enterprise can use the iPhone, several limitations create issues for securing and locking down such devices:
*I cannot encrypt the iPhone end to end (currently). I can password protect some stuff, that's about it. Blackberry Enterprise Server allows me to encrypt the phones and completely control their environment. Exchange ActiveSync alone doesn't allow me to do this. I still can use third party tools with WM to lock down the device or provide encryption.
*I completely cannot control the user environment. I cannot prevent users from installing crap onto their iPhones. You don't want users installing crap onto their phones when the phones are company property. This is just not good best practices to do that.
*Remote Wipe and full sync capability requires Exchange Server 2007 SP1 or small business server 2008 w/ Exchange SP1. MANY companies run on on Exchange 2003 SP2. Upgrading an enterprise from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007 is no easy task and is quite expensive. We currently run on SBS 2003 w/ Exchange SP2. Works very well for push calender, contacts, e-mail using WM phones. We have 4 WM phones and 1 Blackberry. Eventually we will move to SBS 2008 when Blackberry Professional becomes completely compatible with Exchange 2007 and SQL Server 2008 (Blackberry Pro is a limited edition or BES that doesn't provide full encryption and doesn't allow more than 31 users). The main issue with upgrading from Exchange 2003 to 2007 is that Exchange 2007 REQUIRES the 64 bit version of Windows Server 2003 or Windows Server 2008, because Exchange 2007 is 64 bit only. This is actually really necessary now because large Exchange databases with hundreds or thousands of users need allot more than 4GB of total ram. If you have the 32 bit version of Exchange 2003 and wish to move to the 64 version then you have a major upgrade hurdle; this is especially true if you are running Small Business Server 2003.
iPhone ActiveSYNC will work on Exchange 2003, but with far less functionality than compared to a WM phone or a Blackberry.
*mixed environments may provide an issue; say you have 3 iPhones and 4 Blackberrys. You cannot use Blackberry Professional because it doesn't completely support Exchange 2007 SP1, which is required for the iPhone full functionality. You must then upgrade (currently) to BES, which is a hella allot more expensive than Blackberry Professional.
*Apple still doesn't have an end to end solution to run push e-mail, calendar, contacts, tasks, notes etc using OSX Server. Supposedly they are working on a solution.
*I cannot insure a phone. As a company accountant with hundreds of employees I would be pretty pissed if our company had to shell out hundreds of dollars for new phones if the things just stopped working out of warranty, was lost or stolen. This policy of AT&T and Apple is stupid and limits iPhone sales tremendously. They're too afraid of Jailbreaking.
* The battery is soldered (Original) and/or hard (iphone 2nd generation) to replace. Having a user have to wait several days for a new phone, that cannot be insured from AT&T btw, is unacceptable. Apple's answer to the battery issue is to pay around $100, wait 2 weeks and pay a fee to "borrow" a phone. This is not acceptable because not every area has an Apple store. I'm not going to have an end user attempt to replace their battery themselves from an aftermarket kit. If I have an HTC WM phone or a Blackberry I can have the user stop by a specialty store, a Best Buy, Verzon store or worse comes to worse I can have a battery overnighted to them. The non-user replaceable battery is the dumbest thing to have on a cell phone. ONLY APPLE DOES THIS to frustrate users into buying a new phone or to extract large profit margins from battery replacements or to create "clean lines".
*The plans suck. That may be just my opinion, but let's take a look at it from the Bean Counter (accountant's) perspective. For $99 a month I get 900 minutes, the required data plan and 200 text messages. AT&T corporate probably does provide a volume discount, but this information is not disclosed on AT&T's site. For $99 a month I get Sprint unlimited everything, including Exchange ActiveSYNC. I can run hundreds of HTC WM phones for far cheaper per month than AT&T and I don't have to worry about users overaging their cell phone accounts (for heavy users). If we are talking about many white collar workers, they will probably need heavy access to data, voice and (maybe) text messaging services.
Unlimited on the iPhone is $150 a month before taxes (text, minutes, data).
for less usage Sprint has AT&T beat hands down too. $59.99 a month for light users @ 450 minutes a month with data, text, picture mail etc etc
*AT&T sucks or isn't well liked. This is opinion, but their are many iPhone users who complain about AT&T's network speed and availability. Not saying that Sprint or Verizon are great either, but they're more established networks. Sprints EVDO revision A kicks the crap out of HSPDA 3G used on GSM networks.
These issues, with at least the battery, insurance for the phones and encryption/lockdown need to be solved before widespread adoption is done. Remember we are talking about corporate data usage; corporations don't care or need to run to the iPhone so that their users can download some app to read the ski reports.
Gee, Mel, did you just skip the dozen or so posts just prior to this?
I didn't read past the one I responded to , if that's what you mean.
But, nothing wrong with another voice in the choir.
Would you like us to wait for you to catch up?
I responded properly to that post. You were making the point that Nokia was STILL number one. I pointed out the fact that they are losing marketshare rapidly, ergo, they might NOT be number one for much longer.
As you stated that Nokia was available around the world, I also pointed that they dropped out of the Japanese market.
Nothing wrong with my response.
http://www.apple.com/iphone/enterprise/integration.html
and for the iPhone Configuration Utility:
http://www.apple.com/support/iphone/enterprise/
I responded properly to that post. You were making the point that Nokia was STILL number one. I pointed out the fact that they are losing marketshare rapidly, ergo, they might NOT be number one for much longer.
As you stated that Nokia was available around the world, I also pointed that they dropped out of the Japanese market.
Nothing wrong with my response.
Ah, okay. I got cha. I am not so jade like many Nokia fans nor even the Appleistas in this forum to think that market share is exclusive. Nokia will lose shares as will RIM, as will Apple, as will they all. Apple will keep their base, Nokia will as well. It is simple naive to think that with all of the new entrants in the field to think Nokia will continue to sit on a 60% market share. I will put forth that no one will over take them, but they will not enjoy the position that they had before. Still, once again, you have millions of people that do now want an iPhone. These are easy pickings for Nokia, RIM, SE, etc.....
Ah, okay. I got cha. I am not so jade like many Nokia fans nor even the Appleistas in this forum to think that market share is exclusive. Nokia will lose shares as will RIM, as will Apple, as will they all. Apple will keep their base, Nokia will as well. It is simple naive to think that with all of the new entrants in the field to think Nokia will continue to sit on a 60% market share. I will put forth that no one will over take them, but they will not enjoy the position that they had before. Still, once again, you have millions of people that do now want an iPhone. These are easy pickings for Nokia, RIM, SE, etc.....
We have to distinguish between smartphone share, and overall share.
I believe that Nokia's smartphone share is now closer to 40%.
And we are talking about smartphones after all.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...-apple-rim.ars
We have to distinguish between smartphone share, and overall share.
I believe that Nokia's smartphone share is now closer to 40%.
And we are talking about smartphones after all.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...-apple-rim.ars
Good article. I still think that Nokia will lose market share (smartphones only) simply because of the new players. This is natural. As I said before and will say again, it will be interesting to see how things shake out once Nokia drops the N97 and Apple release 3.0, as well as the other guys. Once the dust clears I suspect Nokia will still be on top separated by only a few percentage points between the rest of the pack.
Also, considering that we are speaking about smartphones only, my question is: "why doesn't Apple have an even larger share if the iPhone is the Jesus Phone?" I go back to my original statement that there are millions of people that simply do not want one and this something that Apple will struggle to overcome, while providing an advantage to the other phone makers.
Please refrain from posting comments like ?but you have power at your desk? and ?get a car charger?. Corporate America needs a device that can function like a PC (email, calendar, internet, etc) in a mobile environment which the iPhone has but simply cannot offer the juice to perform these tasks in one work day. The fact of the matter is, if you?re at your desk all day to keep the iPhone plugged in you have a thing called a PC to use.
I love the iPhone, I own one; but I also own a ?personal? Blackberry because I work in the corporate world where I need to be connected to this environment 24/7. The iPhone cannot offer this capability for me like a Blackberry can.
Apple's own stated goal was for 1% of the worldwide phone market and that goal has been met. RIM only holds 1.9% of the worldwide phone market. What makes the difference is that Apple and RIM hold 3% of prime real estate in the most profitable part of the market.
Also, considering that we are speaking about smartphones only, my question is: "why doesn't Apple have an even larger share if the iPhone is the Jesus Phone?" I go back to my original statement that there are millions of people that simply do not want one and this something that Apple will struggle to overcome, while providing an advantage to the other phone makers.
Battery life also depends on how much you use the device. People spend orders of magnitudes much more time on the internet with an iPhone than with BB devices, internet significantly decreases battery life.
Aside form the whole "copy-paste", security issues he pointed out there is one MAJOR drawback that will prevent the iPhone from becoming mainstream like the Blackberry. And that is.... BATTERY LIFE. The iPhone battery life is outrageous. It lasts on average 1/4 the life of a blackberry under heavy use. That is simply unacceptable in a corporate environment.
We have to distinguish between smartphone share, and overall share.
I believe that Nokia's smartphone share is now closer to 40%.
And we are talking about smartphones after all.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...-apple-rim.ars
Was 40% is now down below 37% like Symbian was above 50% and is now in the 40's.
If anyone is going to knock Nokia off number one it's Samsung, the i8910 Omnia HD absolutely blows the N97 away feature wise and will come with a choice of Symbian S60 v5 or WinMo based models, one of the pitfalls of announcing a phone and starting the hype 7 months before release for Nokia is that competitors have plenty of time to surpass their features.
Samsung have tried with limited success to break into business area with their Blackjack series.
In response to an earlier post:-
Enterprise arrange their own insurance for handsets and they also negotiate their own phone plans, you can't possibly extrapolate a business with five handsets to one with thousands.
This is only true of BB that operate on the CDMA network, even then the battery life isn't that much better. BB on 3GSM like the iPhone don't have any advantage in battery life.
Battery life also depends on how much you use the device. People spend orders of magnitudes much more time on the internet with an iPhone than with BB devices, internet significantly decreases battery life.
Not necessarily true. I can not take any phones into my work areas so my iPhone and my E71 sit outside in a non-classified area. At the end of the day, the iPhone is down considerably more than the E71. It is the way it is. The iPhone is a battery hog.
Aside form the whole "copy-paste", security issues he pointed out there is one MAJOR drawback that will prevent the iPhone from becoming mainstream like the Blackberry. And that is.... BATTERY LIFE. The iPhone battery life is outrageous. It lasts on average 1/4 the life of a blackberry under heavy use. That is simply unacceptable in a corporate environment.
Please refrain from posting comments like “but you have power at your desk” and “get a car charger”. Corporate America needs a device that can function like a PC (email, calendar, internet, etc) in a mobile environment which the iPhone has but simply cannot offer the juice to perform these tasks in one work day. The fact of the matter is, if you’re at your desk all day to keep the iPhone plugged in you have a thing called a PC to use.
I love the iPhone, I own one; but I also own a “personal” Blackberry because I work in the corporate world where I need to be connected to this environment 24/7. The iPhone cannot offer this capability for me like a Blackberry can.
Well, that's true of "classic" BB devices, which run slow processors on a limited OS, but as soon as you step up to more consumer friendly models (Pearl, Curve, Storm) the battery life plummets.
So, yeah, if RIM intends to freeze hardware development for its business users, they can hang on to battery life. After all, my last free "just a phone" phone had great battery life as well.
But that's not going to be an option. Like it or not, phones like the iPhone have changed the playing field. Desktop class browsers, advanced media functionality, and a suite of sophisticated apps, all wrapped up in an intuitive touch screen UI, is rapidly becoming the norm. Those things aren't luxuries or toys, just as squinting at tiny displays or fumbling with a stylus are somehow indicators of "professionalism."
Yes, battery life is important, but battery life is just one of the many tradeoffs mobile hardware manufacturers must consider, just as RIM's latest offerings have shown.