I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.
However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.
IOW, if people truly want one phone and one tablet, the solution apple offers is totally inadequate.
Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.
I'm not sure if you have used an iPhone/iPad combo but you can definitely sync contacts, email etc. Ota with either MobileMe or active sync (or other type services). As for backups, that must be done with the computer used to activate it which enterprise would like because back ups are more easily regulated. Lastly, enterprise functionality is limited by the imagination of the company since it can create and deploy custom apps for their own specific needs fairly easily.
What you describe is the exact same situation that the enterprise faces with Macs. You can load any app / malware on it without going through the App store.
Is that why enterprise has overwhelmingly rejected the Mac? I always thought the reasons were different.
Enterprise didn't really adopt Mac because they mostly have a legacy installation of PC software and infrastructure. Moving away from it would represent a huge reinvestment effort.
Adoption of iPHone, iPad into enterprise doesn't have this problem because most enterprises didn't have such an infrastructure in place. They are free to choose whichever technology people prefer and offers most compelling business case.
I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.
However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.
IOW, if people truly want one phone and one tablet, the solution apple offers is totally inadequate.
Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.
you should check out MobileMe service for syncing emails, contacts, calendars, bookmarks, notes...
Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.
The cool thing is, you can load any app/malware on it! Apple doesn't like the fact that people have been doing this, but there are many happy Jailbroke iPhone users out there. It does let them micro manage their applications, run rogue programs, etc.
But those of us that actually need to trust their phones... just play nice with the (rather reasonable) restrictions.
I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.
No he means folks don't want to carry a BB and an iPhone and a iPad and a Playbook. So Apple needs a useable enterprise solution comparable to BES. The closest thing is Good for Enterprise. In my limited exposure it seems a bit slow and clunky compared to the BB but from a security standpoint it is adequate vs BES.
Quote:
However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.
What? My iphone and ipad have the same contact and other info on it and is sync'd automagically.
Quote:
Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.
This is false given that Good is seeing penetration in the enterprise because folks want the iPhone and Android over the BB. Good provides the enterprise level of security for data on smartphones. All the corporate data is encrypted and accessible only via the Good app. The profile can be set to wipe based on policy (like detection of jailbreak) and the devices can all be administered over the air by IT.
You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers.
The reason they hate iPhone is that they are not into the level of technical understanding it takes to program Unix, no to mention C++, and having to understand interface spec's. Their level of understanding is finding some box to tick off after moving 15 levels down in the menus.
Your my new hero, I have been trying to find the way to explain the difference, and this is it.
First basing your information on "Good" is a total joke. Good makes mobile support software thats not required for most phones.
Example we have Exchange 2010 at work, and we use the Exchange tools to manage our mobile devices. We did the same for Exchange 2003.
The key is if a devices supports the Active Sync protocol and how much of it does the device support. The iPhone was a NO GO in the corporate world until Apple licensed AS from Microsoft. Corporate email is 70+% MS Exchange. AS = forced policies, like passwords, screen locks, and other stuff like remote wipe.
Good comes into play if your device does not support or fully support AS. Verizon tried very hard to get us to move to them and the Droid when it first came out. We tested it and it did not fully work with Exchange, so they tried to get us to use Good software to fill in the gaps. We did not want to purchase and setup another system to manage mobile devices, so we moved from Sprint to ATT for corporate mobile phones. The iPhone and Windows phones are the choices users have at my work place.
As of Adroid 2.2 or better I have read that Google fully supports AS.....and no need for Good.
I dont know any of my friends that support Exchange/mobile access at their work places that use Good.
My point being this Data is useless.....unless of course the data looks good for Apple and DED is the blog author.
No he means folks don't want to carry a BB and an iPhone and a iPad and a Playbook. So Apple needs a useable enterprise solution comparable to BES. The closest thing is Good for Enterprise. In my limited exposure it seems a bit slow and clunky compared to the BB but from a security standpoint it is adequate vs BES.
What? My iphone and ipad have the same contact and other info on it and is sync'd automagically.
This is false given that Good is seeing penetration in the enterprise because folks want the iPhone and Android over the BB. Good provides the enterprise level of security for data on smartphones. All the corporate data is encrypted and accessible only via the Good app. The profile can be set to wipe based on policy (like detection of jailbreak) and the devices can all be administered over the air by IT.
You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers.
"You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers."
If you move away from BES, and you are using Exchange you DONT NEED Good. You just need devices that support Active Sync.
I have setup and tested Good, it sucks.
No, I mean that you don't buy Good AT ALL unless you're an enterprise customer. As in all Good users are enterprise. Not that all enterprise customers (not using BES) uses Good.
ActiveSync doesn't provide the same level security as BES or Good. So if you want BES level security then the primary alternative is Good. Yes, it's rather clunky.
How did you conclude that the iPhone features are a pain for users considering the tens of millions of iPhones sold all over the globe to happy consumers?
Oh wait... you must mean the very small, vocal, tech-head minority that feel the need to access every conceivable type of system resource on their phone and micro-manage it, without taking into consideration Apple's successful reasoning to hide all that complexity from those tens of millions of consumers?
Face it. That same simplicity and closed environment is what also makes the iPhone desirable for the enterprise as well. Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.
Have folks not learned enough from the Windows mess?
Old WinMob phones had options that could be forced on them via the exchange server such as requiring a password and encryption on the device. Other options, such as preventing installation of software I'm not sure.
In any case, a good IT staff is always necessary for any platform to ensure its operation, especially its security. The users just need their device to work, and I can tell you from first hand experience that winmob 5 sucked balls on how well it worked with exchange over the air.
No, I mean that you don't buy Good AT ALL unless you're an enterprise customer. As in all Good users are enterprise. Not that all enterprise customers (not using BES) uses Good.
ActiveSync doesn't provide the same level security as BES or Good. So if you want BES level security then the primary alternative is Good. Yes, it's rather clunky.
Why isn't the security of active sync not as good? Just wondering.
While it isn't apparent to consumers because of carrier subsidies, the wholesale price of an iPhone, at about $600, is $100-$150 more than the typical high-end Android device, estimates Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Pierre Ferragu. That makes it less crippling for carriers to offer low-priced deals on Android phones, such as "buy one, get one free."
hi-mobile.net wants $960 for an iphone4 16GB model, with no warranty. That's around twice as much as any other phone.
Why isn't the security of active sync not as good? Just wondering.
Good has jumped through most of the hoops on the certifications for security configuration and cryptography ( FIPS-140-2, Common Criteria is in progress, and a bunch of others already done ).
Their system architecture is very similar to Blackberry, its just that the end "device" is an encrypted app container running on a range of phones, rather than the whole phone itself. Good and RIM had a series of legal disputes over patents in the last 10 years on the messaging solution, and by and large Good won those.
The main negatives of the Good approach and implementation are :
- it doesn't manage the device, it manages the app
- it has no visibility or reporting on the device as a whole
- all its encryption is a software implementation, and it does not leverage the hardware crypto in an iOS device, so its painfully slow with large mailboxes
- the app effectively replaces the functionality of the built in mail, contact, calendar, web browser, vpn and document viewer for all corporate usage, and Good's not done as good a job with these as Apple has, and they are deliberately sandboxed and not integrated into the whole OS like the Apple provided apps
So great from a cross platform device security perspective, great for ticking boxes in security policy compliance, not as good as iOS natively for usability, and reasonably expensive by iOS standards.
With AS and native mail/contact/calendars, if I unlock the device and hand it to you to show you a game, you can also open and read my email app. With the built in mail, I can cut and paste a work email into my GMail or Mobile Me and send it by the other method.
With Good, I need a second authentication with a different password to get into the app, so you wouldn't be able to see my mail, contacts or calendars, and the server side policy can out cut and paste out of the app, and prevent me forwarding work emails on my personal accounts.
So its really a corporate messaging solution thats secure, and kept separate from everything else on the device - kind of like carrying a separate device, its just a virtual one.
The joke is they must be an honest company, because they didn't call themselves "Great Technology". Most of the PITA performance stuff they'd fix on iOS if they leverages the hardware crypto module rather than doing everything slowly in software.
One thing I've always wondered. Why does the Android logo look like a robot? Androids are supposed to look like humans, not robots, George Lucas's droids notwithstanding.
Because all the definitions of what's a robot and what's an android got screwed up in the early 80's, primarily by the popularity of the Star Wars movies.
No one remembers what an android is anymore, they just think it's "some kind of robot."
Good has jumped through most of the hoops on the certifications for security configuration and cryptography ( FIPS-140-2, Common Criteria is in progress, and a bunch of others already done ).
Comments
I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.
However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.
IOW, if people truly want one phone and one tablet, the solution apple offers is totally inadequate.
Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.
I'm not sure if you have used an iPhone/iPad combo but you can definitely sync contacts, email etc. Ota with either MobileMe or active sync (or other type services). As for backups, that must be done with the computer used to activate it which enterprise would like because back ups are more easily regulated. Lastly, enterprise functionality is limited by the imagination of the company since it can create and deploy custom apps for their own specific needs fairly easily.
What you describe is the exact same situation that the enterprise faces with Macs. You can load any app / malware on it without going through the App store.
Is that why enterprise has overwhelmingly rejected the Mac? I always thought the reasons were different.
Enterprise didn't really adopt Mac because they mostly have a legacy installation of PC software and infrastructure. Moving away from it would represent a huge reinvestment effort.
Adoption of iPHone, iPad into enterprise doesn't have this problem because most enterprises didn't have such an infrastructure in place. They are free to choose whichever technology people prefer and offers most compelling business case.
The walled garden concept didn't hurt either.
I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.
However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.
IOW, if people truly want one phone and one tablet, the solution apple offers is totally inadequate.
Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.
you should check out MobileMe service for syncing emails, contacts, calendars, bookmarks, notes...
Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.
The cool thing is, you can load any app/malware on it! Apple doesn't like the fact that people have been doing this, but there are many happy Jailbroke iPhone users out there. It does let them micro manage their applications, run rogue programs, etc.
But those of us that actually need to trust their phones... just play nice with the (rather reasonable) restrictions.
I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.
No he means folks don't want to carry a BB and an iPhone and a iPad and a Playbook. So Apple needs a useable enterprise solution comparable to BES. The closest thing is Good for Enterprise. In my limited exposure it seems a bit slow and clunky compared to the BB but from a security standpoint it is adequate vs BES.
However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.
What? My iphone and ipad have the same contact and other info on it and is sync'd automagically.
Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.
This is false given that Good is seeing penetration in the enterprise because folks want the iPhone and Android over the BB. Good provides the enterprise level of security for data on smartphones. All the corporate data is encrypted and accessible only via the Good app. The profile can be set to wipe based on policy (like detection of jailbreak) and the devices can all be administered over the air by IT.
You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers.
The reason they hate iPhone is that they are not into the level of technical understanding it takes to program Unix, no to mention C++, and having to understand interface spec's. Their level of understanding is finding some box to tick off after moving 15 levels down in the menus.
Your my new hero, I have been trying to find the way to explain the difference, and this is it.
First basing your information on "Good" is a total joke. Good makes mobile support software thats not required for most phones.
Example we have Exchange 2010 at work, and we use the Exchange tools to manage our mobile devices. We did the same for Exchange 2003.
The key is if a devices supports the Active Sync protocol and how much of it does the device support. The iPhone was a NO GO in the corporate world until Apple licensed AS from Microsoft. Corporate email is 70+% MS Exchange. AS = forced policies, like passwords, screen locks, and other stuff like remote wipe.
Good comes into play if your device does not support or fully support AS. Verizon tried very hard to get us to move to them and the Droid when it first came out. We tested it and it did not fully work with Exchange, so they tried to get us to use Good software to fill in the gaps. We did not want to purchase and setup another system to manage mobile devices, so we moved from Sprint to ATT for corporate mobile phones. The iPhone and Windows phones are the choices users have at my work place.
As of Adroid 2.2 or better I have read that Google fully supports AS.....and no need for Good.
I dont know any of my friends that support Exchange/mobile access at their work places that use Good.
My point being this Data is useless.....unless of course the data looks good for Apple and DED is the blog author.
No he means folks don't want to carry a BB and an iPhone and a iPad and a Playbook. So Apple needs a useable enterprise solution comparable to BES. The closest thing is Good for Enterprise. In my limited exposure it seems a bit slow and clunky compared to the BB but from a security standpoint it is adequate vs BES.
What? My iphone and ipad have the same contact and other info on it and is sync'd automagically.
This is false given that Good is seeing penetration in the enterprise because folks want the iPhone and Android over the BB. Good provides the enterprise level of security for data on smartphones. All the corporate data is encrypted and accessible only via the Good app. The profile can be set to wipe based on policy (like detection of jailbreak) and the devices can all be administered over the air by IT.
You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers.
"You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers."
Not true.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../aa998933.aspx
If you move away from BES, and you are using Exchange you DONT NEED Good. You just need devices that support Active Sync.
I have setup and tested Good, it sucks.
"You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers."
Not true.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../aa998933.aspx
If you move away from BES, and you are using Exchange you DONT NEED Good. You just need devices that support Active Sync.
I have setup and tested Good, it sucks.
No, I mean that you don't buy Good AT ALL unless you're an enterprise customer. As in all Good users are enterprise. Not that all enterprise customers (not using BES) uses Good.
ActiveSync doesn't provide the same level security as BES or Good. So if you want BES level security then the primary alternative is Good. Yes, it's rather clunky.
How did you conclude that the iPhone features are a pain for users considering the tens of millions of iPhones sold all over the globe to happy consumers?
Oh wait... you must mean the very small, vocal, tech-head minority that feel the need to access every conceivable type of system resource on their phone and micro-manage it, without taking into consideration Apple's successful reasoning to hide all that complexity from those tens of millions of consumers?
Face it. That same simplicity and closed environment is what also makes the iPhone desirable for the enterprise as well. Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.
Have folks not learned enough from the Windows mess?
Old WinMob phones had options that could be forced on them via the exchange server such as requiring a password and encryption on the device. Other options, such as preventing installation of software I'm not sure.
In any case, a good IT staff is always necessary for any platform to ensure its operation, especially its security. The users just need their device to work, and I can tell you from first hand experience that winmob 5 sucked balls on how well it worked with exchange over the air.
No, I mean that you don't buy Good AT ALL unless you're an enterprise customer. As in all Good users are enterprise. Not that all enterprise customers (not using BES) uses Good.
ActiveSync doesn't provide the same level security as BES or Good. So if you want BES level security then the primary alternative is Good. Yes, it's rather clunky.
Why isn't the security of active sync not as good? Just wondering.
Of course. This is AppleOUTSider, the Faux News of the Mac world.
If you want actual news you'd have to go elsewhere...
Android beats Apple iPhone in US market share
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/9918...osoft-palm.htm
Android users more engaged with ads in Dec
Android overtook Apple in user activity at Thanksgiving and now it takes the lead in user engagement
http://vator.tv/news/2011-01-19-andr...ith-ads-in-dec
Apple Should Be Paranoid About Android
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...748591044.html
Android Leap Frogs Apple in Mobile OS Market Share
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375417,00.asp
Interesting point in one of the articles:
While it isn't apparent to consumers because of carrier subsidies, the wholesale price of an iPhone, at about $600, is $100-$150 more than the typical high-end Android device, estimates Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Pierre Ferragu. That makes it less crippling for carriers to offer low-priced deals on Android phones, such as "buy one, get one free."
hi-mobile.net wants $960 for an iphone4 16GB model, with no warranty. That's around twice as much as any other phone.
Btw it is their top selling model.
Why isn't the security of active sync not as good? Just wondering.
Good has jumped through most of the hoops on the certifications for security configuration and cryptography ( FIPS-140-2, Common Criteria is in progress, and a bunch of others already done ).
Their system architecture is very similar to Blackberry, its just that the end "device" is an encrypted app container running on a range of phones, rather than the whole phone itself. Good and RIM had a series of legal disputes over patents in the last 10 years on the messaging solution, and by and large Good won those.
The main negatives of the Good approach and implementation are :
- it doesn't manage the device, it manages the app
- it has no visibility or reporting on the device as a whole
- all its encryption is a software implementation, and it does not leverage the hardware crypto in an iOS device, so its painfully slow with large mailboxes
- the app effectively replaces the functionality of the built in mail, contact, calendar, web browser, vpn and document viewer for all corporate usage, and Good's not done as good a job with these as Apple has, and they are deliberately sandboxed and not integrated into the whole OS like the Apple provided apps
So great from a cross platform device security perspective, great for ticking boxes in security policy compliance, not as good as iOS natively for usability, and reasonably expensive by iOS standards.
With AS and native mail/contact/calendars, if I unlock the device and hand it to you to show you a game, you can also open and read my email app. With the built in mail, I can cut and paste a work email into my GMail or Mobile Me and send it by the other method.
With Good, I need a second authentication with a different password to get into the app, so you wouldn't be able to see my mail, contacts or calendars, and the server side policy can out cut and paste out of the app, and prevent me forwarding work emails on my personal accounts.
So its really a corporate messaging solution thats secure, and kept separate from everything else on the device - kind of like carrying a separate device, its just a virtual one.
The joke is they must be an honest company, because they didn't call themselves "Great Technology". Most of the PITA performance stuff they'd fix on iOS if they leverages the hardware crypto module rather than doing everything slowly in software.
One thing I've always wondered. Why does the Android logo look like a robot? Androids are supposed to look like humans, not robots, George Lucas's droids notwithstanding.
Because all the definitions of what's a robot and what's an android got screwed up in the early 80's, primarily by the popularity of the Star Wars movies.
No one remembers what an android is anymore, they just think it's "some kind of robot."
Good has jumped through most of the hoops on the certifications for security configuration and cryptography ( FIPS-140-2, Common Criteria is in progress, and a bunch of others already done ).
...
Nice informative post. Refreshing change.