For the record, I'm not a RIM guy.
I do work for a decently-large company (within 35 of being on the Fortune 500), and one of my job responsibilities is to maintain our small BlackBerry Enterprise Server. We have roughly 300 users, 99% of whom have Verizon BlackBerrys, and we're a Lotus Notes shop (out of legacy).
Having said that, I carry two devices with me. My work-issued BlackBerry and my personal iPhone.
I'm behind you 100% on everything you've said about the differences between the two devices from a users perspective. I personally hate using my BB for anything (other than as a tethered modem).
But when I think about the whole workflow of "managed mobile devices" (from a large business perspective), the end-user experience (as long as it's acceptable), is one of the last ones to be considered.
Here are some of my thoughts why Apple won't have replaced RIM as #1 by 05/25/2009.
RIM offers devices through all US carriers. Apple offers the iPhone only through AT&T. I don't see companies wholesale switching wireless carriers (which means negotiating rates, changes in billing procedures, etc) just to offer their users a better UI.
RIM supports Exchange (49%), Lotus Notes (37%), and Groupwise (8%). The bracketed numbers are Gartner's estimate of that platforms marketshare of corporate email. Apple offers no full-PIM sync solution for 45% of corporate email platforms.
Device cost. My company can get a new RIM device for $49. Apple current offers no discounts.
Insurance. If one of our users breaks or loses his RIM device, we can get it replaced for a $50 co-pay. AT&T offers no insurance on the iPhone.
Remains to be seen how through Apple implements iPhone "security management" and "device configuration".
Remains to be see how Apple will offer business support for the iPhone. Does it go into the same queue of calls as consumers that can't sync?
The pace of business doesn't work nearly as fast as you think it does. I think it's realistic to see betas and even pilots of the iPhone in corporations within the first year, but I can't think of a single business that would do a wholesale migration from RIM to iPhone (which is what would be required for Apple to displace RIM as #1 in a years time) simply because the iPhone gives the user a "next generation" experience.
How do you put a ROI on a "next generation" experience? Again, as a user of both platforms, I personally prefer the iPhone, but I've given too many BlackBerrys to users that have never used one before and have seen them figure it out on their own to know that as "previous generation" as it is, it's still a useful tool.
The iPhone is a new platform. And it was obviously thought of as a consumer device. I think sheer demand caused Apple to re-consider it for the enterprise. But it's clear they didn't even consider that in their release. They likely thought of just going after their core iPod market and their pro-customer markets. That being said here is what I think, and it's merely speculation...
I think Apple now realizes the potential of going after the enterprise. I think when Apple does see a true opportunity to dominate a market, they do go after it. I don't think Apple sees an opportunity to go after the entire PC market as they would have to sacrifice margins, and certainly have more enterprise applications in the works, which they don't appear willing to do. That's a situation which describes not going after a market. Let me give you the opposite example now.
Somewhere in 1999 or perhaps slightly before that, Apple lost Avid as a vendor of Digital Non-linear Editing software for the Mac platform. Steve Jobs felt this was a real blow to the pro-sumer Mac customer. At the time, Macromedia was just finishing a new Non-Linear Editing platform called Razor, and later named Final Cut. They showed this to Avid, offering to sell it. Avid turned them down. They showed it to Apple, and Apple bought it. Apple renamed it Final Cut Pro.
A lot of editors in the smallest of catagory bought Final Cut Pro, but all it did was DV editing. DV means Digital Video, and it's a codec. A very specific low end codec at that. Pretty soon some crazy people wanted to edit actual film on Final Cut Pro. But FCP wasn't capable of this. Film editing requires a database to be created which compares digital edits to film frames and then issues what is known as an EDL, or Edit Decision List to be given to an actual film cutter who then cuts the film print. Film is very expensive to develop, and telecine, and then edit and cut. So this is a big deal.
Now Avid, the 800 pound gorilla in this example, (like RIM) had been doing true film editing for the company's lifetime. Most felt Avid in absolutely no danger of Apple what so ever. But pretty soon a company called Film Logic was created which made this database and EDL management system for FCP. Apple later bought this company and renamed the product, CinemaTools. FCP could now do film editing. And in fact, later on Apple bought two different DVD authoring companies, Astaré and DVD Maestro. They started to create a suite of applications that would put the Mac back on the map where Avid had left a giant hole. With FCP, CinemaTools, and DVD Studio Pro they started to build momentum. They bought Nothing Real, the makers of Shake which is a Node Based compositor using in the Lord of The Rings Trilogy. They bought a text effects company which paved the way to LiveType. They hired the ex-team of developers at Autodesk's Descreet devision and created Motion, and Aperture. Apple teamed with AJA and BlackMagic Design to allow editors ingest all kinds of various codecs. Soon Apple wasn't just a DV editor anymore. They had grown to become HD/SD, Film, and on and on. And they are the premiere editor for the new RED camera which does 2k and 4k resolution. Apple is a master with codecs and soon developed ProRES, and many other lossless codecs. They bought a company that makes a color processing application similiar to a $100,000 Da Vinci colorist station.
Apple pretty much dominates editing at this point. While Avid is still large in broadcast, they are losing a lot of ground to Apple. They are starting to show losses in their quarterlies now. And Avid, the once 800 pound gorilla is now undergoing massive pricing restructuring in an effort to compete with Apple. But Apple's suite is so much more for the money. It's like Avid hasn't got a chance now. The time for Avid to change was many years ago, but they (Avid) believed their own you-know-what, and did nothing.
Now this market over Enterprise Smart Phones can be taken away from RIM. And if you look at the market data, without even going after Enterprise at all Apple has gained a lot of attention from that very market. They are basically begging Apple to make something that allows them to use an iPhone in their corporation. They want it, they have said so.
Will Apple rise to this demand? I think the answer is yes because I think Apple knows that RIM can be defeated. Where there is a way, they will create the will. The 2.0 release speaks loudly to Apple putting on the boxing gloves and preparing to enter the ring.
I think the 2.0 is just the very beginning. It's the Film Logic. And in time, they will add more and more of the tools you need in the enterprise so long as they believe this is winnable. All of these areas you mention of lacking capability are likely going to be dealt with. Think about this for a second. Look what they did from 1.0 to 2.0 and look how quickly they are doing it. Honestly remind yourself of one important fact. Since when has RIM worked so quickly to change course? They take a year just to release a minor upgrade. 4.1 to 4.2 to 4.5 is taking a very long time. Apple going from a full 1.0 to 2.0 is taking place in mere months.
So it gos back to a willingness. Apple has the talent, the money, and the desire at this point. They have a better platform to start with, and a better UI. So in my opinion, they just stepped into the ring, wearing gloves, and let the robe reveal what they truly are. Which is the 800 pound gorilla. RIM was never that gorilla. They just thought they were. But in my estimation, they're about to get their lights punched out.
Alex Alexzander
If you followed the thread of the conversation you would have seen where it comes from.
Arisobrat gave a good example of how RIM chases the market by providing cheap devices, like the blackberry for $50.
Apple likes its high margins. If they dropped their margins they could actually be a competitor in the market, with a
worldwide market share of more than 3%
To really gain market share they are going to have to get a lot cheaper. Is Apple up to that? They have not shown that willingness in the PC market.
What you are not considering, obviously, is that this argument fails to compare to the PC and Mac argument. Apple just gained a 25% marketshare in the smartphone market in mere months. As you can see, that differs greatly from the market conditions of the PC and the Mac. So please, realize how foolish and incomparable this argument is.
Alex
