Here's why email integration isn't going to happen:
Corporate IT isn't (and has never been) about what users *want*. Corporate IT is about creating a platform that users can use to do their jobs that IT staff can replicate. It's about reducing the cost of replication and processes--lowering TCO and marginal cost. It's not unlike a . Apple, on the other hand, is about what users want, and creating easy ways for users to do what they want. But they've missed a key middle man: the IT decision-maker. IT takes requests, but it's function in life is to set standards and
On the technology side, Microsoft Exchange, Lotus Notes, and Novell's Groupwise are the email systems which 95+% of all companies use. In order to get 'corporate email integration' like RIMM, you have two choices: Create and sell the Apple equivalent of Blackberry Enterprise Server (BES) or integrate directly with the email systems via POP/IMAP/RPC protocols.
The simplest of these options would be to integrate directly using POP, or preferably IMAP. Now, in addition to configuring the additional protocols for use by clients (they're typcially disabled), you have to go through the steps of requesting and configuring a security certificate on each server for the services. Easy enough to do for people who know how to do it, except there's no support scenario of something along the line keels over. You can call Microsoft to figure out how to troubleshoot POP/IMAP, and you can call Apple to figure out how to troubleshoot the iPhone. But the whole end-to-end package, from phone, across the wireless network, across the Internet, to the email server running the protocol--that's a lot of vendor complexity that most IT shops don't want to deal with it. The cost-benefit just isn't there to extend support to the device if something goes wrong. And telling users that they can buy the iPhone, but they're on their own for support isn't a great option either. So IT shops aren't going to like this option, I don't care what the users want.
RIMM solved this by creating BES. Now, there are only three players--all of whom have support desks, not coincidentally. As long as the data's in Exchange, if it's not getting to your Crackberry, it's either RIMM or your wireless carrier. IT departments adore (and tend to require) having someone to call for help when things go awry. IMHO, that's one of the big reasons Linux still hasn't caught on that well in the enterprise environment. Can/will Apple provide that level of enterprise-class support and responsibility?
If Apple could create a BES-like software, they might have a chance on this front. So lets examine their success in creating enterprise-class software for Windows. Yep, that concludes that list. Go to apple.com, you'll find three categories: Shop Mac, Shop iPod, and Shop iPhone. So the only software Apple makes for Windows is iTunes, and...? *ONE* application for Windows. *ZERO* applications for a Windows IT infrastructure. I'm supposed to believe that Apple is just going to come out with enterprise-class infrastructure software that interacts with Exchange, Groupwise, and Notes that works reliably on the first go round?
Also, from the security side, security and ease-of-use have always been somewhat opposed to each other. Apple specializes in the latter; are they any good at (or even capable of) the former? What about the companies that have standardized on RSA tokens as a means of achieving two-factor authentication--can/will Apple support these kinds of third-party security needs, and will the enterprise customers trust their implementation?
Here's what I think it boils down to:
Microsoft's enterprise software suite does one thing better than any other software suite--interoperate. That's it's hallmark (frankly, that's my belief about why it's the industry standard). You install Windows and Active Directory, you install Exchange, you install SharePoint, and it all just *works*. They work together out of the box. Mac doesn't currently and isn't ready to interoperate with Active Directory or Exchange. It -might- be slightly more prepared to work with a Novell environment. But it's not going to sweep over the gates of the IT world just because users want it. You can't justify the expense of new servers (because they'll have to be Mac servers, I'm sure), new software, new IT staff (who can support the new Apple server environment), and a whole new additional layer of complexity. For a new phone. That you're only going to buy for a fraction of your users. For which there are two entire classes of competitors (BB and Windows Mobile) that have already achieved trust and acceptance.
