Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
"iPhone will never conquer enterprise" - Can someone with IT knowledge translate?
- Thread starter Kinderhauz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Common misconception here. They're subject to governance as much as anyone so they may get one for themselves but the rest of the company will go with the most cost effective solution.
There is nothing wrong with iTunes doing "everything". For a home user it makes a lot of sense. However, in a corporate environment there really is a very good case for a stripped down application for managing the iPhone.
Give it a few months - something will turn up.
The real fun starts with OS X 10.6 - as it is going to have exchange support built in for the desktop.
Interesting. So how long before Apple removes the requirement for iTunes all together. Cause as far as I know DoD and DoJ frown on iTunes
.I was wondering about that as well. It seems like it is going to be based on OWA access, not MAPI access. Of course in Micorsofts eyes anything that can sell a license...
I think he makes very valid points about support and mostly "Change". Big companies don't like "Change". The IT departments are all about getting the job done. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Nobody likes supporting oddball configurations. His comments about Apples support infrastructure is dead on.
His other comments about getting certain things to work are a little overstated. MS products can be finicky (to say the least), but usually when you get them working, they will run forever with just a little care and feeding.
I don't really believe Apple has a huge interest in the corporate world. The iPhone kind of backed into that role, since some of the major industry software houses love the device (The medical stuff you've seen demo'd). Apple stepped up and addressed what it would take to get it running on the corporate network. There are some big companies testing it, so I would think they've gotten similar feedback. IBM was looking at building a Notes client, although that kind of fell off the Radar.
I'm also not too sure about Apples stock price being tied to the corporate penetration of the iPhone. If they can reach their target numbers with the consumer market, the corporate stuff is just gravy.
His other comments about getting certain things to work are a little overstated. MS products can be finicky (to say the least), but usually when you get them working, they will run forever with just a little care and feeding.
I don't really believe Apple has a huge interest in the corporate world. The iPhone kind of backed into that role, since some of the major industry software houses love the device (The medical stuff you've seen demo'd). Apple stepped up and addressed what it would take to get it running on the corporate network. There are some big companies testing it, so I would think they've gotten similar feedback. IBM was looking at building a Notes client, although that kind of fell off the Radar.
I'm also not too sure about Apples stock price being tied to the corporate penetration of the iPhone. If they can reach their target numbers with the consumer market, the corporate stuff is just gravy.
Remember that people have money and job security wrapped around products like the Blackberry and Windows. They know these products well and do not want to change.
Just think if someone tried to take your iPhone or Mac out of your hands at home and replace it with a Blackberry and Dell PC and you had to pay good money for them to do that.
Just think if someone tried to take your iPhone or Mac out of your hands at home and replace it with a Blackberry and Dell PC and you had to pay good money for them to do that.
Poorest excuse ever. Companies constantly retrain their staff for IT needs. A red herring if ever there was one.
*facepalm*
Sorry to be so uninformed but why do companies and the military not want iTunes on their computers? Is it a security thing. Also why is iTunes even in the picture where corporate services are concerned. Someone enlighten me please
Sorry to be so uninformed but why do companies and the military not want iTunes on their computers? Is it a security thing. Also why is iTunes even in the picture where corporate services are concerned. Someone enlighten me please
I know that DoD and DoJ don't like software that phones home, without control of what kind of information is being sent. I remember it being an annoyance when it came time to update Quicktime, how hard it was to just update Quicktime without installing iTunes. Plus iTunes is considered to be entertainment. It is similar to how playing Solitare is frowned on as well.
Other than that iTunes is fine. Apple could fix that by giving admins a way to disable the iTunes Store via Group Policy. Then I could see it being not as much of an issue.
This is indeed a common misconception:don't count on this. SecPols are not designed to be taken lightly and apply for everyone (even an admin needs to take these in consideration as he will be held responsible)
Didn't you know in the "real world" there aren't any security policies. Everyone freely shares information, there are no firewalls. People can write their password down and tape it to their monitor. So of course the iPhone is going to completly take over.
The misconception is your own. If users want it, and especially if management wants it, then the only thing left is if it can be effective. If it can be, and the iPhone certainly can be, then it will get a pilot. The fact that 35% of the fortune 500 is in trials backs up this very claim you ignore. Where do you think the desire for these companies came from? Outsiders? No. They came from the users and the management. That's exactly the point the user made that you dismissed. So by your account, these fortune 500 companies are in trials due to what exactly? Nothing?
It has always been this way. Those that work within a company make a request and support their desire for new computers, different computers, different PDAs, phones, smart phones, etc. All of which is considered and sometimes acted upon. It couldn't be otherwise now could it...
Alex
Absolutely correct. IT is a tool. Anyone who doesn't see this isn't dealing with a full deck. Yes, many companies do have rules they have to abide by. Banks, drug companies, etc. But these posters seem to think for some strange reason that an iPhone cannot be adapted to the rules, which is completely false. For one thing, it's very specific to the company's business. A bank will differ from a drug company for example.
When I was working for BAYER in Berkeley, we had many options on the table. Any of which could have been chosen equally. It was up to us because all the solutions under consideration met the guidelines.
As I said before, 35% of fortune 500 companies are in trials. Obviously some people don't understand what that means. It means a large percentage of the fortune 500 feel the iPhone could adapt to their current environment. If it couldn't even adapt, they wouldn't be wasting time on trials now would they?
So to the nay-sayers out there, try to wrap your head around this thought each time you begin to think enterprise will not accept the iPhone. They ARE in trials. Why do you think that is? They like wasting time and money and/or resources?
Alex
No, 35% of Fortune 500 companies have tested it and, if you look at the news, largely found it wanting.
And that two-thirds don't.
If it couldn't even adapt, they wouldn't be wasting time on trials now would they?
Nope, but they have tested it and it seems it failed.
http://blogs.wsj.com/biztech/2008/06/18/cios-just-say-no-to-iphone-vista/
The take up looks to be about 2% next year.
Now here's a question for you: How many of the Fortune 500 companies use Blackberries? I'm going to bet it's upwards of 80%.
Trials != adoption it seems.
I think perhaps you need to re-read that journal blog. IF you still don't see the flaw in your logic, just say so and I will happily point it out to you. But for now, I'll give you the opportunity to catch it on your own.
Alex
Does it have something to do with the fact that the 2% of CIOs in the blog are not necessarily part of the 35% of Fortune 500 companies that were testing the iPhone? It looks to me like the blogger just polled CIOs, not the ones who've had hands-on experience with the iPhone. It also looks like the survey was done before the announcement of the 3G iPhone, though that's probably of lesser importance.
Indeed. And in fact, look at the number of CIOs polled. Not only is it not entirely in the USA, it's not even the same CIOs. It's not even the amount of existing CIOs in a 35% total of the 500 companies. And in fact, it's a monthly poll. It's only accurate for May.
You see this is what happens when others who post have no real knowledge of their own. They tend to run around Google all day trying to find anything to the support their cause.
To BongoBanger, you can bring the entire BB forum userbase in here if you like. I'll easily beat all of you in my arguments. None of you have what it takes to form a good argument. Keep trying, and I'l keep exposing you for what you are.
Alex
Okay, here is my argument. I have asked a few folks in Quantico (hint: not just the marines are there) if they are interested in the iPhone. They all said yes, they also all said as long as there is a camera on the phone the Blackberries will stay.
Now, how many fortune 500 companies have similar no camera phone policies?
So I don't want to put any words in your mouth. Are you saying Apple is unwilling to make a phone without a camera for those customers that have such policies?
Are you aware that Apple made special Macs just because schools wanted them? Units without CD or DVD drives in them. Are you aware of the eMac product at all? That was developed specifically for education. And later Apple sold it to the general public because of overwhelming demand.
So again, I put the question back to you, sir. Do you feel Apple will let these markets slip through their fingers? Don't you believe it is certain that others in the trials have already told this to Apple? Don't you believe that Apple has likely already told them not to worry, it will be taken care of?
Do you believe a company like Apple is so blind that they do not recognize this opportunity?
I'm seriously asking your opinion. I'll give you mine up front. My opinion is, they are already going to give these enterprise customers exactly what they want. That's my take. What's yours?
Alex
The only response I can give, we will see. I sure do hope they offer phones without the camera, as I have said numerous times it sucks not being able to bring my iPhone into the building.
I would be the first customer!
EDIT: Sorry if I came across as a little rude or mean. I am just kind of bitter about the whole camera thing. I also wanted to add that I was going to try to convert my network over to macs. When looking at the Macs offered there was no option to get the MacBook Pros without a camera (see the theme).
The only response I can give, we will see. I sure do hope they offer phones without the camera, as I have said numerous times it sucks not being able to bring my iPhone into the building.
I would be the first customer!
I don't much care for a camera myself. I have a small 7MP camera I carry in my laptop bag. It's a neat feature a lot love. But I too have worked as a consultant in places that require an NDA ID, and once, Natural Born American Citizenship just to walk in. And of course no camera can be brought on site.
I'd be blown away if you didn't see some variant phones by Apple.
And what you said is dead-on. We'll have to wait and see.
Alex
The only response I can give, we will see. I sure do hope they offer phones without the camera, as I have said numerous times it sucks not being able to bring my iPhone into the building.
I would be the first customer!
EDIT: Sorry if I came across as a little rude or mean. I am just kind of bitter about the whole camera thing. I also wanted to add that I was going to try to convert my network over to macs. When looking at the Macs offered there was no option to get the MacBook Pros without a camera (see the theme).
You are not rude, Sir. If anyone can be it is me. As you can well see I am sure. I am not a Mac fanboy. I use them because it makes sense to do so. But that's me. Ask me two years ago what I was using and it was a few custom made machines I built for myself. I believe in using the right tool for the job. It's that simple with me. I have owned 4 blackberry devices in total. Perhaps as many as 8 palm devices. A nino. And HP jurnada CE device. And I go back with regards to computers to 1979. My first use of modems was at the low speed of 75 and 150 baud. I used to be quite adept at the AT command set. And I was a field tech for 9 years. So I have watched this industry grow up from absolutely nothing. I believe I understand better than most kids that get a silly cert (i have 39 of those, all lapsing) and think they understand business all of the sudden. They don't.
Alex
I think any corporation that allows the IT department to dictate every single technological implementation exclusively on the grounds of how difficult it 'appears' like it is going to be for them to support rather than exclusively on how cost effective vs productivity and user experience after a legitimate trial or investigation, (and even as seems to be suggested in some posts here just arbitrarily overrule a CEO), is doomed to a slow competitive demise.
In my experience IT people generally fall into two camps ;
1) Those who serve the organisations best interests with enthusiasm, courtesy and accept and adopt a service based attitude to users.
These are the good IT Guys. They tend to be fast, efficient, flexible and open to new ideas with a genuinely open mind. They are insanely great assets to any large corporation. They are not stuck on any one platform and are always willing to learn new skilles and try new ideas.
They would trial the iPhone objectively, without prejudice, and with enthusiasm if requested to do so by key users.
2) Those who deliberately block new technology, are unwilling to change systems, due to ignorance, fear or laziness, and resist any initiative to try new ideas or those that don't fit in with their mis-placed idea of personal job security.
These are the bad IT Guys. They tend to be dogmatic, unhelpful, lazy, unskilled and closed to new ideas. They are insanely damaging to any large companies - though amazingly enough due to the ignorance in most users are allowed to dictate policy which has a massive impact on companies productivity and future direction and often go unnoticed for years.
They would either block the trial of an iPhone by verbal misdirection or an apathetically conducted trial that was almost pre-doomed to 'fail' by design.
Sadly, the second camp represents about 50% of all IT people. They believe they can protect their future by either over-complicating the IT systems and/or deliberately maintaing an air of secrecy. In my past as an IT manager I have personally had no option but to fire people in the 2nd category who simply would not SERVE the users or the organisation with it's best interests at heart.
The stupid thing is that if only all IT people would follow camp 1 - they'd have a more dynamic, diverse and exciting job with far greater long term job security. They actively help build a company and make it prosper and they become skilled and flexible in a vast array of technology solutions.
Once again, I would strongly urge any IT people requested by a high level key personal in their organisation to trial the iPhone without prejudice. Just remember this - if it fails and there wife or their children or friends get one and they find out how good it is - those IT people will dent their own credibility.
In my experience IT people generally fall into two camps ;
1) Those who serve the organisations best interests with enthusiasm, courtesy and accept and adopt a service based attitude to users.
These are the good IT Guys. They tend to be fast, efficient, flexible and open to new ideas with a genuinely open mind. They are insanely great assets to any large corporation. They are not stuck on any one platform and are always willing to learn new skilles and try new ideas.
They would trial the iPhone objectively, without prejudice, and with enthusiasm if requested to do so by key users.
2) Those who deliberately block new technology, are unwilling to change systems, due to ignorance, fear or laziness, and resist any initiative to try new ideas or those that don't fit in with their mis-placed idea of personal job security.
These are the bad IT Guys. They tend to be dogmatic, unhelpful, lazy, unskilled and closed to new ideas. They are insanely damaging to any large companies - though amazingly enough due to the ignorance in most users are allowed to dictate policy which has a massive impact on companies productivity and future direction and often go unnoticed for years.
They would either block the trial of an iPhone by verbal misdirection or an apathetically conducted trial that was almost pre-doomed to 'fail' by design.
Sadly, the second camp represents about 50% of all IT people. They believe they can protect their future by either over-complicating the IT systems and/or deliberately maintaing an air of secrecy. In my past as an IT manager I have personally had no option but to fire people in the 2nd category who simply would not SERVE the users or the organisation with it's best interests at heart.
The stupid thing is that if only all IT people would follow camp 1 - they'd have a more dynamic, diverse and exciting job with far greater long term job security. They actively help build a company and make it prosper and they become skilled and flexible in a vast array of technology solutions.
Once again, I would strongly urge any IT people requested by a high level key personal in their organisation to trial the iPhone without prejudice. Just remember this - if it fails and there wife or their children or friends get one and they find out how good it is - those IT people will dent their own credibility.
How does he work for so many large companies at the same time.
I know some people that do consulting and actually do work with a lot fo the fortune 50 companies... and this does not seem to be the case at all.
The geeks who run these departments are migrating to the iPhone which makes it much more likely for the integration to take place.
I know some people that do consulting and actually do work with a lot fo the fortune 50 companies... and this does not seem to be the case at all.
The geeks who run these departments are migrating to the iPhone which makes it much more likely for the integration to take place.
ActiveSync uses MAPI for access. More recent versions such as that used for DirectPush use MAPI over HTTP/HTTPS.
Sure, it isn't as fast as a native MAPI connection, but you get a lot of advantages by doing it over HTTP/HTTPS (punches through proxies a lot easier, for example).