RIM's BlackBerry vs iPhone's ActiveSync

[JonHimself]

Thanks, I always forget how ignent us Americans is.

Good thing we are though cause we just might stop protecting freedom and free people if we weren't.

Especially since we're hated so much.

Us Americans that is.

I hate to debate politics and religion because there is no winner, especially in a discussion about the iPhone... BUT
I'm not sure what you mean? I understand you're being sarcastic by saying things like "Us Americans" and "Ignent" but are you serious about protecting freedom and free people? Because to some people, Americans included, I'm sure that the US as a country is seen as not necessarily protecting freedoms, especially those of speech AND of the freedom to practice different societal/religious values than the accepted ones of America. Just my thoughts though, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Feel free to delete this for being off-topic.

 

[EagerDragon]

As has been pointed out, the SMS that the device uses is different and doesn't count against your SMS count. Also, there is a new version of this called DirectPush that doesn't use this method - it requires Exchange 2007 and is what Apple is using.

Glad to hear.

 

[surferfromuk]

I would highly doubt it. Neither application has the capability to push data to another computer/device right now as they're meant to be consumer products and not for professionals on the go. Not only would you have to get program updates for software never meant to do that, but you'd have to find a way through your home firewall (you *do* have a home firewall, right??), etc.

No, I don't see that even as a remote possibility. The real question is if Apple's own servers and services (iCal server/.Mac) will get the same treatment as Exchange.

?? Don't understand...

My mac mail connects to Exchange now - either on the LAN or via a VPN directly to the Exchange server using built in standard Mac VPN ( PPTP)...Activesync embedded in mac mail and iCal means Exchange will 'push' full exchange data to it rather than having to use the current exchange (imap-esque) connection built in...

 

[AGSHender]

?? Don't understand...

My mac mail connects to Exchange now - either on the LAN or via a VPN directly to the Exchange server using built in standard Mac VPN ( PPTP)...Activesync embedded in mac mail and iCal means Exchange will 'push' full exchange data to it rather than having to use the current exchange (imap-esque) connection built in...

Maybe I misinterpreted the original poster. It sounded like they were wondering if iCal and Mail would be able to push email and calendar entries to the iPhone like Exchange will be able to do to the iPhone, so I was responding to it from that perspective.

As for Exchange->iCal/Mail, I don't know the terms of Apple's licensing agreement with MS. I'd bet it only covers mobile devices, since Microsoft wants people to be using Outlook with Exchange and doesn't want to infronge on that golden goose.

When you say your Mail connects to Exchange via your VPN, you're talking about via IMAP or POP3, I presume?

 

[EagerDragon]

As has been pointed out, the SMS that the device uses is different and doesn't count against your SMS count. Also, there is a new version of this called DirectPush that doesn't use this method - it requires Exchange 2007 and is what Apple is using.

Thanks for the clarification. Is this what you talking about?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/articles/directpush.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/evaluation/features/owa_mobile.mspx

 

[skirmish]

?? Don't understand...

My mac mail connects to Exchange now - either on the LAN or via a VPN directly to the Exchange server using built in standard Mac VPN ( PPTP)...Activesync embedded in mac mail and iCal means Exchange will 'push' full exchange data to it rather than having to use the current exchange (imap-esque) connection built in...

Still no sync from iCal to exchange server. Something I want - there's no pocket pc -> iSync plugin.

 

[sdunlapa]

I'm sure that the US as a country is seen as not necessarily protecting freedoms, especially those of speech AND of the freedom to practice different societal/religious values than the accepted ones of America. Just my thoughts though, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Are you joking? So your comparing those two things to what country? A communist one? [sarcasm]

What free speech do we not have? What religion can't be practiced in the USA?

Don't confuse morals with freedom. We aren't Amsterdam.

Always remember, "to whom much is given, much is expected"

Now about that iPhone. I only wish my company had an Exchange server.

 

[AGSHender]

Now about that iPhone. I only wish my company had an Exchange server.

As an Exchange admin, I can honestly say no you don't. Well, I guess it depends on how big your company is and what your needs are. Exchange is a good enterprise email server for the Windows platform, but Outlook? Crappy email program even if the collaborative features are necessary. Whatever team of developers thought the PST system for managing and archiving email would be a good idea should be fired...out of a cannon, into the sun. Try working with attorneys who save every piece of email ever received and then tell me you like/want Exchange and Outlook.

 

[surferfromuk]

Maybe I misinterpreted the original poster. It sounded like they were wondering if iCal and Mail would be able to push email and calendar entries to the iPhone like Exchange will be able to do to the iPhone, so I was responding to it from that perspective.

As for Exchange->iCal/Mail, I don't know the terms of Apple's licensing agreement with MS. I'd bet it only covers mobile devices, since Microsoft wants people to be using Outlook with Exchange and doesn't want to infronge on that golden goose.

When you say your Mail connects to Exchange via your VPN, you're talking about via IMAP or POP3, I presume?

Aahh yes, I see now..

VPN: No, just uses the exact same mac mail 'exchange' settings I use to connect when on the lan.

If you make sure your mail settings under the mac mail account for 'exchange' use a DNS name to connect then;

1) If you create a DNS entry manually using terminal

a) type sudo nano /etc/hosts
then add <your mailserver lan address> <your mailserver DNS address>
b) save the changes

2) Then connect to your exchange server via VPN (using PPTP - standard Exchange Remote Access) in your network settings using your standard domain user name and password - you will be on your LAN and your Mac mail will just connect as normal.

Works very nicely - other than as you say the calendar. I hear there is a way to make ical work with Exchange 2007 - but I've not tried it yet...

 

[AGSHender]

Aahh yes, I see now..

VPN: No, just uses the exact same mac mail 'exchange' settings I use to connect when on the lan.

If you make sure your mail settings under the mac mail account for 'exchange' use a DNS name to connect then;

1) If you create a DNS entry manually using terminal

a) type sudo nano /etc/hosts
then add <your mailserver lan address> <your mailserver DNS address>
b) save the changes

2) Then connect to your exchange server via VPN (using PPTP - standard Exchange Remote Access) in your network settings using your standard domain user name and password - you will be on your LAN and your Mac mail will just connect as normal.

Works very nicely - other than as you say the calendar. I hear there is a way to make ical work with Exchange 2007 - but I've not tried it yet...

I wasn't aware Mail.app had the capability to download Exchange email save for via IMAP/POP3--I thought that feature lay with Entourage.

 

[impierced]

Thanks for the clarification. Is this what you talking about?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/articles/directpush.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/evaluation/features/owa_mobile.mspx

Yes, specifically the DirectPush.

Reading the articles I did find it interesting to note that some providers DO charge for the SMS usage of ActiveSync and while someone said they do not, perhaps that was incorrect.

However, Apple is reportedly using DirectPush and therefore won't be using the older "Push" (SMS) approach.

 

[impierced]

I wasn't aware Mail.app had the capability to download Exchange email save for via IMAP/POP3--I thought that feature lay with Entourage.

You are correct, the user you are quoting is seeing the word 'Exchange' in Mail.app and thinking it's MAPI (Outlook) or WebDAV (Entourage) when it's actually IMAP.

 

[surferfromuk]

I wasn't aware Mail.app had the capability to download Exchange email save for via IMAP/POP3--I thought that feature lay with Entourage.

Under the Mac Mail Account settings there is an option for Exchange - I think it uses some trickery via OWA (Outlook Web Access) to access email. It certainly needs you to enter the OWA address but I'm not specifically stating it doesn't use any form of IMAP as well - I can't say categorically since I've never tried connecting it to mine with IMAP turned off...

I can say for one that it sends via SMTP but you can accept and trust a certificate which is presented and everything works pretty nicely - before you accept that certificate permanently you can see that it's the exact same one presented to you when you try to connect via OWA in a browser - that tells me the mac mail is using the same 'route into the exchange account' - at least at some level.

 

[petvas]

As an Exchange admin, I can honestly say no you don't. Well, I guess it depends on how big your company is and what your needs are. Exchange is a good enterprise email server for the Windows platform, but Outlook? Crappy email program even if the collaborative features are necessary. Whatever team of developers thought the PST system for managing and archiving email would be a good idea should be fired...out of a cannon, into the sun. Try working with attorneys who save every piece of email ever received and then tell me you like/want Exchange and Outlook.

PST files can certainly be a nightmare, but nowadays there are options. You can disable the usage of pst through group policies. You can implement an archiving solution that will also take care of the pst files. Don't just sit there and complain. There are things you can do to improve the situation!

 

[pesos]

WOW, so much misinformation on this thread. I am an Exchange admin and have been for 10 years. Exchange 2007 (despite the horrible management gui) is a fantastic product and is rock solid running on Windows 2008 Server.

1) Yes, Steve is an ass, but sometimes he is right, and this is one of those times. Today Activesync communication happens entirely over tcp/ip, using SSL. There is no SMS involved, that is an older version.

2) I love the post about 99.95% uptime for RIM (from April 2007 -- hmm, don't want to post earlier numbers eh???). 99.99% is considered low in this industry - "five 9s" is what you want to shoot for at minimum.

3) The single choke point for the RIM solution is a problem, ask all the companies and government groups and political campaigns that got hit hard by this most recent outage. It also is poor from a network geography standpoint - if you're in San Francisco and your Exchange server is in LA, there's no reason to introduce the latency of a trip to Eastern Canada and back.

4) RIM was first to market with a workable solution - THIS is why they have such a stranglehold on the market. Palm blew it and never focused on the business space - RIM saw the opening, put out a solid solution (for 5 years ago) and has done very well. Microsoft (in their usual MO) came along late to the party, but studied hard and brought out a solid competitive product. They have the advantage of owning the email sever product that everyone wants to connect to, so RIM will never be able to tie in as directly as Microsoft can. That being said, there is no reason for RIM to still send all the email through their NOC. They could just as easily design BES to talk directly to the crackberry devices just like Exchange talks to WinMobile devices. They may ultimately move this way to stay competitive. The uptime stats for #2 above wouldn't be an issue - and they SHOULDN'T be. RIM should be delivering software, just like microsoft, and let the admins worry about designing their own hardware and connectivity infrastructure to their own specifications.

5) Windows Mobile is evolving. The early devices were kludgy, but they have come a long way. My Treo 700w is a bit long in the tooth at this point, but it has served me well. The Treo 750 is rock solid (running winmobile 6.0) and the 800w is what I would get next if the iPhone exchange support wasn't coming. I have been holding out for iPhone 2.0 and hopefully in June I'll be able to pick up the new 3g hardware with Exchange support. The iPhone announcement is simply another nail in RIM's coffin - it would have happened eventually, but the iPhone will be a big catalyst.

6) As for having a decent Exchange client on the Mac, don't hold your breath. Microsoft is loathe to do this because they know that once they do, they will lose a LOT of windows license sales. This is why Entourage continues to suck and lag far behind Outlook in features. I set up my girlfriend's Macbook with Parallels and Office/Outlook 2007, but of course this requires a Windows XP license and that's how Microsoft wants to keep it, even in the enterprise space.

-Wes

 

[MattInOz]

Apple is using the latest (and as of Exchange 2007, the only) supported new method which is the DirectPush variant.

Basically, the client device makes a secure (HTTPS) connection to the server. If there is any new event (calendar/contact/mail) then data is sent across the wire. If no data has been sent for the heartbeat interval (typically 30 minutes), then a simple ping message goes across to keep it alive. Otherwise the connection lies dormant, which on most devices means it isn't sucking battery life etc unless it is in the midst of exchanging data.

This DirectPush method does not use any SMS messages and should not be involved with the other patent issue you brought up. Of course, should they decide to sue Microsoft, Microsoft would go to bat to make sure DirectPush stays alive (as it is used by all their current Windows Mobile devices as well)

Hasn't this been in mail servers for some time.
I remember the old OS9 Based mail servers even had the option to sent a message to the last known IP of the client when new mails arrived.
Sure it wasn't very useful as it just popped a message on the screen that interrupted what you where doing* telling you, you had new mail, so you could go to the mail client and update.

OK so they have improved it a bit so that the computer hijacks the message and tells which ever client it needs to up date, instead of the user doing it.
If it's even doing that it may even just update the icon if mail isn't active.

*oddly enough it's the people who complained when the feature was turn off again that are now crackberry addicts.

 

[AGSHender]

PST files can certainly be a nightmare, but nowadays there are options. You can disable the usage of pst through group policies. You can implement an archiving solution that will also take care of the pst files. Don't just sit there and complain. There are things you can do to improve the situation!

There are ways around it, but there's still a hard-coded limit is the size that PST/OST files can get to. I have around 30 users with laptops, and we use cached Exchange mode for them so they can access their folders while offline. And some of them are saving every email they ever get. Once they reach the 2 GB OST file mark, they can't do anything until they offload some email into PSTs or delete emails and restart Outlook.

We're investigating the use of EmailXtender or Enterprise Vault to eliminate the use of PSTs altogether, but the only reasons products like that exist is due to poor foresight on Microsoft's part. Did they seriously think that people wouldn't ever have more than 2 GB of email in a corporate environment?

Aargh.

 

[AGSHender]

Under the Mac Mail Account settings there is an option for Exchange - I think it uses some trickery via OWA (Outlook Web Access) to access email. It certainly needs you to enter the OWA address but I'm not specifically stating it doesn't use any form of IMAP as well - I can't say categorically since I've never tried connecting it to mine with IMAP turned off...

I can say for one that it sends via SMTP but you can accept and trust a certificate which is presented and everything works pretty nicely - before you accept that certificate permanently you can see that it's the exact same one presented to you when you try to connect via OWA in a browser - that tells me the mac mail is using the same 'route into the exchange account' - at least at some level.

I'll be damned, I hadn't noticed that. I'm too tired to play with that option now, but it's interesting to know it's there.

 

[MacFly123]

The Blackberry is already disappearing from the corporate world. Everyday I see more and more iPhones appearing in the workplace. People are buying them on their own and then handing in their Blackberries. RIMM will be deader than Palm in two years. I wouldn't be surprised if Verizon buys them.

My office has hated their BlackBerries so much that last week they all traded them in, switched to AT&T, and got iPhones and LOVE them. ANY higher level successful business man I see now has an iPhone. It is becoming a mark of success in the business world. Business owners and execs are going to demand iPhone support in their businesses and the countless apps that will be out in June are going to be a HUGE hit against RIM.

 

[MacFly123]

One issue that hasn't been covered here is HOW ActiveSync actually works.

It's nice to see the pretty arrow pointing from iPhone <----> Exchange and think that's very simple, but the reality is that it's not.

RIM paid huge bank for the rights to use true push technology. Remember that large lawsuit against RIM for patent infringement and the $600+ million payout to NTP for a perpetual license?

Microsoft didn't pay out any money to NTP for that same patent. So what did they do to enable ActiveSync to do "push"? I should also note that ActiveSync clients prior to the "push" craze could and still can do time based sync'ng (+5 min, +10 min, etc).

When you first sync your ActiveSync client to Exchange, Exchange caches out the devices identity. When a message arrives for the user, Exchange sends an SMS message to the device telling it to sync up to the mother ship. The device does a sync and just like magic your mail is there.

While the user receives his/her mail virtually instantly, the SMS hit can be large as you better have unlimited SMS if you get a lot of email.

Well how convenient that NONE of AT&T's plans have unlimited SMS, not even the unlimited plan lol. So would you have a million texts coming to your phone or are they like invisible to the user???

Sorry, I found my answer in the posts above.

P.S. Is there a way to combine your posts if you can't combine all your quotes while you read through the thread like I have here and above? Thanks.

 

[davinche]

One issue that hasn't been covered here is HOW ActiveSync actually works.

It's nice to see the pretty arrow pointing from iPhone <----> Exchange and think that's very simple, but the reality is that it's not.

RIM paid huge bank for the rights to use true push technology. Remember that large lawsuit against RIM for patent infringement and the $600+ million payout to NTP for a perpetual license?

Microsoft didn't pay out any money to NTP for that same patent. So what did they do to enable ActiveSync to do "push"? I should also note that ActiveSync clients prior to the "push" craze could and still can do time based sync'ng (+5 min, +10 min, etc).

When you first sync your ActiveSync client to Exchange, Exchange caches out the devices identity. When a message arrives for the user, Exchange sends an SMS message to the device telling it to sync up to the mother ship. The device does a sync and just like magic your mail is there.

While the user receives his/her mail virtually instantly, the SMS hit can be large as you better have unlimited SMS if you get a lot of email.

That is the way it worked like 3 years ago but not since Service Pack 2 for Exchange 2003...

There are ways around it, but there's still a hard-coded limit is the size that PST/OST files can get to. I have around 30 users with laptops, and we use cached Exchange mode for them so they can access their folders while offline. And some of them are saving every email they ever get. Once they reach the 2 GB OST file mark, they can't do anything until they offload some email into PSTs or delete emails and restart Outlook.

We're investigating the use of EmailXtender or Enterprise Vault to eliminate the use of PSTs altogether, but the only reasons products like that exist is due to poor foresight on Microsoft's part. Did they seriously think that people wouldn't ever have more than 2 GB of email in a corporate environment?

Aargh.

You might want to upgrade to something newer than Office XP.... 2003 and 2007 will support pst and ost files over 10GB, I think configurable in group policy up to 100GB, I'm not say that is the best idea but it is possible

 

[TJones]

You might want to upgrade to something newer than Office XP.... 2003 and 2007 will support pst and ost files over 10GB, I think configurable in group policy up to 100GB, I'm not say that is the best idea but it is possible

That's so not a solution. Outlook is a poor document management tool and the competition out there for the lack of a better word .. blows. Opentext DM (used to be Hummingbird, used to be PCDOCS before that) for example. How many times have I heard "Hey we're having a closing this weekend and need to swap an 90 Meg file back and forth by email around 350 times and I need to keep every copy. Can my mailbox hold that many?"

Back to the original topic. BlackBerry's at my firm started out as a gotta have toy. The top partners wanted it and so they get it. If they end up wanting the iPhone (when it finally releases in Canada) then guess what happens. Everything else is just fulfilling IT's requirements, once you blow away the objections then all bets are off. End users want something that works, the actual mechanisms involved are absolutely pointless so long as they get mail on their mobile device that looks way cooler than their peer's version while they're downing drinks during happy hour then they're happy.

 

[aristotle]

So people are criticizing RIM for known errors and assuming that Apple's untested system will be just fine.

Not clever.

Maybe you should have watched the presentation yourself instead of commenting based solely on an article on the presentation. Phil mentioned that Apple had invited several entities to test out the enterprise features and provide feedback.

The main problem with RIM is not security but rather having dependance on the RIM servers and a single point of failure that subscribing companies have no control over.

 

[kis]

Anyone that has a Blackberry that's worked non-stop for the past few months raise your hands .. Oh that's right they've had at least 2 major outages in the past three weeks.

no outages here - must have been your exchange server. I've experienced my BB to be FAR more reliable than any other mobile e-mail solution I've ever used (including the "push mail" solution currently implemented on the iPhone using Yahoo! email). Active Sync is a bloated piece of bad engineering that produces an enormous amount of overhead and pushes your data volume bills massively. Any Windows Mobile device I've used had massively shorter battery-life than the Blackberry and Direct Push has always been the culprit for that.

The iPhone already doesn't have the best battery-life and combined with Active Sync it won't last a day.

Apart from that: I really think it's about time Jobs retires as he's obviously losing it. After years of Microsoft-bashing he's suddenly started brown-nosing them simply because Apple hasn't been able to develop their own push-mail solution. And as for the iPhone in work-places: I don't think so. E-Mail security is only part of the problem. The blackberries are inherently more secure than the iPhone on many other levels as well (e.g. in that they encrypt all of the data on the phone if the users wishes to have that done).
Multimedia devices might be great for college use but definitely not in companies. Also I fail to see how Apple is trying to address the business market with the iPhone while they're clearly leaving exactly this market on every other front (iMacs with glossy screens that can't be used in businesses because of work-place ergonomics regulations, getting rid of the RAID options for the Xserves etc. )

kis

 

[kis]

The main problem with RIM is not security but rather having dependance on the RIM servers and a single point of failure that subscribing companies have no control over.

And being dependent on Microsoft and their proprietary Exchange platform that is every administrator's absolute nightmare is better how? At least Blackberry supports Lotus Domino as well - also BB is able to offer push-email to customers who don't want to run their own Exchange or Domino servers through BIS.