Re: Breaking Rumor: Apple iPhone goes enterprise on Jan. 21

Sorry to burst your Apple bubble----few companies are going to pay a
super-premium price for a "phone" that is 75% entertainment device. You may
want one, but that's as far as it's going to go. Business buys Blackberry
(or Window Mobile) because these are business-centric devices, not an
entertainment device with some communication ability.
"4phun" <vic.healey@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d362ea74-ec00-4d38-bbcf-caa939e6eb6a@i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> AT&T prepping to bring iPhone to corporate and business customers
> - Apple iPhone goes enterprise on Jan. 21
> Posted by Will on Thursday, January 17th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
>
> The enterprise market is a huge money-maker for carriers and
> manufacturers alike. Just take a look at the leading smartphone
> platform in the US. The RIM-made BlackBerry platform is the push-
> emailing, Outlook server compatible, enterprise-handset of choice
> among the corporate-set. Sure, the iPhone has already taken the second-
> highest market share in the smartphone segment, but cracking the
> mainstream corporate market would drive up market like mad.
>
> There are already many businessmen and businesswomen (or is it
> businesspeople? Political correctness, bah) bugging their IT
> departments to support the iPhone, and there are even enterprise
> iPhone users that don't even care that their IT departments are
> lagging on iPhone support. Well, it seems that AT&T is getting set to
> officially give the iPhone some corporate-love.
>
> One of BGR's tipsters have indicated that, come January 21, AT&T will
> be offering the iPhone to its corporate and business customers. All
> discounts associated with corporate and business accounts will still
> be valid - although there may be special iPhone data plans of $25 and
> higher that will be require mandatory subscription. Corporate and
> business customers looking to bring the iPhone into their enterprise
> environment will have to undergo a special pre-activation process
> before activating the iPhone through iTunes.
>
> Now, it's unclear whether or not the iPhone's entry into the AT&T's
> official corporate stable marks Apple and AT&T's intent to bring
> Microsoft Outlook Exchange support to the iPhone.
>
> links
>
> http://www.intomobile.com/2008/01/17...on-jan-21.html
>
> http://www.intomobile.com/wp-content...ook-server.jpg
>
> Contrary to what the image above (from BGR) might lead you to believe,
> there is no native support for MS Exchange on the iPhone. But, we sure
> hope the US iPhone duo is working to bring Outlook server integration
> to the iPhone - that would just make our week.
>
> Apple iPhone Confused - Wants To Be Enterprise Phone
> http://www.intomobile.com/2007/04/25...ise-phone.html
>
> Avaya gives iPhone some enterprise prowess - Avaya one-X Mobile coming
> to iPhone
> http://www.intomobile.com/2007/12/19...to-iphone.html
>
> Apple iPhone does Enterprise - will have standard OSX VPN-client and
> Quick Look for Word and Excel Files
> http://www.intomobile.com/2007/06/27...cel-files.html
>
> AT&T iPhone Business Edition coming soon
> http://www.intomobile.com/2007/11/19...ming-soon.html
>
> iPhone syncs with Microsoft Exchange via Synchronica's Mobile Gateway
> 3.0
> http://www.intomobile.com/2007/07/12...ateway-30.html

At 18 Jan 2008 05:49:10 -0500 Prilosec wrote:
> Sorry to burst your Apple bubble----few companies are going to
> pay a super-premium price for a "phone" that is 75% entertainment
> device.

True, but that's not the point- some companies will allow you to use your
own device for corporate e-mail if compatible. It's a win-win- they don't
have to pay for your phone, and you don't have to schlep two phones around.
If the iPhone can get BES or (true) Exchange support, that willbe a oon
for iPhone users who want to carry one device.


> You may want one, but that's as far as it's going to go. Business
> buys Blackberry (or Window Mobile) because these are business-centric
> devices, not an entertainment device with some communication ability.

Right, but RIM is licensing a BIS/BES clients for other devices- some
Nokias and WinMos include one. If that trend continues to the iPhone,
companies will Be happy to save thecost of a $300 Blackberry if you're
willing to bring your own BES-device to the table-particularly for the
executive-types who are fighting their IT departments over this issue now.

The upcoming Lotus Notes support is a baby-step in that direction.

> The upcoming Lotus Notes support is a baby-step in that direction.

Have you ever USED Notes? It's a cluster****. I've yet to find anyone that
likes using it.

In alt.cellular.attws Todd Allcock <elecconnec@americaonline.com> wrote:
>
> The upcoming Lotus Notes support is a baby-step in that direction.
>

People still use that crap?

:-)

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

I read Playboy for the same reason I read National Geographic.
To see the sights I'm never going to visit.

At 18 Jan 2008 13:09:50 -0500 Bill Kearney wrote:
> > The upcoming Lotus Notes support is a baby-step in that direction.
>
> Have you ever USED Notes? It's a cluster****. I've yet to find anyone
that
> likes using it.

Regardless, some orizations are, and for Apple it's at leastva step in the
right direction...

On 18 Jan 2008 18:22:05 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com>
wrote in <5vc92dF1lj3heU1@mid.individual.net>:

>In alt.cellular.attws Todd Allcock <elecconnec@americaonline.com> wrote:
>>
>> The upcoming Lotus Notes support is a baby-step in that direction.
>
>People still use that crap?

Lots!

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:ueu1p3185ib0snbmqvv689pufdg86v8c8v@4ax.com:

>>People still use that crap?
>
> Lots!
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
>
>

Turning a huge corporation away from Lotus Notes it's committed to is like
trying to turn the QE2 away from its course with an outboard motor.....(c;

I wonder how many enterprises will tolerate
The iPhone "iPhone" could not be restored. An unknown
error occurred (2001).
as the final phase of installation/setup of a new-in-box iPhone (or iPod
Touch) that happens not to have the latest software (and thus iTunes
offers to upgrade it).

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5vc92dF1lj3heU1@mid.individual.net...
> In alt.cellular.attws Todd Allcock <elecconnec@americaonline.com> wrote:
>>
>> The upcoming Lotus Notes support is a baby-step in that direction.
>
> People still use that crap?

Heh, I laughed out loud at the fanboys somehow trumpeting this as an
enterprise solution.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Mark Crispin posted:
> I wonder how many enterprises will tolerate
> The iPhone "iPhone" could not be restored. An unknown
> error occurred (2001).
> as the final phase of installation/setup of a new-in-box iPhone (or iPod
> Touch) that happens not to have the latest software (and thus iTunes offers
> to upgrade it).

And now it's two bricks in the same evening. First get "Unknown error
1602" when trying to upgrade, then the silly thing goes into "recovery
mode" and you get "unknown error 2001".

Such fine, enterprise-level quality.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

In article <alpine.OSX.1.00.0801190004170.502@pangtzu.panda.c om>, Mark
Crispin <mrc@Washington.EDU> wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Mark Crispin posted:
> > I wonder how many enterprises will tolerate
> > The iPhone "iPhone" could not be restored. An unknown
> > error occurred (2001).
> > as the final phase of installation/setup of a new-in-box iPhone (or iPod
> > Touch) that happens not to have the latest software (and thus iTunes offers
> > to upgrade it).
>
> And now it's two bricks in the same evening. First get "Unknown error
> 1602" when trying to upgrade, then the silly thing goes into "recovery
> mode" and you get "unknown error 2001".
>
> Such fine, enterprise-level quality.

Readers will note that Mark is claiming his hatred of iPhone made him
buy one.
If you find that believable, he now claims he is having this problem
(just him!) on a new iPhone (new, but without the latest software?).

And he uses that unbelievable story to suggest that enterprise won't
accept it -- a segment of the market that has so much trouble with
high-tech they staff tech support before purchasing, and assume every
business has to accept garbage like malware and hardware/software
conflicts, just because their current system often has those problems.

Mark Crispin isn't being honest or reasonable.

"Mitch" <mitch@hawaii.rr> wrote in message
news:190120081824009753%mitch@hawaii.rr...
>... isn't being honest or reasonable.

But at least he's coherent. You, OTOH, come off like a drunk fool.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Mitch posted:
> Readers will note that Mark is claiming his hatred of iPhone made him
> buy one.

Actually, it wasn't an iPhone, it was an iPod Touch. The iPhone without a
phone.

And yes, the purpose was to go and give the technology a full evaluation
without having retarded fanboys like Mitch in Hawaii claiming that "you
can't rate it fairly because you don't own one."

I refused an iPhone offered to me freely, because I have no need for a
locked 2G GSM phone. I'm quite happy on Verizon's 3G EV-DO cellular
network in the US, and Softbank's 3G UMTS network in Japan. But as the
purpose of the testing was to test the non-phone stuff and I don't care
about toy cameras, now that iPod Touch has the missing applications in the
software upgrade it can be done on that.

> If you find that believable, he now claims he is having this problem
> (just him!) on a new iPhone (new, but without the latest software?).

The bricking was on two successive iPod Touches, which indeed did not have
the latest software and thus needed to be upgraded.

However, a simple Google search, which apparently is beyond the capability
of fanboy Mitch in Hawaii, shows that people have been having this problem
with iPhone too.

Even better, a call to Apple Technical Support included the representative
saying that there have been quite a few of this exact problem lately.
After having me uninstall and reinstall iTunes and Quicktime on the
Macintosh, he stated that the only fix is to take it to a Apple repair
center for repair, but that since I just bought it I should take it back.
I did so (a 50 mile round trip), and the same thing happened to the second
one.

Actually, the Apple representative wasn't quite correct on that last bit.
It turns out that you can fix an iPod Touch or iPhone that has been
bricked in this fashion, so it wasn't really bricked. The fix is, hold on
to your seats boys and girls, to...
USE A WINDOWS MACHINE INSTEAD OF A MACINTOSH!!

Yessiree, iTunes on Macintosh can't do a software upgrade without making
the iToy useless, but iTunes on Windows can.

I contacted one of the people who got his (unhacked) iPhone bricked by the
latest software upgrade, and asked him if he used a Mac. He did; and I
suggested to him that he try it with Windows. Sure enough, that fixed it
for him too.

> And he uses that unbelievable story

Believe it because it happened. And I have the paperwork and digital
photos to prove that it did. And I have a reproducable script to make any
other new-in-box iPod Touch useless using a Macintosh.

If Apple does not believe me, I am willing to go to any of their stores
and show them how it's done. I can then show how to fix it using Windows.

> to suggest that enterprise won't
> accept it -- a segment of the market that has so much trouble with
> high-tech they staff tech support before purchasing, and assume every
> business has to accept garbage like malware and hardware/software
> conflicts, just because their current system often has those problems.

You obviously don't have a clue about what enterprises use.

> Mark Crispin isn't being honest or reasonable.

Sorry that your precious little Jesus device fails to live up to its hype.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Bill Kearney posted:
> "Mitch" <mitch@hawaii.rr> wrote in message
> news:190120081824009753%mitch@hawaii.rr...
>> ... isn't being honest or reasonable.
> But at least he's coherent. You, OTOH, come off like a drunk fool.

It was fun, actually, especially when I started Googleing around to find
other victims of the same problem. In the end, the only real waste was
the unnecessary 50 mile round trip to get a second one to break, because
the first one could have been fixed if only I had tried to use the Windows
system to fix it. But I just assumed that it would be better to use a
Macintosh with an iPod.

It did make me feel good to give that hint (to use Windows) to that fellow
who had his iPhone break. It worked for him, and he would have been stuck
otherwise.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

In article <alpine.OSX.1.00.0801201023210.644@pangtzu.panda.c om>, Mark
Crispin <mrc@Washington.EDU> wrote:

> And yes, the purpose was to go and give the technology a full evaluation
> without having retarded fanboys like Mitch in Hawaii claiming that "you
> can't rate it fairly because you don't own one."
Actually, I think I said you can't rate it's useability and design
fairly without giving using it a fair trial. I'm not accepting that
Mark Crispin could ever compare anything without using it; others might
compare features and compare just those usefully. Mark is too motivated
to make unfair generalizations, claims, and comparisons. (And now
namecalling, apparently, is his way to convince you he's more fair.)

> However, a simple Google search, which apparently is beyond the capability
> of fanboy Mitch in Hawaii, shows that people have been having this problem
> with iPhone too.
I didn't claim that no one was having the problem, or that it was with
just one version of the devices. I suggested it wasn't usual.

> And I have a reproducable script to make any
> other new-in-box iPod Touch useless using a Macintosh.
That part is too funny -- as though it would be hard to make almost any
device (especially those running Windows!) useless with a script.

> > to suggest that enterprise won't
> > accept it -- a segment of the market that has so much trouble with
> > high-tech they staff tech support before purchasing, and assume every
> > business has to accept garbage like malware and hardware/software
> > conflicts, just because their current system often has those problems.
>
> You obviously don't have a clue about what enterprises use.
Hah! Has Mark decided that Windows isn't the cause of the horrendous
Windows problems permeating all of business world?
Nope; he decides instead to ignore which platform creates the problems,
and just to claim it is my ignorance of what they use and what problems
they have (without stating where those problems lie, or maybe denying
that business has any computer problems?)

> > Mark Crispin isn't being honest or reasonable.
>
> Sorry that your precious little Jesus device fails to live up to its hype.
Boy, are YOU off-base. _I_ never once claimed that iPhone was such a
device. I stated only that _your_ stupid reasons weren't valid
complaints and criticisms.
I really don't care what device we are discussing -- you just made
stupid arguments against this one.