[hayden]

Microsoft admits Research in Motion's BlackBerry device dominates the market in handheld e-mail provision, but contends its own solution can cut costs for enterprises -- a claim RIM denies.

"Research in Motion is obviously a core competitor in the mobile information space, and you could say they've done a good job of owning that environment," Microsoft's Pieter Knook said during a recent visit to Sydney. The US-based executive is senior vice president, mobile and embedded devices and communications division.

Read More...

[Vfdmaniac]

Interesting article. We use MS SBS with Outlook 2003. We went with BB just because everyone else had them... Kind of makes me wonder if we made the right choice. Didnt' even look at the Windows Mobile offering, although our IT (outsourced) folks suggested it.

[Aroc]

The WM devices need to be able to be centrally controlled, locked down, or at least tailored/pigeon-holed into a streamlined behavior. From I'd learned in supporting WM in the enterprise is the flexibility of the devices (and the device varieties) result in higher support costs (user more frequently ask for support, often takes a tad longer to resolve). IMNSHO. I find it cheaper and less frustrating to support two UMPCs than two WM handhelds. YMMV. It can work, it just needs some work on the vendors part to help us poor IT staff.

Wm is great for the power user who likes to tinker though.

[Lowrider]

I would hate to see MS dominate anything. I mean, they own my pc, they hide junk on there w/o my permission. OS is unstable as heck. Anti-Trust, haha!

I would hate to see them screw BB up.

[saipale]

~via BB (wap.pinstack.com)~

[furtive]

Here's what I look at first - what is the business problem I'm trying to solve? Well, in our organization, it was to provide workers who are away from their desks all day the ability to do email/calendar on the run. At the time we looked at this, Blackberry was the only game in town, and as a result, we spent money on a Blackberry infrastructure (BES, etc). As we go through the Exchange migration process (from 2000 to 2003 and eventually to 2007), we're learning that Exchange can do a large majority of the functions that BES gives us.

My environment consists of 13,000 Exchange accounts, 5500 desktops and a few hundred Blackberry devices. It's large and as a result, we're not going to make decisions all willy-nilly. Since we have a BES infrastructure that works, there's not a compelling business case to move to Windows Mobile. I refer back to my business problem - just email/calendar/PIM stuff. We're solving this now with BB/BES.

If you were starting from scratch, you sort of have to go through the same decision-making process: what are we trying to solve? Then you build a solution from there. You should be device/OS agnostic in the overall process. If you have Exchange 2003 SP2 running already, then you can leverage this to start with, so your initial costs might be lower than buying BES and the infrastructure to support it.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses. In this space, Microsoft clearly sees RIM as a competitor, which is good because that means they'll be able to push each other.

I don't see Microsoft being able to win away companies like mine by promises of cost savings because we'd have to invest in new devices, training and a whole bunch of other soft costs in order to see savings, which may or may not happen over a few years. Where Microsoft can claim is getting companies who are starting to look at more mobility solutions.

But then again, I could write 20 pages about where this is going and how I see this market moving.

[gkast1]

Some comments, three years after hayden's original post.

RIM hasn't been squashed , and it won't be -- barring an avalanche of further catastrophic Blackberry meltdowns such as we have experienced in the last few months. I should hope RIM is now aware of single-point failure issues etc., and has, or will, fix them.

MS's original statements in the quoted article, veritable FUD , are fueled by its Procrustean approach, that some version of Windows be appropriate for anything and everything. Not so -- indeed, if anything, the center of gravity is shifting: many of us, at least those who can manage it, are moving towards a smaller-footprint presence on the Net; limiting our exposure by use of a sturdy, controlled device like the Berry, instead of making accessible to the Whole Wide World the innards and the sum total of our computing environment. I for one use my berry, or a laptop, on the Net but keep crucial servers, especially those running flavors of Windows (are you ready for this?) off the Net.

Heresy?!I cherish the security and peace of mind this provides, and do not begrudge an extra step involved, say via CD's or DVD's, to communicate. Sooo sorry, but I do NOT operate under the watchful eye either of Redmond or of the random script kiddie...or worse, the Storm botnet . Those who want to risk being zombies, let them; it is not for me -- and I can make guarantees to my clients that would otherwise be false and dishonest.

It is precisely the closed OS and server-routed nature of RIM's model that is crucial here. Windows, with its choices re filesystem, Registry, the whole OLE/ActiveX/COM+/DCOM shebang, and...and..., is inherently vulnerable and impossible to secure in any efficient and viable manner. More than that, it suffers from MS's market-driven modus operandi, e.g. monopolistically bundling their browser, media player or what have you with the OS, ignoring for years matters of security for the sake of speed and penetration -- because they felt they could derive advantage.

I sincerely doubt that Windows Mobile will manage to be any different and offer, at some stage, what the Blackberry already does have.

Many have accepted the Microsoftean state of affairs in the past, under compulsion or due to habit or via peer pressure...but when a practical as well as pleasant alternative exists, many will gravitate towards it. I have. It could be others also will, more and more so.

[archer6]

Kudos to those who posted very well thought out responses prior to mine.

I too have invested in the BlackBerry infastructure for my business, & find it perfect for the job at hand. I cannot imagine migrating to the WM platform anytime in the near future. The amount of downtime that using BlackBerrys saves us due to the stellar reliability we enjoy is priceless.

While personally I continue to "sample" the various WM devices simply to stay informed, this only furthers my satisfaction with our existing BlackBerry system. ~via BB 8310 (wap.pinstack.com)~

[gkg3059]

Ha ha ha the joke of the day!

[gkast1]

May I add that there is something distasteful in the Windows paradigm... users, Admins, Domain Admins, Enterprise Admins, Ultra Galactic Admins Strictures that unfortunately do not provide security, defense against intruders or reliability, but do end up hindering everyday execution as well as complicating the task of management. It is presumably "in the image" of The Enterprise -- yet not everybody runs their business along strict hierarchical lines and formal definitions. Maybe large size outfits have to... but smaller ones, if they have people a) good at their work, b) trustworthy and c) of good will, can afford to do otherwise; and a looser arrangement can then be more efficient and more productive... not to mention more human as well.

[harry3334]

It may cut costs but "you get what you pay for"

[silverzz28]

Exactly harry

[obsidianjaguar]

You guys rock

[Schirripal]

Very moving and heartfelt

[CaCHooKa Man]

i wish blackberries had easier to crack software like windows mobile. i have a windows mobile phone too and i havent had to pay for any of the programs i have ever since i got it. the only program i want for my blackberry is jivetalk and i dont want to pay for that.