Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 153
  1.    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by nrosser

    This FIPS item is going to become moot, as least as far as WM5 devices go:

    From Microsoft’s website:

    “…Windows Mobile 5.0 has gone through extensive threat-modeling testing and completed the rigorous Microsoft Trustworthy Computing full security review. The platform is also FIPS-140-2-certified, meaning it meets the stringent U.S. government security requirements for IT products.”
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Windows Mobile being FIPS 140-2 means nothing. MSFP is NOT FIPS 140-2 certified. Having the OS being certified is a the moot point being that the transport system for messaging is not.


    I'd submit that the time to worry about MS is now, not later. They want to eliminate all middleware, as we all know. If anyone saw the MS keynote pres at CTIA Wireless IT in San Fran (I did), you know that they can take a VERY compelling argument to IT - 'why create an entirely separate infrastructure (meaning - BES, Goodlink, et al) just for mobile devices, when with E2K3 and SP2, you have it all built in?' Device wipe? Yep. Monitoring? Yep. Oh and FIPS? Sure - it's IN THE OS. Other apps? Well, let's see - we're MICROSOFT - have you heard of Sharepoint? Server Mgmt System? SQL? Access? LCS? yes I believe that we Microsoft can mobile enable just about ANY app you might have.
    No, MSFT is all about the OS. The fact is that WM5 is good for Good. More device choice, wider acceptance and other things make this good for us, bad for RIM. THAT is who MSFT is going after. If they were going after Good, they would productize MSFP and charge for it. If the world's largest networking hardware manufacturer chooses to pay for a solution rather than take a free one, what does that tell you?

    As for features:

    Monitoring? Nope, not to the device.
    Remote wipe? How about that SD card in that FIPS certified device?
    Third party application push? Nope, gotta cradle them.
    Guaranteed message delivery? Nope
    FIPS? Again, doesn't matter if it is in the OS. That means the device is certified. So you are telling me that because WM5 may be FIPS certified that the government can use OWA? Nope, because OWA is NOT FIPS certified and neither is MSFP.

    And keep thinking that "we're MSFT" line. Sharepoint? A web based component does not a wireless solution make. Besides, what is the market share of Sharepoint? The fact that you think MSFT CAN mobilize any app in no way says the can or are mobilizing apps. Good and RIM already ARE mobilizing these apps. Even if and when MSFT does mobilize these apps, there is not a common security, encryption or data sync method. You just added the additional infrastructure you were just hammering on.

    Keep thinking MSFP is going to get you there. When people mention MSFT, all I have to say is one word: Security. The discussion usually ends right there. We are running a pool to see how long it will be after SP2 gets released that the first security patch gets released.

    Good and others - I do believe that the lights are dimming for you, and rapidly. RIM - not quite as quickly, but the same fate awaits. If you're a middleware provider, or even device OS provider, your days are numbered.
    Does anyone remember Wang? Netscape? And the countless others......
    Heard of Google? TiVo? Nokia/Symbian? Cisco IOS? WebEx? countless others that MSFT has tried to go after and have failed miserably. Wang? MSFT had nothing to do with Wang's demise. That was IBM. Funny you should mention Wang and RIM in the same sentence. Propietary systems don't work and always fail in the end. So, even if I thought for a second MSFT had a snowballs chance of dominating the wireless space, RIM would go long before Good.
  2.    #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by ptyork
    This is rather silly. The MSFT solution is, in effect, identical to the IMAP IDLE solution offered by Chatter (albeit including PIM data in addition to email), and the "true-push" argument has been well argued by the Chatter camp. For Good, you are still polling Exchange (server to server) prior to pushing the data to the handheld, so even if all of your arguments hold water, you'd still have a hard time convincing me that Good is any more of a true push solution than any of the competition. I'm not 100% how the Handheld-Server communication is handled by Good, but assuming it doesn't require an open (though latent) socket, then perhaps this a positive in terms of resource needs (i.e., the server doesn't require an open socket for inactive links), however, there is little true difference. In both scenarios, the handheld must notify the server that it is ready to receive data, making the process at least initially handheld driven. Whether the server uses the existing socket or opens a new one is essentially immaterial. Also immaterial is whether the handheld must initiate a separate socket to receive the actual data versus having the data shipped down the initial socket. Regardless, the server is telling the client when there is new information and the client is receiving it.
    Again, as I have said numerous times, the semantics of push are pretty moot and was only a point I used to start the thread. This, again, is not a Good vs MSFT thread. I just happen to be well versed in how GoodLink works. Having a server polling Exchange then pushing the data is entirely different from the handheld polling the server. Your own argument made my point. The server pushes the data without any interaction from the handheld. GoodLink does not wait for a notification from the handheld to send the data. It is sent automatically. If the handheld does not send an acknowledgement of receipt of the data, the GoodLink server holds traffic until IT finds the handheld, not the other way around.

    Good is in a difficult position. They still have a window while 1) organizations don't have SP2 and 2) other handheld vendors (including Palm) don't have access to the latest ActiveSync logic. If Good sits back and watches things materialize, they will disappear in a matter of a few years.
    Do you honestly think Good is sitting back watching? People have been calling our demise for years because of RIMM , a company who’s entire focus is wireless messaging and it hasn’t happened yet.

    To survive, they simply must innovate. Create an AFFORDABLE hosted solution to target consumers (integrating with their POP and IMAP servers and other hosted PIM solutions like Yahoo! and .mac). This will provide a significant advantage over MSFT, since most consumers don't have personal Exchange servers.
    Good is not after the consumer market and never has been. There are plenty of great products out there (you mentioned one in Chatter) that fulfill that need. Trust me, innovation has always been there and will continue to be there. Our product roadmap is nothing short of amazing. Just the announced products show that. An example us the JP Mobile acquisition. We were an Exchange only solution. Next year, we will have Notes and then Groupwise. How does MSFT plan to address that market? Advantage #1.

    Work to reduce the requirements on the server side so that the Good gateway doesn't necessarily require a separate box. Integrate Good more closely into Exchange so that it can be installed as a native connector or protocol and managed centrally using Exchange System Manager. Reduce the cost of the server solution and make it easier to manage than MSFT's solution to insure that the TCO for Good is at least competitive with MSFT's native solution.
    Again, not a Good vs MSFT fight here, but since you bring it up. We are integrated with ESM, our management is dedicated to the wireless messaging. Let MSFT handle the “land” email as they do that very well. Our management console and monitoring portal are consistently pointed to as one of the strongest features of the solution.

    Buy a systems management company like XcelleNet to integrate OTA systems management (software distribution, inventory management, etc.) to make the package more valuable to an organization. Innovate on the client side by supporting cross-platform rich text reading and creating on the handheld. Provide native support for reading all of the most common attachment types across all platforms. Support other enterprise messaging servers so that you are not forced to compete directly with MSFT. Do any number of other things that I'm not thinking of.
    We already do OTA software distribution (Advantage #2). We already support native view of rich-text attachments and we are targeting next year to provide the ability to send attachments from the handheld. We have already announced support of Lotus and Groupwise. So, basically, we are already doing or have announced on doing everything you point out.

    Look, in reading your above messages, I'm not seeing any long term benefit of Good versus the competition. Neither of your "Differentiators" are valid nor is this attempt to play up Good's "pushness." Instead of trying to defend Good's existing architecture with empty arguments, continue to innovate and make Good a truly valuable tool for both consumers and corporate customers. Otherwise, you will see your company wither under the competition.
    One last time: This is not Good vs MSFT. I don’t know how many times I have to say, the push argument was to start the thread (or continue the other) and is simply showing how MSFT are geniuses at selling powerpointware and spin marketing. I haven’t hammered the differentiators between Good and MSFT as this thread was not about that. It is about how everyone seems to think MSFT will crush RIM, Good, SYNC and others and the fact of the matter is that is simply not true. The differentiators are most definitely there, they will continue to grow. RIM is in more trouble than Good or others, IMHO, since they are a proprietary solution with their own OS and devices. Our support of Palm, WM5/PPC, and Symbian allows us to run on legacy equipment as well as new devices. That would be Advantage #3.
  3. #23  
    I wouldn't use TiVo as a long-term success story. Someone's gonna kill TiVo, and you're right, it won't be Microsoft. It'll be DirecTV. DirecTV is not renewing their contract with TiVo when it expires, and they've been developing in-house DVR services for a while and should be rolling them out shortly. Something like 60% of TiVo's current customer base comes from it's partnership with DirecTV, and that's a source of revenue that's about to dry up.

    Good would be foolish to think they aren't in the same situation. If the majority (or even a significant minority) of your revenues are tied to providing a push Exchange solution, and Microsoft has targeted this as an opportunity for improvement, then you better do something quickly. Sitting on your hands and toting today's benefits, while saying Microsoft isn't a concern right now, isn't going to get it done.

    Netscape was better than IE once, OS2 was as good (if not better) than Windows, and Treos only ran PalmOS.
    I'm back!
  4.    #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    I wouldn't use TiVo as a long-term success story. Someone's gonna kill TiVo, and you're right, it won't be Microsoft. It'll be DirecTV. DirecTV is not renewing their contract with TiVo when it expires, and they've been developing in-house DVR services for a while and should be rolling them out shortly. Something like 60% of TiVo's current customer base comes from it's partnership with DirecTV, and that's a source of revenue that's about to dry up.
    I was using TiVo as an example of a market that MSFT has tried to penetrate that they haven't had success. I agree, they are in trouble with DirecTV developing their own in-house solution and some would say this would be analagous to MSFT developing a wireless email solution for Exchange. However, if DTV's DVR solution does not have the feature set or improve significantly what TiVo has provided, the acceptance rate will be significantly lower than they are willing to admit. The same could be said for MSFP vs other already established email providers.

    Good would be foolish to think they aren't in the same situation. If the majority (or even a significant minority) of your revenues are tied to providing a push Exchange solution, and Microsoft has targeted this as an opportunity for improvement, then you better do something quickly. Sitting on your hands and toting today's benefits, while saying Microsoft isn't a concern right now, isn't going to get it done.
    Netscape screwed up by resting on their laurels. We (and other providers, I would assume) are not doing so. It is ironic how many members of our executive team and Board were with Netscape when their demise started. They are intimately familiar with how MSFT works. Toting today's benefits are enough for the time being for several reasons: 1) SP2 hasn't been released yet, so all we have is what MSFT is saying vs what we (and others) are doing. 2) Based on what I have read about SP2 is why I am not concerned right now. To say that MSFT won't improve upon the product would be foolish, but their history with initial release of products is not stellar.
    [quote
    Netscape was better than IE once, OS2 was as good (if not better) than Windows, and Treos only ran PalmOS.[/QUOTE]

    Everyone points to Netscape when talking about the beast of Redmond. OS2 got killed by IBM's complete lack of marketing the product. Treos have been running PalmOS for years and other devices have been running some version of Windows Mobile and WM is still third in the smartphone OS space behind Palm and Symbian. Treos still only run PalmOS and it will be 6 months before a Treo does run WM. If MSFT hits release dates for any of the announced products, it will be a first. Remember Longhorn?
  5. Cartman's Avatar
    Posts
    700 Posts
    Global Posts
    879 Global Posts
    #25  
    Good morning all...

    I'm sorry to see this discussion go in the way of Exchange vs Good but I guess that was inevitable as they both seem to provide similar solutions.

    What I can share in that regard is the Microsoft is not going after Good/RIM directly. Their plan/goal is to acquire new implementations. During the WM Treo press conference Bill Gates focused on numbers (I don't remember them exactly) stating that current market penetration of device connections to Exchange (using BB's mostly) vs total exchange deployments. Currently connected devices are a very small number of the potential market.

    They are focused on new customers vs taking away current Blackberry/Good customers. They are doing it by making it an out of the box feature. If a customer finds that the out of the box solution does not fit their needs then they can invest in Good I think most customers will find that the out of the box experience is good enough

    In regard to the security issue perhaps we can discuss that in more detail. From my understanding security with Exchange SP2 will be just as good as what we use to log into secured web sites (https).
  6.    #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by gex
    They are focused on new customers vs taking away current Blackberry/Good customers. They are doing it by making it an out of the box feature. If a customer finds that the out of the box solution does not fit their needs then they can invest in Good I think most customers will find that the out of the box experience is good enough
    I agree to a point, though I think the size of the organziation will be a driving factor. SP2 will meet smaller organizations needs, but in it's current iteration (or what I have read about it) I don't see it becoming an enterprise level solution.


    In regard to the security issue perhaps we can discuss that in more detail. From my understanding security with Exchange SP2 will be just as good as what we use to log into secured web sites (https).
    As it relates to security for MSFP, I can show you what a third-party is saying:

    http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=129022

    As it relates to OWA:

    http://searchexchange.techtarget.com...tml?bucket=ETA
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    I was using TiVo as an example of a market that MSFT has tried to penetrate that they haven't had success. I agree, they are in trouble with DirecTV developing their own in-house solution and some would say this would be analagous to MSFT developing a wireless email solution for Exchange. However, if DTV's DVR solution does not have the feature set or improve significantly what TiVo has provided, the acceptance rate will be significantly lower than they are willing to admit. The same could be said for MSFP vs other already established email providers.
    Yeah, I brought up your TiVo reference because I felt it was completely analagous. TiVo was a revolutionary product, ahead of it's time for a while, but I think the company is on it's way out. You can have an extremely successful product for an extremely successful company, but if an inordinate amount of your revenues are tied to one product or partner, you won't be around long. When DirecTV pulls the plug on TiVo, they will be in major trouble.

    I find your comment about DirecTV's new DVR, and the comparison to Microsoft, intriguing though. You seem to feel that if DirecTV's DVR isn't as good as TiVo's that the acceptance rate will be significantly lower. I couldn't disagree more. You have a DirecTV with TiVo receiver because you are a DirecTV customer and want TiVo, not the other way around. If DirecTV turns out a complete POS, I won't dump DirecTV to buy a standalone TiVo box and go to cable. I'll complain and wish they wouldn't have dumped TiVo (or that they produced a better DVR), but they won't lose me as a customer. There are too many other things about DirecTV that I like, and too many advantages over cable. Saying that companies won't switch to Microsoft because of a few annoyances is the same thing. Microsoft is already in the house with their Exchange infrastructure. Yes, for Good customers, Good is in there as well, but there will be momentum to switch to Microsoft, regardless of whether or not Good is an established product. And the perceived convenience of an all-in-one Microsoft solution will be difficult to overcome. Honestly, RIM and Good are in the positions they are in because Microsoft never offered a quality solution, not because they overtook the Redmond beast. Neither company won the war, the war is just getting started.

    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    Everyone points to Netscape when talking about the beast of Redmond. OS2 got killed by IBM's complete lack of marketing the product. Treos have been running PalmOS for years and other devices have been running some version of Windows Mobile and WM is still third in the smartphone OS space behind Palm and Symbian. Treos still only run PalmOS and it will be 6 months before a Treo does run WM. If MSFT hits release dates for any of the announced products, it will be a first. Remember Longhorn?
    Well, let's be honest, OS2 wasn't killed by IBM not marketing the product. IBM gave up on the product when Microsoft gave up on the product, realizing they weren't going to make this work. Microsoft was a partner in OS2, and when they realized they could make a better product, without IBM's name on it, they jumped at the chance. As far as Treos running WM, they're doing that now. Those weren't 650s Photoshopped with a Today screen on them at the Microsoft/Palm/Verizon announcement.

    Unfortunately, I'm living the Longhorn nightmare. At least the Visual Studio 2005, .Net 2.0, and SQL Server 2005 releases are imminent.
    I'm back!
  8.    #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x

    I find your comment about DirecTV's new DVR, and the comparison to Microsoft, intriguing though. You seem to feel that if DirecTV's DVR isn't as good as TiVo's that the acceptance rate will be significantly lower. I couldn't disagree more. You have a DirecTV with TiVo receiver because you are a DirecTV customer and want TiVo, not the other way around. If DirecTV turns out a complete POS, I won't dump DirecTV to buy a standalone TiVo box and go to cable. I'll complain and wish they wouldn't have dumped TiVo (or that they produced a better DVR), but they won't lose me as a customer. There are too many other things about DirecTV that I like, and too many advantages over cable. Saying that companies won't switch to Microsoft because of a few annoyances is the same thing. Microsoft is already in the house with their Exchange infrastructure. Yes, for Good customers, Good is in there as well, but there will be momentum to switch to Microsoft, regardless of whether or not Good is an established product. And the perceived convenience of an all-in-one Microsoft solution will be difficult to overcome. Honestly, RIM and Good are in the positions they are in because Microsoft never offered a quality solution, not because they overtook the Redmond beast. Neither company won the war, the war is just getting started.
    Bear in mind, DirecTV customers aren’t the only ones with TiVo, though you make very valid points. Microsoft is in place, but when there is a better solution that provides more feature/functionality, be it Good or otherwise, organizations are used to going with third-party products that have an advantage over MSFT products, even mature ones. I am not saying people will drop Exchange, what I am saying is that while the new messaging feature will win some people over, I honestly believe in the enterprise space, the current iteration of SP2 will not be readily accepted. As for RIM and Good being in the position they are because they are focused on their core competency, provide world class support and have developed a product that people want. You are giving MSFT way to much credit. Yes, they are a massive, very powerful organization, but there are other spaces where they have tried and failed. Do you think Google has succeeded only because MSFT search is "not quality"? No, they provide a superior product to anything MSFT has offered.

    Well, let's be honest, OS2 wasn't killed by IBM not marketing the product. IBM gave up on the product when Microsoft gave up on the product, realizing they weren't going to make this work. Microsoft was a partner in OS2, and when they realized they could make a better product, without IBM's name on it, they jumped at the chance. As far as Treos running WM, they're doing that now. Those weren't 650s Photoshopped with a Today screen on them at the Microsoft/Palm/Verizon announcement.
    RE: OS2, we have to agree to disagree on this one. Had IBM done the proper marketing and development, OS2 would still be around and MSFT would be nowhere near the behemoth they are today in the OS world. IBM dwarfed MSFT when they were partnering on OS2 and had IBM had any stones, they would have continued development. IBM crumbled and killed a great product.

    As for the WinTreo, I know they weren’t PShopped, however they are not shipping and there aren’t plans to ship for roughly 6 months, so, like SP2, they are powerpointware. Granted, a ton of hype, but they don’t exist in production.
  9. #29  
    In 10 years Good and RIMM will be suing MS for killing them by bundling a "good enough" solution, like IE vs Netscape, or WMP vs Real. Or Windows vs Be.

    Surur
  10. Cartman's Avatar
    Posts
    700 Posts
    Global Posts
    879 Global Posts
    #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    ... however they are not shipping and there aren’t plans to ship for roughly 6 months, so, like SP2, they are powerpointware. Granted, a ton of hype, but they don’t exist in production.
    I expect we will see the WMTreo available mid to late January... The moto Q in late Dec.

    SP2 mid to late Nov...maybe Dec.
    Messaging and Security Feature Pack in dec.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    Bear in mind, DirecTV customers aren’t the only ones with TiVo...
    No, I know, but it is something like 60% of TiVo's customer base. That's a lot of revenue that most likely will go walking when TiVo's contract with DirecTV expires. I would expect a very small percentage of those displaced customers to travel with TiVo out of DirecTV. There are very few, if any, companies that can lose 60% of their customer base and still remain viable.

    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    I am not saying people will drop Exchange, what I am saying is that while the new messaging feature will win some people over, I honestly believe in the enterprise space, the current iteration of SP2 will not be readily accepted.
    Maybe that came out wrong. I didn't mean people would migrate from Exchange, I meant that people will be more likely to migrate from Good as a wireless solution. It will be far easier to employ SP2 and Activesync than to migrate to Notes or Groupwise because you want to keep Good.


    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    You are giving MSFT way to much credit. Yes, they are a massive, very powerful organization, but there are other spaces where they have tried and failed. Do you think Google has succeeded only because MSFT search is "not quality"? No, they provide a superior product to anything MSFT has offered.
    Yes, Google (and Yahoo and Good and RIM) have partially succeeded because they offer a superior product, and partially because Microsoft either ignored the market, ignored the segment, ignored the impact, ignored the need, or ignored the future of the products. Again, look to the Netscape example. Netscape was first to market and produced a superior product to the first iterations of IE. Why was that? Because Microsoft didn't see the browser as a necessary product. Gates and his minions didn't see the impact of the browser, he has admitted that himself. He's admitted they were arrogant to the need and therefore were late to the party. And once they got there, they found that Netscape was a superior product and that it would be difficult to overcome. And it only took what, 2 or 3 years to pull that off? Netscape is a castoff company now, a footnote of what not to do in the business world. Yes, Microsoft rips off a lot of ideas (what company doesn't?), and it buys a lot of smaller companies so that it can get their technology hassle-free, but don't underestimate where they are going. Sometimes, as a competitor, by the time you see what Microsoft is doing, they've already passed you by.

    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    RE: OS2, we have to agree to disagree on this one. Had IBM done the proper marketing and development, OS2 would still be around and MSFT would be nowhere near the behemoth they are today in the OS world. IBM dwarfed MSFT when they were partnering on OS2 and had IBM had any stones, they would have continued development. IBM crumbled and killed a great product.
    IBM was still very much a "big iron" shop in the 80s, and I don't think they ever had the vision to see where computing was going. I'm pretty sure they still envisioned a world of mainframes and emulators, with PCs still acting pretty much as dumb terminals.

    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    As for the WinTreo, I know they weren’t PShopped, however they are not shipping and there aren’t plans to ship for roughly 6 months, so, like SP2, they are powerpointware. Granted, a ton of hype, but they don’t exist in production.
    I think the first WM 5 Treos will be available in January.
    I'm back!
  12. #32  
    With all due respect to Good, I can't say that they're going to be around very long once MS fully bakes in MSFP. It's not going to take them long.

    Regarding security, at the CTIA show, MS showed a Dept of Defense video, with General BLah BLah talking about their Windows Mobile device deployment, and how secure it is, etc. Yes, they may have some work to do, but you know they'll get it right. They almost always do.

    To say that WM5 is good for you is just crazy. The bottom line is that ANY large organization who is a big MS shop will want to get away from separate infrastructure for mobile devices (cost, management hassle, etc). MSFP will take them to the promised land.

    But time will tell - I'm still betting on Microsoft, even as painful as that can often be.
  13.    #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x

    Yes, Google (and Yahoo and Good and RIM) have partially succeeded because they offer a superior product, and partially because Microsoft either ignored the market, ignored the segment, ignored the impact, ignored the need, or ignored the future of the products. Again, look to the Netscape example. Netscape was first to market and produced a superior product to the first iterations of IE. Why was that? Because Microsoft didn't see the browser as a necessary product. Gates and his minions didn't see the impact of the browser, he has admitted that himself. He's admitted they were arrogant to the need and therefore were late to the party. And once they got there, they found that Netscape was a superior product and that it would be difficult to overcome. And it only took what, 2 or 3 years to pull that off? Netscape is a castoff company now, a footnote of what not to do in the business world. Yes, Microsoft rips off a lot of ideas (what company doesn't?), and it buys a lot of smaller companies so that it can get their technology hassle-free, but don't underestimate where they are going. Sometimes, as a competitor, by the time you see what Microsoft is doing, they've already passed you by.
    Thanks to the DOJ, things are bit different now than they were back then. Now, pplease don't take that to say that DOJ will step in as it relates to MSFT and their foray into wireless. Secondly, as I said, many of our board and executives were with Netscape when that happened, so they have an idea of how MSFT works. I am not underestimating MSFT by any means. I know what they can do. However, in the same vein, don't overestimate them either, which I think some people and the media, tend to do.

    IBM was still very much a "big iron" shop in the 80s, and I don't think they ever had the vision to see where computing was going. I'm pretty sure they still envisioned a world of mainframes and emulators, with PCs still acting pretty much as dumb terminals.
    OS/2 was released in 1987, a full three years after the PC-AT, so IBM had a basic idea of where things were going, but I don't think anyone, including Gates himself regardless of what he says, had any idea the the PC market would explode the way it did. To get an intersting view of the OS/2-Windows issues, check this out http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2History.html



    I think the first WM 5 Treos will be available in January.
    And when was Longhorn supposed to be released? How about Yukon and Whidbey? Remember the XP SP2 fiasco? Over a year between when it was supposed to be released to when it was released. The WM Treo is not the issue, here. MSFP is the issue.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    Thanks to the DOJ, things are bit different now than they were back then. Now, pplease don't take that to say that DOJ will step in as it relates to MSFT and their foray into wireless. Secondly, as I said, many of our board and executives were with Netscape when that happened, so they have an idea of how MSFT works. I am not underestimating MSFT by any means. I know what they can do. However, in the same vein, don't overestimate them either, which I think some people and the media, tend to do.
    You're right, things are definitely different now. Microsoft will not be able to pull off some of the same tactics they have in the past. That being said, I don't think this is the same thing as running IBM out of the OS market or Netscape out of the browser market or attempting to run Real out of the multimedia market. Exchange is a Microsoft product, and the DOJ will give them far more lattitude to extend the product into the wireless game. Yes, the spotlight shines far brighter on Microsoft today than it did 10 years ago, but I don't think this contest will be viewed the same way.

    If I were a Microsoft competitor though, I'd much rather overestimate them than underestimate them.


    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    OS/2 was released in 1987, a full three years after the PC-AT, so IBM had a basic idea of where things were going, but I don't think anyone, including Gates himself regardless of what he says, had any idea the the PC market would explode the way it did. To get an intersting view of the OS/2-Windows issues, check this out http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2History.html
    Agreed, I think IBM had a basic idea of where things were going, but I think it ended there. As I said, they were still very much a "big iron" shop back then, and probably had a hard time envisioning large companies abandoning their mainframes and AS/400s for an army of servers and desktop machines. This is the same company which famously said they couldn't see a need for desktop machines for consumers. When Microsoft pulled out, I'm sure IBM lost interest in a hurry and went back to their bread-and-butter.


    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    And when was Longhorn supposed to be released? How about Yukon and Whidbey? Remember the XP SP2 fiasco? Over a year between when it was supposed to be released to when it was released. The WM Treo is not the issue, here. MSFP is the issue.
    I can't defend Microsoft on any of those fronts. They are notoriosly bad at making their deadlines, partially because both their deadlines and products are just too aggressive. It pains me to see them miss both their deadline and feature sets, like with Longhorn, which is about 2 years overdue and will be scaled back when it's released. Yukon and Whidbey are about a year or so past their deadlines too, but at least they're being released in the next couple of weeks. I think that since Microsoft is working with Palm and Verizon on the Treo 700w, they'll be a little more apt to make this deadline.
    I'm back!
  15.    #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by nrosser
    With all due respect to Good, I can't say that they're going to be around very long once MS fully bakes in MSFP. It's not going to take them long.
    You are entitled to your opinion. However, I talk with IT directors and Exchange admins in organizations of various sizes all day long and I can tell you that 99.99% of them have absolutely no plans to switch. They use MSFT for Exchange and the OS. The use Oracle for database, not SQL. They use Siebel or SAP for CRM, not MSFT CRM. The don't use Great Plains, They don't use Axapta.

    Regarding security, at the CTIA show, MS showed a Dept of Defense video, with General BLah BLah talking about their Windows Mobile device deployment, and how secure it is, etc. Yes, they may have some work to do, but you know they'll get it right. They almost always do.
    Man, why do I have to repeat myself. WM5 is FIPS 140-2 certified but MSFP isn't. OWA isn't. The fact that the device/OS is certified goes to my point about how WM5 is good for Good. GoodLink is FIPS certified and will run on WM5. All MSFP is glorified OWA and OWA will NEVER be used where security is a top concern.

    To say that WM5 is good for you is just crazy. The bottom line is that ANY large organization who is a big MS shop will want to get away from separate infrastructure for mobile devices (cost, management hassle, etc). MSFP will take them to the promised land.
    Let's look at hassles and cost:

    1) How many patches will be released for SP2?
    2) Want to add some kind of security to MSFP? Looking at anywhere from $250 to $400 per user.
    3) Want to add an application to all your devices? Bring them in from the field, take your IT guys' time to cradle them and install, then redeploy them. All of this has a cost.
    4) Troubleshooting? Forget it. Full end-to-end visibility of your network down to the device? Doesn't exist with MSFP.
    5) Ever called MSFT for support? Any cost involved there?
    6) Want to to go beynod email? Access to back office apps on your handheld? Not with MSFT.

    WM5 is good for Good because it will increase the uptake of wireless devices becuase of a familarity with Windows anbd we will ride the coattails of MSFT's marketing. WM5 is entirely different from MSFP. We are already seeing a great acceptance of the new Sprint 6700 and with more and more devices coming with WM5, we will see and even bigger uptake.

    But time will tell - I'm still betting on Microsoft, even as painful as that can often be.
    People have been saying the same thing about RIM vs Good and it hasn't happened.
  16.    #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    You're right, things are definitely different now. Microsoft will not be able to pull off some of the same tactics they have in the past. That being said, I don't think this is the same thing as running IBM out of the OS market or Netscape out of the browser market or attempting to run Real out of the multimedia market. Exchange is a Microsoft product, and the DOJ will give them far more lattitude to extend the product into the wireless game. Yes, the spotlight shines far brighter on Microsoft today than it did 10 years ago, but I don't think this contest will be viewed the same way.
    True, I don't see DOJ getting into this one. The biggest difference now, thanks to DOJ, is that the strong arm tactics MSFT used with partners (I worked for Gateway back in the mid-90's, so I saw first hand the power MSFT had. Actually met Bill Gates at the GW Christmas party because at the time GW was the largest reseller of MSFT software in the world) don't exist. This gives end-users more choice in their solution preference. MSFT wants RIM and the handheld OS. MSFP is a feature of Exchange, not a stand alone product. MSFT is late to the wireless email party, but they will most definitely get their share, but nothing like the IE vs Netscape battle, but I am not naive enough to think it will be the MSN vs Google battle either. Consolidation has already started, ie Seven, and will continue. I think the next big thing will be RIM acquiring SYNC. The MSFT acquisition of FrontBridge does raise concerns with me, but not for the short term.

    If I were a Microsoft competitor though, I'd much rather overestimate them than underestimate them.
    Agreed to a point. I don't underestimate what they can do in the future, but I won't overestimate their current offering.

    Agreed, I think IBM had a basic idea of where things were going, but I think it ended there. As I said, they were still very much a "big iron" shop back then, and probably had a hard time envisioning large companies abandoning their mainframes and AS/400s for an army of servers and desktop machines. This is the same company which famously said they couldn't see a need for desktop machines for consumers. When Microsoft pulled out, I'm sure IBM lost interest in a hurry and went back to their bread-and-butter.
    True, they were a big iron shop then, but their direction was switching to the PC market. Their lack of foresight caused them to lose the OS battle. I honestly don't believe that applies with Good (can't speak for other companies) because I have seen our product roadmap and we are far from resting on GoodLink.

    I can't defend Microsoft on any of those fronts. They are notoriosly bad at making their deadlines, partially because both their deadlines and products are just too aggressive. It pains me to see them miss both their deadline and feature sets, like with Longhorn, which is about 2 years overdue and will be scaled back when it's released. Yukon and Whidbey are about a year or so past their deadlines too, but at least they're being released in the next couple of weeks. I think that since Microsoft is working with Palm and Verizon on the Treo 700w, they'll be a little more apt to make this deadline.
    Agreed regarding the 700. It will hit fairly close to the announced date. However, I guarantee there will be issues with the device. This is not a dig on Palm, MSFT or VZN, but more along the line of every 1st release of a phone has issues. How they (Palm/MSFT/VZN) address those issues and the speed with which they address them will be key.

    My point on release is more directed to MSFP and if they hit a release date and if it has all the features they are touting.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    However, I guarantee there will be issues with the device. This is not a dig on Palm, MSFT or VZN, but more along the line of every 1st release of a phone has issues. How they (Palm/MSFT/VZN) address those issues and the speed with which they address them will be key.
    I can't argue with you there! Isn't this a given? With both Palm's and Microsoft's track records, there's no shot of this thing being close to perfect out the door.

    It's a shame that this is what we've come to expect in a new product offering.
    I'm back!
  18.    #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    It's a shame that this is what we've come to expect in a new product offering.
    Truer words have never been spoken.
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodGuy
    Truer words have never been spoken.
    I've owned both a 600 and a 650 (although I've never had to return either, I've had more than my fair share of annoyances and resets), and I know full well that there's no chance of either the 700w or 700p being better out of the box than my 650.

    It's just sad that an "upgrade" will actually be a step back for a while until they get all the bugs worked out.

    If they are better though, I'd dump my 650 in a heartbeat. I was swayed by the premise of the 6700, but it appears that it's not the cure-all I thought it would be either.
    I'm back!
  20. Cartman's Avatar
    Posts
    700 Posts
    Global Posts
    879 Global Posts
    #40  
    FYI: the new Treo received FCC approval last week...good sign that it will be released in Jan.
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions