3 ms·

The Danger acquisition didn't really make sense from an engineering perspective - the Sidekick was a great phone - 5 years ago. MS doesn't have the greatest tr

The Danger acquisition didn't really make sense from an engineering perspective - the Sidekick was a great phone - 5 years ago. MS doesn't have the greatest track record with consumer products (Xbox not withstanding). They OWN the enterprise. While I'm not sure the resulting products would be all that great (though everyone usually has great things to say about Windows 7 Mobile), it would be an easy sell to an enterprise. Chinks in the apple/android armor: 1) Right now, enterprise applications have to go through the App Store (for both devices). It would be pretty powerful for enterprise to be able to push their own applications at their leisure to their phones 2) Existing tie-in to blackberry servers. 3) Android phones irritate me b/c you need a gmail address to even set it up. This is just an additional requirement for enterprise phones that shouldn't even be there. 4) Dev tools that people are familiar with. Objective C experience is harder to find that C#/.NET experience (Android is wash here with Java).

m0nastic 16y ago
"1) Right now, enterprise applications have to go through the App Store (for both devices). It would be pretty powerful for enterprise to be able to push their own applications at their leisure to their phones" This isn't true for iOS. On iOS, enterprise managed phones can absolutely push out their own apps and bypass the App Store: http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/apps/in-house/resources.html http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/apps/in-house/resources... And Android phones which aren't third-party app locked by the carriers (so no ATT phones) can already install any app the user wants. It doesn't look like enterprise phone management for Android can "push out an app" though.
potatolicious 16y ago
> "4) Dev tools that people are familiar with." This is a nice-to-have, and has IMO no bearing on the success of a platform. How many devs knew Obj-C well before the iPhone SDK came out? How many do now? It's a bitter pill for developers to swallow, but the truth is that consumers drive platform adoption, and developers will learn whatever it takes to have a crack at the goldmine. Nokia went well out of its way to be dev-friendly, but couldn't produce a platform consumers wanted. Having a solid dev platform that's easy to use is good, but makes little difference when nobody's wielding your phone in the first place. > "2) Existing tie-in to blackberry servers." Doesn't last forever. The consumer preference for iOS and Android device is so strong that enterprises are starting to decouple themselves from BB enterprise servers. There's a difference between the bitchings of rank and file engineers and the CEO being unable to use the new fancy sexy device because IT doesn't support it. One gets more change than the other, sadly. The tie-in to RIM's proprietary servers is a stopgap at best. Without it RIM would be sinking far more rapidly than they already are. It is an advantage that is shrinking and won't last for much longer.

m0nastic 16y ago

"1) Right now, enterprise applications have to go through the App Store (for both devices). It would be pretty powerful for enterprise to be able to push their own applications at their leisure to their phones" This isn't true for iOS. On iOS, enterprise managed phones can absolutely push out their own apps and bypass the App Store: http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/apps/in-house/resources.html http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/apps/in-house/resources... And Android phones which aren't third-party app locked by the carriers (so no ATT phones) can already install any app the user wants. It doesn't look like enterprise phone management for Android can "push out an app" though.

potatolicious 16y ago

> "4) Dev tools that people are familiar with." This is a nice-to-have, and has IMO no bearing on the success of a platform. How many devs knew Obj-C well before the iPhone SDK came out? How many do now? It's a bitter pill for developers to swallow, but the truth is that consumers drive platform adoption, and developers will learn whatever it takes to have a crack at the goldmine. Nokia went well out of its way to be dev-friendly, but couldn't produce a platform consumers wanted. Having a solid dev platform that's easy to use is good, but makes little difference when nobody's wielding your phone in the first place. > "2) Existing tie-in to blackberry servers." Doesn't last forever. The consumer preference for iOS and Android device is so strong that enterprises are starting to decouple themselves from BB enterprise servers. There's a difference between the bitchings of rank and file engineers and the CEO being unable to use the new fancy sexy device because IT doesn't support it. One gets more change than the other, sadly. The tie-in to RIM's proprietary servers is a stopgap at best. Without it RIM would be sinking far more rapidly than they already are. It is an advantage that is shrinking and won't last for much longer.