View Single Post
Old 04-09-2006, 12:02 PM   #2 (permalink)
wibbly
CrackBerry Addict
 
wibbly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Model: 9700
Carrier: T-Mobile UK
Posts: 857
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

> will not be able to distinguish between Microsoft's DirectPush solution and BES email functionality

No they won't. And from a user perspective I think they're pretty much the same. And from what I've heard, the MS solution works well and is quite efficient on bandwidth too.

But... today MS aren't "quite there" in the device stakes (battery life) and OS stakes (the UI simply is broken in a number of areas, and other corp stuff is missing. A MS champion I was talking to was surprised, for example, that my 8700 has a firewall build in, out of the box). For me the questions are thus

- When MS catches up, will RIM have moved forward enough to keep the gap between them and MS? IMHO there's a lot of what MS is doing that shows they simply "don't get it" yet when it comes to PDA/phone usage models and how people want to interact and use them. But they're bound to get it right in the end...

- Do most people buying this stuff take the trouble to compare the two different product approaches properly and make an informed decision? My fear (for RIM) is that many/most do not. ("If it's MS it must be equal to or better than the competition". "If it's MS it must integrate into/be more stable in a MS environment". etc etc).

> Sustaining 70% of their revenue from propietary hardware is unrealistic...if you think I'm way off base then consider how many OEM handhelds are being introduced in 2006 with BB Connect functionality

I don't think the 70% is what RIM actually want. Main problem as I see it with the current BB Connect programme is that the BB connect versions of the client are behind the curve feature and stability wise compared with what's on RIM's own hardware.

Maybe RIM need to do a deal with a volume phone vendor and produce a fully RIM version of the 3rd party product (not a BB Connect application bolt-on), capitalising on the volume/price points of the 3rd party hardware platform, but with RIM more in control of the software. But most 3rd party platforms seem to have shorter lives than RIM's hardware - normal phones/PDAs are more prone to fashion changes. This risks the hardware being out of date (ie becomes more expensive as volumes do down) before RIM have a chance to exploit it...

W

Last edited by wibbly : 04-09-2006 at 12:08 PM.
Offline