BlackBerry Forums Support Community
              

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-27-2005, 06:05 PM   #21 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Please Login to Remove!

What about security?

You're patching an Exchange server all the time anyway, what difference does it make?

The ActiveSync mobile stuff is all designed to be a part of Exchange, not another piece of infrastructure to manage. The organizations using Exchange are already married to the idea of having patch manangement being a full-time job!

I still don't see Microsoft losing this. I really want to see it, but that isn't the way to get there.
__________________
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 06:21 PM   #22 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Model: 7230
Posts: 46
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sempai
What about security?

You're patching an Exchange server all the time anyway, what difference does it make?

The ActiveSync mobile stuff is all designed to be a part of Exchange, not another piece of infrastructure to manage. The organizations using Exchange are already married to the idea of having patch manangement being a full-time job!

I still don't see Microsoft losing this. I really want to see it, but that isn't the way to get there.
True we keep patching exchange all the time but there are a couple of differences. First, if the security issue is in the device side then you have to patch all the device individually. Its expensive and time consuming. Second, if a security breach is in Exchange then atleast you have some kind of protection because its within a corporate environment. Here data is transfered wirelessly and so its a serious problem (I bet not many people want their emails read by strangers). By the way security is just one of the many problems of this solution. The emails are not instant. Its about 20 mins lag worst case lag (http://blogs.technet.com/exchange/ar...07/406035.aspx). Battery life is another since its the device thats makes the connection requesting status every few mins. Also reliability since its based on polling the exchange server. Again we still have to wait to see the actual performance. But atleast on paper it doesn't look good.

Last edited by bbmember : 06-27-2005 at 06:31 PM.
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 06:37 PM   #23 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbmember
True we keep patching exchange all the time but there are a couple of differences. First, if the security issue is in the device side then you have to patch all the device individually. Its expensive and time consuming. Second, if a security breach is in Exchange then atleast you have some kind of protection because its within a corporate environment. Here data is transfered wirelessly and so its a serious problem (I bet not many people want their emails read by strangers). By the way security is just one of the many problems of this solution. The emails are not instant. Its about 20 mins lag worst case lag (http://blogs.technet.com/exchange/ar...07/406035.aspx). Battery life is another since its the device thats makes the connection requesting status every few mins. Also reliability since its based on polling the exchange server. Again we still have to wait to see the actual performance. But atleast on paper it doesn't look good.
That doesn't make any sense.

If the BlackBerry requires a patch (which it has) you've also had to patch every individual device (which has happened).

Why would it be any different for other devices?

As for battery life, those of you using Nextel BlackBerry handsets are already lucky if you see 24 hours on the darned thing, and I have to tell you, other batteries *are* doing better jobs.

It seems a bit premature to judge Microsoft's offering until it is actually being tested in the field, no? You're also assuming that ActiveSync will not be encrypted, which everything I have read about it says that it is - and that your data is no more or less at risk than the BlackBerry.

In fact, since you'd no longer be relying on a party such as RIM to route messages to devices, you have less exposure to third parties intercepting your data.
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 07:11 PM   #24 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Model: 7230
Posts: 46
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sempai
That doesn't make any sense.

If the BlackBerry requires a patch (which it has) you've also had to patch every individual device (which has happened).

Why would it be any different for other devices?

As for battery life, those of you using Nextel BlackBerry handsets are already lucky if you see 24 hours on the darned thing, and I have to tell you, other batteries *are* doing better jobs.

It seems a bit premature to judge Microsoft's offering until it is actually being tested in the field, no? You're also assuming that ActiveSync will not be encrypted, which everything I have read about it says that it is - and that your data is no more or less at risk than the BlackBerry.

In fact, since you'd no longer be relying on a party such as RIM to route messages to devices, you have less exposure to third parties intercepting your data.
Well I haven't been patching my Blackberry everyday like I do on my Windows. Thats my point!

Atleast the way I see this technology is PULL not PUSH. If you are fine with a 20 mins lag, not worried about security and reliability, and have a Exchange 2003 then it may be fine for you.

Also don't tell me polling data on a server will require less battery life than pull. That the point. I am not commenting about individual battery life of devices. The overall concept is what I was commenting.

Regarding security you are one of the few who thinks this solution is secure. Infact Gartner analysts dont' even this their security is "ENTERPRISE WORTHY"

http://www.brighthand.com/article/Ga...Email_Insecure

Again, we all have to wait to see the actual performance. So I agree its a bit too premature. No doubt the Razrberry looks cool. But remember cool doesn't imply good performance.
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 07:18 PM   #25 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Model: 7520
Posts: 26
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

LOL... you think you have problems with Virus's now. LOL...
Well let's see what they do with this phone. They love Microsoft and well you know where that goes from here. Forget the crashing. Viru's will just eat your contacts and calender.
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 07:22 PM   #26 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbmember
Well I haven't been patching my Blackberry everyday like I do on my Windows. Thats my point!

Atleast the way I see this technology is PULL not PUSH. If you are fine with a 20 mins lag, not worried about security and reliability, and have a Exchange 2003 then it may be fine for you.

Also don't tell me polling data on a server will require less battery life than pull. That the point. I am not commenting about individual battery life of devices. The overall concept is what I was commenting.

Regarding security you are one of the few who thinks this solution is secure. Infact Gartner analysts dont' even this their security is "ENTERPRISE WORTHY"

http://www.brighthand.com/article/Ga...Email_Insecure

Again, we all have to wait to see the actual performance. So I agree its a bit too premature. No doubt the Razrberry looks cool. But remember cool doesn't imply good performance.
Gartner is writing about Windows Mobile.

They said nothing about the underlying protocol or methods of the ActiveSync Exchange component. I think this may because the product doesn't exist yet, and Gartner couldn't have written a report about a product that isn't available to them.

I am not talking about the RazrBerry - I am speaking directly to the users of Exchange and BlackBerry devices and telling you, the writing is in the wall, and RIM will be squashed if they don't move to a different licensing model.

Exchange ActiveSync will not only work with Windows Mobile devices! It is being supported by no fewer than 8 handset makers. Not all of whom make or will make Windows Mobile devices.
__________________
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 07:28 PM   #27 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Model: 7230
Posts: 46
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sempai
Gartner is writing about Windows Mobile.

They said nothing about the underlying protocol or methods of the ActiveSync Exchange component. I think this may because the product doesn't exist yet, and Gartner couldn't have written a report about a product that isn't available to them.

I am not talking about the RazrBerry - I am speaking directly to the users of Exchange and BlackBerry devices and telling you, the writing is in the wall, and RIM will be squashed if they don't move to a different licensing model.

Exchange ActiveSync will not only work with Windows Mobile devices! It is being supported by no fewer than 8 handset makers. Not all of whom make or will make Windows Mobile devices.
So insecure Windows Mobile ok with you? In any case I will reserve my comments about the MS wireless email solution until it comes to the market.

Last edited by bbmember : 06-27-2005 at 07:40 PM.
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 07:32 PM   #28 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbmember
So insure Windows Mobile ok with you? In any case I will reserve my comments about the MS wireless email solution until it comes to the market.
Are you asking if Windows Mobile is okay with me? It isn't. I don't think it is a useful platform for me. Mainly because as a Mac and Solaris user Microsoft doesn't care if their devices work with my computers, so I see no reason to attempt to shoe-horn their crap into my life.

Fact is, I think a lot of people will go to Active Sync instead of buying more BES all the time. And you don't have to use Windows Mobile to benefit from it - that is only one of the several platforms that are supporting it.

I'd be happy to discuss the Microsoft email sync solution now, as long as we can find the actual specifications and features of it. That Gartner report wasn't it: it was only about using Windows Mobile devices with some new patch or firmware update.

Edit: s/insure/insecure made it all more better. thanks, bbmember.
__________________

Last edited by sempai : 06-27-2005 at 07:44 PM.
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 07:42 PM   #29 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I really, really hate to do this, because I absolutely loathe this guy, but if you go here:

http://msmobiles.com/news.php/3913.html

You can see some information on how the new ActiveSync email piece works, and its comparison to BlackBerry. Ignore for a moment that the guy clearly doesn't really know how a BlackBerry works, but he's got the general idea.
__________________
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 10:46 PM   #30 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Model: Many
Carrier: Sprint
Posts: 1,475
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Hmmmmm....the article discusses Windows Mobile 5.0 devices and Exchange 2003 Service Pack 2 - which is not yet released. I suppose the solution is OK if a user only wants Email. There does not appear to be any MDS type functionality. If I wanted something that simple I'd downgrade to BES 2.0.
Offline  
Old 06-27-2005, 11:35 PM   #31 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Model: 7100T
Posts: 14
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barjohn
Well, I used to think the Blackberry OS was solid but it shure hasn't been with the new Blackberries. All you need to do is read the threads to see the numerous problems. Seems like any new OS will go through its bleeding edge period and we are sort of dripping if you get my jist.
i agree with you barjohn, but dont you think windows mobile should have come out of this "bleeding edge" period a long time ago. .
Offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 07:12 AM   #32 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by southwestcomm
Hmmmmm....the article discusses Windows Mobile 5.0 devices and Exchange 2003 Service Pack 2 - which is not yet released. I suppose the solution is OK if a user only wants Email. There does not appear to be any MDS type functionality. If I wanted something that simple I'd downgrade to BES 2.0.
You don't need MDS when the device can access IP networks natively.

There is no concept of the "blackberry APN" in the rest of the industry - email and PIM are synched via HTTPS in the ActiveSync world.
__________________
Offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 07:59 AM   #33 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
barjohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Riverside, CA
Model: 8700
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 1,068
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

While admittedly I am not a big Microsoft fan, the PPC software that I have used was as stable as the current BB software. In the worst case, when it did require a reboot it was not a 5 minute process. Where PPC software has problems, is the same place many systems start to encounter problems and that is as you add third party apps. A buggy app should not crash a system but they often do. My guess is that it is related to the lack of robustness of the underlying hardware firmware. Since virtually all apps need to talk to various hardware elements on a smartphone and this firmware addressed via the API is not robust, it leads to system crashes when unexpected events are raised. Look at JVM errors, endless loops and reboots as an example in the BB world. In theory, JAVA apps should be running in a sandbox where they can do no damage. So much for theory.
__________________
John

For more information see barJohn Reviews It
Active PIN 203A5535
Offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 12:54 PM   #34 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Waterloo: Home of RIM
Model: PlayB
Carrier: Bell Mobility
Posts: 1,008
Post Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I agree that in theory the Microsoft "push" solution will be cheaper from an IT perspective.

What about the end user?

If I were to go with a PPC device, I'd have to subscribe to a non-Blackberry data plan. And as I suspect that the Microsoft "push" solution will be quite chatty with the Exchange server, I'd likely need an unlimited data plan. So that pushes the monthly fee from $60CAD to about $100CAD. And while $40 per month won't discourage most of us, if I was a company deploying hundreds of these devices...well...that's a big difference.
Offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 12:59 PM   #35 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jase88
I agree that in theory the Microsoft "push" solution will be cheaper from an IT perspective.

What about the end user?

If I were to go with a PPC device, I'd have to subscribe to a non-Blackberry data plan. And as I suspect that the Microsoft "push" solution will be quite chatty with the Exchange server, I'd likely need an unlimited data plan. So that pushes the monthly fee from $60CAD to about $100CAD. And while $40 per month won't discourage most of us, if I was a company deploying hundreds of these devices...well...that's a big difference.
I'm not so sure.

The Microsoft solution uses notifications to alert the client that something has changed. Then the client performs a pull for near-real-time synchronization.

Please stop saying this will require a PPC device. It doesn't and will not. Nokia and Sony Ericsson do NOT make PocketPC devices, they DO however have ActiveSync devices under active development, based on Symbian Series 60/80 and UIQ.

And in the United States market, this doesn't have to be expensive. Unlimited data plans from T-Mobile USA currently run you USD$19.
__________________
Offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 06:21 PM   #36 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
T-Roy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Model: 8800
Carrier: Darth Vader
Posts: 704
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I think there is a lot of inaccurate and misinformation all over the place about how all of this works. I can see this being adopted in a lot of newer, small businesses.
Offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 10:47 PM   #37 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Model: Many
Carrier: Sprint
Posts: 1,475
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Default

So - if I understand you sempai - the solution is a poke-and-pull solution - not truly a real-time push like Blackberry? That scares me. Some older solutions that were poke-and-pull had issues when the devices leave data coverage and returns and the device isn't aware it has missed messages. I don't know if the new Microworst solution has overcome this.
While I like the idea of the solution I just don't trust Microworst to really have a solid solution. They couldn't get the MPX product right and even Cingular quietly pulled the product from their product line.
Offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 11:06 PM   #38 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Model: 9100
Carrier: TMO
Posts: 426
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Has anyone read this article?

http://www.pdastreet.com/articles/20...CEO-Talks.html
Offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 06:48 AM   #39 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
sempai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Providence, RI, US
Model: 8xxx
Carrier: T-Mobile, US
Posts: 728
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by southwestcomm
So - if I understand you sempai - the solution is a poke-and-pull solution - not truly a real-time push like Blackberry? That scares me. Some older solutions that were poke-and-pull had issues when the devices leave data coverage and returns and the device isn't aware it has missed messages. I don't know if the new Microworst solution has overcome this.
While I like the idea of the solution I just don't trust Microworst to really have a solid solution. They couldn't get the MPX product right and even Cingular quietly pulled the product from their product line.

It looks to be that way. The way ActiveSync does it though doens't lend itself to missed messages. It is using HTTP for transport so it will perform a true synchronization, not merely a delivery of items.

So if a device leaves data service, it knows it has things to get, and will perform the sync when it can. I don't think it will fall victim to the item-pushing because it isn't getting just one item.

I think the earlier systems worked similar to how MMS works today:

When someone sends another user an MMS message, it ends up being put on a little HTTP/web server somewhere, and two binary SMS messages are sent to the recip. The recip's device gets those messages, assembles them, says "Ah, we have instructions to retrieve this message!" and goes off and gets that one message.

Now with ActiveSync, it would appear that it sends a message saying "y0! your mailbox and calendar are updated. talk to me!" and the handset will dutifully call it up over HTTP and ask for a sync/match/flush.

The BlackBerry /actually/ does something similar in a way, the device itself is responsible for accepting things and the network is bombarding you with requests to update and accept things. Someone more knowledgable will hopefully chime in.

There is no way for "push" to work on mobile devices, really. To some extent all devices are going to have to "pull".
__________________
Offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 07:06 AM   #40 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
blkberryboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dearborn, MI
Model: Repl.
Carrier: Cingular/ATT
Posts: 1,146
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sempai
And in the United States market, this doesn't have to be expensive. Unlimited data plans from T-Mobile USA currently run you USD$19.
This brings up a great question begging to be asked. How can RIM or T-Mobile consider the Microsoft option after T-Mobile has invested so much in BlackBerry. Last thing I read was T-Mo sells the most BB's, if that is the case would they really try and jump ship? Thoughts on this would be appriciated.
__________________
JASON
iTurned to the darkside.
Offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Allen Bradley 1785-ME64 /A PLC-5 EEPROM Memory Module 64K Words
$148.0
Allen Bradley 1785-ME64 /A PLC-5 EEPROM Memory Module 64K Words  pictureST7271N5B1/CEH / ST7271N5B1 / ST7271 / ST EEPROM
$12.0
ST7271N5B1/CEH  / ST7271N5B1 / ST7271 / ST EEPROM  pictureGY-NEO6MV2 Flight Controller GPS Module With Antenna For Arduino EEPROM APM2.5
$10.25
GY-NEO6MV2 Flight Controller GPS Module With Antenna For Arduino EEPROM APM2.5 picture63 NEW MICROCHIP 24LC02BHT-I/OT EEPROM MEMORY
$7.99
63 NEW MICROCHIP 24LC02BHT-I/OT EEPROM MEMORY  pictureGY-NEO6MV2 Flight Controller GPS Module With Antenna For Arduino EEPROM APM2.5
$10.25
GY-NEO6MV2 Flight Controller GPS Module With Antenna For Arduino EEPROM APM2.5 picture






Copyright 2004-2016 BlackBerryForums.com.
The names RIM and BlackBerry are registered Trademarks of BlackBerry Inc.