vowe dot net :: What is killing BlackBerry? Hint: it's not the devices.

What is killing BlackBerry? Hint: it's not the devices.

by Volker Weber

So RIM has a new CEO. One that will continue the course set by the old CEOs. BlackBerry seems to be in a downward spiral, if you believe what the US press is writing. Or the rest of the world is parroting.

At the same time, RIM has a pretty good line of devices. But there is something wrong. I see three things that kill BlackBerry. All of them could be changed:

Carriers
Enterprise IT
Emotion

Carriers require a special provisioning for BlackBerrys that they charge extra for. BlackBerrys don't work over the carrier access point. They need to talk to the BlackBerry.net AP and the RIM infrastructure. RIM charges the carriers, the carriers charge their customers. This is not smart, since BlackBerrys use a lot less bandwidth than other smartphones. Lower network utilization means extra dollars. If BlackBerrys would work with every single SIM on the market, devices handed down from business to family would become a lot more useful.

Enterprise IT locks down BlackBerrys in a way that makes them completely useless for private use. The reason is "security". Those enterprise policies are old and outdated. RIM provides BlackBerry Balance, which would allow IT to secure enterprise usage and allow private use of Facebook & Co at the same time, without compromising security. The irony is that enterprise IT kills the only platform that provides this solution.

Emotion. This is your call, Thorsten Heins. Unfortunately you don't look like emotion. Not in the least bit.

2012-01-24 :: email :: twitter :: facebook :: google+

Comments

Volker, as always your comments are spot on. I don't know how much money RIM is making from the BlackBerry service fee, but lifting the fee would for sure help them. Some carriers already allow you to book the BlackBerry service free of charge on top of your existing plan. So at least there seems to be a change in how the service is "sold" to users.

BlackBerry Balance is so easy to implement. You can get it up and running in just a few hours and roll it out to your user base. Indeed, the IT departments need to change their thinking about and management of the BlackBerry solution. Some IT departments seem to have the urge to enable each and every IT policy to lock down the devices. BlackBerry Balance allows you to get a lot more of a BlackBerry device. As you said, that is not really necessary.

I don't know how often I have mentioned to my contacts at RIM that they need to put emtions into their products.

Abdelkader Boui, 2012-01-24 16:19

Yes, thats it. But - none of the companies I am working for bothers for security issues with iPhones and iPads. Since having the BES infrastructure it was easy to talk about security issues - this was intrinsic to the solution and the main selling point for the carriers. With iPhones it is the "user experience". Try to fight this with a "secure" device.

And: I usually refrain from judging people by their appearance on photos (with the exception of some people that send me their application ;-) ). Looking at the interview I had the impression he is another steven-jobs-epigone (all this "fantastic", "amazing" etc stuff). Looking at the photo I had the impression, he takes the wrong stuff. Too much. Or all at once. RIM, try another photo, please. Not the one from his confirmation.

cheers

EKKI

Eckhard Eilers, 2012-01-24 16:50

i fully agree with that article!

Ralph Hammann, 2012-01-24 17:07

Totally agree

Thomas Einwaller, 2012-01-24 17:14

3. EMOTION. EOM!

Marco Foellmer, 2012-01-24 17:26

1. - should be fixed with BB10 as RIM is switching to ActiveSync

Mirel Popa, 2012-01-24 18:35

That is unlikely. ActiveSync or not, RIM will keep this secure channel.

Volker Weber, 2012-01-24 18:36

Sure, I work in Enterprise IT, but lately, it really makes me laugh. They lock down BlackBerry devices, as you describe, but when I come around to install Lotus Traveler, the usual answer I get about "security" is, "Traveler is just good enough, no need to lock it down more." This, from people who have limited the usefulness of another mobile device. What changed between rolling out BlackBerry devices and rolling out iOS and Android devices? And if it is suddenly okay to allow an open device, like iOS and Android, why aren't they opening up the BlackBerry? I agree with you, it's almost as if they (Enterprise IT) want BlackBerry to fail.

Gregg Eldred, 2012-01-24 18:38

> The reason is "security". Those enterprise policies are old and outdated.

Thanks for the laugh!

marc egart, 2012-01-24 18:56

@Mirel: Yes, RIM is going to use ActiveSync with the upcoming devices. But in a corporate environment the device will establish an MDS connection through the BES to the corporate network and from there the device will then talk ActiveSync to the mail servers. As far as I understood, ActiveSync was RIM's only option to allow more than one device per user.

Abdelkader Boui, 2012-01-24 18:59

_some_ of their devices are the pits and around here at least, are the norm; the entry level Curve is junky plastic compared to entry level offerings from HTC that are half the price.

Colin Williams, 2012-01-24 19:31

RIM will have a hard time to justify the extra fee for BB consumers. Yes, RIM NOC is required for services like BBM&video chat but I do not think consumers will pay when they have many other options.

Here is a chart (No 3) that shows how the service fee went down over the years. Today, the fee may be as low as $2/month for BIS subscriber and (I hope) not a big part of RIM's revenue.

http://www.telco2research.com/articles/AN_RIM-BlackBerry-fit-telco-2-strategy_Summary

For corporations, RIM NOC makes perfect sense as it keeps BES servers safe behind the firewalls.

I think RIM should:
- focus more on apps as a future source of revenue
- offer RIM NOC security for free to differentiate from all other players

Time will tell ...

Mirel Popa, 2012-01-24 21:51

Emotion is playing a big part. The old saying of "you have to be twice as good to be considered equal" fits RIM perfectly now. Emotion means that often people will dismiss a device before they've even seen it (I've speaking as someone who's experienced people dismissing Windows Phone but they've never touched one).

RIM have to win the hearts and minds of the consumers who will increasingly have the power to choose their own device and bring it in to work (and then have it supported). At the moment the iSheep and Android owners are winning that battle. RIM have to shake off that aura of their devices feeling like they have to be part of a nailed-down restrictive infrastructure, but at the same time adopt the 'compromises on both sides' approach of consumerisation. I refer, as always, to the Forbes article 'I Want My iPad'.

Darren Adams, 2012-01-24 23:41

I think their marketing has a lot to answer for. When they started out, BB were generally recognised as *the* phone to have for BUSINESS people. In the last few years the message has changed and they're pitch is now a bit confusing. "Look music!". "Ooooh a tablet just like the consumer iPad".

Business buyers are now confused: is a BB a "work" phone or a "play" phone.

Just check out the current BB au homepage: http://au.blackberry.com/ giftwrapped devices! If it's a work phone your boss aint gonna gift wrap it for you. "Business" is the second last option in the top right.

BB cannot compete with Apple or Android in the consumer market but pitched right they have a compelling argument for business folks.

Brendon Upson, 2012-01-25 01:21

It's something that anyone in security has to learn, just as IT in general. If something makes sense to the users (be it rational or emotional), there's little good in blocking or fighting it. It will come eventually and blocking or fighting it just harms the relationship.

So, in security, I believe the best idea is to point out risks, show options on how to mitigate them - usually there are multiple options, some cheaper, some more effective. And then let those who are eventually accountable make the decision. If you are eventually accountable yourself already, your most certainly not only looking at the security aspects anyway...

Ragnar Schierholz, 2012-01-25 09:01

I agree with the first two points.

Since I'm into development of BlackBerry Apps I see an additional issue: "customers" were the carriers and "big business", not the users of the devices. You see it how you are treated if you seem to be somewhat "nameless". So, as a user, you got what they decided is "best for you".

One example from my point of view: two years ago, support for third-party app development looked like something that just has to appear on a checklist as "available". On the bright side: that changed noticeable during the last year.

For the third point: look at crackberry.com. Might be, he got it and gets it...

Horst Weber, 2012-01-27 14:29

communicate :: collaborate :: commemorate

What is killing BlackBerry? Hint: it's not the devices.

by Volker Weber

Comments

Post a comment

Recent comments

Ceci n'est pas un blog

Archives

Mobile tag for this page