| Not Allowed We do not support BlackBerry devices anymore in our organization. If an end user wants mobile device access to their e-mail, we tell them to purchase a Windows Mobile device (we run Exchange). I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys.
--
"I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies." Thomas Jefferson |
|
 mlernerPremium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5 | said by texans20:We do not support BlackBerry devices anymore in our organization. If an end user wants mobile device access to their e-mail, we tell them to purchase a Windows Mobile device (we run Exchange). I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. or at least don't rely on Blackberry for connectivity! |
|
| reply to texans20
Based on what?
I have tried to get a few of my users to WM only to find devices that aren't reliable (require restarting, freeze up, etc.) at all. Mail delivery that is slow.
With BlackBerry things run smoothly. While there are a few things i'm waiting on which should be available soon (HTML e-mail, calendar availability).. BlackBerry just functions best (when they're not having in outage!).
I have tried Good too personally, but I hate that if you have rules setup for e-mail items to move to folders automatically that it is more difficult to see new e-mail, and Good doesn't always alert you to unread mail in those folders. BlackBerry, no problem, ALL incoming (including SMS/private e-mail accounts) messages can be seen from one screen if desired.
--
-Sterling |
|
amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to texans20
said by texans20:We do not support BlackBerry devices anymore in our organization. If an end user wants mobile device access to their e-mail, we tell them to purchase a Windows Mobile device (we run Exchange). I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. Lucky you!
I loathe WM phones for the most part... Had nothing but trouble with those things. One day they work fine, next day they refuse to work normally unless you start clear over from scratch... I've just not had a good experience with them... though I can see your stance...
Sure, they're neat (when they work w/Exchange...) but overall I think RIM got it right and they've done a fine job of making their service work smoothly and easily. No messing with certificates, or ActiveSync (don't even get me started on that...).
Guess it's a matter of preference. I find the Blackberry service to be flat out awesome. It works better with MS than MS' own phones in our case 
T-Mobile has apparently been working fine here all day for our users. Haven't heard a peep out of 'em. Then again, they could likely deal with a brief outage and not gripe too much (as long as it isn't a fault on our end ).
Anyway, I think it's funny, as reliable as they seem, that it happens again... even after they promised such a thing wouldn't happen again...
Time for better redundancy. Having all of it go through their system seems like a recipe for exactly this kind of disaster.
Do they have any other data centers, or is it just one??? I'd think they'd want to setup at least one redundant center where if ANYTHING goes crazy, it automatically switches anyone who was affected to the alternate location... |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | My Nexthell BB7100i appears to be Ok
I'd take a Linux based, or even an iPhone before I use WM.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
 SnickerdoPremium
join:2001-02-28
Niagara Falls, ON | reply to texans20
said by texans20:I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. ... then you don't know what you're doing. A Blackberry with BES will blow a WM device out of the water and use a crapload less on-air data to boot. Any organization that is serious about how their BBs are used will have their own BES server.
--
I swear that I will faithfully and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen. |
|
|
|
 rpeAMP
join:2000-12-02
San Antonio, TX | said by Snickerdo:said by texans20:I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. ... then you don't know what you're doing. A Blackberry with BES will blow a WM device out of the water and use a crapload less on-air data to boot. Any organization that is serious about how their BBs are used will have their own BES server. Completely agree. |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to texans20
said by texans20:We do not support BlackBerry devices anymore in our organization. If an end user wants mobile device access to their e-mail, we tell them to purchase a Windows Mobile device (we run Exchange). I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. We've had the exact opposite experience. Our BlackBerry devices are the devices that don't have any issues with our Exchange server.
Email delivery for our WM5 devices is flawless, but the WM devices themselves have constant trouble, although the Smartphone Edition devices seem to have far fewer issues than the full-fledged WM devices.
I absolutely despise my WM5 XV6700. I have to clear it and start over every month or so, otherwise I get weird OS level errors like windows that only display half-way down the screen, buttons randomly stop working, screen taps won't work, SMS and txt messages can't be sent.
I hacked WM6 onto my device and that brought a whole new set of problems, although they were different issues, so I don't feel the hardware is at fault.
A co-worker who has a Moto Q (which runs the WM5 SmartPhone Edition) doesn't have nearly the number or severity of problems that I do. |
|
| reply to texans20
I've used BB devices and WM devices. The BB interface is much better and a lot less "clunky." |
|
 wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to texans20
said by texans20:We do not support BlackBerry devices anymore in our organization. If an end user wants mobile device access to their e-mail, we tell them to purchase a Windows Mobile device (we run Exchange). I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. Thats odd. I have literally had WM (phone) devices since before they were officially released in the US (I imported them from Asia). I have had over 12 different models for different carriers, and while I liked them very much, nothing beats Blackberry for email delivery. After dealing with years of delayed email delivery (even with the new "push" feature offered on WM), I was overwhelmingly surprised by the fact that the email on the BB simply "works".
--
с новым годом |
|
 nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1 | reply to Snickerdo
Agreed.. used WM device for a couple of years, the bb is much better and nicer to use.
--
Life is too short to be boring |
|
yahtzeePremium
join:2000-12-03
Richmond, VA | reply to Snickerdo
said by Snickerdo:said by texans20:I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. ... then you don't know what you're doing. A Blackberry with BES will blow a WM device out of the water and use a crapload less on-air data to boot. Any organization that is serious about how their BBs are used will have their own BES server. +1 |
|
| reply to texans20
We've found the Windows devices to be more unreliable than Blackberrys, either using POP or enterprise server... |
|
| reply to Snickerdo
said by Snickerdo:said by texans20:I've found that the WM 5 and WM 6 devices work with Exchange much better than the BlackBerrys. ... then you don't know what you're doing. A Blackberry with BES will blow a WM device out of the water and use a crapload less on-air data to boot. Any organization that is serious about how their BBs are used will have their own BES server. Can't afford BES, our budget per year for equipment and IT software is less than $20,000, we support 155 users. Most of that is spent buying new hardware, and anti-virus licenses for each machine come from our budget. The WM devices work with no additional software to purchase. BES might be fantastic, it sure looks like it, but on our razor thin budget we have to go with what's already there.
I guess the experience depends on the mobile devices. Most of our users are on WM Smartphone Edition, and while the interface might not be as good as a BlackBerry that's not my problem. I do use WM6 and it's a big improvement as far as reliability, and WM6.1 due out this summer looks stunning, so the interface is catching up. I've had a WM5 Q and a WM6 Q9, the Q9 is extraordinary and works great with our E2k7 setup.
--
"I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies." Thomas Jefferson |
|
SnickerdoPremium
join:2001-02-28
Niagara Falls, ON | said by texans20:Can't afford BES, our budget per year for equipment and IT software is less than $20,000, we support 155 users. Most of that is spent buying new hardware, and anti-virus licenses for each machine come from our budget. The WM devices work with no additional software to purchase. BES might be fantastic, it sure looks like it, but on our razor thin budget we have to go with what's already there. If you're paying per meg for data access on the cell network, the amount of bandwidth saved by switching from WM to BB on BES alone will justify the cost, and even then there are companies that specialize in hosting BES for smaller organizations... though, 155 people is hardly small. The company I work for maintains dedicated BES installations for as little as 30 users. You guys are either really cheap, or don't understand just how much more useful BES is.
--
I swear that I will faithfully and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to mlerner
Even our setup uses RIM. If Im not mistaken ( I don't touch the bb servers ) they all go through RIM.
Im dealing with complaints from a ton of execs about this 
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to Snickerdo
How about we have 12. About 90 % of the users are affected by the RIM outage.
My Moto Q is unaffected and my lg voyager is unaffected by the outage. While I like the BES servers ( so easy to maintain except all the queue stall traps ) Exchange users are still purring along because it doesn't all go through RIM.
I think compressing messages and sending them compressed to hand helds to decompress would give us the same bandwidth savings as the bb.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
SnickerdoPremium
join:2001-02-28
Niagara Falls, ON | said by BosstonesOwn:I think compressing messages and sending them compressed to hand helds to decompress would give us the same bandwidth savings as the bb. That's what a Blackberry and BES does, whereas a WM device just connects to OMA through SSL and pulls the data from there. WM and Mobile ActiveSync isn't exactly a very elegant solution.
--
I swear that I will faithfully and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to SterlingJ85
The problem with RIM is that you're committed to the stability of RIM's services and connectivity. If it goes down so does everything else. It doesn't matter if you're company runs it's own BES server or not. And this is for the most basic services like raw Internet access. This is also why most ISPs charge extra for RIM... they have to route all BlackBerry user traffic through RIM!
The reason people say Windows Mobile is more reliable isn't because the operating system is better (personally, I think it is - at least from a developer's point of view) or that the email application is easier to use. The reason is because most organizations like to remove a point of failure that is not localized by them. By housing their own mail server, when it breaks they can fix it. If you use RIM and RIM breaks the company is at the mercy of RIM to fix it.
You can get another ISP, you can get a different model of BlackBerry, you can run 50 redundant BES servers... but there is only one RIM.
This is so ironic it's awesome. The big bad Microsoft can do nothing but harm and the anti-Microsoft RIM built on the supreme Java (heh) is the savior from the beast. Yet it's odd, Microsoft isn't the ones filtering the bits or flipping your nibbles.
--
»www.fairtax.org |
|
| reply to Snickerdo
Yeah i know , thats why I posted it.
I was thinking about it for WM devices. Which would give the same bandwidth savings.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
