OS and Software > All Things Macintosh > [iPhone] 3.1 breaks Exchange Sync for pre-3GS phones

reply to godlikesme

Re: [iPhone] 3.1 breaks Exchange Sync

I have no control over my Exchange server. I work for a company with like 30,000 employees.

Let's go with the argument that I didn't do my research. However, enforcing hardware encryption was the approach Apple should have taken all along. It would have removed any doubt as to whether or not a customer's MS Exchange servers required it. I would have tried to access my email and received the message I am getting now and known right there and then that the device was not compatible. That would have given me a fair chance to decide whether or not I still wanted to make the purchase. That would have been the right thing to do. Could my IT department have done more research? Perhaps. Could Apple have been more transparent regarding the lack of hardware encryption and it's long-term ramifications? Definitely.

Just to be clear, I could live with a 3.1.2 update that didn't require hardware encryption.

By the way, it's nice to be able to have an intelligent discussion with people and have different opinions without getting flamed like I often see people react on other message boards.

I agree it was irresponsible of Apple to ignore the setting until now and as I stated earlier, I was under the assumption it WAS honoring the setting. However, I didn't seek a definitive answer when I bought my iPhone, so I hold myself, not Apple, responsible.

Could Apple have been clearer that it didn't support encryption? Absolutely. Do I fault them or think in the grand scheme of things they are ultimately responsible for it? I don't. The information was out there, I just chose not to look for it, so shame on me.

reply to Matt

reply to ChiefTom

Chief, I don't think you understand how Activesync policies work. The policy is sent to the device, but it's completely up to the device whether to honor and apply those settings or not. If anything is communicated back, it's simply that the policy was received successfully. The iPhone hasn't been "lying" to the Exchange server in any way, which is why people are in an uproar.

»technet.microsoft.com/en-us/libr···84.aspx#
»msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/···551.aspx

Note the requirement that for all those policies to be applied, the device must support Activesync 12.1. If the device doesn't support a 12.1 requirement that it doesn't know about (as is the case with the iPhone) it continues to function but it just ignores that policy setting. My guess is that Windows Mobile 5 devices also continue to function normally yet don't support encryption or any of the new Activesync 12.1 policies either.

Matt,

Thanks forthe referance links.

In the first referance in the middle of the page is the following

Require Device Encryption
This setting specifies whether device encryption is required. If set to $true, the device must be able to support and implement encryption to synchronize with the server.

This means to me that unless the device has can support encryption, it can not synchronize.

It has been this way since mid 2008.

If Encryption was required, why was the device able to sync when this policy say no.

As a user, not an admin, is there an easy way I can check whether or not my Exchange server requires encryption before I choose to upgrade to 3.1? Of course this won't help me if there is a policy change in the future...

reply to ChiefTom

Just thought you guys might be interested in knowning that MS Exchange Server 2007 SP1 was not released in May 2008 but in November 2007 which was a full 8 months prior to the release of the original iPhone 3G. That gave Apple MORE than enough time to test compatibility with MS Exchange 2007 SP1. This is TOTALLY Apple's fault and I have already contacted an attorney to start preliminary discussions about a possible class action lawsuit. If anyone else is interested in filing please let me know and I will start a listserv.

reply to Matt
Here is the link to the original Exchange Server 2007 SP1 download page.

»www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta···ylang=en

Good luck with your lawsuit.

reply to godlikesme
@godslikeme...

Dude. I've been reading your posts across various forums. I can somewhat understand your frustration about being led to believe the phone did something it apparently doesn't do, but seriously...

A lawsuit? ARE YOU KIDDING???

Tell your Exchange Admin to turn off the policy setting to require encryption. Job done.

Or, sell your phone on Craigslist and buy a Blackberry. Job done. That's cheaper than a lawsuit.

You think Apple will give you money because you can't get your email?

How about having your work mail forwarded to Gmail and access it there?

You have got no grounds for a lawsuit, it's frivolous at best. So what, you can't get your work email on your phone. Too bad. If your company switch to Lotus Notes, or Sendmail, or move to some other system, will you blame Apple then too?

You can't get your own way, so you sue. It's (re)actions like this that give America the "ambulance chaser" and "screw everyone for cash" labels the rest of the world think about you/us. Sorry to say it, but it's true. Just accept the fact that your toy has been taken away and now you need to decide whether to deal with it, or just get a new toy.

With all do respect, I can tell by your post that you don't exactly know what it's like to work in a real corporate environment. I work for a goverment contractor. Our clients include agencies like the FBI, DHS, DOJ etc. All of our email communication must be secure. My team all has security clearance and I would get fired and possibly sent to prison if I forwarded my work email to a gmail account. Not everyone lives in a world of "Facebook and Twitter". Some of us do important things that really matter.

Another thing, and for the last freaking time...

IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO EXPECT COMPANIES TO TURN OFF ENCRYPTION!!!

Having my company relax their security settings is not an option and shouldn't have to be! Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Apple marketed a product as being compatible with MS Exchange "touting" their ability to run with the likes of RIM in the corporate market and it looks like they were a bit too early coming out of the gate. They need to own up to it just like Microsoft did with all of the failed Xbox 360 red-ring-of-death issues.

godlikesme, if that is the case then your option would be to upgrade to the 3GS or another handset.

reply to godlikesme
I'm an email admin and have been for 12 years. I've worked in just about every sector imaginable. Right now I'm in Pharmaceuticals. I totally understand corporate environments, both in the US and UK (I'm English and now living in the US).

My whole issue with you is the fact you think you can sue.

Let me ask, and answer some questions...
(First, I totally understand your point about SP1 Nov 07 and Apple, June 08 and their claim about something). But let me ask this...
When you bought it, did it work as advertised? "Yes"
Did anyone FORCE you to upgrade? "No"
Do/Did Apple claim it will forever work? "No"

On that basis, a lawsuit will fail dismally and Apple will laugh hard and long at you. I can be pretty certain that their lawyers get paid more than the one you hired.

I understand you're upset that something that worked now doesn't. But Apple NOT telling you that something MAY NOT work in the future is just bad communication, not a lie and not false selling.

As for turning off encryption, yes I understand for some people that's not an option, nor is forwarding email. I realise that. But you have never addressed the point many people, and myself, raised... why not just ditch it and get a Blackberry? Or a Nokia? Or a Palm? Do you continue to use the iPhone for other things? Does everything else work?

I have to ask this also - if you SO badly need work email on a handheld device, why doesn't your employer supply you with a device that will work? I'd never use my own device for work email, just out of principle. If I need to check work email outside of the office, I'll use an internet cafe and VPN. I'd suggest you ask your boss about the company providing you with something compatible. Hell, they may even get you a 3GS if you ask nice.

I know you feel slighted by Apple's behaviour and it's understandable to a point, but not so far as you genuinely thinking you can sue. That's just ridiculous, and you're letting your anger overshadow your better judgement. I'm sure in the back of your mind you can't seriously think you'll get anything from Apple.

Oh BTW - I personally HATE FaceBook and Twitter etc so please don't assume I'm a spotty teenager and mix me up with other spotty teenagers. I've got almost 20 years in the tech industry. I'm no PFY or a noob.

reply to ptrowski
Agreed. My gripe is that I (along with anyone else who was also lied to by Apple) should be compensated fairly. I called them serveral times with my issue. I said I would even accept a refurbished iPhone 3GS since it wasn't like I hadn't benefitted from the use of my current iPhone 3G for the last 10 months. I tried to be as accomodating as possible -especially since I was the one that was "misled".

I put it to them very simply. I said that if they would have been forthcoming from the get-go and not "spoofed" the whole MS Exchange hardware encryption support I would have immediately known that the phone would not meet my needs with respect to the corporate email functionality and I would have promptly returned it within my 14 day window. I could have then opted for another phone or stuck with my existing one until a newer version of the iPhone launched that did support my needs. This was a chance for Apple to set things right with me. I didn't immediately jump up and yell lawsuit. I only started pursuing the idea after I exhausted ever other attempt at resolving the dispute.

You know how the entire ATM banking system has an agreed upon set of "guidelines" which all participating banks must adhere to (i.e. Plus, Star, Most etc.) and failing to adhere to those guidelines would result in the cards issued by those banks being refused access to the ATM network?

If Apple ran a bank you could probably expect something like this to happen...

Most people using an ATM card are under the impression that as long as no one knows their 4-digit pin their money is safe. Not with the "Apple Computer iDebitCard". With this wonderful piece of plastic the whole 4-digit pin is bogus and in reality if someone got a hold of your card they could have entered in any 4-digit combination and cleaned out your account.

Now in the case of a bank it didn't cost me anything to open up the account and I might have even received a free gift or $50. In addition there is no penalty for me closing the account. In the case of the iPhone however it cost me $300. Are you starting to catch my drift here?