[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by southwestcomm

True, BB Connect is not the same - yet. First generation Good software was limited as well in functionality.

But Good did not have another solution to be compared to. BB Connect was announced over two years ago and is still not shipping in the US. IMO, BBC will hurt RIMM more than it helps. This will get non-RIMM devices in the hands of people. They will see BB Connect and the limited functionality of the application and want more. They will have already purchased the devices and will want a solution that will run on those devices. I liken it to the new version of MSFT ActiveSync. This will get people to buy WM devices, they will see ActiveSyncs limited capabilities and want a solution that will run that device.

Wrong. UCS is a proprietary format that is only used by RIMM.

Format is just that - format. Would you also state cellular carriers are proprietary in the way in which they handle wireless data? They are different, i.e. GSM, CDMA, TDMA, etc. The format in which the data is handle and transported doesn't make it a bad thing - just the way the technology was written.

No. Who else uses UCS? Nobody. GSM, CDMA, etc are transport protocols used by several different carriers. iDen, on the other hand, is propietary because only one carrier uses it. UCS is ONLY used by Blackberry and nobody else. Proprietary.

True, up until recently the BB OS only ran on BB devices. So what? RIM chose to be a solution and harware manufacturer. Hence the reason they have been so succesfull and financially strong. As the market place has changed so has RIM. There was a Good device at one time. Why not more of them? Good appears to have taken a different route is all.

There is no "up until recently". The BB OS only runs on BB devices. No other device will run the BB OS. BB Connect is an application, not an operating system.

I am pro-BB amd never claimed it is a proprietary solution. I believe they have chosen a specific format and software is all. Anti-BB people always toss out the "proprietary" issue.

At least we can agree to disagree?

When I say widely accepted, I am speaking of the IT world. The bottom line is that BB OS only runs on BB devices. BB devices without BES or BB internet on the back-end are paperweights. BES without BB devices is useless. Nobody is going to buy BES to run BB Connect solely. That is where the proprietary term comes from.

Not only "anti-RIMM" people say proprietary:

"Having previously developed for the RIMOS (RIM proprietary operating system)"
http://www.j2medeveloper.com/techtips/bb_exp_p1.html

"Though email’s been done pretty well on the Blackberry proprietary service..."
http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/1004675.html

"BlackBerry uses proprietary software and hardware to connect to the computing systems of the user’s organisation"

http://www.agimo.gov.au/publications...e_Guidance.pdf

", outlining accelerating rivals such as the BlackBerry proprietary OS"
http://www.thestreet.com/tech/hardware/1509459.html

These are unbiased articles.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by BES admin

You are aware that BES/BB is exactly the same in this respect right?

Device activation, software install/distribution, and policy application are all OTA.

Unless I am missing the point, it seems invalid.

What do you do if you want to update the BB client on the handheld? Cradle it. Not so with GoodLink. GL updates are pushed out.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by BES admin

Before I address this opinion, let me say the following:

I am a Microsoft fan and have been from the beginning. I Administer MANY windows clients and servers. I am the sole Exchange Administrator for ~7000 users for e-mail and Unified Voice Mail. I also manage our BES service. I think an end-to-end Microsoft solution is key to a successful business in many ways.

Completely OT, have you seen E12 yet? Wow...

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by southwestcomm

Technically the MS Email solution isn't "free". It will only be available on 2003 SP3 I think? So, tehnically, if a company wants they solution will need to upgrade their Exchange to the correct version.

Most organizations will get the SP2 update at no charge, if they are running 2003, however, you are right, to get the full features of the Messaging Security Feature Pack (MSFP), you will need Exchange 2003 with SP2 installed and devices running WM5.

[BES admin]

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

What do you do if you want to update the BB client on the handheld? Cradle it. Not so with GoodLink. GL updates are pushed out.

True, but you are comparing apples to oranges in this respect. BB is the handheld OS. As far as I know, to update the palm OS or the windows OS you have to cradle the device too.

GL is an application on the OS, not the OS itself, so really, that isn't a fair comparison. But in all other respects, BB is all OTA.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by BES admin

True, but you are comparing apples to oranges in this respect. BB is the handheld OS. As far as I know, to update the palm OS or the windows OS you have to cradle the device too.

GL is an application on the OS, not the OS itself, so really, that isn't a fair comparison. But in all other respects, BB is all OTA.

Exactly. GoodLink is a true cradleless solution. Blackberry is not. Kind of goes back to my proprietary argument. On a Blackberry, the application on the handheld is the OS and the OS is the application. If you want to update the application, the device has to come in from the field and be cradled.

[corey@12mile]

That is an unfair statement... If you compare what Goodlink can update and implement OTA, you get the exact same from BES. The only time you need to cradle a BB is for an OS update, which is true for any handheld at this point.

With MDS Studio, now applications can be built and pushed out, with version control et al. I am not aware of any client application development products from Good which allow you to update your fleet to the newest version by means of push.

In addition to all that, the Blackberry consumes far less data to get up and running when installing from scratch as opposed to Good. Shall we compare the actual data usage to get each device up and running?

You also mention that the BB is nothing without BES or BIS/BWC. Tell me this... When Goodlink is put onto a handheld, how does it function without a backend server? With every BB and data plan you get push email via BIS/BWC. Does Good have a solution for users who are not in an enterprise environment but want to get push email? RIM does.

You can talk about people not needing anything specific for gaining access to anything when purchasing a PPC or a Treo, but that has nothing to do with Good. If the user doesn't have a Goodlink server on the backend, Good is a moot point. In short, if a user wants push email via a Treo or PPC they have no choice but the full enterprise solution. With a Blackberry, they get push email without having to buy any kind of server product.

RIM even gives the desktop redirector for people so that there are 3 completely different methods to push mail to the handheld. Good only has 1 method, and it's expensive.

cd.

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

Exactly. GoodLink is a true cradleless solution. Blackberry is not. Kind of goes back to my proprietary argument. On a Blackberry, the application on the handheld is the OS and the OS is the application. If you want to update the application, the device has to come in from the field and be cradled.

[BES admin]

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

Exactly. If you want to update the application, the device has to come in from the field and be cradled.

I would be willing to say that you need to update the OS on a BB and on a Treo about the same number of times per year. But updating the OS is different than updating an application.

BB OS is just that an OS and GL is an App so of course it can be updated OTA. Again, apples and Oranges.

One of the problems wit GL, IMHO, is that it is an APP and not the OS. I don't like the fact that an APP like GL tries to layer itself over the OS of say a PALM device. I think it's kind of cheesy. I much rather like the look and feel of the BB OS which is one layer. It just seems cleaner than the GL solution on a TREO or the like.

[easy-v]

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

Exactly. GoodLink is a true cradleless solution. Blackberry is not. Kind of goes back to my proprietary argument. On a Blackberry, the application on the handheld is the OS and the OS is the application. If you want to update the application, the device has to come in from the field and be cradled.

For the most part, I am really enjoying this thread. I am a BES Admin (amongst other duties), and never really had hands on with the GL product. Its good to see the comparisons and learn the feature sets, weaknesses and strengths of both products.

Also, I think the posts directed at Good_Guy for propagandizing and preacher were out of line. Most people here are trying to learn or find out information, and like I said, it's nice to learn about competing products.

That said; I don't think it is fair to charactarize the BB as a unit that needs to be cradled. If this were true, how would the carriers be able to sell them to consumers? Certainly, pre v4.0 the BB's were tethered, but not anymore.

As far as being able to OTA update the device (in RIMMS case)/or the app (in GL's case), I think it's a mixed bag. It would be nice to be able to do so on the BB, but I think primarily becuase RIMM is working on enabling new features and functionality on their devices. In reality, I don't think I would ever upgrade all the OS's on my BB's, and would instead identify user's that would actually benefit from the expanded functionality of the upgraded OS.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by corey@12mile

That is an unfair statement... If you compare what Goodlink can update and implement OTA, you get the exact same from BES. The only time you need to cradle a BB is for an OS update, which is true for any handheld at this point.

The application IS the OS and vice versa. That is my point

With MDS Studio, now applications can be built and pushed out, with version control et al. I am not aware of any client application development products from Good which allow you to update your fleet to the newest version by means of push.

GoodAccess has included a developer studio since the first release and does exactly that

In addition to all that, the Blackberry consumes far less data to get up and running when installing from scratch as opposed to Good. Shall we compare the actual data usage to get each device up and running?

Can you tell me what difference this makes? Also, can you show me quantitative data to back your assertion?

You also mention that the BB is nothing without BES or BIS/BWC. Tell me this... When Goodlink is put onto a handheld, how does it function without a backend server? With every BB and data plan you get push email via BIS/BWC. Does Good have a solution for users who are not in an enterprise environment but want to get push email? RIM does.

My point was that in order for a BB to function, you have to have some type of server on the backend (BES/BIS/BWC). Without it, a BB is a paperweight. No email, no nothing. Treo, PPC devices, etc, are true PDA's regardless of whether or not they are running GoodLink. They can get email, they can open and edit documents. It is fully functional. No, without GoodLink, they don't have push email, but I personally don't think a consumer cares if his device pulls the email down on a schedule or if it is pushed to him. Yes, there are some that will, but IMO, that is the minority. Why would a consumer pay a premium for BB when they can pay Sprint $10 a month and get all his email?

You can talk about people not needing anything specific for gaining access to anything when purchasing a PPC or a Treo, but that has nothing to do with Good. If the user doesn't have a Goodlink server on the backend, Good is a moot point. In short, if a user wants push email via a Treo or PPC they have no choice but the full enterprise solution. With a Blackberry, they get push email without having to buy any kind of server product.

If they have IMAP permissions, they can use ChatterMail to get their email pushed to them. There are plenty of consumer focused email solutions out there that are far less expensive than Good and BB that provide the functionality the lion's share of consumers need/want. Again, there will be some consumers that will want BB functionality. Those will go with BB.

RIM even gives the desktop redirector for people so that there are 3 completely different methods to push mail to the handheld. Good only has 1 method, and it's expensive.

You are right and we are giving BB that non-server required market. Our business model is focused on the enterprise. Fair comparisons are BES to GoodLink and the GoodLink solution is less expensive (based on publised retail pricing from BB website):

For 20 users:

BES Server with 20 licenses: $3,999
GoodLink Server with 20 licenses: $3,480

Sprint Monthly Data w/GoodLink: $40/month
Sprint Monthly Data w/BB: $49.95/month

Again, published pricing only, no promotions taken into consideration.

cd.[/QUOTE]

[teamcrn]

me as a consumer i will take qulity and stability over bells and whistle's.. thats why i own a bb and not a treo and a mac not a pc... works for me

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by easy-v

Also, I think the posts directed at Good_Guy for propagandizing and preacher were out of line. Most people here are trying to learn or find out information, and like I said, it's nice to learn about competing products.

While I am obviously biased towards our solution, I try not to outright bash BB. Look, they have a great solution and to be honest, if it weren't for RIMM, I wouldn't have a job. They were the only player in this space for a long, long time. However, that is no longer the case. The biggest hurdle I face is the fact that RIMM's marketing department is genius and everyone knows what a BB is. Outside of IT groups (and even then, as evidenced by your comment) we are nowhere near the brand recognition. Things in that space have improved dramatically over the last year, but still a big mountain to overcome.

That said; I don't think it is fair to charactarize the BB as a unit that needs to be cradled. If this were true, how would the carriers be able to sell them to consumers? Certainly, pre v4.0 the BB's were tethered, but not anymore.

If that consumer wants to update the client, they are going to have to cradle the device. Though your do bring up an interesting point. When a consumer gets a BB, do they get the Desktop Manager software? I would assume so.

As far as being able to OTA update the device (in RIMMS case)/or the app (in GL's case), I think it's a mixed bag. It would be nice to be able to do so on the BB, but I think primarily becuase RIMM is working on enabling new features and functionality on their devices. In reality, I don't think I would ever upgrade all the OS's on my BB's, and would instead identify user's that would actually benefit from the expanded functionality of the upgraded OS.

Agreed. When you identify those groups, bring the devices in and cradle them. With GoodLink, identify the group, push the new client out to them.

The biggest issue here is differentiation. GoodLink is comparable to BES, BB is comparable to the Treo or other smartphone, the BB OS is comparable to Palm OS, WM or Symbian. This is where the greatest amount, IMO, of 'debate' comes into play. Compare GoodLink with BB, the application. Compare Treo with BB, the device. Compare Palm OS with BB, the OS. Hardest part here is that BB the app, BB the device, and BB the OS are so intertwined that it makes it very difficult to do a side by side, feature by feature comparison. This leads to comments about the device that have nothing to do with GL, and vice-versa.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by teamcrn

me as a consumer i will take qulity and stability over bells and whistle's.. thats why i own a bb and not a treo and a mac not a pc... works for me

Isn't choice a wonderful thing. You can go with what works for you.

[BES admin]

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

Fair comparisons are BES to GoodLink and the GoodLink solution is less expensive (based on publised retail pricing from BB website):

For 20 users:

BES Server with 20 licenses: $3,999
GoodLink Server with 20 licenses: $3,480

Sprint Monthly Data w/GoodLink: $40/month
Sprint Monthly Data w/BB: $49.95/month

Again, published pricing only, no promotions taken into consideration.

That sounds about right, however there is a yearly license fee for GoodLink I believe, with BES, you do not have the yearly fee to continue running the software.

I will know for sure shortly, I have an email in to GL sales and we will see what their response is. If it's what I think it is, then the initial cost for GL is less, but the TCO for 5 years is much higher for GL than it is for BES.

I will confirm later.

[BES admin]

Originally Posted by teamcrn

me as a consumer i will take qulity and stability over bells and whistle's.. thats why i own a bb and not a treo and a mac not a pc... works for me

AMEN to that. I have another server guy I share an office with, and he has a Treo, at least twice a day I hear "DOBT!" from the other side of the partition when his TREO 650 crashes! I just chuckle cuz I have YET to crash any of the three BB devices I have had over the last year or so!

LMAO

[stevenyc]

Originally Posted by BES admin

That sounds about right, however there is a yearly license fee for GoodLink I believe, with BES, you do not have the yearly fee to continue running the software.

Don't forget $1500 for RIM's T-Support scam.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by BES admin

That sounds about right, however there is a yearly license fee for GoodLink I believe, with BES, you do not have the yearly fee to continue running the software.

I will know for sure shortly, I have an email in to GL sales and we will see what their response is. If it's what I think it is, then the initial cost for GL is less, but the TCO for 5 years is much higher for GL than it is for BES.

I will confirm later.

No. No annual fee for GoodLink when purchased through the carrier. The TCO for GL has consistently been shown to be lower than BB.

BTW, I am in GL sales.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by stevenyc

Don't forget $1500 for RIM's T-Support scam.

Left that out. If you don't get that, what support do you get?

[BES admin]

Originally Posted by stevenyc

Don't forget $1500 for RIM's T-Support scam.

We do not use T-Support, however, some less experienced admins may need it. I think $1500 is well worth the cost. I know for mission critical services like Exchange, we pay $250 per incident. To me that is a steal!

Since I have never used, and hopefully won't need it any time soon, T-Support, I can't comment on the service you receive for $1500. I have used M$ support per incident, and as long as you get the right support person, they are well worth the $250.

[BES admin]

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

BTW, I am in GL sales.

I figured you were with GL in some capacity, but not sales. I have to admit you are more technically knowledgeable than most sales people I talk to in the industry, Kudos to you.