1. dentynefire's Avatar
    RIM has said they are focusing on the Enterprise with BBX and thats a good thing, companies should have great security/privacy. I wonder if RIM would be able to innovate quicker without the headache of verifying the security of everything. And should they relax the security for consumers (provide a consumer version of BBX) as most consumers clearly don't care as much as governments and corporations seem to.
    06-27-12 10:22 AM
  2. T
    RIM has said they are focusing on the Enterprise with BBX and thats a good thing, companies should have great security/privacy. I wonder if RIM would be able to innovate quicker without the headache of verifying the security of everything. And should they relax the security for consumers as most consumers clearly don't care as much as governments and corporations seem to.
    Ridiculous. There are several other "innovative" less secure platforms to choose from if you're looking for a phone that makes silly noises to play games on.
    06-27-12 10:24 AM
  3. kbz1960's Avatar
    I think it has in the past. Maybe with mobile fusion they won't need to not allow things?
    06-27-12 10:27 AM
  4. Pete6's Avatar
    RIM's secure network is a major plus point for most BlackBerry users. It also makes RIM a lot of money.

    It does make writing network based apps harder though and atleast one developer has told me that even RIM does not understand how some of it should be interfaced to. The same dev also told me that he found working with blackberry.net "very old fashioned".

    Most users don't need a high security network. What they need and want is high speed and cheap and lots of it too. I know that this is what I want. I would also like more flexibility with email delivery too. I hate 100% push mail. I'd like to have choice, please.
    06-27-12 10:32 AM
  5. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    RIM's security helped them get started, they gave mobile e-mail to governments around the world, but it has also significantly hurt their perception in the masses. Most people's only experience with the device is their work experience, which can be locked down in over 600 ways (seriously thats how many different options are in the IT policies), and prevent them from doing anything. IT admins found it easier just to remove features than to whitelist or go through testing apps etc. Other manufacturers took advantage of this and targeted this security as a weakness, and have drilled it into people's heads that BlackBerry cannot do what other devices can do.

    So to answer your question, it helped and hurt them.
    06-27-12 10:37 AM
  6. dentynefire's Avatar
    I for one value security, might not require it but I certainly like to have it. I agree that BES lock down has hurt BB reputation just like employers requirement for a strong password and the long boot time.

    I wouldn't mind if they kept BIS for BBM etc. but had these other features as options when you bought the phone. I certainly trust RIM to do it right and I certainly don't know all the specifics but seems to me if it can be done it should be a choice. BB Balance does seems to adress some of this though.
    06-27-12 11:16 AM
  7. Speedygi's Avatar
    Why would it when it is their core strength and one that no other competitor can yet lay claim?

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
    06-27-12 11:31 AM
  8. kill_9's Avatar
    Apparently the people complaining about security have not worked in environments where information security (INFOSEC) was essential. The consumer users of BlackBerry smartphones on the BlackBerry Internet Service (BIS) are not impeded by the presence of security; it is there is protect you at least until various governments demanded access to BlackBerry Internet Service traffic and like a schoolgirl Research In Motion spread it legs and giggled.
    06-27-12 11:46 AM
  9. kbz1960's Avatar
    Why would it when it is their core strength and one that no other competitor can yet lay claim?

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
    Because the majority of consumers don't think about security. Because of said security so far bb's have been void of popular apps that access certain parts of the OS that RIM/security does not allow them to access. So from a consumer point of view yes security hurts.
    06-27-12 11:49 AM
  10. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    I don't think security hurts at all. The perceived lack of other things hurts, but I don't think anyone will turn down more security if it didn't directly impact other features.

    Put another way: if and one OS could project a secure platform AND a good ecosystem (used that term again) AND compelling hardware, it would be a winning combo.
    hornlovah and dentynefire like this.
    06-27-12 11:53 AM
  11. FR33MAN's Avatar
    This topic will come back as soon as people will get their credit card information been stolen.
    With the coming trend to have our smartphone use as a wallet with credit card info in it security will be a key.
    Actually now only corporate care of this but soon we will be concerned as well.

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
    06-27-12 12:03 PM
  12. Speedygi's Avatar
    I think having a secure system is paramount in every way, because everything you do on the phone, on social networks, on the Internet are the most delicate of things to protect. Identity theft can be a huge issue, let alone your important documents and data.

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
    06-28-12 06:00 AM
  13. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    I think having a secure system is paramount in every way, because everything you do on the phone, on social networks, on the Internet are the most delicate of things to protect. Identity theft can be a huge issue, let alone your important documents and data.

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
    While Identify Theft IS a huge issue, people still dont really care until it happens to them or someone close to them. Security is always "good enough" until that time.
    kbz1960 likes this.
    06-28-12 08:22 AM
  14. Speedygi's Avatar
    Which could be used to describe 99 % of the problems out there, I'm afraid.

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
    Sith_Apprentice likes this.
    06-28-12 09:53 AM
  15. Blackberry_boffin's Avatar
    I think Heins admitted they overestimated the 'value' of security to their customers.
    And I thibk it certainly hinders them in many respect but I'm inclined to think they would be in deeper trouble without it.
    That said there would be little (okay there has been the keyboard thus far) to differentiate them from other manufacturers.
    That said, it is certainly valuable to be that trustworthy in plain old security. RIM only needs to match competitors in everything else (the OS is looking good so its the specs and app portfolio left) and thing could turn around.
    It is not impossible or overly difficult for RIM but it takes time, which they are increasingly running out of.
    06-28-12 12:57 PM
  16. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    I think Heins admitted they overestimated the 'value' of security to their customers.
    And I thibk it certainly hinders them in many respect but I'm inclined to think they would be in deeper trouble without it.
    That said there would be little (okay there has been the keyboard thus far) to differentiate them from other manufacturers.
    That said, it is certainly valuable to be that trustworthy in plain old security. RIM only needs to match competitors in everything else (the OS is looking good so its the specs and app portfolio left) and thing could turn around.
    It is not impossible or overly difficult for RIM but it takes time, which they are increasingly running out of.
    In any security field, the better the security, the harder it is to do routine tasks. For a very simplistic concept look at the security on a car. Its extremely convenient to leave your car unlocked and running with the doors open so that you can just walk up to it sit down and drive away. Closing the doors adds a small layer of security, as does a lock (which is what most mobile phones do with screens turning off and a password). Add in an alarm and now you are up to the minimum level of security one should expect. Then you get into things with biometrics, remote tracking, shutdown of engine, reporting back of the cars vitals, etc and you go into the high end of security. To have all of these things there requires much more significant access to the machine itself, and makes it much more difficult to use.

    Consumers still, as a general observation, are good with simply locking their doors. When their car gets stolen is when things start becoming real to them. Until that time its "unnecessary".

    All that being said, security DOES have a significant value. However it ALSO slows down development, makes things more difficult, and by definition less consumer friendly.
    hornlovah and kbz1960 like this.
    06-28-12 01:02 PM
  17. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    RIM has said they are focusing on the Enterprise with BBX and thats a good thing, companies should have great security/privacy. I wonder if RIM would be able to innovate quicker without the headache of verifying the security of everything. And should they relax the security for consumers (provide a consumer version of BBX) as most consumers clearly don't care as much as governments and corporations seem to.
    I believe it's a major advantage in favor of RIM. It may slow down revolutions (if the core system is impacted, as with BBM), but not evolutions. In a BYOD perspective, it can't be under evaluated.

    And as you stated, security for companies is also privacy for consumers. Don't either forget your phone is near to become a payment method. Do you unzip your wallet on the table while "washing your hands" ?
    Last edited by Superfly_FR; 06-28-12 at 01:09 PM.
    06-28-12 01:05 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD