03-09-11 12:10 AM
125 ... 2345
tools
  1. i7guy's Avatar
    30 feet with no interference. WiFi has similar distances and the minute you put walls and doors in the way it degrades less than gracefully.

    Bluetooth isn't that good. If you want a good connection, you will need to have the Blackberry with you. If you're fortunate enough to live in a small appartment or have it charging in a median area where you can get a good BT link between the two, then more power to you.

    Also, with an Android, Windows Mobile (not WP7) or iPhone you can tether a tablet wirelessly via BT (WinMo) or WiFi Hotspot (iOS/HD2/Android).

    However, you aren't limited to one type of phone for email access.

    I think the fact that you have to tether for email is already a bit of a fail for the Playbook. I think the fact that you need a Blackberry specifically will drive some people away even if they thought the price was pretty good, because they won't want to may the difference between Playbook and iPad/AndroidTab01 just to have 85% the functionality of the competing products.
    You know what? I might just refrain from reading emails when I'm in the bathroom?

    As far as tethering, at least on Verizon you have to pay for it. I don't know about tethering charges between the BB and PB though.

    I think the PB is aimed at BB audience. Whether that is a postive or negative depends on your point of view.
    02-28-11 03:13 PM
  2. i7guy's Avatar
    No, I and others have explained it several times, but you fail to grasp it because you've never personally experienced it and are going by what others have told you or what you've read or seen. That's not enough to really see how seamless it really works.



    I never said OWA can't be secure. I said that some places that are super concered about security won't use it because they think even SSL isn't enough to secure the info on the portal site, even though SSL is all that's used by most banking websites anyway. Please don't put words in my mouth.
    I kind of asked a very simple question, is the email on the device: yes or no.

    As far as OWA you talk in such generalities it easy to rebut any opinion. Using words like some and most, means one to infinity. Some companies that don't allow OWA probably allow use of remote desktop protocol, which the playbook will support. So again one is not completely shut out with no blackberry in the bathroom and only a wifi connection.
    02-28-11 03:20 PM
  3. lnichols's Avatar
    True, so in your case, as long as the Java app is not browser client "picky", it should work on any platform that has a good enough browser, be it the PB, Android, iOS, etc. Not everyone has the same setup as yours and to some extent, your Citrix environment is a bit open to the public... not necessarily from a security standpoint because I'm sure it's got at least SSL, but from an accessibility standpoint. In the end, it's no more insecure than OWA, but if the user config is for published desktop instead of published app for Citrix, it could leave the user's entire profile and thensome open if that username and password was ever key captured off of any PC you might be using. But now we're getting way off topic here... sorry. (I'm just mentioning these factors for the same of discussion.) These factors are why a lot of IT admins require that a Citrix or VPN client be used exclusively only on a company issued laptop. That way, they guarantee the user doesn't choose different endpoint connectivity options on their own and inturn open them up to a few more variables in terms of security. This is the #1 reason why when you talk to someone in IT and they simply tell you something cannot be done or they tell you that it won't work like that, it's more of a white lie. The true answer is that it could work like that if you were to have all the necessary info to set it up, but they choose not to tell you that because they want you to work within the security contraints that they've put in place.


    For example, if you have an Intraweb application that only works on your corporate network via browser access and the company requires you to have a VPN client on your PC to first bridge yourself into the corporate network via that VPN tunnel before you can run the app on the private website, technically there's no reason why you couldn't have the same access from your iPhone for example. The iPhone has a built in VPN client, so you take all your info from the VPN client on your laptop, put it all into the iPhone's client and nail up the connection. Once that's up, the Safari browser can now hit the local Intranet website to run your company app. This may not be a supported config and could in some cases get you fired, but that doesn't mean it cannot work like that and be just as secure as it would be on your laptop. In the end, it's just IT policy that dictates what capabilities one has and nothing more. However, in most cases, that policy is there to protect the company and you from certain security risks that could far outweigh your slight inconvenience of having to break out your laptop to do your work.
    Well I haven't mentioned everything that is used by the organization I contract to for obvious reasons, you're making quite a few assumptions, all of which are incorrect. It is much more secure the OWA and their is no chance of someone coming in behind and logging back in with the same credentials.

    I don't need a lecture on how a VPN works... i've engineered 1000's in my time, and I'm still responsible for a large number. The built in Apple client won't connect, nor will never connect to the concentrator I connect to. It simply lacks the compatibility, and isn't compatible with every concentrator out there. Also there is no FIPS approved VPN client for an iPhone. There will be, but there isn't now.
    02-28-11 04:35 PM
  4. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    I kind of asked a very simple question, is the email on the device: yes or no.

    As far as OWA you talk in such generalities it easy to rebut any opinion. Using words like some and most, means one to infinity. Some companies that don't allow OWA probably allow use of remote desktop protocol, which the playbook will support. So again one is not completely shut out with no blackberry in the bathroom and only a wifi connection.
    Yes, the email is on the device, but the mailbox content and state of content is the same across all the ActiveSync devices connected to the same account.
    02-28-11 05:32 PM
  5. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    Well I haven't mentioned everything that is used by the organization I contract to for obvious reasons, you're making quite a few assumptions, all of which are incorrect. It is much more secure the OWA and their is no chance of someone coming in behind and logging back in with the same credentials.

    I don't need a lecture on how a VPN works... i've engineered 1000's in my time, and I'm still responsible for a large number. The built in Apple client won't connect, nor will never connect to the concentrator I connect to. It simply lacks the compatibility, and isn't compatible with every concentrator out there. Also there is no FIPS approved VPN client for an iPhone. There will be, but there isn't now.
    Granted, and if you used key code authentication generators to log in that would solve the issue with keylogging. Like we can both agree upon, I can't read your mind on what you have and you can't read my mind on what my knowledge background is.

    As for the VPN client, again, you're right... depending on concentrator being used and the form of authentication being used, the native iOS client may not work. I never said it would work for everyone, but it does work for a large number of uses for those using PPTP and IPSEC type authentication. Regardless, the discussion is moot because not even the PB has the more advanced VPN client apps.... soooo, ummm, ya.
    02-28-11 05:38 PM
  6. lnichols's Avatar
    Regardless, the discussion is moot because not even the PB has the more advanced VPN client apps.... soooo, ummm, ya.
    Vendors making the VPN concentrators will be making the VPN clients for the various mobile OS's that are guaranteed to work with their concentrators, just like they do for PC's. I saw tons of secure Samsung Android via Juniper advertising while waiting for a flight out of Heathrow a couple months ago. Cisco should have one for Android when the Cius is released, and the iOS one I believe is Cisco derived (and why it isn't quite standards based because Cisco likes to mutilate standards in networking like Microsoft does on the computer side). Mobile remote access via smart phones and tablets is going to be huge and the makers of the Concentrators want their hardware, and their VPN clients handling the aggregation in both business and Government.
    02-28-11 06:58 PM
  7. i7guy's Avatar
    Yes, the email is on the device, but the mailbox content and state of content is the same across all the ActiveSync devices connected to the same account.
    Thank you. Here's what I was getting at.

    Let say you have your iphone with you and your ipad is home an turned off. During the day you get 100 emails of which 5 you delete.

    When you turn on your ipad to view your email, you now download 95 emails.

    This scenario does not happen with the BB/PB, as far as I know. It may not be an issue, but I'm just thinking out loud.
    02-28-11 09:17 PM
  8. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    Thank you. Here's what I was getting at.

    Let say you have your iphone with you and your ipad is home an turned off. During the day you get 100 emails of which 5 you delete.

    When you turn on your ipad to view your email, you now download 95 emails.

    This scenario does not happen with the BB/PB, as far as I know. It may not be an issue, but I'm just thinking out loud.
    Why does that matter? Do you really leave 95 emails just sitting there doing nothing? Seems silly. Either way, I would rather have each of the devices I own have identical mailbox content so that no matter what device I pick up, I know I'm not missing anything. The same cannot be said for a PB/BB individually.

    Also, this mirrored content ideal is something Apple is rummored to be playing with when it comes down to NFC uses. Imagine carrying your phone with you and setting it down next to your PC at work and in a few seconds the content and look of your home PC is all of a sudden ported to your work one and vice-versa if needed. That would make for a nice capability that a ton of companies have tried to make happen but failed in fluidity of execution. The Atrix kind of tries to do that now by blurring the lines of smartphone or laptop type device, but in the end it's still a smartphone with a dock.
    02-28-11 11:37 PM
  9. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    You know what? I might just refrain from reading emails when I'm in the bathroom?

    As far as tethering, at least on Verizon you have to pay for it. I don't know about tethering charges between the BB and PB though.

    I think the PB is aimed at BB audience. Whether that is a postive or negative depends on your point of view.
    Tethering for internet access on the playbook isn't free. The BT link for information sharing between the two is *not* tethering. It's like saying I have to pay if I transfer files from my Android phone to my laptop over bluetooth.
    03-01-11 01:42 AM
  10. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    Why does that matter? Do you really leave 95 emails just sitting there doing nothing? Seems silly. Either way, I would rather have each of the devices I own have identical mailbox content so that no matter what device I pick up, I know I'm not missing anything. The same cannot be said for a PB/BB individually.

    Also, this mirrored content ideal is something Apple is rummored to be playing with when it comes down to NFC uses. Imagine carrying your phone with you and setting it down next to your PC at work and in a few seconds the content and look of your home PC is all of a sudden ported to your work one and vice-versa if needed. That would make for a nice capability that a ton of companies have tried to make happen but failed in fluidity of execution. The Atrix kind of tries to do that now by blurring the lines of smartphone or laptop type device, but in the end it's still a smartphone with a dock.
    TBQH, I don't know why you're even bothering with him.

    ActiveSync syncs mailbox status. BES does the same. Google's Gmail App on Android does this as well.

    The Mailbox view is identical regardless of device. Outlook, OWA, iPhone, iPad, whatever. It's the same. That's the point of Sync protocols - to give you an identical view of your mailbox status on different devices/access mediums.

    Provided you didn't empty Deleted Items, the iPad would Sync 100 items. 95 in Inbox marked as read (assuming you read them) and 5 in Deleted Items. You can set some ActiveSync clients to download headers, only, or download only a certain amount of the data - so it's not a big deal. It's not hard to get the rest of the email. The link/button is so in your face, you have to be blind to miss it...
    03-01-11 02:04 AM
  11. i7guy's Avatar
    Why does that matter? Do you really leave 95 emails just sitting there doing nothing? Seems silly. Either way, I would rather have each of the devices I own have identical mailbox content so that no matter what device I pick up, I know I'm not missing anything. The same cannot be said for a PB/BB individually.

    Also, this mirrored content ideal is something Apple is rummored to be playing with when it comes down to NFC uses. Imagine carrying your phone with you and setting it down next to your PC at work and in a few seconds the content and look of your home PC is all of a sudden ported to your work one and vice-versa if needed. That would make for a nice capability that a ton of companies have tried to make happen but failed in fluidity of execution. The Atrix kind of tries to do that now by blurring the lines of smartphone or laptop type device, but in the end it's still a smartphone with a dock.
    You still need two active sync licenses to accomplish this. I was thinking about getting the viphone as my next phone, but I can't seem to pull the trigger just for what would amount to a better browser. I would not be able to get my emails replicated to an ipad should I decide to get one.
    03-01-11 07:06 AM
  12. i7guy's Avatar
    Tethering for internet access on the playbook isn't free. The BT link for information sharing between the two is *not* tethering. It's like saying I have to pay if I transfer files from my Android phone to my laptop over bluetooth.
    How do you know what the tethering policy is between the playbook and BB, at least for Verizon it hasn't been announced. Has it?

    Either way I am covered because I have mobile broadband connect.
    03-01-11 07:09 AM
  13. i7guy's Avatar
    TBQH, I don't know why you're even bothering with him.

    ActiveSync syncs mailbox status. BES does the same. Google's Gmail App on Android does this as well.

    The Mailbox view is identical regardless of device. Outlook, OWA, iPhone, iPad, whatever. It's the same. That's the point of Sync protocols - to give you an identical view of your mailbox status on different devices/access mediums.

    Provided you didn't empty Deleted Items, the iPad would Sync 100 items. 95 in Inbox marked as read (assuming you read them) and 5 in Deleted Items. You can set some ActiveSync clients to download headers, only, or download only a certain amount of the data - so it's not a big deal. It's not hard to get the rest of the email. The link/button is so in your face, you have to be blind to miss it...
    Meh, BES works fine for me. I like the fact I can manage the mailboxes separately. I like the fact the playbook only displays email content and doesn't need to sync it.

    I like the fact I don't need another licensed product on the playbook (although I'm assuming an activesync license is controlled, like a version of Office)
    03-01-11 07:12 AM
  14. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    You still need two active sync licenses to accomplish this. I was thinking about getting the viphone as my next phone, but I can't seem to pull the trigger just for what would amount to a better browser. I would not be able to get my emails replicated to an ipad should I decide to get one.
    No you don't. Mobile client ActiveSync is licensed per user, not per device on the AD server. As long as you have a CAL for the Exchange user account, you're all set to use the mobile ActiveSync client. The ActiveSync mobile client license is part of the Exchange User CAL.
    03-01-11 09:43 AM
  15. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    Meh, BES works fine for me. I like the fact I can manage the mailboxes separately. I like the fact the playbook only displays email content and doesn't need to sync it.

    I like the fact I don't need another licensed product on the playbook (although I'm assuming an activesync license is controlled, like a version of Office)
    You have no idea how Exchange licensing works.

    You get an Exchange CAL:

    Outlook is Free
    ActiveSync is Free
    Outlook Web Access is Free

    The only thing that costs an arm and a leg is BES (more than all the above put together for those of us with Hosted Exchange accounts - and tons of individuals and small businesses use Exchange hosts - hence why there are so many!). That is not fine, if you value your money.

    I suggest you just exit the conversation. You're embarassing yourself.

    Requiring a user to tether one specific type of device to have access to PIM synchronization is bad design - plain and simple. I don't think anyone in their right minds can disagree with that.

    If you have a Blackberry - of course it's fine. You don't have to buy another/different type of phone and deal with a lowering in the quality of your user experience to use a tablet with 85% the functionality of competing products (believe it or not, the lack of ActiveSync support is a HUGE sore spot for both Playbooks and Blackberries to both consumers [especially] and many businesses).

    However, that doesn't make it fine.

    Maybe RIM thought this was somehow innovative. It's not - especially when you can pay as low as $15/mo. on some carriers to tether wirelessly and no device that wants to succeed these days ships without WiFi.
    Last edited by N8ter; 03-01-11 at 11:55 PM.
    03-01-11 11:42 PM
  16. i7guy's Avatar
    You have no idea how Exchange licensing works.

    You get an Exchange CAL:

    Outlook is Free
    ActiveSync is Free
    Outlook Web Access is Free

    The only thing that costs an arm and a leg is BES (more than all the above put together for those of us with Hosted Exchange accounts - and tons of individuals and small businesses use Exchange hosts - hence why there are so many!). That is not fine, if you value your money.

    I suggest you just exit the conversation. You're embarassing yourself.

    Requiring a user to tether one specific type of device to have access to PIM synchronization is bad design - plain and simple. I don't think anyone in their right minds can disagree with that.

    If you have a Blackberry - of course it's fine. You don't have to buy another/different type of phone and deal with a lowering in the quality of your user experience to use a tablet with 85% the functionality of competing products (believe it or not, the lack of ActiveSync support is a HUGE sore spot for both Playbooks and Blackberries to both consumers [especially] and many businesses).

    However, that doesn't make it fine.

    Maybe RIM thought this was somehow innovative. It's not - especially when you can pay as low as $15/mo. on some carriers to tether wirelessly and no device that wants to succeed these days ships without WiFi.
    You need to add IMHO to your continuing stream of nonsense. Or are you going to continue to act like an @## on these forums?

    Do you run or own a major hardware and software phone manufacturer? Are you a product planner for a product millions of people buy? If so I would gladly listen to your half-baked opinions as presented in your posts.

    I'm very happy with the proposed playbook architecture, there aren't emalis floating around on different devices to sync up using up bandwidth.

    And for security concious people like you, you get what you pay for in terms of security using BES. Don't need the security, don't use BES that simple.
    03-02-11 07:08 AM
  17. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    You need to add IMHO to your continuing stream of nonsense. Or are you going to continue to act like an @## on these forums?

    Do you run or own a major hardware and software phone manufacturer? Are you a product planner for a product millions of people buy? If so I would gladly listen to your half-baked opinions as presented in your posts.

    I'm very happy with the proposed playbook architecture, there aren't emalis floating around on different devices to sync up using up bandwidth.

    And for security concious people like you, you get what you pay for in terms of security using BES. Don't need the security, don't use BES that simple.
    lol, I like how you don't even acknowledge that you were wrong in your statements about ActiveSync licensing. You've dodged both my post and his in regards to that and went on a tangent about how PB is right for you. Case in point, use whatever you want to use, but don't dodge the facts and things you either don't understand or haven't ever used yourself to experience it (i.e. ActiveSync on Exchange by your own admittance) and pretend that other platforms and protocols out there aren't as good as BES is. Being a fan of a platform is fine, but living in a delusional state because you've been brainwashed by said platform's company is another thing. At least be open minded about stuff. Sure, there are things that RIM does better (like having tons of policies that BES can push down to the handset), I agree with that, but year after year MS is introducing more and more policy control into ActiveSync, yet people seem to live under the idea that ActiveSync today is what it was back in the early 2000's and that's simply not the case anymore.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is that I (and I'm sure others) would have more respect for someone who's open to criticizing their own loved platform as much as the others out there.
    Rickroller and howarmat like this.
    03-02-11 09:58 AM
  18. i7guy's Avatar
    lol, I like how you don't even acknowledge that you were wrong in your statements about ActiveSync licensing. You've dodged both my post and his in regards to that and went on a tangent about how PB is right for you. Case in point, use whatever you want to use, but don't dodge the facts and things you either don't understand or haven't ever used yourself to experience it (i.e. ActiveSync on Exchange by your own admittance) and pretend that other platforms and protocols out there aren't as good as BES is. Being a fan of a platform is fine, but living in a delusional state because you've been brainwashed by said platform's company is another thing. At least be open minded about stuff. Sure, there are things that RIM does better (like having tons of policies that BES can push down to the handset), I agree with that, but year after year MS is introducing more and more policy control into ActiveSync, yet people seem to live under the idea that ActiveSync today is what it was back in the early 2000's and that's simply not the case anymore.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is that I (and I'm sure others) would have more respect for someone who's open to criticizing their own loved platform as much as the others out there.
    Being wrong about the licensing of active sync is a red-herring and is not really germane for this discussion. So what I was wrong. My basic premise about synching up multiple devices stands.

    I have 2 big toes into the apple pond. What stops me from pulling the plug is the entire apple ecosystem, of which I am not fond of...so don't say I'm not open. If I get the iphone, the ipad will follow, if I don't get the iphone, it's PB on April 10th.

    Either way my BB has worked fine for me, which is why I like it. Reliable, good battery life, yeah stinky browser, but with the playbook and flash, that will be an issue of the past.

    As far as being delusional, there are only a small number of people who post here that really have an open mind.
    03-02-11 10:28 AM
  19. howarmat's Avatar
    Being wrong about the licensing of active sync is a red-herring and is not really germane for this discussion. So what I was wrong. My basic premise about synching up multiple devices stands.

    I have 2 big toes into the apple pond. What stops me from pulling the plug is the entire apple ecosystem, of which I am not fond of...so don't say I'm not open. If I get the iphone, the ipad will follow, if I don't get the iphone, it's PB on April 10th.

    Either way my BB has worked fine for me, which is why I like it. Reliable, good battery life, yeah stinky browser, but with the playbook and flash, that will be an issue of the past.

    As far as being delusional, there are only a small number of people who post here that really have an open mind.
    enjoy paying an extra $500 and tote around another device just to do what other actual smartphones do
    03-02-11 10:36 AM
  20. i7guy's Avatar
    enjoy paying an extra $500 and tote around another device just to do what other actual smartphones do
    I will, thanks. I can well afford it.
    03-02-11 10:38 AM
  21. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    Being wrong about the licensing of active sync is a red-herring and is not really germane for this discussion. So what I was wrong. My basic premise about synching up multiple devices stands.

    I have 2 big toes into the apple pond. What stops me from pulling the plug is the entire apple ecosystem, of which I am not fond of...so don't say I'm not open. If I get the iphone, the ipad will follow, if I don't get the iphone, it's PB on April 10th.

    Either way my BB has worked fine for me, which is why I like it. Reliable, good battery life, yeah stinky browser, but with the playbook and flash, that will be an issue of the past.

    As far as being delusional, there are only a small number of people who post here that really have an open mind.
    And I liked my Storms as well, but a couple of things I'd like you to know. The battery life on the iPhone4 from Verizon is better for me than the S1 or S2 ever were... by a good margin too... I'd say 30% more life out of it for some reason and I'm using the handsets the same way. Being on the phone, using GPS, and using WIFI/radio seemed to be the big battery drainers on the Storms for some reason. The ViP4 seems to sip at the battery a bit better. I can't say the same for the AT&T iPhone because I've seen some people still have problems even with the 4 for some reason. I'll blame the Infenion chipset vs Qualcomm in this case.

    Also, I find it interesting that pretty much everyone wants a PB because they want Flash. I'm not dogging the idea, but I wonder how many people would pass on the PB if the regular BBs had QNX and Flash onboard already. In those cases, I think you'd see more people buy it for the same reason people buy the iPads... a bigger screen and nothing else. If I were Steve, I'd put out today's iPad2 device with Flash support (swallow my pride a little in my own mind) and laugh about it just to screw with RIM. lol But either way, not much matters because Flash is just a Jailbreak away on these devices for anyone that wants to play with it.
    03-02-11 10:45 AM
  22. i7guy's Avatar
    Well there are security aspects related to flash and of course the PB will be a whole new frontier in general for RIM. I also agree iphone/ipad should swallow their pride and offer flash.

    Nobody knows what the marketplace with think of the playbook. The issue is with the playbook I'm locked into RIM, the ipad I'm not really locked in. I don't think I want the Xoom although the device looks tantalizing.
    03-02-11 11:17 AM
  23. JRSCCivic98's Avatar
    Well there are security aspects related to flash and of course the PB will be a whole new frontier in general for RIM. I also agree iphone/ipad should swallow their pride and offer flash.

    Nobody knows what the marketplace with think of the playbook. The issue is with the playbook I'm locked into RIM, the ipad I'm not really locked in. I don't think I want the Xoom although the device looks tantalizing.
    The hardware doesn't need to swallow their pride, Steve Jobs does. You can get Flash support on both of those devices right now with a simple Jailbreak, so it's not like the hardware isn't capable of it. Stevo just needs install it from the factory and be done with it. Until then, if an iOS device user wants Flash they'll just have to Jailbreak the device (which doesn't make it any less secure, unless the user is a complete dummy or something along those lines).
    03-02-11 07:54 PM
  24. sleepngbear's Avatar
    enjoy paying an extra $500 and tote around another device just to do what other actual smartphones do
    Maybe we're glad to pay $500 for a device like this because we all don't want to do all that sh!t on a PHONE. Why is it so difficult for you people to grasp this simple #@*$ing concept.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    i7guy likes this.
    03-02-11 08:17 PM
  25. i7guy's Avatar
    Maybe we're glad to pay $500 for a device like this because we all don't want to do all that sh!t on a PHONE. Why is it so difficult for you people to grasp this simple #@*$ing concept.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Exactly. In a pinch I've browsed on my phone and iphone and would rather have a bigger screen to do serious browsing. I do have my laptop but as I said in other posts a tablet with a decent screen might enable to me to keep the laptop in it's case more often.

    I know that I'll wind up keeping the PB in one of my laptop compartments though.
    03-02-11 09:22 PM
125 ... 2345
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD