RIP Mobile Middleware?

I was reading an interesting post by MobileToday about Nokia’s move to remove the Blackberry Connect Client from their latest E Series of Devices.    Nokia plan NOT to ship the Blackberry client on their E71 and E66 devices but utilise the Mail for Exchange client that talks directly with Microsoft Exchange.   This client uses the inbuilt Microsoft Exchange Server Activesync that Windows Mobile devices also use. 

Obviously RIM is a competitor to Nokia (as RIM make most of their revenue from Hardware) so it’s not a surprising move.  It did get me thinking though that if Mobile email is to become a commodity and evolve past ‘mahogany row’  then the incremental costs incurred by having to deploy middleware need to be avoided. 

I often get the question from Mobile Operators sales team asking how Exchange vs Blackberry compares from a cost perspective when they forget that a customer needs to have a backend mail system to use Blackberry.  What’s surprising is that the middleware component often costs considerably more in licensing than the backend mail system per user. 

With Nokia, Symbian, Motorola and Apple licensing Exchange Activesync how long can these middleware solutions survive and will direct access to Exchange (or Lotus Notes) become the primary method of access to mobile email (just as Outlook Web Access has for browser based access)

I’m interested in your thoughts….

Comments

• Anonymous
  July 28, 2008
  PingBack from http://blog.a-foton.ru/2008/07/rip-mobile-middleware/

• Anonymous
  July 28, 2008
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  July 29, 2008
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  July 29, 2008
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  July 29, 2008
  I'll agree with the above comment - the one advantage that BES (or even Goodlink, to an extent) have is KNOWN, PROVEN mobile device management. Exchange 2007's extra device options require a premium CAL (so we've lost the cost savings, maybe).  SCDM might be a good option, but then you're back to "middleware" again.  (It may be native Microsoft, but there's still a middle layer to deploy and manage). Not to mention that BES is able to upgrade the software release on the devices - with the model that WM5/6 have been using so far - it's up to the carrier to decide whether or not WM6.1 is an option or an upgrade for older devices.  SCDM doesn't do me much good if there are hundreds of WM5 devices using Exchange Activesync and I can do NOTHING with them beyond a basic password policy...

• Anonymous
  July 30, 2008
  In my view, service-based architecture (from Good or Blackberry) provides better security and, typically, it's easier to manage and simpler for IT.   There's also longer battery life and faster message delivery.

• Anonymous
  July 30, 2008
  Kristin - I'd love to understand why you think it offers better Security ?

• Anonymous
  August 01, 2008
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  August 01, 2008
  Fred - you are right middleware is a difficult term however if all you need is just Mobile Email then Exchange 2007 might provide all the management you need.  In terms of bandwidth that discussion is becoming irrelevant due to a lot of the operators bundling data now with their service plans.  The issue left for bandwidth consumption is really just roaming which again will probably be addressed soon.

• Anonymous
  August 04, 2008
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  August 04, 2008
  MobileAdmin - which devices are you comparing for battery life?  The real challenge we have is that many people are comparing a 3G windows mobile device to a 2G Blackberry and the issue is not the method of mail delivery but in fact network performance. For the security - with Windows Mobile and Exchange you can utilise 3DES and AES if you wish.   Many of the policies from SCMDM have already been integrated into Exchange 2007 so if Mobile Email is your major requirement then you may be able to provide that natively with Exchange rather than requiring SCMDM.