Print 24 comment(s) - last by nocturne_81.. on Nov 23 at 2:55 PM

For 2011 so far, BlackBerry has 32.2 percent of the business market while iPhone has 45 percent

BlackBerry phones have been known for their business use, but a new survey indicates that this is no longer the case. The new business smartphone of choice is the iPhone.

The survey was conducted by enterprise mobility provider iPass, which obtained a quarterly Mobile Workforce Report from 2,300 enterprise workers.

According to iPass' results, BlackBerry has slipped to second place in the business realm. Only 32.2 percent of the mobile worker market consists of BlackBerry phones while 45 percent of this market uses the iPhone.

Last year, BlackBerry had 34.5 percent of the mobile worker market while the iPhone only had 31 percent.

Creeping up behind the iPhone are Android-powered devices. In 2010, Android only had 11.3 percent of the business market, but this year, it climbed considerably to 21.3 percent.

Nokia sits at fourth place with only 7.4 percent of the enterprise market. Last year, it was at 12.4 percent.

Overall, 95 percent of mobile workers currently use smartphones, and of this 95 percent, 91 percent use their smartphone for work. These numbers have increased from 85 percent and 69 percent respectively in 2010.

BlackBerry's fall to second place may not seem too surprising to some. Just last month, Research In Motion (RIM), developer of BlackBerry devices, experienced a four-day outage that left many around the world without BlackBerry services. This affected many mobile workers who depend on these services to keep their businesses running. The outage started in Europe, the Middle East, India and Africa, then spread to North America, Canada and Latin America.

Source: Byte

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Those numbers mean squat
By Makaveli on 11/18/2011 9:52:42 AM , Rating: 3
"which obtained a quarterly Mobile Workforce Report from 2,300 enterprise workers."

2,300 works that can be one company or one department depending on how large they are.

More details on how the numbers were attained would be required for this article to actually prove the title is correct.

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By captainBOB on 11/18/2011 10:01:52 AM , Rating: 2
Yep, the sample size is too small. Hopefully someone will follow up on this with more data.

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By FormulaRedline on 11/18/2011 5:03:31 PM , Rating: 2
Wow...sorry guys, but you are way off here and obviously not familiar with polling statistics. I'll spare you the equations and derivation, you can Google it if you are interested, but as a shortcut we can use this handy calculator:

Let's test the article's conclusion that Apple has surpassed RIMM. The difference between the two came out to 45%-32.2% = 12.8%. One could go up or the other down or both, but it must at least add up to this. It's unlikely they would both be off in the "wrong" direction but let's make it easy and just test for the 12.8%. If you plug that number in for the confidence interval and choose a 99% confidence level, then we've only got to figure out the real population size (total amount of enterprise smart phone users).

Fortunately for us, the equations are non-linear and the confidence interval is so large compared to the amount of people in the sruvey that it is irrelevant. Go ahead and plug the entire population of the Earth in there (7 Billion) and you'll still only get a required sample size of 102 compared to the 2,300 that were actually interviewed. I'd say this gives us plenty of wiggle room in case the sample wasn't truly diversified (i.e. a few too many healthcare employees).

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By petschska on 11/18/2011 8:19:38 PM , Rating: 3
Although you're statistically 100% correct, Makaveli is implying that there's a bias in the selection of the sample, which is still a valid argument. If random business users were polled, then as FormulaRedline states, the sample size is more than sufficient. I do appreciate you bringing some science to the argument instead of generalizations.

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By shane.carroll on 11/18/2011 10:14:32 AM , Rating: 5
coming from a company called "iPass", I wouldn't expect anything less... they take after the best in manipulation

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By euler007 on 11/18/2011 10:18:23 AM , Rating: 3
Looks like it could be 2300 of their clients.

Hmm, I wonder what people that choose "iPass" for their mobility solutions choose for their phones...

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By Mitch101 on 11/18/2011 10:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
2,300 and Enterprise is not a combination that go together?

Call me when you get a corporation with over 40,000 mobile devices and has to answer to security, legal, and compliance regulations and standards. I doubt a group this small has to answer to any real security standards of data protection.

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By jimbojimbo on 11/18/2011 12:22:14 PM , Rating: 2
It's not so much the number of employees but the business they're in. If they work in healthcare at all they could have 100 employees but they are held in the strictest compliance requirements.

I do agree though once you get in the 10s of thousands managing Blackberries is easier than on ActiveSync devices though.

Is this article going to mention at all that ActiveSync basically comes with Exchange whereas BES integration requires BES licenses, CALs, and potentially support licensing costs? Overall the ActiveSync method is cheaper for the organization and it could be businesses are cutting budgets and now being more open to it.

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By Mitch101 on 11/18/2011 2:24:27 PM , Rating: 2
I agree but if iPass study was conducted in the last 5 dow 100 corps Ive worked they would find that iPhone holds 0%.

2300 sounds like they cherry picked an operation that can adopt the iPhone and wrote an article on it.

RE: Those numbers mean squat
By Mitch101 on 11/18/2011 5:29:56 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm. My reply to jimbojimbo showed up under me. Time for Coffee?

Apples Says "iPhones Are Not For Businesses"
By FDisk City on 11/18/2011 10:16:14 AM , Rating: 2
Unless something has changed, Apple has stated that iPhones aren't for businesses. While they still make that claim, I would never recommend it for enterprise use.

RE: Apples Says "iPhones Are Not For Businesses"
By ksherman on 11/18/2011 10:50:12 AM , Rating: 2
That article is from 2009. A lot has changed and Apple made significant strides to make the iPhone more appealing to business (remote lock/wipe, better Exchange support, etc).

I agree that the sample is pretty small, but people make decisions off of polling data with smaller samples.

RE: Apples Says "iPhones Are Not For Businesses"
By Dorkyman on 11/18/2011 12:40:04 PM , Rating: 2
(1) I suspect the numbers are fudged, based on what I personally see at large companies.

(2) Android is going to eat Apple's lunch over the next few years. Without another paradigm shift, I think Apple's smartphone market share will be 10-15% in a few years. And the guy who was Apple's "paradigm shifter" has passed away.

(3) the iPhone is a fine phone. But a large part of the support is coming from True Believers, and that support can be fragile.

By Taft12 on 11/18/2011 4:46:13 PM , Rating: 2
And the guy who was Apple's "paradigm shifter" has passed away.

Not so fast! The next generation of paradigm shifters (read: MBA's) will be dying to get Apple into profitable enterprise use. It'll cost Apple its soul, but it can be no other way.

RE: Apples Says "iPhones Are Not For Businesses"
By leexgx on 11/18/2011 12:41:56 PM , Rating: 2
i agree, the security on an Blackberry is far better then an iphone, for government use blackberry i would think be the only option due to the encryption on the blackberry and if you enter the password incorrect so many times it wipes the device (you can set this as low as 3 times default it 10)

but for small-med company's iphones and android bit are far more useful,

for me the only thing that's got going for BB is BBM (you can always just load MSN BB just set the phone to 2g so its reliable) maybe and UMA but now even some android phones have it now

By bodar on 11/18/2011 6:51:28 PM , Rating: 2
It's getting there though. My Galaxy S2 came with disk encryption available, as does the Moto Photon and other new Android phones. iOS has a configuration utility to let you centrally manage all your iPhones/iPads:

Symantec Mobile Management also focuses on iOS and Android to control allowed apps, email, etc. or remotely wipe the device:

The gap is definitely closing.

By sigmatau on 11/18/2011 12:51:29 PM , Rating: 1
I would also never recommend an icrap for business. These phones are the least durable pieces of technology available. I guess the companies will love paying for all the replacement phones, or the super high double the normal insurance costs for these things.

Another thing that is total unacceptable is their horrible web browser that doesn't support many web sites. You can't access even some of the simplest business portals with icrap.

Oh, and don't drop it form 2 feet! That will be $700 out of your pay check.

By TakinYourPoints on 11/19/2011 7:11:00 PM , Rating: 2
Someone on another board I go to explained why Android tablets haven't found traction in enterprise. I'm assuming that the same reasoning follows for smartphones:

...we have to follow industry regulations and institutional policies around encryption of data at rest and mobile device management. Android is basically useless in a business setting because there has been almost no consideration given to most of these issues.

The fragmented nature of the Android device market means there's no central solution for it, either.

Even if the software met the requirements for securing a device, we would still have to narrow it down to one or two devices, because we can't certify or support the entire gamut. Thus, we use iPads.

The iPad is not used in enterprise because it's established, it's used because of the 39 or so ActiveSync security policies that can be applied to an ActiveSync compliant device, only iOS devices support them. Android supports around 7, and is essentially entirely useless for anything other than a casual device. It simply isn't possible right now to have a "secure" Android device, or even pretend you have one.

In addition, narrowing it down to one or two tablets is a LOT harder than you think. We were prepared to support the Galaxy Tab for a separate entity we have to support, but the lawsuits from Apple made us change our minds. Bottom line is no company except Apple has a real investment in the success of a tablet and its ecosystem. Google doesn't even come close for the reasons you mentioned.

Now if Google were to get into the tablet business, I think it'd be a total failure. They can't deliver a product that can last, because whatever they make will be immediately aped by another company looking to explore the market without making a substantial investment in it.

I hope none of my comments come across as discouraging competition, because that's not how I feel. I love competition and innovation in the sector, but the fact is after every other competitor shows their stuff off, the long-term stability and short-term supportability and security of iPads vastly outstrips other devices.

By nocturne_81 on 11/23/2011 2:55:36 PM , Rating: 2
Well, though I hold absolutely no credence to a survey conducted by a company that sells a related product, I would surmise that iOS devices seem to be preferred in most small to midlevel sized workplaces.

Though, it has nothing to do with Apple or RIM... merely, there are so many iFanatics out there, that many have sought to make a buck with specialized business products. Third parties have created iOS equivalents of point-of-sale systems for restaurants, diagnostic and repair tracking tools for mechanics, medical info submission apps (and even a few apps that can run basic medical diagnostics using the iPhone sensors that previously required specialized equipment) -- hell, you'll even find several major metropolitan police departments that have switched completely over to Apple products, though most of the workers don't really know how to use them.

By StormyKnight on 11/19/11, Rating: 0
So when does Google/Motorola wake up on this market?
By wyrmslair on 11/18/11, Rating: -1
By sigmatau on 11/18/2011 12:57:01 PM , Rating: 3
"Fragmentation" : a word coined by idrones to describe their No.1 predator (that is also handing their rear to them btw), that think they can get some relief from all the shortcomings of their icrap.

So is BB fragmented? What about Windows phone? Almost all Android phones (that came out in the past year or two) can load up 2.3. What exactly is fragmented?

My blinders are off so I must be missing something.

By retrospooty on 11/18/2011 3:17:30 PM , Rating: 2
"My blinders are off so I must be missing something. "

Nope, you pretty much hit it on the head. "fragmentation" isnt an issue. Its the result of a wildly popular open platform. It certainly hasn't hurt the Windows market any. There were days not long ago we were supporting Win95,98,MS, 2000 and XP machines all at the same time. Android is ona very similar path.

By jimbojimbo on 11/18/2011 1:26:07 PM , Rating: 5
So when is Apple going to release a business phone with the same requests you made of Motorola? Oddly in fact Motorola's latest phones have much better Exchange 2010 integration than iOS 5. If anybody's only argument against Android is by throwing out the magic fragmentation word I know that person knows nothing.
I've been an Exchange and BES administrator for years going back several versions of each long before the iPhone arrived and can say that the best ActiveSync device so far would really be Windows Mobile 6.5. It's not the best phone but the ActiveSync integration was the best.
Now I own a Motorola Droid 3 and it does a lot more than the iPhone 4 can do with the latest updates. Sure it's missing a couple of features but so is the iphone.

If you knew anything about Exchange you'd know that we have device polices and we can see exactly what device you're connecting or trying to connect to the system and can block anything we want. Every device reports what they are so it doesn't matter. We can allow one Android phone but block all the others quite easily. So what's the argument about fragmentation?

"Death Is Very Likely The Single Best Invention Of Life" -- Steve Jobs

Latest Headlines

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki