35 BB's...0 iphones...6 WinMo... On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 8:40 AM, John Cook <john.c...@pfsf.org> wrote:
> Ours is 55 Blackberries to 0 I phones, absolute control is a wonderful > thing.... > John W. Cook > Systems Administrator > Partnership For Strong Families > Sent to you from my Blackberry in the Cloud > > ------------------------------ > *From*: Sherry Abercrombie > *To*: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Sent*: Sat Oct 03 09:18:22 2009 > *Subject*: Re: iPhone experience > > Rumor at my organization.....BB devices still outnumber iPhones by about a > 4-1 margin. > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 8:59 PM, William Lefkovics > <will...@lefkovics.net>wrote: > >> What an interesting thread. I heard that the number #1 mobile device >> connecting to Microsofÿÿ€™s Exchange Servers is the iPhone. Rumours, surely. >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 2:10 PM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* Re: iPhone experience >> >> >> >> Well said. >> >> >> >> As much as I dont like it for business, I do love this thing. I recently >> mounted and hard-wired audio/charging into my car, and I couldnt be happier >> with it (since its Jailbroken *snicker*). >> >> >> >> I do wish they would expidite more corporate features. But with the >> MobileMe service push, I just dont see that happening anytime soon. >> >> -- >> ME2 >> >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Mayo, Bill <bem...@pittcountync.gov> >> wrote: >> >> I was responding to "how do all the iphone lovers feel now" question you >> asked. There is no context in that question about corporations or >> enterprise readiness. I love my iPhone, so I felt qualified to answer the >> question that was posed. I definitely understand how intention doesn't >> always directly correspond to what your fingers type, so "no harm, no foul" >> from my perspective. >> >> >> >> I agree with you that the iPhone is not quite enterprise ready, at least >> from the perspective of companies that have specific data they need >> protected via legal requirement. That is not every company, though, and I >> am certain there are many places that the current functionality is "good >> enough". What I don't agree with is that Apple is touting that all security >> issues for enterprises are addressed. As someone that has followed this >> pretty closely since the iPhone was announced, I feel safe saying that Apple >> created and designed a consumer phone with the idea in the back of their >> head that this might have some enterprise use in the future. Apple is first >> and foremost a consumer product company and have been for a very, very long >> time. That is not to say that they haven't tried to dabble in the >> enterprise market some (e.g. XSAN), but that is not their core focus. When >> the iPhone originally came out, people came out of the woodwork asking for >> enterprise features. Apple began trying to address that, adding some >> features in each subsequent release. They have made quite a bit of progress >> in a short amount of time. But it is just that: a short amount of time. >> It's like people complaining about the issues with the App Store, which >> didn't even open until July 2008 (just over a year). I think it's safe to >> say that they were overwhelmed by the scale of the success (developers, >> downloads) of the whole thing. Again, it is obvious they are working to >> correct issues on it, but it is still basically just out of diapers. But >> back to the main point, Apple has been working to add the features that >> people are demanding and sometimes marketing-speak can make you look silly. >> Again, the iPhone is first and foremost a consumer device, so they have to >> balance the development resources appropriately (in other words, they just >> aren't going to focus on enterprise functions and ignore all those folks >> that want whiz-bang new features, like video). >> >> >> >> I think we can agree that the iPhone is not the answer for every >> business. However, the iPhone is a fantastic piece of tech, and cannot be >> dismissed as silly/crap/junk as so often comes up on this list. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] >> >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 4:32 PM >> >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* RE: iPhone experience >> >> >> >> "I am not carrying around credit card information on my phone. For better >> or worse, there isn't a whole lot of personal information on the phone that >> people couldn't dig up other ways anyway." >> >> >> >> Nobody cares about that data anyway. Totally besides the point. >> >> *Corporate data leaks, corporate espionage, HIPAA, Sarbanes Oxley, etc. >> That's >> the issue.* >> >> >> >> Apple is trying to tout that the iPhone is Enterprise Ready, and that they >> have addressed all the security issues Enterprises have been asking >> for. Not the case. >> >> >> >> I'm happy with my users that are on AES-192 FIPS Certified >> Devices. iPhones, not so much. >> >> >> >> Goodlink has had AES, Polices, Remote Wipe, etc, etc for YEARS. I'm sure >> BB has too. It's amazing how slow other companies are picking it up. >> >> >> >> That being said, I still DO agree with many of your points :) >> >> >> >> -Sam >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Mayo, Bill [mailto:bem...@pittcountync.gov] >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 12:24 PM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* RE: iPhone experience >> >> You read those articles, right? You phrase your statement to indicate >> that Apple is actively misleading people ("lied") telling people that >> something is in place that isn't. The first article is a hacker saying he >> can work around the encryption and I assume he can. That doesn't indicate >> that Apple "lies" when they say they encrypt the data. Is it a "lie" to say >> that WEP is encryption because it can be broken? You have to understand >> that encryption was *just* added. At this point, I'm sure they understand >> they have a problem and I am sure they are working on it. >> >> >> >> As for the second link, that is referring to the report that with older >> versions of the iPhone OS, it incorrectly reported to Exchange Server that >> it had encryption. This has been fixed in the current version of the OS, >> and I think that is all you can expect. But the bigger point here is that >> Exchange simply blindly trusts any device that connects to it about such >> things. Does Microsoft not bear any culpability? There is a valid argument >> that vendors shouldn't misrepresent, but if you go back to your hacker in >> the first link, it would be trivial for someone to alter traffic from an >> otherwise legit device to say that it did offer encryption and blow up your >> policies anyway. Again, Exchange working on the honor system is just as >> much of a problem as the now-corrected behavior of the iPhone. >> >> >> >> I fail to see how any of the last 4 links have anything to do with lying, >> iPhone security, or encryption. Just a bunch of complaints saying that >> Apple shouldn't advertise software that it is 100% your choice to download >> or not. >> >> >> >> As for my "I feel just fine" response, I offer the following. I am not >> carrying around credit card information on my phone. For better or worse, >> there isn't a whole lot of personal information on the phone that people >> couldn't dig up other ways anyway. But if it were missing, I have the >> ability to: 1) locate where it is on a map, and 2) remotely wipe it. And I >> would imagine that the odds are in my favor that any person that might steal >> the phone is not a hacker anyway. >> >> >> >> Every time an iPhone topic comes up on this list, you can determine the >> tenor of the response from the name of the sender (myself included, no >> doubt). I really don't understand why some people get so bent out of shape >> whenever comes up, but to each their own. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 12:56 PM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* RE: iPhone experience >> >> "Again, source? I feel just fine." >> >> >> >> >> >> Just to recap a few articles that were referenced in this thread: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Hacker Says iPhone 3GS Encryption Is 'Useless' for Businesses" >> http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/07/iphone-encryption/ >> >> >> >> iPhone has been lying about it's compliance with security policies >> >> http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/other-iphone-lie-vpn-policy-support-865 >> >> >> >> Apple pushes iPod/iTunes/iPhone update that includes the Apache web >> server: >> http://www.itworld.com/security/79064/dont-need-it-dont-install-it >> >> http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/apple-releases-iphone-configuration-utility-2-1-for-mac-and-windows-and-mobile-me-control-panel-for-windows >> >> http://blogs.computerworld.com/14808/apple_shovelware_problems_again_iphone_configuration_utility >> >> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9138620/Apple_pushes_unnecessary_software_to_Windows_PCs >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Mayo, Bill [mailto:bem...@pittcountync.gov] >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 11:48 AM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* RE: iPhone experience >> >> Again, source? I feel just fine. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 12:12 PM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* Re: iPhone experience >> >> Another question - how do all the iphone lovers *feel *now that they >> know the security on their precious devices is crap and that Apple lied >> about the included encryption? >> >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Sam Cayze <sam.ca...@rollouts.com> >> wrote: >> >> "So how many of you that have deployed the iPhone have had to deal with >> physical damage" >> >> >> >> I have, but this guy breaks any phone he touches. Many of my friends have >> them, and they seem to hold up quite well. >> >> The problem is that At&t's excludes Assurion Insurance on the iPhone. >> (All other carries offer a damage insurance for smartphones, with a $50 or >> so deductable). A MUST IMO. >> >> >> >> That will leave you high and dry when someone breaks an iPhone. >> >> 1. Get 3rd party Insurance on the iPhone (http://www.squaretrade.com), >> or check your Ins policy at work. You might be able to add a policy rider. >> (It was a rip off where I worked, I opted for square trade) >> >> 2. Keep a spare on hand. (Or at least a dumbphone), in case the user's >> phone breaks, and needs one ASAP. >> >> >> >> >> >> *Another reason for 3rd Party coverage:* >> >> Apple and At&t are NOT offering replacements to users that have bricked >> iPhones during an upgrade to say OS 3.1. >> >> (Ridiculous, I know, don't get me started). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sam >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] >> >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 10:36 AM >> >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* RE: iPhone experience >> >> >> >> So let me pose an iPhone question. >> >> Compared to a BB, how does it physically hold up. I have guys here that >> just beat the living hell out of their phones and of course they are also >> the ones who want iPhones and the iPhone just looks too delicate for day to >> day usage by a lot of folks. >> >> The BB can take a hell of a beating and short of the occasional track ball >> replacement, I rarely have to replace them unless someone has dropped it in >> a toilet or some other catastrophic issue. >> >> But that glass front on the iPhone scares me. >> >> So how many of you that have deployed the iPhone have had to deal with >> physical damage? >> >> >> >> *From:* Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 8:25 AM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* Re: iPhone experience >> >> >> >> OK, so my reply to you: >> >> >> >> I didnt say to pin it on anything. I said it can be done; which is true. >> >> >> >> I didnt say to do it or not to; only that its possible. I really dont >> know how I could have written a more neutral statement about it originally >> or in my reply to you. I dont think its fair to say I'm being disingenuous >> because of my intentional neutrality. >> >> >> >> Touÿÿé on the open source bits of router firmware, which opens the door >> wide for any modifications. My mistake for neglecting to take that into >> consideration. But, these forums have not been quick to uphold Microsoft's >> licensing when it comes to phone firmware/software customization. Theft, >> sure. Customization? No. >> >> >> >> Jailbreaking is not theft. Your comparison to BitTorrent use was >> disingenuous >> - for real. >> -- >> ME2 >> >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Ben Scott <mailvor...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr >> <michealespin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I don't see what was "disingenuous" about my reply to Bob. >> >> Not your reply to Bob, you reply to me. Which I read along the >> lines of, "Oh, I didn't mean you should actually *do* what I was >> talking about, I was just saying it's theoretically possible." You >> want to argue you don't think it's a big deal, or you interpret the >> license different, or something like that (which you did, now), okay. >> I might not agree, but I can respect that. But playing language >> lawyer to try and dodge ownership of what you say -- that is bogus. I >> have no respect for that. Maybe that's not what you intended to mean, >> in which case, I apologize. >> >> >> > Its funny, because whenever someone wants to get better access control >> with >> > a home router, there are plenty of recommendations for DD-WRT. >> >> The license agreements with those routers don't prohibit third-party >> firmware. Indeed, in many cases, they're specifically required to >> release the source under the GPL. Some even advertise their >> compatibility with third-party firmware as a feature, e.g., WRT54GL. >> >> Apple/AT&T forbids it in their licenses, release updates to counter >> it, and threatens legal action. >> >> See the difference? >> >> > Apple is not special. >> >> No, they're not. And these forums are usually pretty quick to >> uphold Microsoft's licenses. So why not Apple's? >> >> -- Ben >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Sherry Abercrombie > > "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." > Arthur C. Clarke > > ------------------------------ > CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or > attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), > confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, > dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this > information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without > the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information > may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act > of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or > unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in civil > and/or criminal penalties. > Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really > need to. > > This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for > the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not > read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed > in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the > company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no > viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility > for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. >
