andy97

iTrader: (1)

Well it looks like they have reached the end of the road!

Cpt Jack Sparrow

iTrader: (14)

Yep our company has just ditched them and moved to Nokia....

That's thousands of users gone.

dukeoffenland

were looking at moving ours over to nokia too, only about 20 phones but had blackberrys for years

JackClark

Frying pan, fire.

Ant

Nokia?!

jonc

Nothing wrong with Nokia, in fact it does make sense, a common OS with phone and computer. Also MS Lync works on both platforms seemlessly to allow for easy collaboration and voice, web and video. Our firm is carrying out a feasibility analysis on the integration of such a system and already have the infrastructure in place, though in an isolated experimental stage. I know a few other large corporates are also looking at the possibilities. Key here is cost of this solution compared to an existing fragmented solution.

stevebt

iTrader: (8)

Blackberry should of nipped this in the bud ages ago. They must of all been thinking its only a small hiccup and sales will return but

JackClark

The day the iPhone launched Blackberry were doomed.

jonc

Shame, I really wish it wasn't the case, but they did themselves no favors; lack of product development and poor advertising and marketing. Even on major product launches, they were pretty low key affairs.

dpb

iphone replacement for BlackBerry, that's hilarious

JackClark

That's what all the morons said at the time. Called me crazy for suggesting the mighty RIM would be toppled. Where are they now.

urban

iTrader: (1)

We also ditched them at the start of the year and went to Nokia.

dpb

Buying Nokia ??!!!

dpb

Why would you fork out 600 quid toy for your staff

As opposed to 150 for a useful tool

JackClark

BYOD.

Psyweb

It'll either be snapped up by someone looking to cash in on the name or dry up altogether.

You need pretty deep pockets to fight Microsoft, Samsung and Apple!

jonc

Exactly.

BuRR

Nasty. Keep work and play air-gapped IMHO.

ScoobyDoo555

+1

Slippery slope BYOD.

Work and play should be separate.
But then again, there are a lot of people who will do this just so they can use their own device.
My employers wouldn't dare risk calling outside of work hours or annual leave.
If I call them, that's a different matter.

Depends how strong your values are and how much you're will to protect them imho.

But back to Blackberry. It's amazing how everybody could see this coming, yet they didn't act either in time, or at all. Classic face-palm moment from a business perspective - I'm doing a Degree-level course in Strategic Management at the moment, and it's fascinating to see the list of errors in relation to the theorists perspective.

I've scratched my itch with Blackberry, and won't be having another one (despite the great reviews the Q & Z range are getting).
The shame is my youngest daughter and my Mother-in-law both have Playbooks - for the £60 it cost, there's NOTHING on the market that comes close.
It's perfect for what they require - the basics of tablet ownership.
And whilst they've both played with my iPad, for certain applications and environments, it's too much (in every sense of the term).

But that in itself demonstrates their poor business choices - a good product that was priced OUT of the market.


Will be interesting to see what comes of it.
But as one columnist stated this morning, whilst executives @ Blackberry are trying to bolster the company in terms of value, it's currently being perceived as a "3 pairs of socks for £1".........

Shaun

ScoobyDoo555,
You're behind the times mate if you think BYOD is a slippery slope...... it will be the opposite, the change is already happening within the business. In fact the business has been banging on about it for years.... ICT has finally let go and started to support this, which it should!!

BuRR

BYOD is a disaster waiting to happen. I work in IT/digital forensics and one of the biggest areas of litigation is IP leakage.... BYOD just adds another layer of complexity (and ultimately cost) to the whole package. the employer effectively loses control of the asset, and then the nightmare for all concerned begins....

It may be great from the IT admin POV, but the big circle will come around when BYOD gets chucked out of the window. (IMHO)

jonc

BYOD is great for cost reduction for IT services; there's no need to supply the devices or pay for the business phone tariffs and insurance. Most organisations that already use blackberry devices will already have Blackberry Enterprise Server and BES 10 allows you to add Android and iOS devices. Blackberry Balance also ensures that work data remains completely separate to private data, work data stays secure, managed and encrypted and cannot be saved to the physical device. If an employee loses the device, the employee bears the brunt of the costs and since work data is not on the phone it cannot be accessed by unauthorised users. The device can also be wiped remotely if needed.

BuRR

If only it was that simple in litigation. It's one of those arguments that will go on and on. I'm coming from a totally different angle to you - I can see your POV, but just bear in mind I also experience the issues that such an implementation can cause (I work for a global org with 100,000+ users and we're having such issues already!)

Just FYI - some products "claim" to store confidential data in a secure container, but they don't. Forensic analysis has shown this to be the case.

Also - to wipe remotely, it has to be able to communicate with the instructing server.

Put it this way - if my firm tells me to use BOYD.... I'll flatly refuse.

ScoobyDoo555

I probably am, and I accept that

But it won't change my opinion of BYOD. The practicalities and economics do make sense from a business's perspective. the employee, bearing in mind its a work-tool, bears the brunt of cost. not going to happen with me tbh, but also ethically it's a little more complicated, as when do "you" the employee, switch "off" from work? Etc etc.

A classic case of just because is technically possible, doesn't make it right. All IMHO, of course

Geezer

Not at all. BlackBerry were doomed because they didn't think phones like the iPhone would be as popular. That is not the same as what you are suggesting.

Another problem is Blackberries are sh!te! I have one for work and I hate it.

Geezer

ScoobyDoo555

Arrogance has killed Blackberry. They thought their products were irreplaceable.

They were wrong.

Business economics 101 - give the CUSTOMER what they want, when they want it. If there's opportunity to develop that further, even better (a la Apple)

Shaun

Sorry but that is a absurd statement to make with no context.

BYOD is more than just device policy, but also how you make relevant use of it with supporting infrastructure and applications.

BYOD should be about providing flexibility where it is relevant / practical to safely do so.

Common sense can prevail with supporting policy to mitigate risk. It's hardly rocket science.

This historical practice of ICT having ultimate control, beyond the practicalities of risk impact and probability has gotten out of control over the years. ICT is here because of the business..... not the other way round.

Applications that are for instance web based with appropriate point of entry security (single or dual authentication), that do not hold or transmit commercial or personally sensitive data, are prime examples of where this works.

Data which is based on sensitive information should be dealt with differently, but some basic security policy in place can be enough. Other instances where increased security is required, there are a multitude of solutions that can be implemented to mitigate risk. However, I would certainly agree that there maybe some instances where total control / lock-down is required..... but I would suggest that's by exception rather than the rule.

BuRR

Shaun - as I've said, I can appreciate why the IT crowd want this, and how it (at least theoretically) should work. My "disaster" relates to possible intellectual property loss and gaining access to user devices when the proverbial hits the fan in law. I'm speaking from my own experience and worry about the mess that is usually left by the legal grey areas that such BOYD implementation usually introduces. From an intellectual property point of view, you lose control of the residual data held on the asset as soon as you allow ownership to be transferred to a third party (ie. the staff).

Secure deletion (as a sales pitch) is all well and good, but I know that "secure" isn't always what it says it is, and neither is the sandbox theory. iOS is terrible for leaking data into core systems (such as the user dictionary) - and a full disk image of a smartphone can usually produce any range of previously-deleted information.

I can't obviously quote specific examples, but believe me, I'm already experiencing problems with the above issues relating to BOYD in large enterprises, and I know of co-practitioners in other large orgs that think the same way.

So just to clarify - I'm NOT speaking from an IT perspective, but from that of legal and forensic disclosure.

Shaun

Burr,
You're assuming IP and residual data is a problem for all.... it's not.

It's about horses for courses, which is what the point of my last post alluded to.

My employer is the single largest/most diverse "establishment" in the UK so I'm well aware of the issues with adopting such practices within an extremely large organisation and enterprise environment, but like I said, this practice has it's place and is very beneficial to employees, the business and service delivery. This has nothing to do with the "IT crowd" wanting this......... I've seen a number of cases where it's the total opposite.

BYOD is not an all encompassing solution in itself...... it should be used where appropriate and as an option, to support the overall service delivery.

I'm not suggesting it's a solution for all scenarios...... but it has, can and does work to support / compliment many end solutions.

BuRR

I'm not saying for all.... I'm being very selfish in saying it's causing issues for me and ultimately my organisation when it has to attempt to keep regulators happy.

We've pissed them off enough this year already, so anything that might (and to be fair is already) increase tensions isn't really my cup of tea.

I've said I can see its benefits. I'd just rather they be appreciated by a different firm.