|
Original analysis by Dave Molta, summary by Art Wittman
We’ve seen a phenomenon repeated with more frequency over the past few years: enterprise IT leaders who’ve implemented a technology for their organization are far more likely to ascribe benefits to it than those who’ve avoided the technology. This stands in stark opposition to the notion that non-implementers either want easier, more fully-baked products, or that they simply have no business need. While both of those are probably true, non-implementers also aren’t buying the claimed benefits of technology.
Our 2006 survey of nearly 600 IT professionals showed that the majority—nearly 66 percent—either haven’t adopted cellular data services or have used them sparingly. Of those non-implementers, only 20 percent see a high personal productivity benefit for cellular data, while 42 percent of implementers see a significant benefit for personal productivity.
These opinions, along with a scant 11 percent of our respondents citing widespread adoption, indicate that enterprise mobile broadband faces a number of challenges. Indeed, the top four perceived obstacles for mobile broadband deployment—cost, security, compatibility and reliability—are directly related to the technology itself, not its appropriateness for business. These results are probably more indicative of the feelings of our respondents toward 2G technologies since it’s fairly unlikely that many have significant experience with 3G. Still, there’s plenty of convincing to do before mobile broadband data is technology de rigueur in the enterprise.
While carriers have cut prices over the past two years and often provide business-oriented voice/data bundling arrangements that reduce the effective cost of mobile broadband data services, the infrastructure and spectrum investments required to deliver these services dictate premium pricing models compared with other broadband technologies. The long and short of it: high-quality mobile broadband data services will get cheaper, but only slightly.
The carriers also have made efforts to provide secure services; however, most organizations can’t rely solely on the carriers. Building additional layers of defense for mobile applications is a daunting task; for many it can be a deal breaker. The good news is that the problem hasn’t gone unnoticed. Vendors have made advances in device management, mobile device encryption, and other security fronts, which should help mollify the security concern.
Concerns about standards are another matter. On this front, the launch of the iPhone with its required AT&T service plan, and the FCC’s 700-MHz spectrum action, with Google’s attempts to introduce nonexclusive use provisions, have brought the issue into focus. But while it has media attention, the issue of interoperability won’t be solved soon. Those stymied by the issue are likely to remain so in the foreseeable future—or will be forced to consider noncellular-based technologies such as Wi-Fi or WiMax. In our survey, there was marginal agreement that these two technologies would eventually better meet mobility needs than will 3G. So far, this seems unlikely, as neither technology will be ubiquitous anytime soon.
Reliability may be less of an issue than most respondents believe. While it’s certainly still true that getting a stable, clear voice connection remains a crapshoot, it’s also true that most mobile broadband applications have the ability to tolerate lost packets or even lost and reinstated connections, permitting services to slow but not break under less-than-ideal conditions. However, to get this kind of reliability, applications must either be built for mobile networks or use mobile middleware.
Adoption trends
Developing proprietary mobile applications isn’t for the faint of heart (see ‘Mobile Apps rethought’). Mobile middleware and other application development tools remain immature, though they are improving rapidly. An even larger stumbling block will be the need to support a variety of devices, probably over a variety of networks. Because of these challenges, the primary business application remains e-mail, with the BlackBerry Enterprise Server as the leading product. The next few years should see a flood of mobile applications from app vendors and (more particularly) software-as-a-service providers who naturally see mobility as an extension of their existing business model.
 There are plenty of architectural decisions to make when creating a mobile application; however, the decision about choosing a mobile service provider comes down to choosing a business partner. In some cases, the carrier’s network coverage area or plans for its 3G rollout will be a determining factor. But at least as often, it’ll come down to the carrier’s reputation for providing the services needed.
All of the incumbent vendors are betting on 3G—either CDMA2000 or GSM/UMTS—as a platform for mobile broadband services. Because these networks rely on licensed spectrum, capacity is an ongoing concern. That means the upcoming FCC auction will likely be hotly contested, with any ‘winner’ (many could walk away with a piece of the pie) perceived as taking a lead in the 3G market.
The threat to the existing carriers may come from the likes of Clearwire and Sprint as they roll out their promised nationwide WiMax networks. While the major players have an advantage in owning the infrastructure on which to build their 3G networks, WiMax vendors have a major champion in Intel and its efforts to embed WiMax in all notebook computers as well as equipment on customer premises.
For both 3G and WiMax, look for carriers to increasingly bundle services along with their bandwidth contracts. The result will be a stratification of offerings and price points, which make the job of choosing the right carrier and services increasingly challenging.
|