Push Email – Email for Everyone – operators and OEMs announce their plans at 3GSM


Well the momentum around Windows Direct Push Email has started at 3GSM.  I know it’s been frustrating for customers waiting for OEMs and Operators to announce dates for availability but 3GSM has seen a large number of partners announce their commitments and plans around Windows Mobile Direct Push!


http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/feb06/02-12GlobalPartnerSupportPR.mspx


Orange


T-Mobile – http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/feb06/02-12TMobNedPR.mspx


Cingular


Vodafone http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/feb06/02-12MSVodaphonePR.mspx


….all announced upgrades to Windows Mobile 5 devices.


Palm and i-mate announced free upgrades too


A whole series of new devices was announced too – all providing the Direct Push Email experience!


The HP 6900 device



The Fujitsu Siemens Pocket Loox


 


Fujitsu Siemens FS Pocket Loox


The Gigabyte G-Smart!


Gigabyte g-Smart


Comments (16)
  1. Puck says:

    Fact is, this whole thing has become a farce. MS could have avoided all this nonsense simply by not releasing WM5 until the direct push was an integratged part of the operating system ON THE ORIGINAL AND FIRST RELEASE TO THE OEMs. Period, end of effing story.

    Check this out:

    JUNE 6 2005 (Yes, almost a YEAR ago): Microsoft Answers Call From Businesses With Messaging and Security Feature Pack for Windows Mobile 5.0: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/jun05/06-06SFPWindowsMobilePR.mspx

    And quoting Vish Sowani, vice president, International Business Marketing at T-Mobile, at the same press conference LAST JUNE:

    "The Messaging and Security Feature Pack for Windows Mobile 5.0 complements T-Mobile’s successful ‘Office in your Pocket’ suite of Microsoft-based solutions with a compelling messaging product that addresses these critical business needs while delivering mobile professionals much more than simple mobile e-mail. In alliance with Microsoft, we have an opportunity to strengthen our business customer portfolio and deliver another very powerful mobile business solution.”

    Bollocks. Bollocks. Bollocks.

  2. Puck says:

    Fact is, this whole thing has become a farce. MS could have avoided all this nonsense simply by not releasing WM5 until the direct push was an integratged part of the operating system ON THE ORIGINAL AND FIRST RELEASE TO THE OEMs. Period, end of effing story.

    Check this out:

    JUNE 6 2005 (Yes, almost a YEAR ago): Microsoft Answers Call From Businesses With Messaging and Security Feature Pack for Windows Mobile 5.0: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/jun05/06-06SFPWindowsMobilePR.mspx

    And quoting Vish Sowani, vice president, International Business Marketing at T-Mobile, at the same press conference LAST JUNE:

    "The Messaging and Security Feature Pack for Windows Mobile 5.0 complements T-Mobile’s successful ‘Office in your Pocket’ suite of Microsoft-based solutions with a compelling messaging product that addresses these critical business needs while delivering mobile professionals much more than simple mobile e-mail. In alliance with Microsoft, we have an opportunity to strengthen our business customer portfolio and deliver another very powerful mobile business solution.”

    Bollocks. Bollocks. Bollocks.

  3. eufreka says:

    Sorry, but you really should stop posting this stuff. It is YOUR reputation that is now shot (MS’ already was…).

    You said: "I know it’s been frustrating for customers waiting for OEMs and Operators to announce dates for availability…" but then your post is all about how they HAVEN’T announced "dates for availability." Unless of course, you think "first half 2006" is (1) a "date" and (2) a reliable indicator of actual availability. I think we all know now that neither is in fact the case.

    So I say, you have actually started embarrassing yourself, because you have so shamelessly repeated the "company line" no matter how ridiculous it is.

    Really, good luck with all that. I can only hope your bonus is directly linked to your (obvious) willingless to strip off your last shred of dignity. If that’s the case, ENJOY THE YACHT!

  4. Leigh says:

    Woo hold on horsy. There is absolutely no need to slag Jason off like that. He is clearly in a position where he knows a lot of information before any release dates etc but is obviously in no position to say anything before things are published because that wouldn’t be professional or very clever. He informs where he can and clarifies when he can as would any other professional working for any other professional organisation.

    We are all desperate for the software and services (Direct Push in this case) to be released  and we will all be the first to complain when the software comes out and doesn’t work.  

    What really irks me is the comment about towing the company line. If he wants to stay employed and keep representing his chosen company (in this case Microsoft) he has to. The company has a strategy and he is part of that. People who don’t tow the company line are the ones without the dignity in my opinion.

  5. Puck says:

    There is a leaked version of the ROM 2.8.7.102 with AKU2/A2DP/Push Email here:

    http://forum.xda-developers.com/viewtopic.php?t=40458

    It works on the UK MDA Vario (T-Mobile), as well as the K-JAM and QTEK 9100.

    Terrible that people have to resort to this just to get an update that WM5 should not have been released without.

    Leigh: Did you hear that? SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED WITHOUT.

  6. MSDNArchive says:

    Eufreka, Puck,

    Hold on now guys – you have to remember that Windows Mobile is an OEM business model and hence the time difference between announcement and release (when our OEMs have tested and integrated the ROM builds)

    The reason why I have to quote dates like Q1 and H1 2006 is because we (Microsoft) don’t actually define when the product is released – that is defined by our OEMs who will perform the testing and integration and then provide the release date to our customers as they are doing at 3GSM now.

    What I’m really pleased to say is that I said Q1 2006 and we are here in Q1 2006 providing a whole range of devices through a huge variety of operators for MSFP!

    On towing the company line – of course I have to respect the commercial confidence placed in me by my company but I think you should give credit to Microsoft in being forward thinking in supporting the blogging culture as many companies do not .   My blog is not channeled through our PR team and I have the freedom to blog anything I wish as there is no censorship.

    Obviously I can’t blog commercially sensitive information though as that would be disrepectful to our partners and Microsoft and would also be pretty stupid.

  7. eufreka says:

    Jason,

    A couple of things. If this is a quasi-official Microsoft blog, you should clearly indicate it as such. Not have it "appear" in any way as an "independent" blog. Period. Perhaps you should include a prominent statement that as a Microsoft employee, the content of this blog is dictated by my employer, etc.

    Two, the embarrassing part is that YOU in THIS BLOG last AUGUST said that devices would be available before the end of 2005!!!!

    Go ahead and look around; I’ll wait. So what is really embarrassing is that you keep saying what your employer tells you to say, but your employer keeps changing its story.

    So when were you lying? Last August or now?

    Everyone KNOWS that schedules have changed (and that problems must have occurred), but instead of being open and honest, Microsoft has been secretive and untruthful. Thus it is almost as if you are being paid to lie…

    One simple clarification, for example, is to clearly explain that there is a difference between Direct Push and MSFP. That the MSFP might be necessary for a Windows Mobile 5 device to access Direct Push functionality; but it is NOT necessary for other Exchange ActiveSync enabled devices to utilize Direct Push.

  8. Puck says:

    Okay, I’m not going to continue to make this a big flame about Jason. I think he’s done an admirable job of at least educating us about WM5. However, last flame – basically my original point….

    MS should not have released WM5 to the OEMs – UNTIL – the MSFP was an integrated part of the OS. THAT’S MY POINT. Then we wouldn’t be having this discussion. It would just be part of ALL Windows Mobile 5.0 devices. PERIOD, END OF STORY.

    ALRIGHT?!!

  9. MSDNArchive says:

    Eufreka –  We had the Gigabyte device out in Taiwan in Q4 2005 and you now see the number of devices announced in Q1 2006.

    To answer your other point  MSFP contains the Direct Push technology so they are one and the same.  

    For Puck – not everyone wants WM 5 just for Push Email as there are other great benefits for other Enterprise use of Windows Mobile but realise it’s your #1 reason.

  10. eufreka says:

    Jason,

    You said: "MSFP contains the Direct Push technology so they are one and the same.  "

    But that doesn’t explain the OTHER Exchange ActiveSync licensees…not the least of which is DataViz, which has been prominently promoting its support for both MS remote wipe and direct push in its RELEASED Symbian client!?!?!?!!?!?

    Or are you now claiming that they have are using MSFP?

    The truth is that MSFP and Direct Push are only related on WM5.

    Interesting that you are incapable of even acknowledging the existence of DataViz’s RoadSync product. It is part of what makes you so hard to trust.

    You might want to review this post at "you had me at ehlo", because it doesn’t agree with you at all:

    "We license the ActiveSync protocol so that other mobile devices can interact with Exchange in the same rich and efficient way that Windows Mobile does. Our goal is to enable customers to use their favorite mobile device(s) with Exchange – even if that device isn’t a Windows Mobile device. With that in mind, ActiveSync licensees have access to the exact same functionality through the protocol that we provide to Windows Mobile. Nothing in the protocol is reserved for Microsoft-only use….All ActiveSync licensees have the ability to update their existing ActiveSync-enabled devices/applications to add Direct Push functionality. Palm is an ActiveSync licensee and can do this at their discretion. "

    http://blogs.technet.com/exchange/archive/2005/10/25/413056.aspx

    He specfically mentions RoadSync as well. Whoops, I may have forgotten to mention who "he" is: Ed Hott, the Director of Business Development for Microsoft Exchange with primary responsibility for the Exchange ActiveSync licensing protocol.

  11. Jon Warburton says:

    The release of MSFP just seems to be dragging here in the UK but its hardly suprising.  If I was a mobile provider and had a lot of fat corporate blackberry accounts why would I rush something out that potentially is going to take away some of that business.

  12. MSDNArchive says:

    Eufreka,

    I’m finding your approach actually quite rude – feel free to drop me an email with your telephone number and I’d be happy to have a chat with you.  

    I am aware of the Roadsync product however this blog is (as it’s name implies) – dedicated to Windows Mobile in the Enterprise

    Our Exchange team is obviously working with other vendors to license our Exchange Activesync technology however I’m from our Windows Mobile team and hence my focus in this area.

    MSFP is OUR implementation of the Direct Push technology hence why they are one and the same for WINDOWS MOBILE.  We have licensed the Exchange Activesync protocol so those folks are at liberty to create their own implementations of which Roadsync’s product is one.  Whilst we license the Protocol to them – it is the 3rd parties decision as to what features they implement.  

    As I said – if you’d like to discuss in more detail – feel free to drop me an email using the feedback section and I’d be happy to chat through with you.  

  13. Jack says:

    Puck and Eufreka, be nice and stop whining…

    Stop using your Windows Mobile device and buy something else if you can’t stand waiting for new features.

  14. Fergus says:

    Yeah, there’s a lot of annoyed people out there about this MSFP thing, but mainly those who want to get technology before everyone else at all costs. You know who you are, and I’m one too. 😉

    However, as I see it, the main problem is that we’ve been promised something for so long that people are getting fed up. The business model of delivering it through OEMs and providers (like Orange who are not the quickest to market with most things!) seems just to prolong the whole thing.

    But I’ve just realised one thing that’s put a downer on my enthusiastic ideas about selling this to enterprises – Windows Mobile is just too complicated. Blackberry, for example, is easy. Non-techies can use it no problem. WM5, however, is simply too much for your average user. Someone needs to come out with a cut-down version of WM5. hehehe.

    Jason, I appreciate your blog, as I did your help a couple of months ago. Keep up the good work.

Comments are closed.