Report Offensive Message
App stores & the enterprise
Erik -
Yes, app stores sell lots of apps. They don't sell lots of *enterprise* apps. Because that's not how business IT works. For example, do you really think that the office admin should be putting a copy of Word on their personal credit card and then waiting to be reimbursed? Of course not. Even once the application has been purchased, enterprise apps often require complex configuration, or configuration that requires administrative rights. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated time and time again that users *cannot* be left with the responsibility to patch/maintain their systems, even if all they have to do is click the "yes" button. Enterprise admins learned this a while ago. Finally, your statement about Deb Shinder *asking her readers a question* is not the same thing as a second source backing your position. The fact is, you haven't provided any data whatsoever showing that "enterprises" are shifting to the app store model. You've simply provided app store sales numbers. How many of those sales are Angry Birds and Paper Toss?
The other point is, that your article points out a number of features which are general usability features, and do not affect the problems specific to enterprise admins. I'm sure that UI improvements are welcome by enterprise admins... they are also helpful to the receptionist. The things that enterprise admins are concerned about are things like security, networking, manageability, storage, etc. if you had mentioned a feature that (I don't know, making something up here) included a built-in monitoring agent that could be polled by a central server and provide alerts for hardware failures and other issues, *that* would be an "enterprise admin" feature. What I'm saying (and so have others, in a different fashion) is that the title and article (as nwallette says) are "out of phase". They don't align. I'm sorry if you cannot see that, but it's true. It feels like a bait 'n switch, which isn't cool.
And in terms of the "personal attacks", I'm sorry if you took it that way. It certainly wasn't the intention. I was merely pointing out that your last few articles have been poorly received by the audience (and rightfully so) for supporting positions that are out of line with the way most of us need to do our day-to-day work. When readers have providing that feedback, you failed to respond. Look, I know that it's hard to reply to each and every message, but when your readers are saying that your approach is a massive security hole or completely unworkable, and you fail to respond, well, it doesn't make sense. The fact is, many of your recent articles (this one on Lion, the one about people bringing personal computers to the workplace, your Macbook Air piece, and the pro-iPad item) have been very out-of-touch to the majority of your readers. Ignoring the silly "shill" style claims, the fact is, those articles show that your mode of working is extremely different from what the majority of us have to live with, and some of them show that your practices towards how networks are run, security, etc. is contrary to industry practice. And again, you've failed to respond to this. If that bothers you, I am sorry to hear it, but that's not a personal attack. It's statement of fact that is directed squarely at the views you've expressed. In my personal experience, when a reader has a well stated comment disagreeing with you, engaging them and explaining the reasoning behind your view is much more effective that not replying. And when you *do* reply, it's best to address the points made. Your responses here have not really addressed anyone's points, as I've explained a few times already. You've ignored my statements about the dangers of allowing users to be in charge of maintenance of their desktops, for example, and refuted them with app store sales figures for smartphones.
J.Ja
Yes, app stores sell lots of apps. They don't sell lots of *enterprise* apps. Because that's not how business IT works. For example, do you really think that the office admin should be putting a copy of Word on their personal credit card and then waiting to be reimbursed? Of course not. Even once the application has been purchased, enterprise apps often require complex configuration, or configuration that requires administrative rights. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated time and time again that users *cannot* be left with the responsibility to patch/maintain their systems, even if all they have to do is click the "yes" button. Enterprise admins learned this a while ago. Finally, your statement about Deb Shinder *asking her readers a question* is not the same thing as a second source backing your position. The fact is, you haven't provided any data whatsoever showing that "enterprises" are shifting to the app store model. You've simply provided app store sales numbers. How many of those sales are Angry Birds and Paper Toss?
The other point is, that your article points out a number of features which are general usability features, and do not affect the problems specific to enterprise admins. I'm sure that UI improvements are welcome by enterprise admins... they are also helpful to the receptionist. The things that enterprise admins are concerned about are things like security, networking, manageability, storage, etc. if you had mentioned a feature that (I don't know, making something up here) included a built-in monitoring agent that could be polled by a central server and provide alerts for hardware failures and other issues, *that* would be an "enterprise admin" feature. What I'm saying (and so have others, in a different fashion) is that the title and article (as nwallette says) are "out of phase". They don't align. I'm sorry if you cannot see that, but it's true. It feels like a bait 'n switch, which isn't cool.
And in terms of the "personal attacks", I'm sorry if you took it that way. It certainly wasn't the intention. I was merely pointing out that your last few articles have been poorly received by the audience (and rightfully so) for supporting positions that are out of line with the way most of us need to do our day-to-day work. When readers have providing that feedback, you failed to respond. Look, I know that it's hard to reply to each and every message, but when your readers are saying that your approach is a massive security hole or completely unworkable, and you fail to respond, well, it doesn't make sense. The fact is, many of your recent articles (this one on Lion, the one about people bringing personal computers to the workplace, your Macbook Air piece, and the pro-iPad item) have been very out-of-touch to the majority of your readers. Ignoring the silly "shill" style claims, the fact is, those articles show that your mode of working is extremely different from what the majority of us have to live with, and some of them show that your practices towards how networks are run, security, etc. is contrary to industry practice. And again, you've failed to respond to this. If that bothers you, I am sorry to hear it, but that's not a personal attack. It's statement of fact that is directed squarely at the views you've expressed. In my personal experience, when a reader has a well stated comment disagreeing with you, engaging them and explaining the reasoning behind your view is much more effective that not replying. And when you *do* reply, it's best to address the points made. Your responses here have not really addressed anyone's points, as I've explained a few times already. You've ignored my statements about the dangers of allowing users to be in charge of maintenance of their desktops, for example, and refuted them with app store sales figures for smartphones.
J.Ja
Contributr Posted by Justin James
30th Jan 2011
