The choices are available are fairly rudimentary. Don't do proprietary - else you're locked in for years and face a nightmare task of migrating at some point - unless you're a fully fledged MS shop. Note I'm not even including the toy that is blackberry.

Once you've made that choice it's a questions of what you actually need - if this is just for email then it's very easy. Web interface and browser - all data stays on the server so no there's no security issues no matter what happens with the device.

We went IMAP a couple of years ago for around 80 users and have had no problems - apart from the odd drunken email written out of hours. But that would have happened with a laptop anyway.

The key is keeping it in line with organisational usage generally - once your users are educated in a standard you've got to keep it there.

We have a small business (less than 10 employees), but have been using mobile technology since the CDPD days. We were VERY early adopters of RIM devices (857, 957) for two-way communications and access to other, non-wireless applications via special-purpose application gateways - mostly self-hosted.

I moved us off of RIM at the beginning of this year (to Motorola "Q" devices) primarily as part of a move from iDEN to PCS - and the fact that at that moment, RIM was somewhat behind the handset offerings of other vendors with the combination of features we wanted in an integrated phone/email/web/PIM device. Specifically, battery life was atrocious, lack of camera and multi-media were becoming a real issue, and the premium price for the devices was unjustified against the rest of the market.

As mentioned before, we self-host our own gateways, but are primarily a LINUX shop - so no MS Exchange or Exchange clones. That being said, one of the selling features of the Windows Mobile platform was the ability to easily integrate non-proprietary mail and web services - although in actual practice this has proven to be very Microsoft-limited. I have had to get Windows in dual-boot configuration throughout the company in order to support the WM5 platform (SynCE is just a bit too far behind to fully support the "Q", and Motorola does not allow access to updates on their web site from non-IE platforms. At least they now allow access from Vista - THAT was blocked when we first migrated to WM5! Bad Motorola - VERY BAD!!)

I am now considering a move to either the new RIM devices (the Curve) or possibly to a Linux-mobile platform from the WM devices. Yes, WM has proven to be THAT much of a disappointment: slow, unstable, requiring a great degree of user interaction with the platform to keep it operating. (BTW, this is NOT a Motorola issue: the same problems occur on ANY WM5 device we've tested. The "Q" is an excellent device on the phone side - except where a WM "feature" gets involved - then it's a dice roll as to whether the device is going to be there when you need it. 10 minutes and two reboots to dial 911 - real-life experience- is NOT acceptable performance.)

As far as service from carrier - Sprint has provided excellent support in all aspects for us, especially on the data side of the equation. EVDO works - period. Data rates are excellent - not DSL, mind you, but consistent 50-100KBpS even in rural markets - plenty of band width for the uses we have.

To summarize: if your business is built on the Windows mono-culture, you have a variety of choices for integration with your mobile communications, albeit with plenty of work to keep your in-house IT support busy. If you are outside of the Windows environment, you are faced with a much narrower choice of handset technology, although the pieces to support it (POP3 from the device, SSL tunnel, custom web-based apps and device-specific applications) are available. If you MUST use a WM device, thorough vetting by in-house IT is a *MUST*, and customized in-house developed training for using the device is a *NECESSITY*.

Oh, and get Opera on there ASAP. It is a FAR superior browser and web-enablement tool than IE on WM. Worth the cost from Opera, even in a large deployment.

We began using blackberries some time ago with the BES and a leased line to the mobile provider. (~1000 users)The service was pretty limited and the devices more so (very limited attachment viewing was the biggest complaint).

And so came along Exchange 2003 with the MSFP and AKU2 for Mobile 5.

Seemingly offering much more in the way of functionality, not so much fromt he back office solution, but from the hand held devices. Line of business app development became much more efficient with the portability of .net apps.

For us, that was the biggest limitation of the BBerries. However, we are currenlty reviewing our mobile working strategy, and with the devlopments of the BBerry devices and the MS OS showing its limitations, there is a distinct possiblity that we will resurrect our BBerries and run the two services in parallel.

Another option is to use a Hosted Exchange provider who provides a Hosted BlackBerry Enterprise Server option. This is a step between using POP3 with BIS and deploying an exchange server and BES in-house.

This is available on a per user basis and the adoption rates are growing as more providers offer this service. We, at Nasstar, have been offering the service for over a year.

And here is an interesting survey regarding email and mobile email use:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6761601.stm

I think the big concern for us was how much management we could have over our device fleet and how much control we could have over what our users do when we're not looking. Microsoft simply could not live up to our expectations in this arena. What we found with BlackBerry was that we could use IT policies on the BlackBerry server to prevent internet access and lock down many of the features which swelled data usage or meant users could be non productive with their equipment. The Windows Mobile solution with Exchange Direct Push provided us with none of that and this meant that our users could surf the internet all day long, using data for non work related things and that just wasn't good for us.

The arguement goes further because of the compression involved with BlackBerry and the fact that because of this mobile phone service providers could offer us fixed data packages. While there are large data bundles available for Windows Mobile, there was nothing which could prevent users simply exploiting this by downloading MP3's all day long and exceeding the bundled packages.

Without a need for middleware, the Direct Push route can be appealing, but the devices are expensive, complicated to use, have poor battery life and as we have seen, the ongoing costs can be huge. For us it's all about BlackBerry, at least for the forseeable future.

I wonder how many resondents use Visto, but weren't sure if they should select "Mobile operator branded solution" (it's offered as Vodafone Business Email in the UK for example) or "other"

I love my BB - but I LOVE my Nokia E61 more. Why ? Because I do not like the "sand pit", no real API Java BS of BB.

I have no means to get the voicestream audio. I want choices, and its insulting that so long as you want to write an app to store golf scores, fine, but anything else you can forget it. Emails to the management are not replied to.

Java is a BAD choice to begin with, but what really pisses us off if the complete closed mind and no channel at BB to get to "low level" APIs, like display cell tower strength, get and send audio realtime, use the USB to access external storage devices/ vice versa. And of course the BES on Linux is very much needed.

As is happening in China already, open source OS phones are already popping up and booming, because users create what they want rather than some bloated committee on a Monday morning in a grey velcro cubicle...cut off from their end users, naturally, as they already know everything/

Whilst I can understand some companies going down the proprietary route either for the device management benefits or job safety issues (the "nobody ever lost their job buying the market leader" argument) I find it hard to see why so many Email service providers seem content to let their market slip away by either inviting in another brand (blackberry) or just completely ceeding the market for mobile email to mobile operators.

If there really is, as your panel survey suggests, a market in taking POP3 email services and enabling them for mobile use, why not just go down the IMAP route? There's a market out there for POP to IMAP conversion that email service providers should be getting involved with, to safeguard both their brand and their bottom line against the RIMs of this world.

And whilst we're on the subject of big brands muscling in on service provider business, I wonder how much of an impact Google will have in the small business space for these services in the near future?

We've used WM5 since it came out, and now have a couple of WM6's - yes they've improved over the past year or so and yes they're relatively easy to manage.

Yes they are (relatively) easier to run as you don't need to pay for or mainain a BES server (in a corporate environment, 50+ mobile email users).

But, and this is STILL what counts - the Cheif Exec and buddies like BlackBerries - and with slim exception (such as Samsung i300 - which itself has a poor battery life) WM phones can't touch BlackBerries in the ergonomic stakes. Just grab hold of an 8100 (Pearl).

It makes me cry.. but not as much as when trying to dial/redial quickly on a WM phone - when the bugger eventually hangs.

Windows Mobile makes huge commercial sense (to companies with a large Exchange userbase) but Blackberry still rules amongst those at the 18th hole..... Sort it out, designers! Bill - buy out RIM if you want this to work! :0

Being an IT consultancy we have customers who are on both sides of the fence. We do however have one customer who has recently made the move from BB to Handheld HP Ipaq devices on the basis of ease of use, nice size screen, additional apps and extras and the fact that it relies on no extra software or hardware to work.

The feedback from the people using the devices has been nothing but positive in favour of the Ipaqs.

From and operational perspective i find the BES system somewhat cumbersome especially when you look at the setup requirements, the need for certain files to be certain versions before it will work and the amount of log files it generates on top of your existing email solution.

In house we use Exchange Server 2007 Enterprise as our core mail server platform. It provides access for outlook clients, webmail users (OWA) and mobile access (OMA) for Windows Mobile handhelds. Through the use of Synchronica's SyncML gateway users with syncML handhelds/mobiles can access their mail and we also have BES4 for blackberry users. Pretty much we keep everyone happy by allowing them to connect with varying feature sets from whatever device they choose. But BES is easily broken by standard Windows Server patching and on the server side has such a shocking user interface that it makes Windows MMC's look positively intuitive.

Exchange will win when 1) push functionality is improved and 2) windows mobile devices become smaller (pocket friendly), better designed and more reliable. (why do so many exec's like BB's over WM's? -it's a crackberry or a status symbol of some kind for some of the lame ducks in management.)

In closing, I hate BES, and Blackberry handhelds. WM's are far easier to manage in an enterprise.

For the past year or so, our upper management have had blackberry devices using the terrible Telco provided 'mobile email'.

This sucked so much, having to sync the blackberries to the PC regularly, it was no more than a PIM device that could also make calls.

So when we implemented Novell Groupwise 7 on Linux ( never having been near Novell before, but being a Linux shop in the backend) we were really really pleased with Groupwise.

So then we implemented BES shortly afterwards, and so far it is a good solution.

The devices 'just work' management of them is a breeze and the integration with Groupwise Tight and Complete.

But as pointed out above, BES on Linux is SORELY needed (WAKE UP RIM - I'm SICK of paying the £500 W2K3 server license).

Management are Blackberry users through and through, and they'd have to be pryed from their cold dead hands.

BES does the job, keeps of the back of IT, and allows us to manage and lock the device down.

Win /Win.

Just get it on Linux RIM !!! Are you listening ???

BTW, both RIM & Novell support are truly excellent, and we've now got a top notch, reliable, desktop & mobile Group Ware solution.

We have a number of Windows Mobile 5 devices and I have just got an Orange SPV E650 running Mobile 6. Must admit I’m very impressed, a synch to use and to setup. Using GPRS and direct push email is simple and just works (when in range of a WiFi hotspot you can use this instead of GPRS to get your email). All you need to do is enter the email server name and your domain Id and password on the device and away you go. On our Mobile 5 devices we had to import our exchange certificates root cert as our cert suppliers root cert wasn’t trusted under Mobile 5, but seems to be under 6.

As for the phone, the E650 is very nice, the only thing it lacks is 3G but it does have Edge (If you can find any locations with Edge coverage, I can’t find any info on Edge sites!). It’s pretty small but with a very useable flip out keyboard and decent screen.

Hi

I run a small company, and gmail seems like a perfect fit for my needs. It is allways available on whatever pc or plug I am, I can use my domain e-mail addresses, it is quite usable, spam filtering is decent, and it runs great even on cheap low end phones. Zero adminm, and it costs next to nothing.

Unless one's business turns around high secrets, it seems like a deal that is hard to beat for SOHO.