I've been watching the release of Apple's next-generation iPhone with tepid interest. Sure it's a sweet device, but my first-gen Samsung Blackjack was 3G-enabled when I picked it up a year ago. What's the big deal, I asked?Charlie Rose addressed this question with several techies last night, and I was surprised to learn that people in the hallowed halls of Wired and TechCrunch are so enamored with the iPhone that they're putting their BlackBerries to bed.
Since attorneys are some of the most dedicated BlackBerry users on the planet, I can't help but wonder how many have thought about trading-up. Just think, if the iPhone became standard issue for lawyers, how would that affect their respective cool factors?
I can't say, since I've never seen an iPhone-equipped attorney in the wild.
5 comments:
I have seen a few, but you are right, they are not all that popular with attorneys.
I have a Blackberry Pearl and an iPod Touch. While the Touch is really awesome, it is bigger than I want to carry around. The Pearl is just the right size.
However, if I were carrying around one of those big PDA phones, I would switch in a second. Even with its few shortcomings, the iPhone/iPod Touch is a beautiful product. A Blackberry will just get the job done. An iPhone will get it done, often better, and with style.
I've never used a Blackberry myself. But when my firm adopted Windows Mobile devices in place of the Treos we had been using, I opted for an iPhone instead. Exchange support with the new firmware version is quite good. The iPhone's email client handles attachments much better than other phones I've used. And the web browsing experience on the iPhone is far better than on any other smartphone I've tried.
I think the lack of carrier choices is hurting Apple...if AT&T/Cingular coverage is bad for you, then the best device doesn't make it worth the poor reception/dropped calls.
Our firm (not in MN) has said that they are testing the iPhone with Exchange to make sure there are no problems. If it checks out, then they are going to allow the 8 gig model in place of Blackberries (firm doesn't see the need to pay for the 16 gig model since that doesn't affect how emails are handled).
There's some discussion out there suggesting that encryption schemes (or lack thereof) for iPhone are inadequate for lawyers (and their special sensitivity to confidentiality). I'm not sure what to make of this (and note there's hardly a consensus, even in BigLaw Land).
e.g., http://abovethelaw.com/2008/07/biglaw_perk_watch_more_iphone.php
Comments anyone?
The differing opinions among Big Law IT departments about whether the iPhone is secure reflect differing philosophies on security generally, IMHO. No mobile device will ever be completely secure, and oftentimes (though certainly not always) increasing security means a trade-off with usability. It comes down to whether the device is "secure enough." The iPhone can be wiped remotely in the event it is lost or stolen. Obviously, for some big law firms and for some large corporations that are also deploying the device, that is enough. For others, it isn't.
Post a Comment