BlackBerry Enterprise Services 10 offers the lowest cost migration path compared to other major enterprise mobile management solutions, according to a recent report from market analyst and forecasting firm Strategy Analytics.
The firm conducted a total cost of ownership (TCO) review of the EMM landscape comparing technology migration models from EMM vendors: AirWatch of VMware; BlackBerry; XeMobile from Citrix; Fiberlink of IBM; Good Technology; and MobileIron.
The study examined a BES 5 to BES 10 migration scenario as well as BES 5 to competing EMM scenarios. User base growth assumptions were 1,000 users from 2014 to 1,500 users in 2018.
Migrating from BES 5 to a BlackBerry competitor is, on average, more than double the cost over five years than migrating from BES5 to BES10, the report found.
Feature options sought were MDM, email application management, container solutions and content management. Support options sought were, training, support and maintenance. Preferred method of payment was subscription.
The report revealed that BlackBerry offers an implementation and service package that is “substantially cheaper” than any of its competitors for the commercial grade EMM package. Authors of the reports said this is not due to specific deal promotions, “but rather the way in which a very broad service package is incorporated for a single fee, for both subscription and perpetual tariffing methods.”
Although BES10 was calculated to be more expensive than BES5, the increment is relatively small, according to Strategy Analytics. “Other providers have similar bundling approaches, but the all- inclusive nature of the BlackBerry offer provides a tangible cost advantage which is then sustained throughout the TCO period.”
For the regulated environment market, Strategy Analytics said the primary players are BlackBerry, Good and MobileIron. Taking into account incremental charges for licensing (and capital expenditure where appropriate), the report showed that BlackBerry is the lowest cost option based on a 5 year TCO, followed by Good Technology and MobileIron.
“The pricing offered by BES 10 creates a lowest-cost migration path from a TCO perspective,” said Andrew Brown, executive director of enterprise research at Strategy Analytics and author of the report. “We attribute this to multiple factors including the BES Licence Trade-up program, the impact of BlackBerry Software Assurance across its Advanced, Priority and Premium support categories, and new tiered support categories.”
The market for Mobile Device Management (MDM), Mobile Application Management (MAM) and mobile security has broadened into three layers of capability which is generally now referred to as EMM, according to Strategy Analytics:
Basic mobility management, typically for small businesses using for example ActiveSync for email
Enterprise mobility management – often used by commercial organizations for managing corporate and personal device use
Regulated-level enterprise mobility management – preferred or required by corporate and government organizations with the highest expectations of security and control
EMM requirements cover a wide and varied area that includes basic mobility management needs such as remote lock and wipe capabilities, password enforcement as well as complex integration requirements stipulated by regulated companies and government agencies.
“Most regulated companies interviewed by SA tended to favour a BlackBerry end-to-end solution for regulated environments as a more secure and easier to manage,” said Gina Luk, senior analyst for mobile workforce strategies at Strategy Analytics. “Therefore, BlackBerry is still seen as the most secure architecture with the lowest cost based on Strategy Analytics’ five year TCO.”
Accompanying industry reviews on what factors IT departments consider when selecting an EMM solution carried out by Strategy Analytics also indicated that ease of implementation and usability have a direct bearing on IT management internal cost.
“BlackBerry again scores well on many of these, and there are other vendors which have done well on individual attributes,” the report said. “However, it is striking that there is no strong leadership across all categories by any one vendor, and this suggests that there is still a lot for EMM vendors to play for in seeking to carve their best space in this rapidly evolving market.”