Macs and iPhones: Reporting for duty

Summary: If the iPhone and Mac are good enough for the US Army, can IT managers keep saying that these Apple platforms aren't good enough anymore?

Macs and iPhones: Reporting for duty If the iPhone and Mac are good enough for the US Army, can IT managers keep saying that these Apple platforms aren't good enough anymore?

Returning to the video of Monday's WWDC keynote, I found that a couple of demonstrations and canned user comments made a strong impression. They offer evidence of a possible change in perception about the benefits of Apple platforms in the enterprise.

First were the recorded comments offered by Lieutenant Colonel C.J. Wallington, Director of Advanced Technologies, U.S. Army., who participated in the beta program for iPhone 2.0 software. Sure, there were other executives in the video, but they were long-standing Apple customers such as Disney and Genentech, so some folks might discount the testimony. But the Army?

Wallington said that his technology decisions touched more than 2 million users and that "soldiers' lives" depended on the performance of technology and its security. His users are "exceedingly mobile, deploy all over the world, and have people shooting at [them]."

He gave a thumbs up to the iPhone. He praised its usability and security.

Actually, Wallington is also on the record being upbeat about Mac clients and servers. In a Forbes article at the turn of the year, he talked up Macs in the data center. Last year there were some 20,000 Macs in the Army, a small percentage of the mix.

At the time, his recommendations centered on server security.

Though Apple machines are still pricier than their Windows counterparts, the added security they offer might be worth the cost, says Wallington. He points out that Apple's X Serve servers, which are gradually becoming more commonplace in Army data centers, are proving their mettle. "Those are some of the most attacked computers there are. But the attacks used against them are designed for Windows-based machines, so they shrug them off," he says.

Of course, this security assertion continues to be disputed by many IT managers and pundits. Even if it's fact.

While it appears that the Mac and iPhone are slowly becoming targets of malware, there are still very, very, very few attacks when compared with the daily onslaught against Windows computers. But that's not good enough for the nay-sayers, who don't see the security difference as enough of a value to change.

However, iPhone security was just one part of the new platform's value proposition. An important element were the productivity from the developer tools. The SDK will make creation and support for in-house applications easy.

You could hear this in the comments from many of the developers who demonstrated forthcoming apps on stage. Sure, they appreciated the iPhone hardware and its capabilities such as multi-touch or graphics performance. But in the next breath, they were praising the tools, which had made a huge difference, or made possible any consideration of the platform.

An example of this was the demonstration by MIMvista of remote evaluation of medical images with an iPhone. According to Mark Cain, the company's CTO, the iPhone has "created a new direction" for the company.

"We've taken a desktop application, removed it from the realm of black art, and placed it in the hands of physicians and patients," he said at the keynote.

But really it's not the iPhone alone that's done it. It's the iPhone and the Xcode tools that are making the difference for the MIMvista app. Same thing with the Army.

Could the Army settle on the iPhone as its preferred mobile platform? Now, that would be something.

Topics: iPhone, Apple, Hardware, Mobility, Security

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

52 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • i agree

    I mean Macs are more secure. If I was in the army I would expect only Apple or Linux.
    exxtraz
    • Funny Security!!

      Yeah I like how the Army says " Well they are more secure because all the attacks are targeted at Windows machines"??? Is this the same old security by obscurity BS again. Of course an attack against a Mac with a Windows vulnerabilty is a joke. Didn't a 17 year crack the iphone for other networks. I really have some faith in that security?? Hello.
      OhTheHumanity
      • Security through obscurity

        It's still security isn't it? Maybe tomorrow that will change, but
        today it is valid.

        FYI, making things obscure to keep them safe is a time-honored
        and highly effective military strategy.
        frgough
        • sure it is....

          until the hole is exploited and they gain entry into their systems. That may work on a stealth bomber but just doesn't cut it on a stand still server. Security for systems like these take many precautions(like IDS)and monitoring to fight against, no matter what OS you are running. No need for false sense of security on these matters. The army is just now getting around to only opening outbound ports that are needed and that right there is a big best practice in my view. So hopefully they will take some steps to combat things before they happen.
          OhTheHumanity
  • Interesting security metric you've decided to use!

    [i]While it appears that the Mac and iPhone are slowly becoming targets of malware, there are still very, very, very few attacks when compared with the daily onslaught against Windows computers. But that???s not good enough for the nay-sayers, who don???t see the security difference as enough of a value to change.[/i]

    So the most important security metric isn't actually how well a system withstands attack, it is how many times it is attacked? Uh huh. Okay. Maybe those of us you have accused of being "nay-sayers" understand that our machines are under constant attack and the [b]fact[/b] that none of those attacks have ever, even once, gotten through, gives us more confidence than if we were using a system that rarely gets attacked but when it does, it is the first to fall (see PWN2OWN where out of the box OS X fell within 2 minutes and out of the box Vista and Linux never did).

    Anyway, good for Apple, I know they'll continue to have success with the iPhone. Personally speaking, I could never use a device that was so huge and bulky. Remember, when dealing with mobile devices, volume is the most important measure. We have been told this with the MBA and we have been told this with the iPod vs Archos comparisons. The iPhone is 1.5 times the volume of the HTC Touch Diamond so that right there means the iPhone is simply too big. Hey, I'm just using [b]your[/b] metrics!! :)
    NonZealot
    • Build an Apple post and he will come...:P

      Still you failed to notice that the writer did
      indicate that some attacks have happened yet I
      have yet to hear of any "damage" done by said
      attempts? Now on the other side I have heard
      such tales. I just find it interesting.....:)

      Pagan jim
      James Quinn
  • OsX is Apple's Killer Advantage

    I've written in comments before that the
    iPhone's great advantage is OsX (a modified
    version which runs the iPhone).

    A few months ago when Apple stock was hitting
    116 from a high of near 200 I wrote that people
    should load up on Apple stock. Analysts and PC
    lovers were dissing the iPhone saying it's got no
    GPS, lacking enterprise functions etc. I said
    don't worry about those stuff, the thing is it's
    got OsX and I bought thousands of bucks more
    of Apple stock. I was laughed at in every PC
    centric blog.

    People still don't get it. Apple can get
    everything the other guys have for example
    iPhone 2 has GPS etc. and get other features it
    still lacks BUT he other phone makers can't get
    OsX.

    OsX was built by a bunch of obsessive fanatics
    led by an obsessive fanatic Steve Jobs over
    something like 20 years starting out as Next
    Os. Years ago when I first saw a Next computer,
    all beautiful black, I said "omigod!". Microsoft
    can't match OsX, but people including so called
    'tech reporters' and 'analysts' think that Rim or
    Nokia (who have got way limited Os experience)
    can build a Os better than Apple and create "an
    iPhone Killer' in a few months! It took Steve's
    team 20 years and Nokia can do it in like 3
    months! (All through last year in every news
    source you keep reading about the next 'iPhone
    Killer').

    Now we read that the iPhone is inferior because
    it's got no video recording, that Rim has better
    encryption etc. People don't get it that Apple
    CAN get all those things, it just takes a bit of
    time, but the other guys will never get OsX. If
    and that's unlikely they match OsX as it exists
    now, Apple would have moved forward,
    hundreds of Apple engineers and software
    developers are hammering at it 24/7 .

    OsX makes the iPhone a differnet beast than the
    other 'smartphones', it's much more of mobile
    computing platform. OsX and the touch screen
    allows the iPhone to 'morph', the iPhone for a
    doctor loaded with medical software will look
    and function differently than the iPhone for a
    Army soldier loaded with military programs or
    real estate agent's, in short an iPhone can
    'change itself' to fit different functions a lot
    more than any phone with buttons. An iPhone
    for a Japanese person with Japanese characters
    and interface can be SUBSTANTIALLY different
    for person using Greek etc. All this is
    revolutionary for mobile hand devices.

    OsX and all its components, the development
    tools, the awesome rendering engine etc. are
    killer advantages for Apple.
    Davewrite
    • A breath of fresh air.

      You are 100% correct. Apple's UNIX is the key, and they know it.
      People
    • Yes, I forgot Apple invented the touch screen cell phone

      [i]OsX makes the iPhone a differnet beast than the
      other 'smartphones', it's much more of mobile
      computing platform. OsX and the touch screen
      allows the iPhone to 'morph', the iPhone for a
      doctor loaded with medical software will look
      and function differently than the iPhone for a
      Army soldier loaded with military programs or
      real estate agent's, in short an iPhone can
      'change itself' to fit different functions a lot
      more than any phone with buttons.[/i]

      Yeah, there never have been any other touch screen cell phones out there. Never. iPhone was the first. Uh huh. :)
      NonZealot
      • never said that

        "Yeah, there never have been any other touch screen cell
        phones out there. Never. iPhone was the first. Uh huh."

        Never said the above.

        My contention is that the iPhone with it's multi-touch
        screen and the osX interface is big step in mobile
        computing development. Ease of use, functionality, ease in
        developing application software. No other phone before
        even other touch phones had a fraction of the iphones
        capability.

        By the way how many MULITI-TOUCH phones out there
        before the iPhone? How many of the other touch screen
        phones are even close to the applications ability shown in
        the iphone SDK and the WWDC presentations?

        Talking about the iPhone today is like talking to Dos users
        20 years ago. They kept saying "DOS is REAL computing.
        The MOUSE is a TOY!" and people (keyboard jockeys) kept
        demonstrating 'HOW FAST they can type and computer in
        DOS". They were adamant that business users will never
        use a GUI computer (sound familiar? "Business users will
        never use the iPhone")

        LIke I said people dis the iphone for its perceived lacks for
        example it's lack of a video camera and miss or or don't
        understand it's POTENTIAL. (That's ok , if the stock drops
        I'm gonna load up more).

        John Doerr financier of Amazon and Goggle says the
        iPhone SDK is the next great platform "bigger than the PC"
        and he's putting 100 million where he's mouth is to finance
        iphone application developments. IF THE OTHER TOUCH
        SCREEN PHONES WERE SO GREAT before the iPhone why
        didn't he finance them instead? Maybe a guy like Doerr a
        multi millionaire tech investor knows something?
        Davewrite
        • You've been drinking too much koolaid

          [i]No other phone before even other touch phones had a fraction of the iphones capability.[/i]

          Just because Jobs says so doesn't make it true. [b]All[/b] touch screen cell phones before the iPhone have had a platform and the ability to install programs on them without having to pay 30% to the mothership. The iPhone actually has the [b]most restrictive[/b] platform out of all of them.

          [i]By the way how many MULITI-TOUCH phones out there
          before the iPhone?[/i]

          Ah yes, multi-touch, the #1 most overrated feature ever. When I want to resize pictures with 2 fingers on my cell phone, I'll buy an iPhone. Hehe, did you notice how little multi-touch was mentioned at WWDC? You ever wonder why?

          [i]How many of the other touch screen phones are even close to the applications ability shown in the iphone SDK and the WWDC presentations?[/i]

          Um, [b]all[/b] them have [b]more[/b] applications ability than anything I saw in the iPhone SDK. Listening to you guys talk I'm amazed how much you truly believe that Java, .NET, Symbian, Palm, and RIM don't exist and that GPS, touch screens, and browsers have never been added to a phone before! By the way, every single one of the platforms above, with the exception of Palm, is on far, far, far, far, far, far more units than Apple is even [b]hoping[/b] to sell in 1.5 years. Don't let the hype you read in the blogosphere fool you, iPhone is small potatoes in the universe of portable devices. :)

          [i]Maybe a guy like Doerr a multi millionaire tech investor knows something?[/i]

          I've no doubt that the iPhone will bring Apple financial success and you can search for my posts going all the way back to before June of last year where I've stated that. It doesn't mean the platform is better. Here, let me bring out an example that all of you always hate: Windows. Windows is far, far, far, far, far, far, far more financially successful than OS X but does that mean it is the better platform? I'm sure you would say no. Well, just because the iPhone will sell well to those who are blinded by the hype does not mean that it is better than any of the hundreds of touch screen cell phones that came before it. In fact, any rational thinker has already realized that the iPhone is worse in nearly every measurable category one can think of.

          Anyway, enjoy your brick. I'm getting an HTC Touch Diamond that is 2/3 the size of the iPhone and twice the resolution and has a [b]real[/b] OS behind it. Remember, with mobile devices, size is [b]everything[/b] (this is what we were told with MBA and iPod vs Archos) so I just couldn't bear to buy something as big and bulky as the iPhone. :)
          NonZealot
          • Read your own post. I wonder who is the real kool aid drinker

            Yep, 20 years ago you've said "REAL computers run DOS!".

            You all still don't get it, people keep comparing the iphone
            and say 'the other phones better, it's got GPS it's got a bar
            code scanner etc." Again I say Apple can get those things if
            they wanted to no problem, will only take time but they
            can't get OsX. You don't understand the iPhone 'concept'
            or OsX advantage.

            "Diamond that is 2/3 the size of the iPhone and twice the
            resolution and has a real OS " If you think any of the other
            cell phone Os is comparable to OsX I think it would be
            futile to convince you otherwise. What i do know is that
            the diamond runs win mobile and practically every tech
            article I've read says that win mobile is unstable and
            sluggish compared to the iPhone (and that's the iphone
            one). By the way the Touch Diamond is $700+ the iphone
            2 is going to be 199!


            "Um, all them have more applications ability than anything
            I saw in the iPhone SDK. " Really? If that were true surely
            people, the press wouldn't be all over the iPhone, surely
            when the iPhone came out they would have just ignored it
            or did they ALL also drink kool aid? Running programs and
            running programs WELL is different. It's like saying all cars
            are Lamborghini's because they have wheels.

            Microsoft hopes to sell 20 million win mobile phones this
            year with 150(!!) plus models (built by different
            manufacturers). Do the math, each model is selling very
            small amounts. If their OS is much better and if their
            phones are better than OS X wouldn't they have after 150
            models a runaway smash seller years ago? 6 million
            iphones from basically one model sold so far in just 6
            countries.

            "By the way, every single one of the platforms above, with
            the exception of Palm, is on far, far, far, far, far, far more
            units than Apple is even hoping to sell in 1.5 years"

            Rim has about 15 million subscribers total after many
            years and many countries, Apple after less than a year has
            6 million just selling in 6 countries (the last two added
            recently). Rim is good well run company with good
            products but the iphone is soon going from 6 to 70
            countries, still think RIM is "far, far, far, far, far, far more
            units than Apple is even hoping to sell in 1.5 years"?

            Example of OsX advantage: iIn a poll one third of doctors
            surveyed said they would buy iPhones because they can be
            loaded up with diagnostic tools many of which will be out
            this year. Try that with any other cell phone.

            People have said to me doctors can do the same with
            laptops, current specialized hardware etc. Carry around a
            laptop from patient bed to patient bed? A specialized tool
            will costs thousands of dollars and probably can only used
            for doctors, a iPhone will cost 199 and be configured to
            many many different occupations: that's the iphone
            advantage.

            Google says 50 times more searches come from iPhones
            than any other phone, if they other phones have so much
            better interfaces why is this true?

            ----
            Apple revenue last quarter up 43% , microsoft down 11%.

            Mac sales up 51% vs. about 9% PC.

            People think Apple is a gnat compared to microsoft but
            apple's revenues are about half msfts. and getting closer.

            Stock last 5 years: Microsoft up 30%, Nokia 59% Apple
            2000%!
            Davewrite
          • Last reply, you are too drunk on koolaid

            [i]By the way the Touch Diamond is $700+ the iphone
            2 is going to be 199![/i]

            You get what you pay for! Sorry to hear you can't afford the superior phone. PS I'm stealing those lines from your brethren whenever anyone says that Macs are more expensive than PCs. :)

            Besides, like I said, the iPhone is [b]huge[/b] and bulky, the HTC Touch Diamond is sleek and elegant. When talking mobile devices, size is so important and the iPhone is just too unwieldly for those who can afford better. Sorry to hear you will be stuck with the iPhoneBook... at least that is what it would be called if the name represented its size! :)

            [i]If that were true surely people, the press wouldn't be all over the iPhone[/i]

            Ever hear of astroturfers? Apple pays, and pays [b]big[/b] marketing bucks to make sure everyone writes about them. Brilliant marketing but don't kid yourself, they are all paid by Apple to write what they do.

            [i]Microsoft hopes to sell 20 million win mobile phones this year with 150(!!) plus models (built by different manufacturers). Do the math, each model is selling very small amounts.[/i]

            It's called choice. You should look into it some time. :)

            [i]Rim has about 15 million subscribers total after many years and many countries, Apple after less than a year[/i]

            Apple got in when smartphone sales are exploding like a rocket. You simply can't compare the # of phones Apple sold in 2008 to the # of phones RIM sold in 2000, you have to compare how many they are selling [b]today[/b]. While Palm is last, Apple is second to last. Of course, I truly do understand that the only way you can make Apple look good is to compare sales from different years. Fantastic logic that!! :)

            [i]they can be loaded up with diagnostic tools many of which will be out this year. Try that with any other cell phone.[/i]

            # of applications available today for iPhone: 0
            # of applications available today for RIM, Symbian, WM, and Palm: hundreds of thousands

            Are you on crack when you suggest you can't load programs onto other cell phones? iPhone is the [b]only[/b] cell phone that can't be loaded up with diagnostic programs. [b]Every[/b] single other cell phone can! :)

            [i]Google says 50 times more searches come from iPhones than any other phone, if they other phones have so much better interfaces why is this true?[/i]

            Hehe, if the iPhone has such a great interface, how come iPhone users spend so much time searching the web? Here is a clue: other cell phone users use their cell phones to do useful things. iPhone users are stuck searching, searching, searching, and never finding. You see, they have no applications to run.

            [i]Stock last 5 years: Microsoft up 30%, Nokia 59% Apple 2000%![/i]

            Ah yes, the last bastion of a lost argument: bring up the stock price! 5 years ago, which company was nearly bankrupt? Apple. It would be [b]impossible[/b] for Microsoft or Nokia's stock prices to rise 2000% because both companies have [b]always[/b] been successful. Apple, on the other hand, goes from 15% marketshare in the 80s to nearly 0% in the 90s. Yes, they've made a great turnaround in the last few years but that still doesn't mean that their products are better than the competition, it simply means their products are better than they were 10 years ago, you know, back when they were nearly bankrupt and their products were [b]so[/b] bad that no one wanted to buy them. Anyway, I'm glad you brought up the stock price because it just told me you lost the argument. Have a great evening! :)
            NonZealot
          • Ok last post for me too.

            "Apple pays, and pays big marketing bucks to make sure
            everyone writes about them"

            Microsoft spent 100 MILLION to launch the Zune and after
            two years has sold 2 million (same period Apple sold over
            60 million ipods). Big ad bucks don't mean anything when
            you don't have a product.

            I said "Microsoft hopes to sell 20 million win mobile
            phones this year with 150(!!) plus models (built by different
            manufacturers). Do the math, each model is selling very
            small amounts." but you don't get what I mean. If Win
            Mobile is SO superior surely with 150 models they would
            be outselling the iPhone by many orders of magnitude. In
            less than a year with basically one model in 6 countries
            Apple has sold 6 million.

            "5 years ago, which company was nearly bankrupt? " Again
            check your facts. When was Apple nearly bankrupt 5 years
            ago?

            "but that still doesn't mean that their products are better
            than the competition" Really? Read what the PC (not Mac)
            press has to SAY:

            PC magazine OS SHOOTOUT Mac Os Leopard wins 4
            categories out of 8 analysed, Vista wins ZERO. Leopard's
            win would be even more stark except it lost in categories
            like Networking and Drivers (as Apple is more integrated it
            would be expected they would have less of these things).

            PC World magazine 2007 Fastest's VISTA laptop is the
            Macbook Pro

            PC World:
            "The fastest Windows Vista notebook we've tested this year
            (through 10/25/07) is a Mac. Try that again: The fastest
            Windows Vista notebook we've tested this year--or for that
            matter, ever--is a Mac. Not a Dell, not a Toshiba, not even
            an Alienware.""MacBook's score is far more impressive
            simply because Apple couldn't care less whether you run
            Windows"


            Editor's Choice recently at PC magazine for notebook is
            Macbook Pro. PC magazine:

            "For now, I can't think of any
            mainstream laptop other than the Apple
            MacBook Pro 15-inch (Penryn) that does
            as good a job of combining fabulous
            design elements with top-of-the-line
            performance parts"

            PC magazine reviews Leopard : " it's by far the best
            operating system ever written for the vast majority of
            consumers, with dozens of new features that have real
            practical value?like truly automated backups, preview
            images in folders, and notes and to-do lists integrated
            into the mail program," and "Leopard again raises the
            question of whether to switch from Windows to a Mac. I've
            found Vista to be a major disappointment that tends to
            look worse the more I use it. "

            Remember the above is from the PC PRESS, imagine the
            Mac (koolaide) press!

            Last post for me too.

            -------
            I must say YOU ARE POLITE with all the smiley faces.
            Davewrite
          • Pass me your dream pipe, please :-)

            I wonder how did you come up with a "real" OS behind HTC (Windows Mobile? 6.1 Professional)? Could you elaborate your statement? I am an embedded software engineer and will greatly appreciate description of Windows advantages over embedded BSD+micro kernel.

            I am dealing (developing SW) with operating systems since 1980 (OS/360, VM/370, RSX-11M, DOS, Win/3.1, Win/3.11,OS/2, Win/NT, FreeBSD, Win/2000, Linux, Win/XP) and embedded avionics is my daily job.

            And in my opinion BSD + micro kernel fits pretty well with iPhone hardware.

            Another thing - if you think that Windows drives a lot of embedded devices then you are wrong (sorry to disappoint you)...

            I already mentioned on ZDNET how many embedded Linux devices live in my house (wireless router, e-book reader, HD DVR, Philips 47") and only one has Windows embedded (Dell Axim - my daughter's). Talk about small potatoes... :-)

            The only device that I specifically chose because of being driving by Linux was wireless router.

            Personal:
            What I can not get is why are you so upset with iPhone? This is just a device, nothing more. And if does not fit your small hand and you are satisfied with HTC then be it!

            I CAN NOT GET THIS VENDETTA ON iPhone... ;-)

            (I just got a little bit tired of your constant praising of Windows) :-)
            Solid Water
          • I love Linux too

            [i](I just got a little bit tired of your constant praising of Windows)[/i]

            [url=http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12554-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=48623&messageID=906670&start=0] I use Linux a lot too. [/url] I don't constantly praise Windows or did you not see how I specifically mentioned RIM, Symbian, and Palm?
            NonZealot
      • Reeeeeeeaching for the Pop

        Busy as ever. Hey... I looked at the quote four times and I
        don't see the claim that the iPhone was the first touch screen
        smartphone. The quote asserted that by having the buttons
        on screen there's an advantage to the user and the
        developer.

        Okay, just a quick pop in, going back to crying in my beer
        about not having a full 64 bit kernel.
        DannyO_0x98
        • Here is the quote

          [i]OsX makes the iPhone a differnet beast than the
          other 'smartphones', it's much more of mobile
          computing platform. OsX and the touch screen
          allows the iPhone to 'morph'[/i]

          By saying iPhone's is a different beast because its touch screen allows the iPhone to morph, he is saying that no other cell phone has a touch screen that allows it to morph. That is false, demonstrably false. In fact, Apple is the [b]last[/b] company to have the ability to "morph" into something else.

          Sorry to hear about your kernel. Hey, at least you are soon going to get server virtualization! We've had it for years and trust us, it's pretty cool! :)
          NonZealot
      • Remember this in 2 years...

        The iPod Touch/iPhone will do to mobile computing what
        Windows did to the desktop.

        The question is, will you be keeping your $$$ in a poor
        quality savings account (MS stock?)
        Bruizer
        • You mean Android ?

          "The iPod Touch/iPhone will do to mobile computing what Windows did to the desktop"

          I think that only Android or a significantly improved Windows Mobile have the potential to do this.
          You see one of the main strength of Windows on the PC is that it is able to run on whatever hardware configurations.
          Thus only an O.S able to do the same in the mobile computing world could do what Windows has done in the PC.
          And the iPhone OSX is unable to do that as it is tied to only one hardware and form factor which is btw useless for the vast majority of smartphone users.
          Physical keys are needed for many of them.

          "The question is, will you be keeping your $$$ in a poor quality savings account (MS stock?)"

          No actually i spend my $$$ on Symbian smartphones and i plan to spend them in the future on either Android smartphones or WM smartphones(if Windows Mobile significantly get better U.I wise).
          timiteh