BlackBerry Enterprise Share Will Drop from 52% to 36% in 2012

BlackBerry Market Share Dropping Fast

The BlackBerry may not be dead, but it's dying, some now say. New research from Enterprise Management Associates likewise indicates that 30 percent of BlackBerry users in companies with more than 10,000 users will move to a different mobile platform in 2012.

That would move Research in Motion's standing in large enterprise accounts into that of a minority operating system. Today, 52 percent of users in such organizations "actively" use a BlackBerry for work purposes, EMA reports; a 30 percent reduction would bring that total to 36 percent.

"We expected to see some market share loss by RIM, but these results were far more dramatic than we could have anticipated," reports Steve Brasen, EMA's managing research director. They come on the heels of a larger defection: Users of all stripes are moving away from BlackBerry, as its continually declining market share shows.

Even the BlackBerry faithful are abandoning RIM

Apple iPhone Demand Seen Exploding

ChangeWave's latest smart phone survey of 4,028 consumers shows an "explosive transformation" occurring in consumer demand, suggesting some major new mobile handset winners and losers for second half 2010.

Changewave says its latest survey shows the strongest interest in smartphones ever recorded in a Changewave survey. But there's a significant change within that demand pattern: Apple and HTC devices are getting strong demand at the expense of Motorola and Research in Motion.

The future buying plans suggest coming huge moves upward for Apple and HTC, with a whopping 52 percent of respondents who plan to buy a smart phone in the next 90 days saying they'll get an Apple iPhone.

It also appears that Android demand has shifted to HTC and away from Motorola.

Explosive Changes in Consumer Demand Shake Up Smart Phone Industry

Can iPhone Overtake BlackBerry??

Now that I've had a chance to look at Research in Motion's most recent quarterly results, which were robust, one can make a comparison between what RIM did, and what 9to5mac.com expects Apple to announce it has done. Namely, 9to5mac.com expects Apple to announce sales of five million iPhones in February.

RIM sold 3.9 million Blackberries in its most recent quarter across more than 100 carriers and 13 product lines. It isn't an apples-to-apples comparison. The two companies have different quarterly "endings," RIM finishing Dec. 1 and Apple Dec. 31.

Plus, it isn't clear what time period the five million iPhones were sold over. 9to5mac.com does not indicate a belief that all five million were sold in one quarter, and one suspects that isn't the case. Make it 3.5 million or so devices in the quarter.

What is interesting is how well Apple would have done, should it report anything like five million devices over even two quarters, given its early status in the market.

Apple has been selling one model of a GSM iPhone in four countries with just four carrier partners; while RIM, with a huge head start, is sold by more than 100 carriers, and features 13 different product lines.

Has Apple Sold 5 Million iPhones?

Cleve Nettles at Mac9to5 thinks so. Nettles expects Apple to say so in January, at Macworld. The issue is how those sales relate to the announced goal of selling 10 million iPhones. Some people recollect Steve Jobs, Apple CEO, promising sales of 10 million phones in calendar year 2008 alone. Others seem to think he meant 10 million by the end of 2008, in total.

Rivals at Nokia and Research in Motion probably aren't excessively worried either way, given the installed base of devices each of those firms has, and the number of new devices they ship every month. Of course, Apple has a distinct advantage. It gets recurring revenue from the sales of each of its phones.

RIM and Nokia do not. So one iPhone sale is worth a lot more revenue than the sale of a new BlackBerry or Nokia handset.

New BlackBerry Consumer Phone

MultiMedia Intelligence projects worldwide unit shipments of multimedia feature-rich mobile phones will exceed 300 million units in 2008, outnumbering shipments of TV sets.

Multimedia phones have at least 1 megapixal image capture, MP3 audio, video playback, Java, USB, Bluetooth, 16-bit screen color, QVGA resolution, WAP and MMS. Revenue from these handsets will be over $76 billion.

Numbers that large are a reason why Research in Motion will be launching new consumer-focused devices in the first quarter next year. The 9000 series is described by Carmi Levy, an analyst at AR Communications Inc. , as "the future of the BlackBerry franchise," a complete breakaway from the device's business roots. Instead, the new series targets the consumer space served by the Pearl and Curve models.

"The 9000 is supposed to be a touch-screen device, very similar in form factor to the iPhone," Levy says. "Which means that it is not an enterprise-friendly device."

The 9000 series will break from the traditional half-screen, half-keyboard look of the BlackBerry. The handsets will also incorporate an upgraded multimedia system, along with the standard push email capabilities.

Levy speculates that RIM will introduce the 9000 series in the first quarter of next year.

Among the updates will be "a Curve with WiFi," according to Levy. These devices may have other updates like GPS location tracking and higher resolution on-board cameras as well.

Do Patents Retard Innovation?

Is the patent system broken? Supposedly a way to protect genuine intellectual property and spur innovation, patents these days seem most likely to wind up being used as a weapon of business warfare, and may actually retard innovation in many cases. Vonage and Research in Motion come to mind, as many observers think the patents Vonage is said to have infringed should not have been granted in the first place, and RIM had to pay what amounts to greenmail so its carrier and enterprise partners would not suddenly have to make all BlackBerry services "go dark."

In fact, it seems to be common these days to attempt to patent common business practices, obvious to anyone in the field. That leads to patent "trolls" buying up intellectual property and then suing companies as a business model.

Suing is a repugnant business model. And most patents seem trivial or--to a layman--overly broad. It is important to foster innovation and reward effort, and some innovations fit that bill. But isn't it obvious we ought to encourage people to work on really hard problems, and reward them, rather than encouraging lots of trivial stuff? Sure, it sometimes is hard to distinguish between an idea of significance and "prior art."

Now there's a big, socially useful problem that Google ought to be able to help with.

Whether it is the patent system or the way it gets used in business, something is out of whack. One might argue it is a necessary evil. Perhaps it isn't so necessary (at least the way currently practiced), though perhaps it often is evil.