If Apple Walls Garden, IT Should Demand Keys - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Government // Mobile & Wireless
10:45 AM
Connect Directly

If Apple Walls Garden, IT Should Demand Keys

Here's how and why IT must influence Apple and its smaller competitors to share a key to the walled garden coming to a desktop near you.

I wrote last week that I'm concerned that Apple and its copycats will use Flashback malware as an excuse to push a desktop walled garden model, raising IT costs while solving nothing. But if Apple and its groupies were to share control with IT, that approach would be palatable. Here's why.

But first, allow me to offer a comparison. I'm a frugal guy, which plays well with the CFOs I've worked with. I grew up with Depression-era parents and six siblings, so reuse and recycle were more than hipster terms in our house. To this day, I won't lease a vehicle. I buy cars used and drive them to 200,000+ miles, happily investing in maintenance and repairs from independent shops. Sadly, those days may be coming to an end now that auto makers are taking a page out of the software vendor playbook and pushing to make vehicle repairs proprietary.

My concerns about the cost of vehicle repairs will be replicated in the IT organization if the desktop walled garden and secure boot are implemented in a way that fails to recognize IT as an authority over that hardware. Under the current desktop model, IT leaders have their pick of "independent computer repair dealers," both from a software and hardware perspective.

Anybody who's been watching this industry knows that Apple's going to go walled garden on its desktops, whether or not it blames Flashback malware. And if other suppliers follow, it's just a matter of time until IT has fewer choices for repair and software distribution, all of which will mean higher prices.

But if IT organizations apply their considerable buyer power and influence to Apple's smaller competitors, those suppliers may relent and let IT control at least some of the walled garden--and thus Apple may be influenced through Michael Porter's "rivalry" force.

Which concessions should IT organizations pursue with Apple rivals? They need two important keys to the walled garden gates.

Part of Apple's walled garden is the notion of authorized or signed code. One reader of my column last week took me to task because he perceived that I was against signed code. I'm not. Signed code is OK, and can even be preferable, because if you don't know who someone is, you don't want his code running across 10,000 desktops at your organization.

What I'm against is creating conditions whereby only your desktop supplier can authorize a signer. If Apple would let IT organizations register "known good" code suppliers, that's the first key to a more acceptable desktop walled garden. Apple already lets enterprises registered with Dun & Bradstreet distribute their own enterprise apps for a mere $299 annually; they just don't let enterprises buy apps from anyone but Apple.

That model isn't good enough. We need to make it very clear to Apple's competitors (and thus to Apple) that CIOs will prefer hardware and operating system suppliers that provide conditions whereby IT organizations can, on an ad hoc basis, add a software supplier as an authorized signature for that enterprise's desktops.

Global CIO
Global CIOs: A Site Just For You
Visit InformationWeek's Global CIO -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.

The other key to the walled garden is the approved and legal notion of jailbreaking a device. Nobody would ask manufacturers to provide warranty or support for a jailbroken product. But manufacturers that incite our lawmakers to make jailbreaking illegal should feel our collective buyer power wrath.

The stakes are high, as noted jailbreaker and open hardware advocate "Bunnie" Huang related to me earlier this year with this example. If a car maker such as Ford were to get locked down with secure boot on critical computers that run its manufacturing robots, and the robotics controller software maker were to go out of business, Ford would have a huge problem. It would be faced with either turning to a new support supplier that's breaking the law by reverse engineering or jailbreaking the software, or buying a new assembly line.

But plant managers don't know enough about computers to advocate for open systems and keys to walled gardens. They rely on us, the IT pros, who shouldn't fall for some mythical notion that wall gardens keep our equipment and data safe.

We work for our employers, not for our IT suppliers, and we're the experts our colleagues and bosses will turn to if something goes wrong critical systems. IT leaders at the table with suppliers would do well to remember which side they're on.

Jonathan Feldman is a contributing editor for InformationWeek and director of IT services for a rapidly growing city in North Carolina. Write to him at [email protected] or at @_jfeldman.

From clouds to mobile to software development, threats may be everywhere, but they're not equally dangerous. The new, all-digital IT Strategic Security Survey issue of InformationWeek will help you prioritize. Also in this issue: IT must decide how to deal with consumer cloud storage being used in businesses. (Free registration required.)

We welcome your comments on this topic on our social media channels, or [contact us directly] with questions about the site.
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
User Rank: Apprentice
5/9/2012 | 11:54:58 PM
re: If Apple Walls Garden, IT Should Demand Keys
I agree. It's in Apple's genetics to be proud of their outsider status. When Mr. Jobs returned to Apple, he focused the company instead on excellence, elegance and cool factor. It's been a winning strategy over the last 15 years for sure, and a linchpin of that strategy is ease of use layered on Unix reliability/safety.

Not focusing on market share has perversely been a winning strategy for Apple. So yes, the key reason that they are so locked down is that they understand their brand. But this has brought about an evolution that can't be reversed.

iPads and iPhones are hot items in the enterprise. Enterprises are accepting this, particularly since the management tools are now mature. Users who once had a Blackberry and an iPhone can now have a single device for work and home.

As BYOD is growing users are similarly looking towards the possibility of one PC, one tablet, etc. Private/public clouds, VPN, VMWare, Citrix, Google Office/Open Office, etc. make this a very viable option at long last and Apple devices are in play here too. In other words Apple has become an insider, even if they came in through the back door.

There's a catch: As the two worlds merge, the ease of having a single device will become more and more appealing. Windows has not been standing still and Linux and Google Chrome lurk. Apple can no longer count on users suffering through Windows by day but coming home to their beloved Macs at night.

If IT departments say no to Macs because they don't play well with others, then some users will move to other platforms and Apple will not easily win them back. To me the only conclusion is that Apple needs to find a way to be Apple within the enterprise.

Mr. Feldman's suggestions are very reasonable in that regard. Give not only D&B sized companies but SMBs and power users the keys to some of the locked rooms--at their own risk. There's a EULA for that.

It's noteworthy that Apple became a commodity manufacturer without tarnishing the Apple reputation for quality, service, cool factor and sex appeal. Now they need to trust that they can bend just a little in the OS X space as well and turn it into a marketing advantage.
User Rank: Apprentice
5/8/2012 | 5:28:11 AM
re: If Apple Walls Garden, IT Should Demand Keys
I can see where Apple is coming from in wanting to control their software distribution and repair business. A large portion of their value proposition is based upon taking ownership for the total experience. One of the reasons, not the only reason, for Apple's rise is that PCs were poorly made and poorly serviced. Sure, Apple could let all kinds of third parties become business partners and hope it all works out, but it is not their style. They have no interest in becoming a high-volume channel driven vendor with hit and miss quality. We have that model from a variety of vendors. Apple is going to provide you with one flavor of service, excellent, at one price, high. That is how Apple has always operated and, even though I don't buy all of their gear, I can appreciate their concerns. I don't think they operate in that manner to make a few extra dollars so much as to ensure that their reputation doesn't get tarnished by third-parties they don't control.

Apple's official response to cost vs. quality control: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Get Your Enterprise Ready for 5G
Mary E. Shacklett, Mary E. Shacklett,  1/14/2020
Modern App Dev: An Enterprise Guide
Cathleen Gagne, Managing Editor, InformationWeek,  1/5/2020
9 Ways to Improve IT and Operational Efficiencies in 2020
Cynthia Harvey, Freelance Journalist, InformationWeek,  1/2/2020
White Papers
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Current Issue
The Cloud Gets Ready for the 20's
This IT Trend Report explores how cloud computing is being shaped for the next phase in its maturation. It will help enterprise IT decision makers and business leaders understand some of the key trends reflected emerging cloud concepts and technologies, and in enterprise cloud usage patterns. Get it today!
Flash Poll