08-26-2009 01:30 PM
Yeah? So I can access BES with Firefox? Without installing a driver? From my Linux desktop?
An my description of my connecting to the management console (where you said "the client apps do not install"), where I detail each step it required me to perfom and each piece it needed to install, and when it required a reboot - that didn't happen?
09-22-2009 11:15 AM
I think I can clear up why logging into the mangement console requests an ActiveX installation. In 4.1 you were able to directly connect a BlackBerry device to the BES and assign the device to a user. This allows a wired activation to take place without the need to use Desktop Manager with a connection to the users mailbox. In 5.0 it was realized that the convience of using a web interface would be diminished if a wired activation, still required that you connect the device directly to the server. This is why the device drivers and associated ActiveX controls are installed. It allows for an administrator to perform a wired activation for a user without having to connect the device directly to the BES or have direct access to the users mailbox (good for Jr. Admins with limited access for example).
I can see where you're coming from on this though. It should be optional to install the ActiveX controls or continue without them. On the other hand though since all previous tools for managing the BES were only for Windows this really isn't a deviation from what was previously expected by administrators.
If using OS's other than Windows is a big issue for your administrators, and you have some Java experience, the BlackBerry Administration API (BAA) is an option that would allow you to write your own tools (or if you're really ambitious your own cross platform BlackBerry Manager) for common tasks that you'd want to perform from your Linux, Mac, etc workstation. You'd lose the ability to assign devices as I described but it doesn't sound like you're interested in that feature anyways. If you want more information on the BAA you can find it here.
11-25-2009 02:53 PM - edited 11-25-2009 03:01 PM
I appreciate your taking the time to explain the motives behind RIM's decisions. I'm still infuriated with the entire situation, though. The fact that RIM believes tying a web interface to an older version of a specific browser (IE8 isn't supported) and a specific operating system is an acceptable solution is proof of some pretty bad practices behind the scenes. Add to that the fact that RIM has no interest in even talking to any of their customers about the problem and I'm much less likely to recommend a blackberry solution to anyone in the future.
If anyone from RIM reads this, please talk to us. There's an issue here that needs to be fixed and would not require a lot of work.