The Samsung SCH-i730 (info) and the Verizon branded Audiovox XV6700 (info) were immediately ruled for simply being too much machine for my average users. My staff does need mobility but don’t necessarily require high-end, high-tech immediacy. The Treo 700p (info) (my favorite) was also out because it didn’t work with Exchange 2003′s ActiveSync. That narrowed the choices down to the Palm Treo 700w (info), the Motorola Q (info), and the Blackberry 8703e (info).

The Motorola Q (shop) would have been my choice if not for some major shortcomings. Motorola has priced the Q perfectly, while offering what many IT staff will think is the perfect device for most non-technical mobile users. It provides a limited interface that allows for ActiveSync synchronization (albeit intermittent, not real-time), a small form, and good sound quality. Unfortunately the Q’s negatives were weighty. Its battery life is very poor, the OS is prone to crashes, and the device’s keyboard is horrible. My fingers are not big and still I had trouble working those keys. Motorola has a great idea with the Q. It is exactly what many companies want for their users, but it is unwise to roll out a first-generation device of such questionable quality.

The Blackberry 8703e has a great screen and a wonderful keyboard. This device would have been my choice if not for the costly implementation. Key to this decision was my requirement of centralized manageability. The Blackberry Server is a great product that provides considerable remote control. Perfect for what I want to do, however, Blackberry does not offer ANY non-profit discounts on its server products. Additionally, should there have been a non-profit discount, such a purchase would still have been tough to justify when Exchange 2003 with ActiveSync was already in production.

The Palm Treo 700w (shop) was my winner. I’m a big fan of the Treo 650 and 700p (Palm OS) models. Though now dated, the Palm OS is a simple, elegant operating system that considers the mobility aspect of mobile computing in its design. Until recently, the Windows Mobile operating system was laborious and clunky and created knots in my shoulders. But Palms rendition of the Windows Mobile OS makes me feel at home. My users will find it simple to use and the hardware is divine.

The Treo 700w costs much more than I would like to spend and is probably not within reach of non-profits seeking larger rollouts. Yet, for the five to seven units that will eventually be in operation in my organization, the Treo is well worth the savings in frustration. However, when the second-generation Q comes out, you better believe I will be taking a close look at it.

I feel now is the time for me to standardize on a smartphone/PDA solution. Since I prefer central management as much as possible, I don’t want to purchase cellphones that require a desktop client. We already have such setups in the New York office for both Blackberry and Treo. Both work fine but I don’t see this as a solution when dealing with remote site users. Since we have Exchange 2003, we have ActiveSync. Using a Windows Mobile device, like a Treo 700w, email and contacts can readily flow to the device. With no desktop client to install, there would be less hassles when something does go wrong with the workstation or PDA. A Blackberry server option winds up being an additional expense that, while far more useful for centrally managing mobile devices, is difficult to justify when we already own something that satisfies the general requirement. Still, Blackberry is not out of the equation yet.

There is a problem on the network side. Because it is easy, I was intending these users to be set up on POP3, which means while I can set up their Outlook to leave the mail on the server for a duration of time thereby syncing with the handheld device, their contacts will forever be on their desktop. Alternatively a VPN for Exchange would create constant synchronization and give me a chance to use ActiveSync. Currently a VPN is what we use for two west coast users, though the rest use POP3. VPN is currently handled between server and desktop instead of between firewalls. I fear over time this setup could eat up bandwidth and resources. I might not want to think that long-term though, since a growing organization is a changing one, and just setup a protocol that really works through the immediate future.