ARCHIVE FOR THE ‘rugged’ CATEGORY

As we continue our series of features helping you decode the jargon and terminology of rugged device manufacturers, we turn our attention to one of the most important yet potentially fragile areas of any device, the screen. Kris Oldand takes a look at what some of the key screen technology developments mean exactly when it comes to selecting devices for your field service workers ...

 

---

 

Read more form this series here

 

---

 

We live in the age of the touch-screen. Indeed my own son, who is now an inquisitive three and a half year old with an obsession with the word why, really struggled to understand recently why when he swiped back fore on the TV it didn’t do anything.

In a world of smartphones and tablets touch-screens have become a universally understood means of interacting with a device. Whether it is inputting data or simply navigating through an operating system, I would put a hefty wager on the fact that anyone reading this article is both familiar and comfortable with using a touch-screen device, such is the prevalence of the technology today.

Touch-screens are an important, even critical part of the user experience of almost all modern tablets and smartphones.

Also, amongst handheld computers that for many years were the go to device for field service teams, touch screens are becoming more and more increasingly common, whether combined with a keypad like the more traditional form factor, or on their own as is appearing in new hybrid products such as the Gen2Wave RP1600.

Yet at the same time, the screen is of course the potential Achilles heel and obvious weak spot in a rugged device.

 

The balance therefore between delivering a screen that is sufficiently capable of with standing drops and knocks, whilst maintaining high usability, is absolutely critical for a rugged device.

So lets look at some of the various options you may find in differing rugged devices when it comes to the screen and explore exactly what these options actually mean.

Capacitive vs. Resistive

Almost certainly the biggest debate when it comes to screen choices in rugged devices is whether capacitive or resistive screens are better suited for the task. But what is the difference between the two?

The older of the two technologies is resistive which relies on pressure to register input. This pressure can be applied by your finger, a stylus or any other object - think of the handheld computers that many delivery companies use, often covered in ink because when the original stylus is lost, the delivery driver often just uses a regular pen to collect a signature instead.

Resistive touch screens consist of two flexible layers with an air gap in between and in order for the touch-screen to register input, you must press on the top layer using a small amount of pressure to make contact with the bottom layer. The touch-screen will then register the precise location of the touch.

 

Rather than relying on pressure, capacitive touch-screens instead sense conductivity to register input—usually from the skin on your fingertip but also from dedicated styluses.

Because you don’t need to apply pressure, capacitive touch-screens are more responsive than resistive touch-screens. However, because they work by sensing conductivity, capacitive touch-screens can only be used with objects that have conductive properties, which includes your fingertip (which is ideal), and special styluses designed with a conductive tip.

Initially one of the big advantages of capacitive touch screens was that they enabled multi-finger gestures - perhaps the most obvious example is pinching or stretching a document to zoom in or out. However, resistive touch screens have also supported multi-finger input for about three or four years now also.

The big advantage resistive screens have over their capacitive counterparts is the fact that the operator can still use the devices whilst wearing gloves - as the input is dependent on pressure rather than the electrical current being completed through a conductive material such as a finger.

An additional benefit is that light touch, such as rain landing on the screen, won’t register so the devices are far better to suited to being used in the wet.

Both of these factors are of course particularly useful in a number of field service environments.

However, another key factor for rugged devices is of course reliability and durability and in this respect capacitive touch screens have the advantage - especially in heavy use applications.

Resistive screens can have a tendency to eventually begin to wear down in frequently used areas. Such areas may be prone to becoming faded and may ultimately even become unresponsive.

 

Also in terms of reliability, if a capacitive touch-screen does happen to become pierced or cracked it is still likely to function - think how many times you have seen someone using a smartphone with a cracked screen?

However, a break anywhere on a resistive touch-screen will often mean that it no longer works.

In terms of field service this is a potentially huge advantage for capacitive screens as it allows for a field service technician to continue to utilise their device until they can get the screen repaired.

Going Gorilla...

A special mention here really needs to go to Corning, a specialist materials manufacturer based in New York whose Gorilla brand glass has achieved what very, very few component manufacturers have achieved by becoming a recognised brand beyond the confines of the technologically minded.

Other than chip manufacturer Intel, can you actually think of a component manufacturer with a brand you recognise? Such is the impact that Gorilla Glass has had on smartphone and tablet manufacturing, with devices ranging from Samsung’s latest consumer flagship smartphone the S7 Edge, through to the Motion F5M by Xplore Technologies rugged tablet, proudly declaring their use of the product. In fact Gorilla Glass has been designed into over 4.5Bn devices globally.

The process developed by Corning to create Gorilla Glass is to chemically strengthen the glass through an ion-exchange process that creates a deep compression layer on the surface of the glass substrate and this layer essentially acts as “armour” to reduce the introduction of flaws.

 

Produced in thicknesses ranging from 0.4 mm to 2 mm, Gorilla Glass is positioned as an ideal cover sheet for touch-screens. It’s tough enough to handle the surface pressures intrinsic to these devices, and exceptionally thin to enable more sensitive and accurate responses.

However, a quick look at the spec sheets of some devices at the higher end of the rugged spectrum from the likes of Panasonic, Xplore, Getac, et al, will reveal that Gorilla Glass isn’t quite so frequently used amongst such devices.

One reason for this is that the whole point of Gorilla Glass is that it can deflect impact significantly without breaking and while extreme deflection seems on the surface like a great a great characteristic for rugged devices, once a Gorilla Glass touch panel is installed over an LCD and a point impact occurs, the Gorilla glass deflects and the impact is transferred to the LCD glass which could potentially break, leaving you with a an undamaged sheet of glass covering a no longer working tablet.

Visibility

Finally, whilst the ability to use a touch-screen in various conditions is important, being able to read the screen in direct sunlight is the other significant factor to consider for field service operatives - who will be often working outdoors.

The key terminology here that you will often find listed in the spec list of rugged device is a level of NIT. Basically a NIT is a unit of visible-light  intensity, commonly used to specify the brightness and it is the crucial the number to look for in device specs for devices that are used outdoors.

On average, your general consumer device will offer something between 300 and 400 NITS, which as anyone who will has tried to watch a movie on their iPad (iPad 4 is specced to 364NITS) at the beach will attest is not bright enough to use in direct sunlight. By comparison, the ultra-rugged Xplore XC6 boasts 1300 NITS, whilst Panasonic’s Toughbook 20 and Getac’s V110 convertible laptop both offer 800 NITS, which makes the devices far more usable in the direct sunlight.

 

Also, in addition to improved NIT levels, many rugged manufacturers also offer their own enhancements to improve visibility such as Xplore Technologies’ ‘View Anywhere’, Getac’s ‘sunlight readable technology’, or Juniper Systems’ ‘Sun-to-Shade’ solutions.

Of course, as with all other considerations around device selection for your engineers, an understanding of their workflow and working environment should be considered. Are they likely to be working in direct sunlight for example or are they likely to be wearing work gloves?

Such questions should shape your requirements when it comes to the type of touch-screen you require in your field service engineer’s devices.

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature

The introduction of the smartphone, and in particular the iPhone in 2007, caused a seismic shift in terms of mobile computing in field service. However, consumer devices have their limitations when it comes to durability and reliability in the field, especially when compared to devices such as Handheld computers that are designed for such use. But with the emergence of a new breed of rugged smartphones geared specifically for field use is that set to change?

As part of our hands on series we take a look at one of the latest such devices, Gen2Wave’s RP1600 rugged Android Smartphone...

What the manufacturers say...

Launched in the UK in February this year, Gen2Wave’s RP1600, is the first octa-core rugged Android industrial Smartphone.

The RP1600 has stand-out performance thanks to its 1.8GHz octa-core processor (Samsung, Exynos5430), 3GB RAM and 16GB ROM on an Android Kit-Kat 4.0 O/S, allowing high-speed parallel processing across eight apps and sufficient RAM space for multi-tasking without delay.

The RP1600 has a tested and proven IP64 rating withstanding drops up to 1.5m.

Adding this to the compact 4.3 inch sunlight readable display, available in either resistive or capacitive touch, this Smartphone is ideal for durability in harsher conditions.

With extended battery options and simple battery swap-out, this device is particularly suitable for mobile workers who need business-critical information on the move in order to carry out their work in an efficient way.

This device delivers a range of communication options including Bluetooth 4.0+HS, WiFi IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n, and embedded A-GPS; assisting the mobile worker with real-time access to important data, increasing productivity and accuracy.

The RP1600 comes with Gen2Wave’s KIOSK feature which enables businesses to restrict the use of applications, limit file access, allows for website blocking and the control of WiFi, Bluetooth or phone usage.

First impressions...

There is undeniably a gap in the market sat right between rugged handheld computers and consumer smartphones.

In fact there are actually two distinct gaps.

Firstly, there is clearly a market for rugged smartphones, a cross-over market that can suit the needs of both industry - including field service, but also a specialist consumer market for those who like the outdoor life, such as hikers or sailors for example, where high water and dust resistance, good outdoor visibility and tested drop resistance are all significant benefits.

 

Then there is a secondary gap, for what are perhaps best defined as industrial rugged smartphones.

Devices that meet the above rugged criteria but also incorporate further additional features such as barcode scanners, which are specifically designed to improve and enhance the workflow of their business users.

The RP series of rugged smartphones firmly sits in this latter category, and the RP1600 is certainly one of the best looking examples of this relatively small market that I have seen to date.

Front on it looks far more like a consumer device than many of it’s competitors with a large 4.3 inch touch-screen display and smooth curved lines, challenging devices such as Zebra’s gorgeous looking TC55.

And whilst selecting a device for your field service engineers is not about a beauty parade, aesthetics shouldn’t be overlooked when it comes to gaining engineer approval and thus enhancing adoption rates.

In hand the device whilst of course not as light as a consumer device, is certainly not cumbersome, whilst still feeling nice and sturdy.

In comparison to other similar devices the RP1600 comes in around the expected range of 250g (up to 300g with extended battery) which is just about 10% heavier than the TC55 but significantly lighter than Trimble’s Juno T41s which weighs in at 400g.

All in all, the RP1600 looks the part, but how does it perform?

Processing power

The obvious devices to look towards for comparison are the TC55 from Zebra, the Juno T41S by Trimble and the Dolphin 70E by Honeywell as each of these devices also belong in what Honeywell term the ‘Enterprise Hybrid Device’ form factor - i.e. the cross over product between Handheld and Smartphone.

 

And in terms of processing power the RP1600 is comfortably leading the pack.

In fact its 1.8GHz Octa-core processor alongside 3GB Ram puts it in a similar bracket to a reasonably high-end consumer device such as Samsung’s Galaxy Note 4. Amongst its peers only the TC55 with a 1.5Ghz dual processor comes remotely close.

There is also plenty of storage space with 16GB internal memory, plus support for up to 32GB on an external micro SD, which again compares well to its main rivals with only the optimum configuration of the Juno T41S besting it.

Operating system

The RP1600 comes with Android 4.4 KitKat operating system however it is upgradeable to Android 5.1 Lollipop.

Whilst 4.4 is certainly a capable OS, the option to upgrade to 5.1 is definitely a bonus and one that isn’t available on many similar devices.

Given that one of the key benefits of an Android device is that there is a familiarity to the OS due to the prevalence of the platform in the consumer world, it could be well worth exploring the upgrade as in the consumer realm many Android devices are now running 5.0 and the look and feel of the two different versions is substantial.

There are also some general performance enhancements on the newer OS as well as some additional features including enhanced battery life, notifications and security all of which are of benefit to a device being deployed to field workers.

It's also worth noting that the RP series also comes in a Windows flavour in the RP1300 albeit with a slightly less impressive set of specs.

The Ins & Outs:

The major selling point for the RP1600 and all of the devices within this bracket, is the inclusion of a dedicated barcode scanner.

The RP1600 is capable of processing both 1D and 2D barcodes and features an easily accessible quick button for activating the scanner, which is pretty much the standard for such devices.

 

Other than this, the device comes with an additional 4 short keys for navigation, supports USB2.0 and also accepts stylus input.

It also has a 13 megapixel camera with auto focus and flash, which again is ahead of its peers.

The one omission that would perhaps of been useful for those out in the field would have been a 3.5mm audio input. However, the device does come with Bluetooth v4.0+HS and has dedicated headset support. However this is of course reliant on providing your engineers with a bluetooth headsets, which are far more expensive than their wired equivalents.

Connectivity:

As mentioned above the RP1600 like the TC55 supports the Bluetooth 4.0 compared to the Juno T41S and the Dolphin 70E which come with Bluetooth 2.1.

This is particularly useful for field service companies as we look to the future as 4.0 is geared much more towards IoT than its older counterpart.

When it comes to wifi the RP1600 is capable of working with all standards of WiFi with the exception of 802.11ac which means that the device can potentially operate on the 5Ghz channel although not as effectively as a device boasting 802.11ac. This is however, par for the course within the form factor and none of the RP1600’s competitors offer better.

The RP1600 also edges ahead of its rivals in terms of mobile internet with support for 4G LTE which is not seen amongst other similar devices.

 

Finally, there is a potential to include NFC capabilities within the RP1600, a benefit the device shares with both the Dolphin 70E and the T55.

Ruggedity:

With an IP rating of 64 the RP1600 is fully resistant to dust ingress. However, in terms of its ability to be protected from water, it is splash proof but nothing more.

Compare this to the Juno T41S which is fully submersible in 2m of water for up to an hour and this could be a major negative for the RP1600 as it potentially may mean the device is not suited to certain environments.

 

In terms of its ability to withstand the occasional knock or two?

Well, the RP1600 is allegedly capable of surviving tests of 1.5m drop onto concrete, and the device we had for review certainly coped with such a drop. However, it is unclear if the device was put through the MilStd 810g testing process, which many of its peers have done.

This could just be information lacking from the spec sheet, or it could be that Gen2Wav used a different approach to testing. However, this does raise a potential red flag when it comes to comparing it with similar devices.

Battery Life:

Finally in terms of battery life the RP1600 comes with three options:

[unordered_list style="bullet"]

• 1860mA/h Li-Ion
• Extended : 4000mA/h Li-Ion
• Medium : 2860mA/h Li-Ion[/unordered_list] Standard : 

Also as the RP1600 also features a built-in backup battery, hot swapping of batteries should be possible, allowing for potentially infinite battery life as long as you have an additional battery especially as the charging cradle (which is included in the box) for the RP1600 also allows for charging an additional battery.

Conclusion:

There is no denying that the RP1600 is an impressive device.

Its Achilles heel perhaps lies within its rugged specs.

 

If you are looking for a device that is going to take a bit of a pounding and definitely get wet once in a while then it may be worth looking at some of the more robust options of the form factor.

However, that said, the RP1600 is both pretty and powerful, is certainly rugged enough for most field environments and would definitely be a good option.

 

---

 

Be social and share this review

In the second of our series examining what makes a rugged device, well, rugged, Sharon Clancy explores IP ratings...

IP environmental ratings along with MIL standards (MIL-STD) are perhaps the most widely recognised yet also perhaps the least fully understood of the standard definitions of what makes a mobile computer or tablet rugged.

Ingress protection is an important element in fit-for-purpose and Total Cost of Ownership considerations because it underpins reliability in the field.

Over-specify and you’ll certainly get a rugged device that won’t let you down, but you’ll push up the price because the more rugged it is, the more expensive the components.

 

You’ll also add weight, so potentially making it less appealing to your field workers.

In contrast, under-specify and you’ll be plagued by in-service unreliability and higher costs - not just of repairs but also those incurred by having technicians unable to carry out critical tasks.

As with all field service buying decisions, it’s a question of ensuring the mobile devices you select for your team are fit-for-purpose: reliable, user-friendly and able to cope with the demands made of them. And when it comes to environmental protection, it’s obvious that the device used by a technician fixing office equipment is less exposed to nature than a utility engineer working outdoors for much of the day.

There’s been lots written about the risks of under-specifying mobile devices for field service, but over-specification, particularly with IP ratings, is also widespread. It adds both unnecessary cost and can have a detrimental effect on productivity – taking us full circle back to the fit-for-purpose question.

“Specmanship” has led to the over-design of many rugged mobile computers, which has quickly led to the (completely unnecessary) over budget predicament many field service organisations are struggling with. A spokesman for Xplore technologies commented:

 

“In the case of IP ratings, less can be more (peace of mind and money in your pocket) and excess protection is counter to the mission of mobile workers, as surely as too little protection will be. It’s a Goldilocks-type situation that can be resolved by having just enough.”

On the other hand, rugged device manufacturers warn against “rugged” versions of consumer smartphones and tablets – often delivered with the addition of a case rather than designing in protection from the start with components such as sealed keyboards and ports and enclosed internal components.

What the IP figures mean 

IP ratings are defined by International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standards and tell you how well devices are sealed against dirt and moisture ingress and the level of protection components have against whatever is thrown at them.

IP ratings have two numbers: the first indicates the degree of protection against dust, dirt and foreign bodies entering the device while the second is about how resistant the device is to the ingress of fluid from drops, sprays and submersion.

Ingress protection ratings can be affected by the number of ports on a device and whether they are sealed or open, by keyboard design and a number of other factors.

 

We’ve included a link to access a full IP ratings table at the bottom of the page, but for field service the numbers to look out for on a rugged mobile device are “5” and “6” for dust protection and 4,5,6, or 7 for water or fluid ingress. (In comparison, consumer devices typically have a rating of IP42 or lower.)

Both are important when assessing devices: if, like me, you’ve ever spilled tea or coffee on a computer keyboard, you’ll know that water ingress can be the kiss of death to electronic components.

Less dramatic but in the long term just as damaging are ingress of dust and dirt particles. They can cause keys to stick and generally penetrate causing damage to components.

While “6” is dust-proof, a “5” rating doesn’t mean the device will prove unreliable, just that it isn’t completely sealed against dust ingress.

It’s worth noting, too, that complete sealing against water and dust ingress may increase internal temperatures which in turn might impact on processor performance.

There are more numbers for fluid or water ingress: a “4” rating signals protection from splashes, “5” against water from a nozzle, “6” will cope with more powerful water jets or sprays, while “7” means you can submerge the device in water and it will still survive.

Again, which is best for your operations depends on the working environment - for many field-service environments, a “5” rating and even possibly a ”4 “will be perfectly adequate.

MIL-STD 810G

We’ll be taking a closer look at MIL-STDs later in this series, but we think it’s worth mentioning here that while most people associate MIL-STD 810G with drop and vibration checks, it also includes water-resistance and particle tests which tablet and notebook manufacturers also use to demonstrate the ruggedness of their products, especially in the ultra-rugged sector.

Panasonic, for example carries out water resistance tests in accordance with MIL-STD-810G, Method 506.5 Procedure I (Blowing Rain) and Procedure III (Spray). The test items are subjected to this test with the LCD open and the unit operating, but with ports closed.

 

Unlike some computer manufacturers, says Panasonic, it does not shorten the duration of liquid resistance tests. For instance, for the Blowing Rain test, Toughbook fully-rugged computers are tested for a full 30 minutes per surface with a 70 mph wind at rainfall of 5.8in per hour.

Toughbook fully-rugged computers are tested for a full 40 minutes on liquid resistance. Although different Toughbook and Toughpad models have different levels of water resistance, all can survive 6oz of water poured on a keyboard.

Panasonic’s dust resistance test uses MIL-STD-810G, Method 510.5, Procedure I (Dust) and Procedure II (Sand), at up to 140°F, using both fine-grain silica flour and abrasive sand. To pass the test, a device must continue to operate with no binding or blockage of moving parts and no malfunctioning contacts or relays.

A testing question

While IP ratings do provide a standard for comparing devices from different manufacturers, some buyer caution is advisable.

Testing costs money, so some low-cost units may “conform” to IP65, for example, but may not have “passed” the required test or even been tested at all.

It’s also sensible to check how the testing was done – in-house by the manufacturer, or by an independent lab.

Getac, for example, uses a 3rd party to test its tablets and notebooks to ensure they are done to the full requirements.

 

---

 

Want to know more? Visit http://fs-ne.ws/10hVys to see full IP table

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature

In our latest research project we’ve teamed up with rugged tablet manufacturer Xplore Technologies to find out what are the tools field service companies are investing in to ensure that they are giving their field service engineers every chance to ensure they are delivering service excellence.

In part one of this series we looked at the merging lines between rugged and consumer manufacturers and the rising trend for field service engineers to use more than one digital device when out in the field.

In part two we looked at the choices being made when selecting either rugged or consumer devices as well as the importance of Operating Systems in device selection. 

Now in this the concluding part of this series we explore the need and desire for connectivity options in the devices being allocated to field service engineers.

 

---

 

There is also an exclusive research report available for download that contains even further insight and analysis of these research findings. Download your copy of the findings here

 

---

 

Connectivity and Data Capture

A key factor in what was driving the decisions around which devices field service companies were selecting for their field engineers was the various options for both connectivity and data capture.

Perhaps it is no surprise given the growing importance of Cloud computing and the prevalence of connected devices that in terms of connectivity, the most desired technology within a device was Wi-Fi capabilities which was cited by 87% of companies as being a key technology that was ideally required in a device deemed to be suitable for field engineers.

Similarly the inclusion of 4G mobile internet was also stated as ideally needed in a field service device by over two thirds (69%) of our respondents.

Perhaps an indication of how much we have moved already to a wireless world is how these figures stack up against the desire to have a wired Ethernet connection which was cited as being ideal by just under a quarter (24%) of companies.

 

Additional evidence to support this desire to move towards wire-free technology is also indicated in the fact that Bluetooth was desired by almost three quarters (73%) of companies as well. This is significantly higher than older, wired methods of connectivity such as RS232 which just over a fifth (21%) of companies desired or even USB which just half (47%) of companies stated they felt was an ideal inclusion.

However, when we look at data input requirements it is the well established, tried and tested technologies that remained the most sought after.

The ability for a device to capture photographic or video data remains the most important means of data input for most field service companies with well over three quarters (79%) stating that they would ideally expect this in a device.

Second to video/photo capture was the inclusion of a barcode scanner, which was desired by almost two thirds (65%) of our respondents.

 

What is interesting is that amongst those companies who opted for consumer devices (which of course are unlikely to have such features embedded within them) the desire to have barcode reading capability actually increased slightly to 71% of respondents.

Again, this perhaps indicates that whilst a number of companies are lured in simply by the initial lower cost per unit of consumer devices perhaps there are wider considerations such as how fit for purpose a device is, that should be considered alongside the initial cost.

In terms of manual data input, it is interesting to note that although laptops remain the most popular device for field engineers overall, the assumption that this is based on the requirements of a physical keyboard is proven to be somewhat flawed by our findings.

Indeed, there were almost three times as many companies who stated that they felt an on-screen keyboard was desired rather than those who stated they felt a physical keyboard was ideal.

In fact over two fifths of companies (42%) backed an on-screen keyboard whilst just 15% identified physical keyboards as their preference.

 

Another indication of the changing nature of how we interact with our hardware is also highlighted that handwriting recognition software was also desired by two times as many companies (32%) than a physical keyboard.

Perhaps one of the most curious findings of the research is that yet again we see NFC/RFID overlooked by field service industries as the technology - which could have such an effective impact within a number of elements of a field service engineers workflow, from checking the service history of an asset in the field being repaired through to ensuring accurate parts inventory, was only cited by 13% as being required in an ideal field service device.

Similarly, voice recognition software, which in an industry where the ability to work hands free is a major factor, one would think would be a significant tool for data input in any given field service focused device, was also relatively shunned with just over a tenth (11%) of companies stating they saw this as being an ideal inclusion within a field service device.

The benefits of mobile computing

Finally, one area where it would seem there is certainly a growing consensus is in the way field service engineers appreciate working on a mobile device.

We asked our respondents: “Do you think your field workers have appreciated a move to using a mobile device?” And the response was overwhelmingly positive. In fact over two thirds (69%) stating their field service engineers had provided mostly positive responses and 35% going further and stating their engineers had ‘absolutely taken to going mobile’.

When we look at the reasons why we’ve seen such wide acceptance of mobile technology amongst field service engineers the single most commonly cited reason was that ‘it made their workflow easier’ which 45% of companies revealed their engineers benefited from.

 

A similar amount of companies (41%) also stated that their engineers felt that the adoption of mobile devices as part of their field service toolkit also allowed them to be more productive and to get their work done more swiftly.

So whilst their are many decisions to be made for field service companies in terms of device selection - rugged or consumer, tablet or laptop, even one or more devices, the one thing is abundantly clear for the 5% of respondents who are still using pen and paper.

A move to a digital device will inevitably be embraced by their engineers whilst delivering clear R.o.I

 

---

 

Want to know more? Download the exclusive research report for further analysis and insight from these research findings

 

---

 

Look out for the next part of this series where we look at the importance of connectivity in device selection...

 

---

 

By downloding the report you are consenting to the T&Cs listed here

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature

In our latest research project we’ve teamed up with rugged tablet manufacturer Xplore Technologies to find out what are the tools field service companies are investing in to ensure that they are giving their field service engineers every chance to ensure they are delivering service excellence.

In part one of this series we looked at the merging lines between rugged and consumer manufacturers and the rising trend for field service engineers to use more than one digital device when out in the field.

Now in this the second part of this series we look at the reasons companies select either consumer or rugged devices and the importance of Operating Systems upon device selection... 

 

---

 

There is also an exclusive research report available for download that contains even further insight and analysis of these research findings. Download your copy of the findings here

 

---

 

Consumer versus Rugged

This of course leads us on to perhaps the biggest question within the discussion around which tools are best suited for field service deployment - rugged or consumer.

In last years findings we saw that the market was largely dominated by consumer grade products with over two thirds (67%) of companies opting for consumer products over their ruggedized cousins.

Whilst this year’s survey does show a slightly greater leaning towards the rugged sector the shift is generally minimal with 59% of this years respondents still identifying that they are deploying consumer grade devices. This is in comparison to 16% who are deploying rugged devices and 20% who provide their field service engineers with a mix of both rugged and consumer devices.

So what are the drivers behind these decisions?

 

Well in terms of consumer devices being selected, the key over-riding factor as touched on a little earlier is simply the cost per unit.

In total well over two thirds (70%) of those companies who opted for consumer devices had done so because of the lower cost per unit.

The second most common reason cited was the faster potential user adoption via user familiarity, which was cited by just under a quarter (24%) of those respondents providing consumer devices.

Interestingly this figure rises to two thirds (33%) when we look at those companies that provide their field service engineers with mobile phones.

What is really interesting, however, is when we compare these findings with those who provide their engineers with rugged devices.

Essentially, we see the primary drivers for device selection completely reversed.

Whereas those that opted for consumer devices were driven primarily by the lower initial unit costs, those who opted for rugged devices were driven overwhelmingly by a need for reliability with over three quarters of companies (78%) providing rugged devices stating this was the driver behind their choice.

 

Also important to this group was the durability and longevity of the device which was identified by around a fifth of respondents (22%).

This set of results is particularly interesting when viewed in the context of the common TCO (total cost of ownership) argument put forward by rugged OEMs and their distributors.

The argument being that across the general accepted lifespan of an asset a rugged device will generally end up costing a lot less than its consumer counterpart (when factoring in breakages, downtime, lower reliability rates, etc etc).

Given the majority of companies still opt for consumer devices because the lower cost per unit there could be considerable savings made if companies began to adopt a more pragmatic and longer term approach to device selection perhaps?

This is of course great news for the rugged manufacturers but surely what makes for an even more compelling argument is the fact that of those companies that did opt for rugged, such long term cost reduction was only a side point with the benefits of reliability and durability being much more widely acknowledged as the driver for rugged adoption.

 

When we consider the mission-critical nature of field service, the need for reliability is of course likely to be anticipated.

However, given the TCO argument as well, it is perhaps surprising that in both this year’s and last year’s research, consumer products have remained so dominant.

Perhaps there is a need for further education amongst the industry on this topic?

The importance of OS

Of course one other factor that could play a part on the selection of devices is the operating system (OS) requirements of a field service management application that a company may have already in place.

Indeed: one respondent stated that his reason for selecting a consumer device was for ‘compliance with the field service management solution’.

Whilst many if not most dedicated field service management apps will be either device agnostic or available in a variety of native formats, this may not be the case if a company has developed their own system perhaps.

Certainly in the wider world of enterprise mobility, where the iPhone remains king having wrestled the crown from Research in Motion’s Blackberry some years ago, iOS is the de-facto choice for native designed apps.

However, whilst this is certainly a plausible theory the reality is that within the niche world of field service the Apple brand is far less powerful with in fact just 7% of our respondents stating their engineers use iOS.

Of course given the inclusion of laptops and tablets as key tools for field service engineers Windows operating systems fare well within our industry with 35% of companies stating this is their OS of choice, whilst Android’s dominance in the consumer markets is almost echoed amongst our respondents also with an impressive 42% of field service engineers using the Google owned OS.

But just how important is the availability of any given OS when it comes to device selection?

 

In fact, it is a fundamental part of the decision making process for almost all companies, it seems, with nearly nine out of ten (86%) of companies saying that the availability of an OS on a device is at least one consideration for them.

However, further to that, over half (52%) of field service companies in our survey group stated that it was very important and they ‘decided our choice of device based on the OS it supports.’

 

---

 

Want to know more? Download the exclusive research report for further analysis and insight from these research findings

 

---

 

Look out for the next part of this series where we look at the importance of connectivity in device selection...

 

---

 

By downloding the report you are consenting to the T&Cs listed here

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature

In our latest research project we’ve teamed up with rugged tablet manufacturer Xplore Technologies to find out what are the tools field service companies are investing in to ensure that they are giving their field service engineers every chance to ensure they are delivering service excellence...

 

---

 

There is also an exclusive research report available for download that contains even further insight and analysis of these research findings. Download your copy of the findings here

 

---

 

As technologies such as the Internet of Things, Artificial Intelligence and Augmented Reality dominate the headlines in field service it is perhaps a bit too easy to forget just how recently field service operations were being revolutionised by the emergence of mobile computing.

The improvements that come with the digitization of a field engineer’s workflow are well documented from more efficient processes, greater customer service delivery to even simple straightforward cost savings via the sheer volume of paper forms no longer being used.

Yet whilst for some companies the move to a modern mobility solution happened over a decade ago and they are now exploring their third, fourth or even fifth iteration of mobile hardware, there also still some companies that have yet to move away from pen and paper.

At the same time, the options for field service companies looking to invest in a mobile computing solution for their service engineers, whether it be for the first time or an upgrade of their existing system, are ever more complex.

For a start, the lines between rugged and consumer devices are becoming more blurred with  companies such as Samsung making a play for what is seen to be a growing and lucrative market with semi-ruggedised versions of their consumer products such as the Galaxy Tab Active.

 

At the same time rugged manufacturers have become aware for the growing desire from their client base for more consumer looking designs in the rugged space and as such products like the Motion R12 have begun to emerge which combine the sleek, cleaner lines of a consumer tablet in a rugged device that can fully withstand the rigours of the field.

However, rugged versus consumer is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the many, many factors to be considered when selecting the right device for your field service engineers.

What about form factor? Has the rugged handheld that was all prevalent not so long ago been surpassed by the smart phone?

Are tablets, which can bring the mobility of a smart phone to the table, but with greater processing power (on a par with high end laptops in some aspects) becoming the go to tools?

And of course then there are the considerations around peripherals - is a keyboard required for large amounts of manual data entry perhaps? How about vehicle docking? Or even carry straps and cases?

To find out more about the latest trends within the industry we decided to return to this topic (having explored it some 12 months previously to see what trends were emerging or evolving when it comes to the devices being selected by field service organisations for their engineers and technicians.

With additional expert input into the survey design provided by rugged specialists and partners with us on this project Xplore Technologies, the survey took in the responses of around 150 field service professionals from a wide range of industry verticals including manufacturing, telcos, engineering, HVAC, and many more.

There was also a wide representation of companies of differing sizes with some respondents having as few as 10 or less engineers in their workforce whilst many had over 800 or more engineers in their teams.

Dual digitality

One of the key findings of the 2015 study was that many companies are now providing their field service engineers with more than one digital device for use in the field.

However, when reviewing the questions from the previous study we felt that perhaps the meaning of this question could have been slightly ambiguous, so in this year’s study we wanted to refine this notion further by including the response “Multiple digital devices – e.g. smart phone and laptop etc used equally for field work simultaneously” as an option to the question “Which devices are your field engineers currently using as their primary device for field work?”

And it seems that this digital duality that we uncovered last year remains very much a key trend for field service organisations with one in five companies now providing their field service engineer with at least two devices to undertake their work in the field.

However, one of the perhaps most interesting findings of this year’s survey was the amount of companies who are providing their engineers and technicians with laptops as a primary device for work in the field.

Whilst the response group across the two surveys  was different - meaning that direct year on year analysis is always at risk of being slightly skewed - both surveys had a sizeable enough response set to provide a fairly reliable snapshot of the industry sentiment to allow for some meaningful comparison.

With this in mind it was interesting to note that amongst this year’s respondents laptops were the most prevalent of devices being given to field service engineers with a third (33%) of companies seeing them as the best device for their field service engineers compared to a fifth (20%) of companies opting for smart phones whilst 15% opted for tablets.

In comparison to last year this would indicate that despite the claims in some analysts’ quarters of tablets emerging to eventually replace the laptop, the laptop remains a regular tool amongst field service engineers.

One reason for this could be simply a cost decision as when we look deeper into the research findings we see that of those companies that provided their field service engineers with laptops the majority (61%) had opted for consumer based devices. This is compared to just 11% who were providing their engineers with rugged laptops.

Further to this within, this group almost two thirds (64%) stated they opted for consumer devices because of a cheaper cost per unit.

 

However, when we look at those respondents who indicated that they are providing their field service engineers with tablets we saw a much greater parity between those who were providing their engineers with rugged devices versus those providing consumer grade products.

In fact the split between the two was exactly even with 40% of respondents opting for rugged and 40% opting for consumer whilst 20% provided as mix of both rugged and consumer.

Indeed, when we look at the data from only those respondents who provided their field service engineers with rugged devices a completely different picture emerges entirely.

Amongst this respondent group the most common device deployed amongst field engineers was the tablet by some margin with just under half of companies (44%) selecting them as the right tool for their field engineers.

In comparison rugged laptops and rugged PDAs/Handheld computers were the next commonly used devices with a just over a fifth (22%) of companies opting to implement these devices, whilst 11% of companies provided two or more rugged devices.

What is clear from this initial view of the data is that whilst the laptop and smart phone are regularly deployed as mobile computing tools for field service engineers, amongst those companies who see the need for and benefits of ruggedised tools for their engineers it is the tablet that has become the dominant form factor.

 

---

 

Want to know more? Download the exclusive research report for further analysis and insight from these research findings

 

---

 

Look out for the next part of this series where we look at the whether consumer or rugged devices are ruling the roost plus the importance of operating systems when it comes to device selection....

 

---

By downloding the report you are consenting to the T&Cs listed here

 

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature

Getac's new-generation S400 series notebook has the footprint of a business notebook, the features of a full-rugged device and incorporates Intel's latest Skylake micro-architecture to boost performance.

Rugged computer manufacturer Getac has unveiled the first model in its next-generation S400 series semi- rugged laptop, the Getac S410. At  2.2kg and 35mm wide, it has the footprint of a business notebook but incorporates many features of a full-rugged device.

"The S410 builds on our success in the semi rugged notebook space, providing a combination of design, performance and versatility,” says Chris Bye, President of Getac in the UK.

The S410 can be specified with Intel 6th generation Core i3, i5 or i7 processors incorporating the latest Skylake U-series micro-architecture which boosts both CPU and GPU performance and reduces power consumption compared with the Broadwell series it replaces. Windows 10 operating system is standard.

The  S410 incorporates Getac’s newest proprietary composite materials to enhance ruggedness. It has a splash-proof keyboard; rugged I/O door; flexible and durable handle and rubber bumper and footpad, with ventilation provided by the footpad from the bottom of the unit. Environmental credentials include an IP51 rating for dust, MIL-STD 810G certification and the ability to cope with 3ft drops.

A 14in TFT LCD HD 1366 x 768  display is standard, with a 14in TFT LCD FHD 1920 x 1080 high resolution screen optional. Getac’s Lumibond sunlight readable technology can be specified on either screen.  Capacitive touchscreen technology means the S140 can be used in touch, gloved and pen modes even when wet.

Up to 1TB storage is available plus an optional SSD drive.

The 11.1-volt 4200 mAh battery should last a full day, but the S410 also comes with Getac's optional a hot-swappable battery feature with a light indicator to flag to users if there’s enough power left for the main battery to be switched. There's also a range of in-vehicle docking accessories.

Wireless communications include Intel’s dual band AC 8260, Bluetooth 4.2 and optional GPS,  GOBI mobile broadband and RF Triple Pass-Through.

The S410 also offers multi-factor authentication including fingerprint touch technology.

I/O options including a docking connector slot, USB 3.0 connectivity and expansion bay for, for example, PCMCIA.   In-vehicle and office docking units; a battery charger, and vehicle and AC Adapters are among the accessories available.

The S410 comes with Getac's standard three-year warranty.

 

---

 

Be social and share this news

Field Service News Editor-in-Chief Kris Oldland looks asks whether too many field service companies are taking the easier short term options that will ultimately lead to greater costs in the longer term...

 

---

 

Click here to download a digital version of Field Service News issue 11 now!

---

Is x,y or z fit for purpose? It’s a question that we should be asking ourselves on a regular basis but unfortunately human nature tends to prefer a make do and muddle through attitude rather than face the tougher option of re-evaluating our choices...

Of course this isn’t always true, if it were there would be no innovation in the world and as anyone who reads this column regularly can attest innovation is one thing that gets me excited.

And in fairness in our industry it is all around us, my only fear is that perhaps such examples of smart out of the box thinking are sometimes the exception rather than the rule.

A point in case is to be found within our latest research project where our findings point to so many companies taking the easy options when it comes to device selection for their field service engineers.

In their defence they will likely point to the fact that it was the cheaper option, but all to the often what appears to be the cheapest option up front can ultimately be a more costly choice further down the line. Indeed the Total Cost of Ownership argument that many rugged manufacturers or distributors will put forward is based around facts and figures that support this exact notion.

However, for me the issue is not thinking the choice through in terms of how these devices will genuinely fit into an engineer’s workflow. For example of the 59% of companies that opted for consumer devices to empower there engineers in the field, 71% stated that ideally the devices for field service should have barcode scanning capability.

Now whilst I know the camera on a consumer tablet or smart phone is capable of handling barcodes, but it’s a cumbersome process whereas so many industrial devices are designed to incorporate this functionality with a dedicated button to make our engineers lives easier.

 

Basically one product is fit for purpose and the other is not.

Yet the overwhelming majority of companies opt for the device that isn’t fit for purpose because of an initial lower cost per unit. It is a short-sighted approach that leads to potential efficiency improvements being missed, which in turn could see potential additional profits melt away.

OK I may be being a bit melodramatic but I’m sure you get the point.

Considering what is fit for purpose and taking the time to make considered decisions - whether it be around hardware, software or even processes is, in my humble opinion at least, the key to long term success.

In fact this issue is full of examples who questioned if what was the accepted norm was in fact actually fit for purpose or not.

Take Dr. Bart Guthrie, neurosurgeon and founder of Help Lightning to begin with. Ultimately it was his acceptance that the standard means of communicating remotely in the medical sector, i.e. the telephone, wasn’t really fit for purpose anymore that led to the creation of mobile merged reality and Help Lightning which is shaping up to be a significant game changer in both the clinical and field service sectors alike.

Then there is Kony.

A mobile app development platform who have identified the fact that the functionality of many traditional FSM solutions is constrictive and in the context of a digital mobile worlds not fit for purpose.

Or how about IFS’s Tom Bowe.

In our interview he makes a great point about beginning to define new processes today in preparation for the oncoming sea change that will be mass adoption of the Internet of Things.

Very simply Bowe argues that the SLAs currently in place and the processes to support those SLAs will soon no longer be fit for purpose as ultimately technology will make them obsolete.

It is only by challenging ourselves and our decision that we can continuously improve. And the question ‘is it fit for purpose’ is therefore a handy one to keep tucked in our head to help us achieve that.

 

---

 

Click here to download a digital version of Field Service News issue 11 now!

---

Be social and share this feature

Enabling our field engineers with the right tools for the job is critical to success for any field service organisation. To help you find the right device for your mobile workers, Field Service News is road-testing a number of the leading devices on the market. This time around we turn our attention to the XM5, a rugged handheld computer from Janam...

What the manufacturers say...  

The XM5 mobile computer redefines productivity and is built to withstand the rigours of heavy duty use in the field.

It combines the latest technological advancements in mobile devices with a sleek and rugged design to provide the power and flexibility that enterprise and government customers demand.

Equipped with 4G-ready WWAN and 802.11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi communications, the XM5 ensures mobile workers will be able to access voice and data anytime, anywhere.  Additional features include the choice between a 1D/2D imager or 1D laser scanner, as well as integrated RFID and NFC reading capabilities, front and rear facing cameras, Bluetooth and smart battery power management.

The XM5 mobile computer survives repeated 5ft drops to concrete across a wide operating temperature range, is sealed to IP65 standards and is UL-certified to provide ultimate reliability in extreme and hazardous locations.

First impressions...  

In a world where consumer smartphones and tablets are being used more and more frequently by field service companies, the form factor of a traditional handheld computer such as the Janam XM5 can’t help but look ever so slightly dated.

This is not so much a slight on the XM5 but more so on the Handheld form factor itself.  However, it’s important to remember that being industrial devices, rugged handhelds are built for functionality not fashion.  For example, whilst most smart phones offer barcode scanning ability, the functionality is cumbersome compared to a fit-for-purpose device such as the XM5.

Indeed, the XM5 itself is a sleek and lightweight example of the form factor, whilst remaining undeniably a rugged device capable of withstanding its fair share of bumps and knocks.  The XM5 comes with a rear strap that makes holding the device comfortable and it’s 3.5 inch brilliant VGA TFT display was bright and easily read in daylight.

[quote float="left”]“You get the feeling that the XM5 is all about reliability and even when first getting to grips with the device, you get a sense that this is a device that won’t let you down...”

In the hand the device feels a lot lighter than it looks and, weighing in at 305g, it is about a third heavier than a high end consumer phablet such as Samsung’s Galaxy Note 4.

 

However, thanks to the aforementioned rear strap such a difference is negligible.  The device itself has a profile on par for the form factor with its 2.5cm depth being similar to that of Zebra’s MC45 and Handheld’s Nautiz X4 but the challenge again for any handheld computer is comparison with smartphones such as the Caterpillar CAT S30 which with a depth of 1.3cm has a profile almost half that of the XM5.

The build quality on first impressions seems high and the hard rubber casing features grooves that provide a comfortable grip on the device.  Button placement is also sensible with access to the scanning function available in three separate places again conveniently placed to make the device easy to handle.  The XM5 comes in two options for the keyboard, either numerical or full Qwerty. The unit we had for review featured the Qwerty layout and, whilst by definition the keyboard is of course incredibly small and a challenge for those of us blessed with stubby fingers, again the build quality is good and the keyboard has just the right amount of responsiveness delivering a satisfying click when buttons are pressed.

Whilst it’s never going to deliver the ‘wow’ factor for an field service engineer that a consumer device or even some rugged smart phones or tablets might do, you get the feeling that the XM5 is all about reliability and even when first getting to grips with the device, you get a sense that this is a device that won’t let you down when you need it the most.

The one area where it does fall down though is the telescopic stylus that just feels that bit more fragile and flimsy compared to the XM5 itself.

Processing power

In terms of processing power, the XM5 has a 512mb RAM with a 1GB of ROM and uses an ARM Cortex-A8 1GHz processor which again puts it on a par with similar devices such as the Nautiz X4 and more powerful than Zebra’s MC45 which has just a 256mb RAM with a 600Hz processor.

Such processing power should be sufficient to run most basic field service productivity apps that handle activities such as job completion and parts and inventory management whilst some of the more vertical specific CPU intensive applications would potentially struggle.  However, in fairness, utilising such apps is not what devices such as the XM5 are designed for and in terms of its form factor it delivers as much of a punch under the bonnet as many other similar devices.

Operating system  

One of the big factors in the XM5’s favour is that it comes both in a Windows and Android flavour with both operating systems being able to run on the same hardware. In terms of Windows, the XM5 runs Microsoft Windows Embedded Handheld 6.5.  This is starting to feel a tad cumbersome and dated compared to some more of the modern handheld OS, although Windows 8.1 is seen in many quarters as a not being a viable option for Handheld devices and Windows 10 development in this market is still in its infancy.

[quote float="right”]One of the big factors in the XM5’s favour is that it comes both in a Windows and Android flavour with both operating systems being able to run on the same hardware.

Also remember Windows Embedded Handheld 6.5 as an operating system is proven and robust as well being built with enterprise security in mind. So, whilst not the slickest of interfaces, it again remains true to its cause.

 

On the Android version the device runs Jelly Bean 4.2. Again, this does feel that little bit dated compared to the more recent Android OS, with many devices (both rugged and consumer) running the latest OS of Lollipop 5.1

That said the leap from 4.2 to 5.1 in terms of user interface isn’t that dramatic and Android users should generally feel at home quite quickly. Given which given that Android is the most popular mobile operating system in the consumer market, this could potentially speed up user adoption rates.

With most field service management vendors now including apps for Android (as well as IoS) these days the Android Play Store application makes getting the right applications on a device an easy task.

The Ins & Outs

When we look at the device ports, while somewhat limited by the available space the XM5 again comes with the usual suspects in terms of I/O for a handheld computer.

With a 3.5mm headphone jack with a unique locking mechanism (which can be essential for making voice calls in an outdoor environment), a mini USB slot for syncing and charging, and user accessible microSD card slot with SD and SDHC support, the fundamental basics are all there.

The XM5 also comes with a choice of 1D/2D imager or 1D laser scanner, which are accessed by one of three buttons which should allow for the quick and efficient scanning of parts in and out of a field service engineer's van.

Connectivity:

In what is one of the key considerations for selecting a device suitable for a mobile workforce, namely delivering good connectivity options, then the XM5 certainly doesn’t let us down.

The device comes with strong mobile internet connectivity being both 3G and 4G capable as well as good Wi-Fi connections with 802.11a/b/g/n availability.

Alongside this the XM5 also comes with Bluetooth 2.1, Ublox GPS and assisted GPS and features embedded RFID and NFC - again both useful for parts monitoring within the field service space.

Security is also well covered with the XM5 meeting enterprise level EAP standards alongside WPA,WPA2 and WEP encryption.

Ruggedity:

This is where the XM5 really shines. It certainly a tough little cookie for sure.

[quote float="left”]Officially the device is protected from low pressure water jets from any direction, meaning it will survive outdoors in the rain as well as being washed down and for clean room environments it can withstand 85% concentration alcohol rub.

With an IP rating of IP65 the XM5 is deemed to be completely protected from total dust ingress making it perfect for a number of environments such as building sites, warehouses and Middle Eastern locations.

 

The IP65 rating also means it can take a decent bit of drenching. Officially the device is protected from low pressure water jets from any direction, meaning it will survive outdoors in the rain as well as being washed down and for clean room environments it can withstand 85% concentration alcohol rub.

The XM5 is also tested to survive 5ft drops onto concrete. Indeed, having put this to the test ourselves, the XM5 survived numerous drops without even picking up scratch and given the stability in hand offered by the rear strap, it would certainly survive the rigours of all but the most demanding field service environments.

Finally, with an operating temperature ranging from -20°C through to 60°C again the XM5 should be suited to almost all field service operating environments.

With this combination of ruggedised features, the XM5 sits comfortably within its sector as one of the most robust devices available.

Battery Life:

In terms of daily usage, the XM5 should be capable of lasting a full shift for most field service engineers as it ships with a 4000mAh rechargeable Li-ion battery, which the manufacturers claim will provide ‘extended battery life as a standard feature, not an optional one.’

In addition to this the XM5 boasts smart battery power management to eke out the very most from the battery.

Conclusion:

As mentioned in the introduction, in an age where smart phones have gained massive traction within certain corners of the field service industry, any handheld is going to struggle to win the hearts of field service engineers when it just comes down to sleek modern looks.

Handhelds now do just look a bit dated in general when sat directly alongside the large touchscreens of the modern smart phone.

 

However, fortunately for Janam and other handheld computer manufacturers, there is far more to selecting a device than just the ‘wow’ factor and shiny good looks.

But in fact, this is perhaps being a little unfair on the XM5 - it is a decent looking example of the form factor, with a relatively small footprint, decent sized screen and is comfortable and light in hand.

From a processing point of view, again the XM5 can sit proudly amongst its peers and whilst it will fall flat for those engineers who are dependent on CPU hungry applications, equally it should be capable of meeting the demands of most field service applications.

One thing is certain though and that is that the XM5 can certainly handle itself in the great outdoors and when we look at its impressive rugged specs, its strong array of connectivity tools and its more-than-decent battery life, then you can see that the device is going to be unlikely to fail in the field.

A few minor gripes would be the flimsy feel of the telescopic stylus which could potentially be easily lost or broken and the touch-screen wasn’t the most responsive, resulting in a few applications being opened multiple times.

Also the fact that the device can run both Android and Windows on the same hardware could be a major selling point for those companies looking to switch from one platform to the other (generally Windows to Android).

Very much a device clearly designed for industry, the XM5 lives up to the Janam claim that they make business tools not toys.

Overall the XM5 is a good, solid option for companies looking to select a handheld computer over a rugged tablet or smart phone and the ease of scanning functionality, alongside the embedded RFID and NFC, would make this a great device for any field service engineer whose role involves swapping and replacing a lot of parts.

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature