ARCHIVE FOR THE ‘rugged’ CATEGORY

In this new series we’ll be exploring mobile device specifications, helping organisations decide what’s essential for their field service operations and what’s “nice-to-have-but-not-critical”. In this first article, we ask: is rugged best?

It all starts with what’s fit-for-purpose, explains Sharon Clancy...

More people now use smartphones and tablets in their personal lives, we are used to having these powerful computing tools in our pockets, helping us to organise our lives, entertain us keep in touch with family and friends and to buy stuff.

We take for granted multi-functionality, intuitive user interfaces, simple-to-use apps and easy connectivity.

As a result, expectations of mobile devices in the workplace have gone up.

The impact of this trend – often called "consumerisation of IT” - in field service is considerable.

It has given new impetus not just to the longstanding debate about the merits of rugged devices versus consumer devices but also what type of mobile device is best suited for the task in hand: handheld computer, touchscreen phone, tablet or notebook.

 

Another affect is that field service companies deploying mobile devices want shorter times from project start-up to roll-out and a return-on-investment within months.

There’s also been a shortening in device refresh cycle times – down from a typical five years to three. No-one wants to risk being disadvantaged in operational efficiency and customer service because they still have two years to go before the planned device refresh.

As the consumer market for smartphones and tablets matures manufacturers can no longer rely on consumers frequently upgrading devices.

Consequently, consumer device manufacturers are casting their eyes at the potentially still growing and lucrative mobile enterprise and B2B sector.

Fit-for-purpose

With no shortage of devices to choose from, deciding what’s best for your service operation is no easy task.

Fit-for-purpose should be the starting point for any deployment, say the experts. What tasks will the device be used for?

Ease-of-use of can have a big effect on productivity and user-acceptance – would an integrated barcode scanner, for example, be better than a more fiddly-to-use camera?

 

Mobile devices in field service are mission-critical – they are not just “nice-to-have”, they are the lynchpin of your operations essential to the efficient running of the operation.

Once you’ve made the shift away from paper, there’s no going back – the mobile device is your service technician’s new pen and paper; it carries the job schedule, customer details and equipment data. Your customers will become used to the higher service levels.

So, above all, the device needs to be reliable. Can it survive the technician dropping it? Are the processor and memory up to running several apps at once if that’s required? Is the screen readable in strong light? Will the touchscreen work if it gets wet? Can it last a whole shift without recharging the battery?

Make sure you can monitor devices and users once they have been deployed.

If you don’t know what is causing unreliability, you can end up in a cycle of blame between hardware and software suppliers and mobile network providers.

In mission critical operations, how will you manage repairs, replacements and connectivity issues?

Rugged devices usually come with pre-installed device management firmware for monitoring battery status, usage, scans per hour, docking and other activities. Battery-health monitoring, for example, can prevent mid-shift failures, but also the too early replacement of batteries.

Size matters

With smartphone screens getting larger and tablets now available with 5in and 6in screens, form factor is another business-case/fit-for-purpose decision service companies will need to make.

What practical benefit would tablets bring compared to a rugged handheld device or rugged smartphone?

 

Would it make the job any easier? A device that fits into a pocket and combines voice and data can be a productivity booster.

If field service operations are largely outdoors, for example, rugged tablets and notebooks have superior screen specs.

If a service operation is task-based in a simple check in an indoor environment, a rugged smartphone might fit the bill.

Fit-for-purpose also means recognising that the service organisation will have to manage different devices.

The proliferation of mixed estates will increase the need for managed services and mobile device management tools – not necessarily available with consumer devices.

Mobile Device Management (MDM) can capture a lot of granular data automatically from devices, which in turn can be used to improve productivity, address user issues and deliver predictive analytics about imminent battery failures.

Total cost of ownership

Companies who have already deployed rugged devices understand total-cost-of-ownership so are not being tempted by consumer devices.

However, the low initial cost of consumer smartphones and tablets can be attractive to field service companies on a tight budget – after all, you can buy at least two consumer devices for the price of one rugged and they have user-appeal shine, with touch screens and intuitive apps.

 

While this can help get a green light a shift from paper to electronic capture and deliver some productivity benefits, there are some risks to this approach – not least in-service reliability.

The less robust components are not designed to last the rough-and-tumble of intensive, eight hour, daily use.

Crucially there is a proven risk of higher breakdowns and failures with consumer devices – they are simply just not designed for the day-in, day-out intensive use they get when used in the field by engineers and technicians.

The appeal of rugged

Rugged tablets and notebooks have given excellent service in sectors such as utilities and emergency services, where processing power, outdoor screen visibility and high levels of reliability are required.

Rugged handheld computers, with small 3.5in screen and mini-keyboards, were at the forefront of capturing mobile data in the field: reliable, versatile and easily configurable and well-suited to simple data capture tasks – a barcode scanner or a sign on screen delivery confirmation, for example.

However, in response to the challenge of consumer devices, rugged computer manufacturers have developed hybrid tablets and touchscreen devices that bridge the gap between consumer and fully-rugged – and are also cheaper.

 

Hybrids have various names but what they have in common is consumer-style skins and touch screens necessary for user appeal, underpinned with rugged features to enhance in-service reliability.

Small 5in, 6in and 7in rugged tablets are now widely available.

There may have been compromises on ruggedness, but only for those operations where this would not compromise reliability. The manufacturers point out that they understand the need for in-service reliability and device management.

How to decide

The choice of devices for your field service operations has never been wider. But comparing specs and ensuring your devices are fit-for-purpose has never been harder.

Our Rugged Decoded series will help you do that. We’ll be unpicking the mysteries of IP ratings and drop specs, capacitive or resistive screens, and what it takes to make a device suitable for specific sectors such as ATEX and clean room environments...

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature

Our  new Hands On  regular feature focuses on the hardware choices available for field service organisations, from smartphones to tablets.  To set the scene, Sharon Clancy runs through some of the key specification points to consider.

As more field service companies automate their business processes, so is the market for the devices required to capture all that useful data. Consumer devices are proliferating thanks to their low initial cost and this has given new impetus to the rugged v. consumer device discussion but has also raised questions about what type of mobile device best suits the task in hand.

Rugged tablets, for example, have given excellent service in sectors such as utilities and emergency services, where processing power, outdoor screen visibility and high levels of reliability are required. Rugged handheld computers might lack user-appeal but they are reliable, versatile and easily configurable. Their relatively small 3.5in screens are not seen as a particular deterrent because the data capture tasks they are used for are simple.

At the other end of the spectrum are consumer devices - cheaper, with user-appeal shine and intuitive apps, but also with components not designed to last the rough-and-tumble of an intensive eight-hour daily use. In the middle are a new breed of hybrid devices with shiny smartphone-style skins underpinned with rugged features to enhance reliability.

Price pressures are certainly driving some of this innovation with consumer and lower-cost devices being deployed in operations where traditionally only rugged devices would be considered. Buyers might agree that the up-front cost of a device is just a fraction of its total life costs but a low initial device cost can get a project green-lighted - important for field service managers keen to gain the operational and cost efficiencies mobile devices deliver.

 

Device names can be confusing - one manufacturer's rugged smartphone is another's Personal or Enterprise Digital Assistant (PDA and EDA). The straightforward approach is to focus on what functionality you need the device to have and also on dimensions and weight. For example, does it need to fit in a pocket; does the data task require a keyboard; a scan engine;  or a camera. What connectivity does your operation need?

We've put together this short guide for buyers to guide to help ensure the devices you choose are fit-for-purpose.

FSN Buyer's checklist

1. Ruggedness
   The rugged specification of a device is more critical for some field service operations than others. Compromises on IP (ingress protection against dust and water) and drop-spec ratings are possible in some environments, but push that too far and the result will be more downtime and repair costs.A typical rugged spec for devices used mainly indoors, for example, might be IP54 for dust and water ingress and a 1.2 metre or 1.5 metre drop rating. some models are rated as high as IP67 and some survive 1.8 metre drops. Check if the drop test is to a soft surface or to concrete (which mimics a fall on to a car park floor).
2. Functionality
   This is a key differentiator when choosing between consumer devices and rugged ones. Rugged devices tend to be built on a modular platform that allows varying degrees of customisation: you get a device precisely tailored to your data capture needs. Specifications for consumer devices are less, if at all, configurable. One area where this manifests itself is in whether the device has a dedicated scan engine for barcode scanning or relies on device camera with a scanning app. A camera might be fine for occasional scanning, but if your service worker has to scan frequently, using a camera is a much slower and fiddly process, affecting productivity and, possibly, data accuracy.
3. Form factor
   With form factors ranging from 2.8in screens on smartphones to 10in or more on tablets, service organisations are spoilt for choice. Small devices are portable, but the small screen may hamper productivity; tablets allow more information to be displayed and usually have more configurability, making it easier to get the exact fit for your processes.Some rugged devices incorporate a hard keyboard matched to a small screen, but user experience with consumer smartphones is helping to create demand for similar larger screens in the business world.
   [quote float="right"]There is intense competition in the 5in and 7in tablet sector

    

   - an area also populated by rugged smartphones. (The main difference is that while smartphones automatically include voice functionality, tablets may not.) Some fully-rugged tablets incorporate a mini-hard-key navigation keyboard to one side, whereas smaller tablets and smartphones rely on touch screens.The use of larger tablets for enterprise is a fast-expanding sector. Rugged tablets may not be as slim as Apple’s iPad, but they are still ultra-portable, with some incorporating a carry handle.
4. Screens
   Screens can be glass or polycarbonate: glass is more fragile and scratch resistant, while polycarbonate is flexible so less likely to crack, but over time can dull with scratches. Toughened glass such as Corning's Gorilla glass is popular in tablets and in some of the rugged smartphones now appearing on the market, while other manufacturers are using bonded screens that are as scratch-resistant as glass but more flexible.Not all mobile devices have the capacitive touch screen technology found on smartphones and tablets for touch data entry and screen. Some rugged devices have resistive screens which are said to be more responsive to touch when the user's finger is wet or gloved, but less responsive than capacitive to bare fingers. However, the latest generation of resistive screens can handle finger-touch input as well as stylus input. Everyone's had the experience of a slow-responding touch screen when navigating: one technical factor can be the number of wires incorporated in the screen, so do ask.

   For field service, there are two other important factors to take into account when it comes to screen specifications: how easy are they to read in bright sunlight and how wide is the viewing angles. NITS is the measure by which visibility in strong sunlight is described and there are various technologies that improve visibility in strong light, usually involving a combination of reducing loss through reflection off the screen and colour management.

5. Operating systems
   When selecting devices, it's important to think about the Operating System as it could impact on whether or how your apps run on it. For Apple fans, iOS is standard; for other devices there is a choice of various Android OS or Microsoft Windows OS in their various guises.[quote float="left"]Device OS is particularly important when you have legacy applications

    

   OS is particularly important when you have legacy applications: they may have been developed with earlier software development tools that are incompatible when it comes to upgrades. Bearing in mind, for example, that Apple iOS is incompatible with a lot of enterprise legacy software systems unless deployed with some sort of mobility management system, for example.Device manufacturers can also tweak the OS, so the more frequently a device is refreshed, the higher the risk that an app which ran happily on an older model won’t on the new one. This is more of a concern with consumer devices which have more frequent model updates than rugged devices.Android is popular with software developers who like the open-nature of Android. Android was once labelled as not-fit-for-enterprise: earlier versions (2.0 or Gingerbread) are more vulnerable from security-wise and may lack enterprise-friendly features such as mobile device management functionality - they can still be found on some older rugged models. Expert advice is to opt for Android 4.0 or later.Tablet manufacturers and their enterprise customers have remained loyal to Microsoft Windows, partly because of its easy integration with desktop software. Some tablet makers now offering licence-free Android as an alternative OS, especially on small form-factor devices where cost is a factor.

   Microsoft's tardiness in releasing a roadmap for 6.5 embedded (popular with rugged device manufacturers) and less-than-stunning Windows 8 has seen customers desert it for Android. However, the newly launched Windows 10 may help it regain some of that lost traction in enterprise.

6. Processing power
   Having sufficient processing power is key if you intend to run multiple applications on any device. Many, but not all, devices now incorporate dual or quad processors with advanced power management that help preserve battery power when running multi-applications.  Some low-cost devices may have older generation, slower, processors. Tablets, especially those 10in and above have impressive RAM and storage facilities, with solid-state memory now widely available. Intel’s Atom or i-series processors and Texas Instruments’ OMAP family are the most widely used.
7. Connectivity
   While smartphones tend to come as standard with all the connectivity you could wish for, on rugged devices, there's greater variation in what is standard and optional. GPS or A-GPS is usually standard on devices aimed at field operations, as are network radios from 3.5G upwards. WiFi and Bluetooth may be operational rather than standard.
8. Batteries
   Some features considered essential for field service management (GPS location fixes and 3G or 4G communication, for example) are notoriously power-hungry, so do compare battery life claims. Smart battery management is now a feature on many devices. Some of the latest generation of rugged devices claim impressive battery life of up to 20 hours, thanks to a new generation of higher-capacity batteries coombined with smart battery-life management and power-saving multi-processor architecture. Light and proximity sensors, for example, power the device or applications on-and-off and battery-condition monitoring and reporting are often included.If the app or operation will be particularly demanding of battery life, it's worth checking how the claimed life was calculated: some manufacturers now quote different hours between recharges for different types of use.It's easy to forget that battery replacement needs factoring into total-cost-of-ownership calculations: the more discharges, the shorter the battery life and the sooner they will need replacing. Don't forget either, think about how devices will be recharged and check the comparative costs of types of in-vehicle chargers.Rugged tablets designed for field service often have hot-swappable batteries which allows users to change batteries without losing data.[/ordered_list]

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature

In the first part of this exclusive research project run in partnership with Advanced Field Service, we looked at the types of mobile devices being used in the field and why it seems that the days of pen and paper are becoming increasingly numbered. Now in the second of this four part series we look at whether there is a future for wearables in field service, are devices being used rugged or consumer and has BYOD worked?

There is also a white paper accompanying this series, with even further insights, which you can download here

The next wave of technology –wearables

Of course whilst one end of the spectrum is the laggards still using paper based systems at the other end we have the bleeding edge early adopters. With 2014 being predicted to be the year of the wearables have these very personal computers started to become part of the fabric of the field engineers tool-kit? Or have wearables faltered in industry much as they have done in the consumer world?

Our research would seem to indicate that the latter is true with two thirds of our respondents stating that they didn’t think Wearables would be a device they would be implementing within the next 12 months. Many of the arguments against such devices becoming part of the field engineers tool-kit were focussed around there simply not being a need for them in the eyes of many.

Comments from those who didn’t see Wearables coming to the fore anytime soon included there being “no obvious benefit of wearable technology”,“Too small, not enough visible info, techs have enough gadgets they need tools that work efficiently – not toys to keep up with technology” and the rather damning “They are a gimmick. No-one takes them seriously”

However, even within this group there were those that felt that Wearables would eventually come good with one respondent stating “It will happen, but it will take longer than 12 months.There will be some customer resistance to overcome”.

 

As for those who did see the march of the Wearable happening within the next 12 months almost three quarters (71%) felt this was because Wearables could help “improve the engineers work-flow” over half (56%) saw the advantage of “hands free working” as key to the potential of the devices while just under a third (32%) identified “health and safety” as a reason why Wearables could be important. 

Rugged vs. Consumer

Having established the form factors that were prominent in the industry, the next focus of our research moved on to another ongoing debate in field service – is the higher cost of rugged devices worth it in the long term?

Or are consumer grade devices fit for the task?

Our research highlighted that amongst our sample group of field service companies at least, the vast majority of almost three quarters of companies (74%) were using consumer grade devices compared to the 21% of companies using more rugged devices.

 

Often one of the most frequent arguments put forward by rugged device manufacturers is the Total-Cost-of-Ownership – i.e. that whilst a consumer grade device may be available at a lower cost, across the space of the devices lifetime the more expensive rugged device will prove to be a better investment as repairs and replacements for the consumer grade device mount up.

It would appear however, that either the numbers don’t stack up or that the argument is falling on deaf ears as almost half (48%) of those companies that selected a consumer device based their decision around cost, while 44% cited the fact that they felt the “improved speed of user adoption” was what drew them to a consumer device.

BYOD

The other reason cited for the preference of consumer devices was BYOD. However, despite a large amount of hyperbole surrounding the movement towards implementing a Bring Your Own Device policy this remains a largely unpopular option, with less than a tenth (8%) of those companies opting for consumer devices citing BYOD as the reason for doing so.

Amongst this small group the leading reasons for taking this approach were “quicker user adoption” and “employee satisfaction” which were both identified by over half of the respondents. Meanwhile the lower costs associated with the BYOD was acknowledged as a driving factor by a 29% of respondents in this section.

However, whilst a small group, those who had implemented a BYOD policy had universally found it to be a successful approach with 86% reporting that it had been a successful strategy and 14% stating it was highly successful.

 

The reasons for the success of BYOD were stated as “increased productivity” (44%), “engineer satisfaction” (43%) and again interestingly the cost factor scored lowest with just 14% stating that the “reduced cost of mobilising their workforce” was a significant factor in why they perceived their adoption of a BYOD policy as a success.

From the engineer’s point of view the adoption of a BYOD policy was also mainly positive with 86% of respondents stating their engineers were “generally supportive of the policy”. However, such a policy was not universally accepted by engineers with 14% of respondents admitting they had faced “strong resistance to  BYOD” from their engineers.

 

---

 

Want to know more? Download the exclusive research report now!

---

Find out more about Advanced Field Service in the Field Service News Directory

 

---

 

Please note that by downloading the above research report you agree to these fascinating terms and conditions

Motion Computing's Ian Davies asks whether we can get too obsessed with specs when it comes to selecting a rugged device and why it's important to get the balance right...

When investing in a rugged tablet platform, a business must be confident that the assets can withstand varying weather conditions, wear-and-tear and even unexpected accidents. In particular, field service applications in more demanding environments need assurances that tablet PCs – which are often the one and only work computer for field service personnel – will still continue to function even if dropped from waist-high, left out in a rain shower or given a light dusting.

The IEC standardized markings for Ingress Protection (IP) clearly classify and rate the degree of defences that mechanical casings and electrical enclosures provide against dust and water.  “IPxy” is the default system for showing which mobile tablet is built tough enough for the job at hand. The two numbers that follow “IP” to rate the level of protection guaranteed with each tablet PC, refer to the protection against solid particle and liquid ingress.  The IP ratings seen most often in today’s top performing rugged tablets are IP54 and IP65.

Typically this is best understood when evaluating why a consumer grade unit may not be suitable for life in the field or on the factory floor.  Many businesses are already realising that consumer units simply cannot take the knocks of business use, even when they are placed in cases or shells.

 

Some consumer unit manufacturers have begun to use IP ratings as part of marketing material and this has further increased awareness of the issue of ruggedisation.  As these consumer units have become more rugged, they have put pressure on “dedicated” rugged manufacturers to increase the gap between enterprise and consumer units.

But having too much of something can be just as expensive as not having enough.  In the case of IP ratings, less can be more (in terms of both peace of mind and money) because excess protection can be very counterproductive for mobile workers.

This is far from a statement of the obvious.  “Specmanship” throughout the procurement cycle in many enterprise mobility projects has led to the over-design of many rugged mobile computers, which has quickly led to the completely unnecessary predicament many field service organisations now face: too much or too little protection for the job at hand.

The push for ever more rugged extremes and the impact of BYOD has led to a swathe of examples at either end of the ruggedisation spectrum.  Some projects have ended up with an expensive, heavy mobile tank of a tablet PC that is difficult to incorporate into workflows. Elsewhere, an army of consumer grade devices, such as an iPad, barely survive one month in the field.

 

This extremism is not just an operational concern.  It has substantial impact on warranty discussions and as such affects procurement and finance.

There is however, a third way - a Goldilocks zone situation that can resolve the issues by having “just enough” ruggedisation without drowning in unnecessary specification and cost.

Getting this balance of ruggedisation, cost and productivity right is based in an honest assessment of “Which IP rating is right for this workflow?” This means an accurate consideration of two main factors:

1. How business critical is the process that is enabled by the tablet PC? (The more critical the process, the greater the argument for ruggedisation that will protect the continuity)
2. The actual environment(s) that the tablet will be deployed in (and how the use of the tablet PC may change in those environments)

Many applications substantially over-estimate the amount of ruggedisation needed.   The vast majority of mobile work flows do not require a dust proof device as dust tight will suffice and offers several advantages over dust proof, including reduced thermals (which allows for higher tablet performance).

And when it comes to liquid, how much water is the tablet PC going to be exposed to?   IPX4 exceeds even the heaviest of downpours. Think “buckets of water” equivalent to approximately 10 litres per minute, or a litre every 6 seconds.  The chances are this will cover off 99% of all applications in an environment exposed to water.

Liquid ingress is also a key issue for many markets that need to clean the tablet PC, such as healthcare.  However again, IP54 is more than sufficient for the actual workflows in place.

 

Why does this matter?  Firstly because “excess IP” is expensive.  It not only adds to the upfront cost of the units but also means the device is heavy and bigger, meaning more accessories are needed throughout the workflow. In some cases this will then compromise the mobility offered by the unit and that threatens the entire mobility project being undertaken.  This typically happens when concerns over the environment of the deployment overtake considerations of the process that the mobile technology enables.

But perhaps the biggest threat is that choosing a rugged tablet on its IP rating causes - in any business - a series of compromises elsewhere.

 

This may then lead to the sacrifice of features such as input devices that a mobile team simply cannot afford to miss.  Bulky, heavy units are not welcomed by teams in the field and even more so when those units cannot do the job demanded of them; not because the unit is not tough enough, but simply is not equipped with the right kit because of the weight and IP rating of the tablet itself.

Many procurement managers, IT teams and even manufacturers have made a fetish of the IP rating and the subsequent perceived “ruggedness” of a given design for different reasons.  It is now time to correct this early error and realise that not every application demands the toughest possible tablet.

Whilst it is clear that consumer units will not meet the needs of business users out in the field, there is now a clear case to evaluate the specific workflow and environment for a deployment and select a tablet accordingly.  Just as a business would not equip its field service teams with armoured vans but finds the right vehicle; so it should issue tablets fit for purpose rather than excessively laden with unnecessary specifications.

 

---

 

be social and share this feature

Xplore Technologies’ Sandy McCaskie asks whether the rising “consumer made rugged” approach can work for field service companies?

In an industry so exposed to mobile technology it was inevitable that consumerisation would have a huge impact on field service. Mobile phones, tablet PCs and intuitive, point solution apps have all been part of the FSM landscape for years.

And it is now clear that the consumer manufacturers have their sights set on the industry.

It is easy to understand why there has been such profound interest in this market. Gartner research puts the revenue for packaged field service dispatch and workforce management software applications, not including service revenue, at approximately $1.2 billion in 2012, with a compound annual growth rate of 12.7%.

Other analysts forecast the Global Field Service Management market to grow at a CAGR of 4 percent over the period 2012-2016.

 

Much of this growth has been driven and will continue to come from small and medium-sized enterprises and though high implementation costs could pose a challenge to the growth of this market, the clear commercial drivers are presently winning.

Top of this list of drivers is that an ever-more competitive landscape means service businesses are struggling to differentiate themselves to a customer base with expectations at an all-time high.

As the number of customer touch-points increases for every brand, services in the field are rapidly becoming the new frontline in the battle for competitive market share, playing a major role in customer satisfaction, brand reputation and customer retention and profitability.

Adding to this, logistical challenges, unpredictable fuel prices, incoming legislative requirements and environmental concerns make today a challenging time to run a service operation.

 

These service organisations will need to invest in a number of initiatives to tackle these elements. At the risk of sounding predictable, it is the technology at the heart of those customer interactions in the field that will be vital and needs most intense scrutiny.

In recent research, 88% of field service directors say say that increasing workforce productivity and utilisation is an important strategic objective but less than 20% had implemented fully automated scheduling, dispatch and mobility systems to deliver real-time visibility and control of field service

The research suggests that the need to integrate a diverse mix of often incompatible legacy systems is preventing many organisations from realising the full potential of technology to increase workforce efficiency, a crucial factor in achieving service excellence.

 

This is one half of the story - the other comes from the development of the rugged tablet market.

The rugged tablet market, has shown consistent quarterly growth upwards of 20% for the past two years, is showing signs of slowing. VDC anticipates that the rugged tablet market will top $500 million in 2014 and that the increased adoption of Android will present a growing opportunity as more enterprises move to adopt the OS for line-ofbusiness applications.

This is in comparison to the rugged handheld market, which represents the single-largest mobile computing category at nearly $600 million.

This battle between form factor is keenly fought in field service: recent VDC research showed that 89% of “field mobility” businesses deploy smartphones, 67% deploy tablets, 24% use a rugged handheld and 28% use a rugged tablet.

This dominance of consumer tablets over rugged tablets pervades all vertical markets, but so does the closeness of the figures of those deploying rugged handheld and tablets.

 

At the present time, in many cases the decision to deploy a rugged tablet is at the immediate expense of rugged handhelds, rather than a consumer tablet.

This can be best understood because rugged tablets offer a better “point of convergence” for all of the demands on the technology in the field, especially when compared to handhelds or even ruggedised smartphones.

However, there are some strong conflicting factors at play for the rugged tablet market at the present time - top of which is the need to develop more consumer-inspired designs versus maintaining legacy capabilities when dealing with verticals that are typically averse to change.

And of course, one of the problems with making a tablet that is built to last, is that refresh cycles are going to be further apart.

However, the fact remains that the enterprise tablet market, especially a rugged market that comes with added incentives of billable service, peripherals for workflow and strong customer loyalty is going to spark the interest of the major manufacturers.

Samsung has recently made strong attempts to secure rugged business.

Field service, alongside construction, is going to be a great proving ground to see if this “consumer made rugged” approach can work.

This is not just a simple case of ruggedised casing on existing consumer models.

Peripherals, be they data collection units, docks, carry bags etc are important considerations.

Small design nuances like a handle, stylus input and screen viewability will cause a lot of early changes for these consumer-based units. But much will come from the simple question of if these consumer-focused manufacturers understand the vertical markets in which they will operate.

Consumer taste changes fast. IT investment cycles do not. There is a reason for imposing standards such as software security or methods of data collection. The worry is that using consumer based units is – frankly - begging to have holes ripped into the fragile fabric of mobile data security.

 

A lot of the expertise (and therefore control) is in the hands of the channel and some manufacturers may not like that. And let us not forget that the rugged market is already dominated by a consumer name.

For those of us already engaged in developing ruggedised tablets for professional markets such as field service, we must view the the entrance of the large consumer manufacturers as a call to arms.

The response will be one of innovation, keen alignment to the demands of the industry, And perhaps one or two moments of disruption too.

 

---

 

be social and share this feature

Xplore Technologies a manufacturer of powerful, longest-lasting, ultra and fully-rugged tablets, recently announced it has secured a $2 million (US) order for its XC6 DMSR ultra-rugged Windows tablets from a company providing infrastructure services to utility and telecommunication companies. This newest order expands on a relationship with the company that began in 2008, when Xplore technology was initially deployed.

“Our customer has a mobile workforce of more than 1,300 employees and having a ruggedized tablet solution to meet their needs in rugged field conditions is critical to their responsiveness and productivity,” said Philip S. Sassower, chairman and CEO of Xplore.

“Their team has been using Xplore tablets for many years and upgrading their mobile initiatives with the latest Xplore model, the XC6 DMSR ultra-rugged tablet, was based on the decision to continue to outfit their field technicians with cost-effective sunlight readable and weatherproof technology.”

 

The XC6 DMSR is the most rugged Windows® tablet on the market and is ideal for industrial and outdoor environments.

Powered by a 4th generation Intel® Core™ i5 processor, the high-performance rugged tablet features a direct sunlight readable display, as well as an innovative resistive, multi-touch interface to make running your toughest applications easier than ever--no matter how extreme the environment.

“We have a very positive and long standing relationship with this customer, and we are very excited they have decided to expand and upgrade their mobile technology infrastructure utilizing Xplore rugged tablets,” said Mark Holleran, president and COO.

“We are confident our XC6 DMSR will meet all their mobility needs with the industry’s leading processing power, ruggedization and security features they require for their expanding field workforce.”

Be social and share this news

Samsung Electronics UK announced late last month that the Galaxy Tab Active is now available in the UK through IT distributor Exertis.  Samsung’s first tablet designed specifically for the B2B market will be available exclusively for six months with Exertis, in both the 4G and Wi-Fi versions.

Samsung has chosen to partner exclusively with Exertis due to the strength of offering in terms of sector alignment. Exertis will offer the Galaxy Tab Active with specific sector proposals to enhance the end user experience, across lone workers, field-based operators, the health sector and the education arena.

Graham Long, Vice President of Enterprise Business at Samsung, commented:

[quote float="left"]The enterprise technology landscape has shifted dramatically, driven by the demand for devices that appeal to consumers while being able to cope with the challenging requirements of professional use

“Samsung’s Galaxy Tab Active device has been designed to address the requirements and challenges faced by business users. The enterprise technology landscape has shifted dramatically, driven by the demand for devices that appeal to consumers while being able to cope with the challenging requirements of professional use. We’re excited to announce that the Samsung Galaxy Tab Active is now available from our distribution partners Exertis, whose sector-specific proposition reflects our view that a tailored approach is key to differentiating within a crowded marketplace.”

 

Ewan Davies, Exertis’ head of devices, commented:

“I am delighted to partner with Samsung on what is their strongest B2B tablet opportunity to date. Samsung’s choice of Exertis as its exclusive partner reinforces the value that Samsung sees in us as a distributor. This allows Exertis to develop a unique proposition for all sectors, particularly in education and health. As an exclusive product for Exertis, this really enables us to be creative in terms of value and service and we are already seeing volume deals across multiple sectors.”

Features of the Galaxy Tab Active deliver complete business functionality based on performance, durability and protection, allowing professionals to work without limitations in and out of the office.

The Galaxy Tab Active delivers the full connectivity and meets the “always on” needs of today’s mobile business environment. It is ready to take on the harshest of work settings, and its slim, light, premium, robust design coupled with replaceable battery allows users to work efficiently wherever and whenever needed and it could be a significant launch within the field service sector for Korean technology giant...

 Be social and share this news!

If we are to select the right mobile device we must look at both the environment and the application to make the intelligent decision argues Xplore Technologies Sandy McCaskie

All too often the deployment of rugged technology is borne of a quick analysis of the environment where the work will be carried out.  Working in a safe, plush office full of suits?  Use a consumer device.  Out in the field recovering a breakdown or on the tarmac at the airport?  Grab a rugged tablet such as Xplore Technology’s Bobcat.  But this thinking is dangerously flawed – a throwback to the mindset that technology exists separately from the business it serves.

The deployment of rugged technology such as tablet PCs is – if done correctly – almost regardless of the environment.  Instead, such a deployment should be based upon the level of the “business-critical” nature of the process performed and how vital the technology is to the completion of that process.

If you can honestly get by without a tablet or PC in a given process, a consumer unit is ideal, subject to issues such as the compatibility of the operating system.  When the unit breaks, the process simply slows down, but still carries on whilst a replacement is found. The relatively low cost of a single consumer unit, ubiquitous Wi-Fi and easily downloaded apps make this an attractive short-term option, though for the recovery market, the likelihood of damage means that these replacements will soon start to add a substantial cost.

 

Studies show that a consumer tablet used in the field is four times a likely to break as a rugged unit and the resulting loss of productivity can be hours.[/quote] At any sort of scale, or if the process is dependent on the technology but there are alternatives available, the semi-rugged or “robust” category may be a more cost-effective option. This is often the case in controlled environments outside of an office - home visits in the field would be a great example.  Why go to this extra expense?  Because studies show that a consumer tablet used in the field is four times a likely to break as a rugged unit and the resulting loss of productivity can be hours.

 

This consideration of “task first, location second” progresses through the levels of ruggedness based on if a given job/process can be completed without the tablet.  As an example, a recovery engineer in the field cannot complete a job without access to technical data, compliance forms or a proprietary workflow application – all of which require processing power of a PC.   This necessitates a tablet that works every time in any environment - hence a level of full ruggedisation.

However this approach can exist independently of the environment that demands a comprehensive set of IP, drop test and MIL ratings.  Yes, hardware must perform in the right environment but ruggedisation is simply a way to enable reliability and that concern of reliability is not the exclusive province of rugged environments.

A manager based in an office but with processes that are critical to the ongoing operation of the business, for example, communicating and sharing data with a small team of field engineers that are the only contact directly with customers, still needs to assess ruggedised options in order to guarantee that workflow.

Of course, usability beats reliability when it comes to technology.  Hence design that accounts for IP ratings and MIL testing must still also cover basic points such as weight, ease of input and the versatility that comes from connectivity options.

In many applications of real world tablet deployments, the challenges of some environments are enough to drive the desired technology toward a ruggedised tablet that can withstand far more than the person using it.

But an intelligent approach to ruggedisation must be grounded in the task at hand, in addition to the place it has to take place, even when that place could be anywhere.

 

Motion Computing's Ian Davies looks at the true value of rugged computing and why going for the cheaper option is a false economy...

Every IT director and line of business manager looking at a tablet PC deployment will, at some point face the question “why invest in a ruggedised solution when we can get two or three consumer units for the price of one ruggedised tablet and just swap them out if they go down?”  Even allowing for the restrictions of consumer devices in terms of software, operating systems and processing power, the initial numbers can - at first - be attractive.

But, speak to any manager or director who has then faced the issues of deploying and managing non ruggedised hardware and those numbers soon evaporate.  In fact, research shows that the total cost of ownership for non-ruggedised tablets is three times greater than ruggedised alternatives over a three year period.

A recent survey from VDC highlights the causes of this expense in using consumer grade units.  As part of a research project among IT decision makers at 215 companies managing a mobile device deployment, VDC discovered that the leading cause of device failure was that the tablet had been dropped.  The second cause was software issues but this was only marginally ahead of exposure to water and liquid (and just over 1 in 4 tablet PCs will face such exposure). Other leading causes of failure include excessive heat / cold, dust exposure and vibration.

Summarising these factors, when respondents were asked to rank their satisfaction with various tablet features, the level of hardware ruggedisation around dust and water was ranked lowest.  By comparison, satisfaction around issues such as operating system was far greater.  Simply put, we now have the level of tablet deployment that means customers are facing the issues of fragile, non-ruggedised tablets as they fail in the field and that those issues have become the dominant concern, especially for those applications involving wet environments.

  do such factors around device failure matter?  Because each device failure can cost an organisation upwards of 200 minutes in lost labour - a little under three and half hours.  This can be seen in a loss of productivity, the time spent to redeploy a new unit and the time spent in between with diagnosis and any necessary repair. And it is worth noting that these costs are per device failure - in a fleet of hundreds of units, this can soon amount to weeks of downtime.

 

Even without incidences of failure, it is worth noting that these softer costs make up a substantial amount of the TCO of a unit.  Initial and ongoing user training, system maintenance, technical support, upgrades and application management all contribute to TCO and for a consumer unit, these can be substantially more than a dedicated enterprise tablet.

However, factoring in the incidences of failure, the research found that IT costs and loss of productivity accounts for 89% of the TCO of consumer grade tablet PCs. To put that into hard figures, on an annual basis, a ruggedised tablet will have a TCO of around €2000.  By comparison a non-ruggedised tablet costs in excess of €4000.  That is despite the fact that the initial hardware cost of a ruggedised tablet will likely be double that of a consumer unit.

Figures such as these show the increasing importance for strong metrics such as ROI and TCO to not only validate investments but to track and measure use of mobile solutions within the enterprise throughout deployment. Furthermore it is clear that, because line of business mobile solutions are often mission critical, organisations need robust and reliable solutions to support them.

It is critical to align the right mobile solution with the users and application environment. But amidst the flood of consumer technologies in the enterprise that has driven a spike in failure rates, it is important to remember that consumerisation of IT all about introducing consumer experiences – NOT technology – into the enterprise.

Recognising this, many businesses now see that the cost of supporting and managing a device post deployment is just as - if not more - important that the upfront device investment.   There is much more to consider than the initial set up costs of the mobile solution. Organisations demand that IT investments deliver tangible benefits and incur predictable costs.  From platform consistency and sustainability, to the impact of device failure in various use scenarios – it is critical to understand the actual cost and impact of your mobile device deployment against the choices available and the increased interest in low cost consumer grade tablets.

 

Want to know more? Ian will be discussing this topic in further depth at this year's Service Management Expo on June 17th - 19th in London's ExCel. To get your complimentary pass click this link

 

 

 

Find out more about Motion Computing in the Field Service News Directory. Click here to visit their page