POINT-TO-POINT vs. MEAP THE RIGHT APPROACH FOR AN INTEGRATED MOBILITY SOLUTION

POINT-TO-POINT vs. MEAP

THE RIGHT APPROACH FOR AN INTEGRATED

MOBILITY SOLUTION

A RapidValue Solutions Whitepaper Feb - 2013

Executive Summary

There are two commonly used approaches for building

integrated mobility solutions: Point-to-point integration

and Mobile Enterprise Application Platform (MEAP).

This paper explains why an enterprise mobility

integration solution is needed, describes and compares

the two approaches, and provides a guide for how to

choose the right mobility integration technique for your

organization. The paper also examines various MEAP

platforms available and the key differences between

popular platforms.

From a mobile application development standpoint,

there is another widely used approach: cross-platform

development frameworks. These frameworks allow

developers to build once and deploy across multiple

device platforms. However, these frameworks lack

integration and mobile device management capabilities,

and therefore we have excluded them from

consideration for the purposes of this whitepaper. To

learn more about cross-platform development,

download our whitepaper: “How to Choose the Right

Architecture for your Mobile Application” -

http://www.rapidvaluesolutions.com/whitepaper/

Enterprise mobility has

transformed the way

businesses engage with

customers, partners and staff

while exchanging critical

information. Innovative

applications are only part of

an overall mobility solution –

integrating them with existing

systems in a scalable manner

is equally important and can

be even more challenging.

Enterprise Mobility Solutions

Gone are the days when employees would sit in front of their desktop computers all day to do their

work and communicate with coworkers and clients. More and more companies are adapting enterprise

mobility solutions to make it easier for their employees to work out of the office using mobile devices

and cloud services to perform business tasks.

Point-to-Point: An application deployment technique which allows mobile users

within the organization to perform a business operation and engage with co-workers

and customers. It is mainly designed for smaller organizations.

The two most popular enterprise mobility deployment techniques are:

01

Mobile Enterprise Application Platform (MEAP): An application middleware

designed specifically for mobile enterprise application users. It allows controlled access

to all mobile applications hosted on a particular platform. Employees and enterprise

customers can access and exchange data from any mobile device to perform a number

of business operations.

02

Definition of MEAP

There is a general tendency to combine MEAP/middleware tools with cross-platform mobile

development tools. We would define MEAP as a platform that includes:

–

Comprehensive integration capabilities – Connectivity to corporate systems such as ERP, CRM,

etc.

–

Mobile application development – Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for building mobile

applications

–

Mobile Device Management (MDM) capabilities – Support for device provisioning, secure

transmission of data, remote configuration, mobile asset tracking, policy identification and

adaptation, etc.

–

Mobile Application Management (MAM) capabilities – Support for provisioning and access control

to mobile applications used in business settings (configuration settings, user authentication, push

notification services, application usage analytics, etc.)

As the name implies, cross-platform development frameworks provide the ability to develop once and

deploy across multiple platforms, but mainly on the client/device side with minimal support for

integration. Since this paper is about integrated mobility solutions, we focus on the MEAP approach,

with the view that cross-platform frameworks are outside the scope of the discussion.

MEAP

Examples

Cross- Platform Development

Frameworks Examples

Point-to-Point Solutions vs. MEAP

Point-to-Point Approach

Typically, a Point-to-Point (P2P)

integration solution is used to develop

an independent native application for

each business requirement, using

individual resources/middleware to

handle the data and control layer of the

application. This solution is useful when

data segregation is possible and

independent security for the application

is required.

REQUIRED AND BASED ON LOCATION

MULTIPLE MIDDLEWARE

FOR EACH APPLICATION

DATA WAREHOUSE

POINT-TO-POINT DEPLOYMENT ARCHITECTURE

P2P Solution User experience is rich (typically based on native application development).

Less expensive to build compared to MEAP if the features required are straightforward.

Performance is higher compared to MEAP since there are fewer

applications to handle.

Requires additional integration with identity management.

Requires third-party connectors to integrate with external systems.

Need to build each application based on the specific business requirement, with limited reusability.

Any changes required in the application need developer involvement.

Approach Pros Cons

MEAP Approach

MOBILE ENTERPRISE APPLICATION PLATFORM (MEAP)

Gartner Group has developed a concept called the Rule of Three for determining when to use a Mobile

Enterprise Application Platform (MEAP). According to the rule, you should use the MEAP approach for

enterprise mobility if the business requirements include (i) Three or more mobile applications, (ii)

Three or more mobile OS (Operating Systems) and (iii) Integration with at least three back-end data

sources.

IPAD

DESKTOP

IPHONE

BLACKBERRY

MEAP DEPLOYMENT ARCHITECTURE

MEAP ARCHITECTURE BLOCK DIAGRAM MOBILE DEVICE

MANAGEMENT

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

ENVIRONMENT

AUTH

EAI ADAPTERS | SERVICE BUS WEB SERVICES

DATABASE CONNECTIONS

HTTP(S) VPN HTTP(S)

VPN OLEIVECSREEV RC(U)EDO RO N-RPMESID POLICY

ENFORCEMENT

SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION

CLIENT AGENT

SERVER APPLICATION

LOGIC

CLIENT APPLICATION

UI+ LOGIC EAI TOOLS +

LOGIC DIRECTORY

SERVICES

APPLICATION WEB SERVER

MULTICHANNEL ACCESS GATEWAY

OFFLINE NATIVE STORAGE CLIENT

APPLICATION

RUNTIME HTML5

BROWSER

OFFLINE BROWSER

STORAGE RELATIONAL

NoSQL DATABASE ENTERPRISE

PACKAGES DATA SOURCES

MEAP Highly scalable architecture.

Pre-integrated to identity management system.

Supports multiple platforms – native (iOS, Android, Windows Mobile, BlackBerry), web (XHTML browsers) and hybrid applications.

Can leverage device features seamlessly.

Plug-in or connectors are available to communicate with systems such as SAP, Oracle, CRMs, etc.

Web service layer runs on DMZ to secure the entire infrastructure.

The solution can be deployed on premises or in a cloud.

User interface and usability are sub-optimal.

Initial implementation time is higher.

Initial investment is high – requires upfront payment for the solution, maintenance fee and user based fee.

Dedicated administrator is required to maintain the MEAP server.

Approach Pros Cons

Source: robtiffany.com

Comparing Point-to-Point and MEAP

The following table summarizes the key differences between Point-to-Point solutions and MEAP.

User Interface

Cross-device

platform support One solution across a wide range of mobile

devices Point-to-Point Solution

Parameters Mobile Middleware/MEAP

Not as great as point-to-point Typically a native application – rich user

experience

Unique solution for every mobile device/

mobile OS

Device Management

Each device update needs to be man- aged individually

– Each application update needs to be managed separately

– Multiple proprietary tool sets are required for managing & monitoring applications, security and devices

– New applications can be placed in a pre-defined shared location in the middleware

– Centralized management of data – Single tool for managing all devices,

applications and security

– Builds are specific to each type of device

– Remote locking of mobile devices and remote wiping of data are supported

– Data resides in a centralized server – Controlled at one location with single

console

– Flexibility in expanding mobility – Seamless user experience with

increase in number of users and/or mobile applications on the platform Flexibility &

Change Management

Remote

Installation and Updates

Connectivity

Security

Scalability &

Redundancy

Implementation Cost

Multiple integrations required to connect all backend systems

Initial investment is low

Each point-to-point solution has its own security controls

Decreases as number of hosted mobile

applications increases High, with optimized services between client and server networks

Requires additional hardware and software to support additional users and/or mobile applications

Not part of the solution but possible to

distribute them over the air individually Allows OTA provisioning to many devices and mobile operating systems

simultaneously

Pre-integrated with all kinds of backend databases and other applications

Initial investment is high

Performance

Summary Comparison Between Two Key MEAPs

The table below summarizes the differences between two popular MEAPs: Kony and SAP Unwired. We

have selected only these two MEAPs for comparison to illustrate key parameters you should evaluate

before deciding on the right MEAP for your enterprise.

Kony

NATIVE APPLICATION CAPABILITIES

PLATFORMS SUPPORTED

Parameters SAP Unwired

Yes

Yes

Yes Single code base for all native

UI components

Access to all native capabilities

Native code generation

Native UI components have to be

developed specific to each platform using native languages

Supported with code written in native

Not at present Rich UX

User experience Browser-dependent. Code must be

written specifically for each native platform

iPhone, Android, BlackBerry (4.2.1 and above), Win- dows Phone (5.0 up to Windows 8), Symbian, Palm, J2ME

Windows 7 Device platforms

Desktop clients/kiosks

Windows Mobile 6.0, 6.1, 6.5 (Standard and Professional), Windows XP, Vista and 7 (32 bit and 64 bit), BlackBerry 5.0 and 6.0, iOS 4.2 and 4.3

Windows XP, Vista and 7

Eight dedicated websites for 15+ browsers, five form factors, from WML to HTML5

Device-optimized mobile web Not at present

Overall Cost Customizations are expensive. IT cost increases with increase in team size (mobile enterprise app users)

– Lower administrative, maintenance and support costs

– Cost-effective if many mobile enterprise applications are to be supported supported

PLATFORM FEATURES 7+

Number of operating systems for native applications

supported

7+

Yes

Access to HTML5 capabilities Yes

Lua/Javascript

Language used Mainly Java, .Net and Objective C are

also used Yes

Cross-platform debugger Not at present

Yes Quick UI preview on all

platforms None. Need to build and compile the

projects to view the UI Yes

Foreign function support from

single codebase Not at present

Yes Ability to seamlessly create

native deployable binaries for all platforms

Requires usage of platform specific native SDK tools (to be configured and understood)

Yes, all glue code is auto-generated Extensions – ability to augment

existing APIs without

knowledge of underlying SDK

Yes, but glue code has to be manually written for each of native SDK

Yes Drag & drop widgets for UI

development Needs to be done outside the developer

platform Not required

Coding required for consuming data from network services and mapping it to the UI widgets (80% of the application codebase)

Yes, all data mapping code has to be handwritten

By default purely native, optionally WebUI can be used for rendering Wrapper-based solution (uses

WebView for rendering) Yes, a hybrid web based container

approach

Yes. Also supports offline sync

Synchronization capabilities Yes. Also supports offline sync

Yes Ability to download a new

version of the application without accessing app stores

Yes

Yes, supported via Kony App Store and Kony App

Management Container Mobile Application Management

with App management capability

Requires additional license and compo- nent via Afaria

Eclipse plugin from Kony Integrated Development

Environment (IDE) Eclipse IDE

Web Services support – REST/SOAP

Backend system integration Sybase ASE 12.x and 15.x, Sybase SQL

Anywhere 11.x, Oracle 10g and 11g, MS SQL Server 2005 and 2008, UDB 9.1, SAP R/3 4.6 and higher, SOAP and REST (XML) Services

Yes Extensible connectors to

consume data from SAP, web services, XML, Java API

Yes

Yes

Oracle backend support Yes

Yes Connectors to Siebel,

PeopleSoft and SharePoint Information not available

Five ways to connect to SAP JCO, Gateway (OData), Web Services, HTTP, iWay , and SAP Namespace (inside SAP) – i.e. no middleware

Connectors to SAP Supports JCO, Gateway and Web

Services

SMS/MMS – 2-Way and common push APIs

SMS/MMS (2-Way & push) Not supported

INTEGRATION AND CONNECTORS

Choosing the Right Approach

What approach works best for your enterprise? While each organization will have a different mobility

strategy, when it comes to selecting mobile enterprise applications, you will reach a point where you

have to decide between a point-to-point solution and MEAP. As always, the right solution for your

organization depends on your business requirements. The following figure illustrates key factors that

will help you decide on a mobility solution that’s appropriate for your organization.

POINT-TO-POINT

SOLUTION

– Focus is on building a small number of applications to run on a few

mobile operating systems only (Blackberry, iOS, Android, Windows mobile) – Out-of-the-box solution is acceptable, and does not require much

customization

– Requires very few internal updates

MEAP

(MOBILE

MIDDLE WARE)

– Requires device-agnostic solution

– Host multiple mobile applications across multiple mobile operating systems

– Simplifies integration to back-end systems – Cost-effective over the long term

POINT-TO-POINT SOLUTION VS. MEAP

DECISION MAKING CHART

According to industry experts, a MEAP

solution works best for organizations looking

for over three mobile applications or above

150 users. This decision-making chart will

help you select between the two enterprise

mobility approaches. However, before making

a decision, you need to understand the pros

and cons of both types of enterprise mobility

solutions and the cost involved in switching

between the two solutions in the future

should that become necessary.

50 100 150 200

1 2 3 4

Lo

Hi MEAP PERFORMANCE

MEAP TCO POINT SOLUTION

PERFORMANCE POINT SOLUTION TCO PERFORMANCE

TCO PER USER

Users Applications Source: [Sybase White Paper]: What’s the point? Comparison

of Middleware Vs. Point Solutions

Conclusion

Of all the factors driving the need for mobility, the main parameters to consider are the number of

applications, the device platforms to be supported, the amount of flexibility and control you need for

managing the servers and how quickly you plan to scale up. A point-to-point solution is the most

cost-effective and fastest approach for an immediate, single mobile application deployment. MEAP is

best suited for organizations with a well-defined mobility strategy and a vision for expanding their use

of mobile applications.

If you have any questions or need more information about building an integrated mobility

solution, please write to the author Kavyanidhi Narayan, Sr. Manager - Marketing at

[email protected] or give us a call at 877-643-1850. We look forward

to hearing from you!

About RapidValue

RapidValue is a leading provider of end-to-end mobility solutions to enterprises worldwide. Armed with a

large team of experts in mobility consulting and application development, along with experience delivering

global mobility projects, we offer a range of mobility services across industry verticals. RapidValue

delivers its services to the world’s top brands and Fortune 1000 companies, and has offices in the

United States and India.

www.rapidvaluesolutions.com www.rapidvaluesolutions.com/blog

+1-877-643-1850 [email protected]