Apple's iPad tablet computer and "e-readers" like Amazon's Kindle and Barnes and Noble's Nook have gained huge popularity with the tech-hungry public over the past few years, but it appears Pennsylvania law firms are not totally sold on the devices as professional tools.
Almost no one The Legal Intelligencer spoke to said they had considered replacing traditional laptops with the iPad, and most agreed the devices are geared more toward entertainment than anything else.
Likewise, firms have yet to embrace e-readers for work, though several individual attorneys said they own or are considering buying the devices for personal use.
And firms seem equally wary of jumping on cell phone trends.
BlackBerry smartphones may be facing stiff competition from Apple's iPhone and Motorola's Droid in the general consumer market, but they still reign supreme at law firms.
The Legal Intelligencer spoke to a number of firms across the state to find out what type of technology their lawyers rely on and what they're considering. What interviews revealed is that most firms, big and small, seem to have a similar approach to technology and little has changed in recent years.
THE iPAD IS NO SUBSTITUTE
Everyone The Legal Intelligencer spoke to agreed that e-mail access is the number one thing lawyers look for in mobile technology, followed closely by the ability to retrieve documents on the go.
Most said attorneys largely use their phones to check e-mail and their laptops to view, edit, and draft documents.
That said, despite its marketing push as a sleeker, less bulky alternative to the traditional laptop, the general consensus was that the iPad is no substitute and therefore has little application for lawyers in the workplace.
For one, according to Laurence Liss, chief technology officer at Blank Rome in Philadelphia, the iPad's data encryption isn't as strong as that of a laptop, making information stored on it more vulnerable to hackers.
"In our opinion, it's not an enterprise-worthy device from a security point of view or, for that matter, a production point of view," he said. "It's not a replacement for a laptop."
Kevin F. McKeegan, managing partner of Meyer Unkovic & Scott in Pittsburgh, said his firm's technology committee has also been reluctant to support Apple products for security reasons.
He added that he doesn't see much professional use for the iPad anyway.
"I bought my son an iPad when he graduated from college and he loves it, but I'm not sure what I would do with it," he said.
Several people said the iPad is also lacking from a production standpoint because, unlike a laptop, it doesn't have a physical keyboard, which is better suited to typing-intensive applications like Microsoft Word and Excel than a touch-screen is.
"I have one person who has an iPad they bought for themselves and she said it's great for checking e-mail but not user-friendly for editing or preparing documents," said Adelaine F. Williams, chief operating officer at Kaplin Stewart Meloff Reiter & Stein in Blue Bell, Pa.
But not everyone agreed the iPad was inapplicable to the practice of law.
Steven W. Agnoli, chief information officer at K&L Gates in Pittsburgh, said a number of attorneys at his firm have been using the iPad as a supplement to their laptops.
"In our case, it's not a laptop replacement, meaning if you have a lot of work you need to do, [such as] e-mails you need to respond to or draft, you wouldn't use an iPad," he said, but added that what the device does do is give users computing capabilities in situations when they might not otherwise have them.
Agnoli said his firm combats security concerns by having iPad users connect through a network called Citrix, which transfers information over servers without copying data to the devices.
Michael O. Pansini of two-lawyer plaintiffs firm Pansini Mezrow in Philadelphia said his iPad actually has fully supplanted his laptop.
"I've been able to basically duplicate my desktop on my iPad," he said, adding that the device is "great for general research."
Nevertheless, the general consensus among the firms The Legal Intelligencer spoke to was that laptops are still firmly the status quo and that the iPad is less a work tool than a leisure device.
"I haven't seen anyone actually use it as a replacement," Liss said. "But I've seen some people buy them because they think they're cool."
E-READERS
As with the iPad, most of the firms The Legal Intelligencer spoke to said they don't feel there's much professional utility in e-readers like the Kindle, the Nook, and others.
"I don't really see an application for the Kindle," Liss said, calling it "a very limited-functionality device."
But while no one said they use e-readers specifically for business, several lawyers said they own them or are considering purchasing them for their personal reading.
Kaplin Stewart managing partner Maury B. Reiter said he uses the Kindle to read books and newspapers, as did David J. Sorin, co-managing partner of King of Prussia, Pa.-based Sorin Royer Cooper.
"I carry it everywhere I go -- my Kindle and a netbook and my BlackBerry -- and I get most of my reading materials directly on my Kindle, in terms of what I read for professional development and for staying current," he said.
One obvious advantage of an e-reader over the iPad is price.
While the leanest version of the iPad retails for around $500, some models of the Kindle and other devices like it are priced under $150.
Of course, the iPad, which was released three years after the original Kindle, performs a much broader set of functions than eReaders, including web browsing and e-mail.
Still, not everyone has been compelled to make a change.
"I was an early espouser of the Kindle and I don't feel any pressing need to switch," Sorin said.
While neither tablet computers nor e-readers have fully caught on with lawyers as professional tools, it's possible that could change if more firms begin digitizing their law libraries.
Sorin Royer Cooper, for example, already hosts a completely electronic library on a private secure cloud, a move that has "dramatically enhanced cost efficiencies," according to Sorin.
Other firms, like K&L Gates, are considering something similar.
Agnoli said his firm's librarians are looking into going digital, though there are currently no set plans.
If the firm does decide to digitize its library, he said, it will make the materials accessible on its network.
SMARTPHONES
Liss said "the vast majority" of law firms are BlackBerry-oriented, adding that, as with the iPad, many attorneys prefer the BlackBerry's physical keyboard to the iPhone's on-screen touchpads.
Clifford A. Goldstein, CEO of Chartwell Law Offices in Valley Forge, Pa., said he has stuck with the BlackBerry for exactly that reason.
"I considered the iPhone but I found the touchpad to be more difficult to use than the BlackBerry keyboard," he said.
Williams said less than 3 percent of the attorneys at her firm use an Apple device in lieu of a BlackBerry.
"In my personal opinion, BlackBerrys are made for enterprises and iPhones are toys," she said.
But Liss said that, while BlackBerry phones are the standard issue devices at his firm, the firm does allow its attorneys to opt for alternatives like the iPhone and reimburses them a portion of the cost.
Liss admitted this policy can present challenges for the firm's IT department.
"It's a little bit of a headache," he said. "We're not in a position to support every device that comes out on the market, but we'll make a best-effort attempt."
Like Liss, Williams said her firm issues and is mainly set up to accommodate BlackBerrys but will partially reimburse those who prefer to purchase an iPhone, albeit while offering less technical support.
However, in an attempt to avoid straining its IT department, the firm has decided not to offer any compensation or support for other phones like Motorola's Droid, Williams said.
"We feel it's more efficient to have a standardized server," she said.
Similarly, Agnoli said K&L Gates supports BlackBerrys, iPhones, and Windows mobile devices but doesn't deviate from those platforms.
SERVICE PROVIDERS
Many of the law firms The Legal Intelligencer spoke to said which cell phone service providers they do business with is based at least as much on quality as it is on price.
Liss said his firm's largest contract is with T-Mobile, partly because of cost but also because the company has offered consistent international network connectivity and phone reception.
"T-Mobile is, for those of us who travel to Europe and overseas, the best," he said.
But Liss said the firm recently entered into agreements with Verizon and AT&T as well, both of which he said have been improving in price and quality as of late.
Similarly, Williams said her firm contracts with Verizon for its BlackBerrys because it has "the strongest network for our area," which extends to Lancaster and Lehigh counties.
Meanwhile, Agnoli said K&L Gates largely leaves it up to its lawyers to decide which service providers suit their travel habits and geographic location.
That said, the number of options varies greatly with each device.
AT&T, for example, is currently the only service provide available to iPhone users, though media reports are predicting the release of a Verizon iPhone in 2011.
Pansini said now that he owns an iPad he's close to getting rid of his iPhone and exclusively using his BlackBerry for phone calls, citing frequent dropped calls as a major frustration.
So will the technology buying habits for Pennsylvania firms change anytime soon? Based on those interviewed, it would seem that firms will have to be sold on the idea of how new devices and services will improve the productivity of attorneys. And getting that buy-in won't be easy.
Subscribe to The Legal Intelligencer
No comments:
Post a Comment