Carl Ford
| 4G is the next evolution in wireless technology. Discover how 4G will transform the wireless industry
Emerging Technology
Google vs. Apple
January 5, 2010I am STUNed with the Jonathan Rosenberg / Skype announcement.
November 9, 2009
The appointment of Jonathan Rosenberg as Chief Strategy Officer adds a new wrinkle to a career that started in "The Labs" and now moves beyond Cisco. He has followed voice to app side all his career, and now he is at the right place to look at the application of all he knows.
Candidly, I was feeling like all the can SIP save Skype discussion was a waste of time. My thoughts were that the courts were going to be the place where this got settled and not in the standards bodies.
However, I was mistaken. While I believe much of the knowledge about NAT traversal came from the capabilities embedded in Paradial, the world was off chasing the use of SIP as a solution.
Upper management found a strategy at a deeper level. Namely to make it so that Skype now had the benefit of Jonathan (Prior Art) Rosenberg.
If ever there was someone who had been looking at the issues of NAT traversal Jonathan has been the guy. From the development of MIDCOM, STUN, ICE, TURN and of course SIP, Jonathan has been there.
Mind you, the addition of another Jonathan at Skype also indicates where the company is heading even after being acquired. You can think of Jonathan as being at the beginning of SIP coming somewhat full circle. From adapting the Web model to telecom to now guiding the SIP model into the Enterprise, Jonathan is going to be well positioned.
Candidly, I was feeling like all the can SIP save Skype discussion was a waste of time. My thoughts were that the courts were going to be the place where this got settled and not in the standards bodies.
However, I was mistaken. While I believe much of the knowledge about NAT traversal came from the capabilities embedded in Paradial, the world was off chasing the use of SIP as a solution.
Upper management found a strategy at a deeper level. Namely to make it so that Skype now had the benefit of Jonathan (Prior Art) Rosenberg.
If ever there was someone who had been looking at the issues of NAT traversal Jonathan has been the guy. From the development of MIDCOM, STUN, ICE, TURN and of course SIP, Jonathan has been there.
Mind you, the addition of another Jonathan at Skype also indicates where the company is heading even after being acquired. You can think of Jonathan as being at the beginning of SIP coming somewhat full circle. From adapting the Web model to telecom to now guiding the SIP model into the Enterprise, Jonathan is going to be well positioned.
Did you buy your car to access the road?
November 2, 2009
Roger Von Oech, the creator of the Whack Pack, often looks to spur creativity by asking questions that are not direct but would have a parallel. So I asked the question to understand the nature of the access point to the Internet, which is your phone, home network or some other connection. You buy a car with the assumption that your ride on roads.
Are we at the point where you buy a device assuming it has connectivity to the Internet?
What if the device starts at Google?
What if the device only gives you Apple approved sites?
What if Microsoft made it a closed system?
Note these are not the names associated with the access fees you pay, but having everything to do with the regulations being discussed.
We are at interesting stage of discussion in Washington about the future of the Internet. We could make a case that it is an irrelevant discussion since the Internet has never been designed to be regulated by a single country. However for the 200 M plus of us that live in the US, these issues are real.
In the Wall Street Journal today, L. Gordon Crovitz did a nice job talking about the goings on in Washington. Markey and McCain giving opposite views as well as the Freedoms / Principles expanded by Chairman Genachowski.
One thing that Washington may be missing is the insight by Craig Labowitz shared at the joing meetings of NANOG/ARIN. It was very insightful about the technological innovations that are reshaping the Internet.
In the presentation there is cause for concern, in the fact that 50% of the Internet's traffic is aggregating into 150 sites. It used to be thousands. So Media control may be happening to Internet as well. However these 150 sites are not just carriers or media companies, so the rules and roles of regulators are not a match to this next generation. We could of course redefine Media to include them.
The reality is the Internet is progressing in its own policing with technology. So where is the bottleneck? And is it a smoking gun, a slow adopter, or some market power that represents the problem?
My own take is that its slow adoption, so I applaud the administration for its BTOP program, because the last mile is the place where you attach your device. And back to the car metaphor, you want to hit the open road as soon as possible. Trying to regulate the open road by your driveway specification seems like a bad strategy.
Are we at the point where you buy a device assuming it has connectivity to the Internet?
What if the device starts at Google?
What if the device only gives you Apple approved sites?
What if Microsoft made it a closed system?
Note these are not the names associated with the access fees you pay, but having everything to do with the regulations being discussed.
We are at interesting stage of discussion in Washington about the future of the Internet. We could make a case that it is an irrelevant discussion since the Internet has never been designed to be regulated by a single country. However for the 200 M plus of us that live in the US, these issues are real.
In the Wall Street Journal today, L. Gordon Crovitz did a nice job talking about the goings on in Washington. Markey and McCain giving opposite views as well as the Freedoms / Principles expanded by Chairman Genachowski.
One thing that Washington may be missing is the insight by Craig Labowitz shared at the joing meetings of NANOG/ARIN. It was very insightful about the technological innovations that are reshaping the Internet.
In the presentation there is cause for concern, in the fact that 50% of the Internet's traffic is aggregating into 150 sites. It used to be thousands. So Media control may be happening to Internet as well. However these 150 sites are not just carriers or media companies, so the rules and roles of regulators are not a match to this next generation. We could of course redefine Media to include them.
The reality is the Internet is progressing in its own policing with technology. So where is the bottleneck? And is it a smoking gun, a slow adopter, or some market power that represents the problem?
My own take is that its slow adoption, so I applaud the administration for its BTOP program, because the last mile is the place where you attach your device. And back to the car metaphor, you want to hit the open road as soon as possible. Trying to regulate the open road by your driveway specification seems like a bad strategy.
Report Excerpt: Market Launches Keep Clearwire on Target
October 20, 2009
Editor's note: The following is an excerpt from our latest quarterly report on all things Clearwire, the CLEARWIRE NTK OCTOBER 2009 (need to know) report, available now for the low low price of $4.95. In this excerpt we talk about how Clearwire's on-time, on-target market launches in Atlanta and Las Vegas, as well as a host of smaller cities, have kept the company on target with its ambitious 2009 rollout plans. For the full report, order online here. Report excerpt follows:
Vegas, Atlanta and Silicon Valley - but where is Chicago?
Easily the most positive sign for Clearwire during the hot months was its on-schedule rollout of services in Atlanta and Las Vegas, the two bigger markets Clearwire had said it would launch during the summer -- and did.
Vegas, Atlanta and Silicon Valley - but where is Chicago?
Easily the most positive sign for Clearwire during the hot months was its on-schedule rollout of services in Atlanta and Las Vegas, the two bigger markets Clearwire had said it would launch during the summer -- and did.
Dear Congress; A Phone Number does not a Service Make
October 12, 2009In the last thirty years, the computing world has changed so much, that it is hard to remember the logic of roles and rules that existed and still drive the basis of law and leadership when it comes to telecommunication. Telecom has always been a service that has made a distinction between service and use. Telecom services were deliberately limited to enable the maximum amount of people to use the services for whatever activities they choose.
Enabling the network to be ubiquitous was accomplished by aggregating the costs of service between local services and long distance services. The cost of providing the connection (the local loop) was harmonized as much as possible with statewide loop costs and subsidization from the long distance market. However with the ubiquity achieved the opportunity to support specialized services enabled for the early focus of the Internet to be about the signaling on top of the phone network and not inside it.
A primary reason why the issues of the phone network were of no concern was that IP was distance insensitive, and connecting at the closest point on the phone network through dial up or private line was pretty efficient.
Now the technology and cost models of access are intertwined and efficiency in the network is not represented in any particular type of fee structure. Nor is there a clear distinction between accessing a service via the phone network, or an "Internet" service that replaces the phone network.
As the Promoter for the Fight: I would like to get credit
October 7, 2009
Yesterday, we taxed the system of a friends conference server with a call about Net Neutrality. It was covered by many other media outlets, which did not give us credit for the call. It included Hank Hultquist of ATT, Todd Daubert of Kelley Drye and Dave Erickson of Free Conference call. Rick Whitt was to be on the call, but had to pull attend to other matters. It was a great call. And as usual I was my orthogonal self. I may not be a lawyer, but I make any Congressman proud in confusing the issues.
If you want to listen to the call for yourself listen hear.
Of course, All parties have agreed to come back for round 2 in Miami January 20th at 4GWE
Although Dave Erickson will part of another session about the issues of Applications Compensation.
If you want to listen to the call for yourself listen hear.
Of course, All parties have agreed to come back for round 2 in Miami January 20th at 4GWE
Although Dave Erickson will part of another session about the issues of Applications Compensation.
What Is and Isn't under the FCC Jurisdiction
October 5, 2009
Can the Enhanced Service Provider exemption stay in place?
On the Google Policy Blog Rick Whitt responds to the FCC letter from ATT regarding Google Voice. It is very pertinent to the discussion we are having on the Calliflower call tomorrow about Net Neutrality.
We could say the carriers are suffering from a little enhanced services envy, given the fact that Verizon wanted to be compared to Google at the last wall street conference they attended. In this case ATT wants to point out that GoogleVoice admits that because of tariff anomalies, it is not servicing the rural markets, but does not consider this their battle.
So Let's see if we come to a common ground tomorrow, about what exactly the FCC is trying to accomplish.
On the Google Policy Blog Rick Whitt responds to the FCC letter from ATT regarding Google Voice. It is very pertinent to the discussion we are having on the Calliflower call tomorrow about Net Neutrality.
We could say the carriers are suffering from a little enhanced services envy, given the fact that Verizon wanted to be compared to Google at the last wall street conference they attended. In this case ATT wants to point out that GoogleVoice admits that because of tariff anomalies, it is not servicing the rural markets, but does not consider this their battle.
So Let's see if we come to a common ground tomorrow, about what exactly the FCC is trying to accomplish.
Cisco buys Tandberg - Surprise the Wrong Conclusion is drawn again!
October 1, 2009
Lots of noise today about Cisco's acquistion of Tandberg.
No one wants to take the simple approach.
The best analysis, as usual, comes from our friend Andy Abramson who sees this rightly from the telepresence side of the equation.
Some analysts see this as a blow to Radvision.
To me the issue is different. Tandberg is a solution that has a loyal customer base and is priced way below the Cisco Telepresence services of Cisco.
I have already spoken about companies like Magor Networks (sister company to CounterPath) and Samsung (both also Radvision) customers that have much lower price points.
IMHO, the issue is the price war on Video Conferencing has hit Cisco.
Their systems which were 100K to start were always being installed and then were subject to issue of prestige vs. practicality.
The acquistion of Tandberg is not a redesign of what exists but extends the product line to the practical participant (although to Andy's point its a better look and feel).
To Andy's point a SIP core should mean interoperability, and Tandberg will add to some of the interoperability Cisco requires to move forward.
It also should signal that the Cisco Telepresence product line will be driven by the channel market in the next year.
No one wants to take the simple approach.
The best analysis, as usual, comes from our friend Andy Abramson who sees this rightly from the telepresence side of the equation.
Some analysts see this as a blow to Radvision.
To me the issue is different. Tandberg is a solution that has a loyal customer base and is priced way below the Cisco Telepresence services of Cisco.
I have already spoken about companies like Magor Networks (sister company to CounterPath) and Samsung (both also Radvision) customers that have much lower price points.
IMHO, the issue is the price war on Video Conferencing has hit Cisco.
Their systems which were 100K to start were always being installed and then were subject to issue of prestige vs. practicality.
The acquistion of Tandberg is not a redesign of what exists but extends the product line to the practical participant (although to Andy's point its a better look and feel).
To Andy's point a SIP core should mean interoperability, and Tandberg will add to some of the interoperability Cisco requires to move forward.
It also should signal that the Cisco Telepresence product line will be driven by the channel market in the next year.
My Instincts about the Korean market opening up for iPhone
September 24, 2009
It will be interesting to see what happens next, now that the Korean Communications Commission has okayed the importing of iPhones and Blackberries.
Korean has a very saturated market, so I would not expect a fast migration. However I would expect to see improvements from Samsung in software strategies, including an adoption of Android in the states.
It has been interesting to observe Kanji based cell phone users, They have a phonetic use of the alphabetic keyboard that makes their sms messages happen quite quickly. I am not sure the soft key boards on a screen are going to add any value to most users.
Additionally most games in Asia have found their way through existing solutions, so I am not sure how much additional value the app store will bring to the table.
Of course on a sheer numbers market perspective the adoption will probably be astounding, but like Telefonica, I think the more interesting question is what impact it will have on carrier adoption.
Korean has a very saturated market, so I would not expect a fast migration. However I would expect to see improvements from Samsung in software strategies, including an adoption of Android in the states.
It has been interesting to observe Kanji based cell phone users, They have a phonetic use of the alphabetic keyboard that makes their sms messages happen quite quickly. I am not sure the soft key boards on a screen are going to add any value to most users.
Additionally most games in Asia have found their way through existing solutions, so I am not sure how much additional value the app store will bring to the table.
Of course on a sheer numbers market perspective the adoption will probably be astounding, but like Telefonica, I think the more interesting question is what impact it will have on carrier adoption.
Significant Skype Snipes
September 21, 2009
I am always impressed with Skype. The user interface is good, the business strategy is clever and left to themselve's they have carved out significant marketshare of communication users without technically being a carrier.
That is a difficult road to travel. Virgin Mobile, Vonage, Packet8 and most MVNOs have not been able to navigate that agile path as nimbly.
So if the Janus has been jilted by the former Joltid's CEO the question is does that mean an end to IPR held by Janus and Niklas? A friend has pointed to the irony of the Kazaa IPR owners claiming foul over copyright rules.
Inside Avaya there is a lot of buzz about being able to join the Skype ecosystem. It could take on a lot of different strategies, from developing media server solutions, interfacing like Digium has to the Skype network, or my favorite, federating the pbx's with supernode abilities.
Federating has been a giant problem, because the long tail of the federating has been elusive. I was very close to it once, and the company I helped to form got lost in the weeds. See the thing they forget to tell you about the long tail first mover is that it's the new category creation that is the key.
But if Silver Lake's Skype acquisition goes through, in theory Avaya's federation has found a new home and its not aligned with a network operator.
On the other hand if Janus and Niklas win their war, its not about enabling the enterprise for them. The path that the current team has been on in deepening the ecosystem. I am not sure if the partner program would be totally restored, but I would bet that it would at least be reorganized. (As you know it was killed shortly after the announcement of the acquisition) This could have been just an issue of not hosting it with the Ebay types, which had hosted the community as a subset for a while.
If Niklas negates the deal, the question of "what is next?" becomes significant. Without a clear path, Skype could go the way of Alta Vista, AOL, and other industry movers. If the objection is one of allowing Skype to go IPO I think that works. If it is about the IP embedded in the system and the licensing deal is the real issue, that should be addressable. (I have stated my view previously).
I am sure Ebay would love for this to be over, but like a diamond that is going to be cut, the next move is the significant one. Let's hope it makes the service more precious.
That is a difficult road to travel. Virgin Mobile, Vonage, Packet8 and most MVNOs have not been able to navigate that agile path as nimbly.
So if the Janus has been jilted by the former Joltid's CEO the question is does that mean an end to IPR held by Janus and Niklas? A friend has pointed to the irony of the Kazaa IPR owners claiming foul over copyright rules.
Inside Avaya there is a lot of buzz about being able to join the Skype ecosystem. It could take on a lot of different strategies, from developing media server solutions, interfacing like Digium has to the Skype network, or my favorite, federating the pbx's with supernode abilities.
Federating has been a giant problem, because the long tail of the federating has been elusive. I was very close to it once, and the company I helped to form got lost in the weeds. See the thing they forget to tell you about the long tail first mover is that it's the new category creation that is the key.
But if Silver Lake's Skype acquisition goes through, in theory Avaya's federation has found a new home and its not aligned with a network operator.
On the other hand if Janus and Niklas win their war, its not about enabling the enterprise for them. The path that the current team has been on in deepening the ecosystem. I am not sure if the partner program would be totally restored, but I would bet that it would at least be reorganized. (As you know it was killed shortly after the announcement of the acquisition) This could have been just an issue of not hosting it with the Ebay types, which had hosted the community as a subset for a while.
If Niklas negates the deal, the question of "what is next?" becomes significant. Without a clear path, Skype could go the way of Alta Vista, AOL, and other industry movers. If the objection is one of allowing Skype to go IPO I think that works. If it is about the IP embedded in the system and the licensing deal is the real issue, that should be addressable. (I have stated my view previously).
I am sure Ebay would love for this to be over, but like a diamond that is going to be cut, the next move is the significant one. Let's hope it makes the service more precious.
