VoIP Princess Blog

Last week at DreamForce, Salesforce.com's annual orgy of self-congratulation, Google CEO Eric Schmidt took the opportunity to explain why Google dropped $12.5 billion for Motorola: The Internet search giant wants to make... telephones.

The world's most famous Internet company uses the annual conference of the company that practically invented the Software-as-a-Service industry to announce that Google's next business move is manufacturing telephones.

While everyone is running around with "software prohibited" buttons pinned to their sky-blue lanyards – get it, clouds in the sky? – one of the industry leaders in no-software applications is talking about making actual stuff.

Let that sink in.

There's certainly a message here. But not necessarily one that the boys – and I do mean boys, but more on that some other time – in Cloud Cukooland think they're hearing.

In other words, as more and more people attempt to do things "in the cloud," the Next Big Thing is making appliances that connect to it. Like, for example, telephones. Continue Reading...

I woke up this morning with the world around me atwitter. Not the finches on the back fence, but with the news that the Evil Empire had acquired Skype. I was temped to post a link to this 2008 VoIP Princess post and go back to sleep. 

"In Skype, Microsoft is buying the leader in Internet voice and video ... " You might guess that this headline was written by some wit on the editorial staff of The Onion. You would be wrong. Continue Reading...

The more things change the more they stay the same. Like Skype outages. Three years ago I talked to VoIP gray-beard Erik Lagerway – whose VoIP pedigree includes executive roles at Shift Networks and Eyeball Networks as well as founding Vocalscape Communications and  Counterpath – about the Skype outage during the summer of 2007. What Lagerway said then is just as pertinent now. Continue Reading...

The more things change the more they stay the same. Like Skype outages. Three years ago I talked to VoIP gray-beard Erik Lagerway – whose VoIP pedigree includes executive roles at Shift Networks and Eyeball Networks as well as founding Vocalscape Communications and  Counterpath – about the Skype outage during the summer of 2007. What Lagerway said then is just as pertinent now. Continue Reading...

The iPhone 4 was unveiled yesterday and already 1.9 billion comments about it have been published in cyberspace. The more interesting news, from the perspective of an industry observer is AT&T's far less-heralded - a mere 215 million hits - data plan change. Namely: no more unlimited data.  

The reality is that nobody stays in business selling something for less than it costs -- despite the self-indulgent fantasies of dot-com startups. Continue Reading...

This morning Global IP Solutions announced that it has entered into a $68 million buyout agreement with Google. Add that to Google's February, 2010 announcement that it was undertaking an "experiment" to build 1-Gbps FTTH networks, and it's clear that Google has plans to become a serious telecom infrastructure player.

In the last two years, Google has made several forays in the voice market. After buying VoIP startup GrandCentral in 2008, Google went on to buy the peer-to-peer softphone Gizmo5. Google did nothing with these investments; suspending new customer signups for both services at the end of 2009, with the explanation that Google was conducting extended beta tests before "re-launching" the services.

Google has undoubtedly studied the history of Internet companies in VoIP; and AOL's, eBay's, and Yahoo's VoIP missteps paint an uninspiring picture, as Tom Keating noted last year. 

There's a fundamental lesson: operating a telephone company has a very different imperative than operating an Internet company: subscribers have to get a dial tone when they pick up the phone - 100% of the time.

Meeting that imperative is what legacy telephone carriers are good at: performing a well-understood and clearly defined operation in real-time, with near-absolute reliability. Continue Reading...

This morning Global IP Solutions announced that it has entered into a $68 million buyout agreement with Google. Add that to Google's February, 2010 announcement that it was undertaking an "experiment" to build 1-Gbps FTTH networks, and it's clear that Google has plans to become a serious telecom infrastructure player.

In the last two years, Google has made several forays in the voice market. After buying VoIP startup GrandCentral in 2008, Google went on to buy the peer-to-peer softphone Gizmo5. Google did nothing with these investments; suspending new customer signups for both services at the end of 2009, with the explanation that Google was conducting extended beta tests before "re-launching" the services.

Google has undoubtedly studied the history of Internet companies in VoIP; and AOL's, eBay's, and Yahoo's VoIP missteps paint an uninspiring picture, as Tom Keating noted last year. 

There's a fundamental lesson: operating a telephone company has a very different imperative than operating an Internet company: subscribers have to get a dial tone when they pick up the phone - 100% of the time.

Meeting that imperative is what legacy telephone carriers are good at: performing a well-understood and clearly defined operation in real-time, with near-absolute reliability. Continue Reading...

I checked in this morning to see how the FCC's latest Net neutrality proposal last week was faring with the unhinged fringe.

Fox News, with its customary fair and balanced perspective, offers "FCC Goes For Nuclear Option - Seeks To Control Interent," and "Genachowski's 'Third Way' Is a Washington Internet Takeover."

Over at Whited Sepulchre we have: "The announcement last week by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski that the agency planned to assert authority over the Internet raises all kinds of red flags...Every street in America should look like one of Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution Rallies."

And at Freedom's Phoenix, "FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's Mussolini-like Internet Power." It's right there next to "Obama's secret plan for the 4th reich? Part 1," and "The Military is Spraying Our Skies."

Despite the fact that everyone, from the Washington Post to career conspiranoid Alex Jones - Police State 4: The Rise Of FEMA - Don't Miss Out! Get Your Subscription Today! - is saying that Chairman Mao Tse Genachowski is enacting a diabolical master plan for crushing the free spirit of the Internet - not to mention Avatar downloads from BitTorrent - under the FCC's Wehrmacht, the FCC is not, repeat IS NOT, proposing to regulate ISPs like telephone companies.

How do I know this? Because unlike most of these reporters, apparently, I actually read the FCC's 14-page statement.

It all goes back to 1910 when the Federal Trade Commission first established its jurisdiction over telecommunications, along with the notion of "natural monopoly," the helpful suggestion of the Bell Telephone Company.

(Nothing like a "free market" married to a "natural monopoly." Our current worst-of-all-approaches telecommunications un-regulation is its bastard offspring.)

Twenty years later the 1934 Communications Act established the FCC, which remains the underlying architecture of US telecom regulation. The 1934 law chartered the FCC to regulate telecommunications, but not necessarily promote its development.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 - of which we in the Internet industry are so fond - brought significant change to the communications the industry landscape. In addition to letting us plug in our 2400 Bd modems, the 1996 law formally defined two types of public communications services: "regulated telecommunications services" - conventional telephone service - and "information services" that were not subject to the requirements governing telecommunications services. Continue Reading...

I checked in this morning to see how the FCC's latest Net neutrality proposal last week was faring with the unhinged fringe.

Fox News, with its customary fair and balanced perspective, offers "FCC Goes For Nuclear Option - Seeks To Control Interent," and "Genachowski's 'Third Way' Is a Washington Internet Takeover."

Over at Whited Sepulchre we have: "The announcement last week by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski that the agency planned to assert authority over the Internet raises all kinds of red flags...Every street in America should look like one of Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution Rallies."

And at Freedom's Phoenix, "FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's Mussolini-like Internet Power." It's right there next to "Obama's secret plan for the 4th reich? Part 1," and "The Military is Spraying Our Skies."

Despite the fact that everyone, from the Washington Post to career conspiranoid Alex Jones - Police State 4: The Rise Of FEMA - Don't Miss Out! Get Your Subscription Today! - is saying that Chairman Mao Tse Genachowski is enacting a diabolical master plan for crushing the free spirit of the Internet - not to mention Avatar downloads from BitTorrent - under the FCC's Wehrmacht, the FCC is not, repeat IS NOT, proposing to regulate ISPs like telephone companies.

How do I know this? Because unlike most of these reporters, apparently, I actually read the FCC's 14-page statement.

It all goes back to 1910 when the Federal Trade Commission first established its jurisdiction over telecommunications, along with the notion of "natural monopoly," the helpful suggestion of the Bell Telephone Company.

(Nothing like a "free market" married to a "natural monopoly." Our current worst-of-all-approaches telecommunications un-regulation is its bastard offspring.)

Twenty years later the 1934 Communications Act established the FCC, which remains the underlying architecture of US telecom regulation. The 1934 law chartered the FCC to regulate telecommunications, but not necessarily promote its development.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 - of which we in the Internet industry are so fond - brought significant change to the communications the industry landscape. In addition to letting us plug in our 2400 Bd modems, the 1996 law formally defined two types of public communications services: "regulated telecommunications services" - conventional telephone service - and "information services" that were not subject to the requirements governing telecommunications services. Continue Reading...

Mac users just don't get no respect, as Disruptive Telephony's Dan York points out today in his kvetch about Skype's video group calling: Mac users need not apply for this Windows-only beta.

Oh sure, we'll get a separate-but-equal version "later in the year," Skype says. They just neglected to mention which year.

Much of Skype's success can be attributed to individuals who use it, like it and go on to insinuate the service into their work lives.  It's certainly not Skype's talent for PR. (I was once dis-invited to a Skype event when someone realized I was a journalist, not a system integrator.)

So it's not unreasonable to think Skype should be more politic - if not actually attentive - to the notoriously independent-minded Mac community.

On the other hand, Skype does enough of what it does, and does it well enough, to make it easy for people to keep paying them money.

Before eBay sold Skype back to its founders, eBay reported $620 million in net revenue from Skype (eBay Inc. Continue Reading...

Mac users just don't get no respect, as Disruptive Telephony's Dan York points out today in his kvetch about Skype's video group calling: Mac users need not apply for this Windows-only beta.

Oh sure, we'll get a separate-but-equal version "later in the year," Skype says. They just neglected to mention which year.

Much of Skype's success can be attributed to individuals who use it, like it and go on to insinuate the service into their work lives.  (It's certainly not Skype's talent for PR; I was once dis-invited to a Skype event when someone realized I was a journalist, not a system integrator.)

So it's not unreasonable to think Skype should be more politic - if not actually attentive - to the notoriously independent-minded Mac community.

On the other hand, Skype does enough of what it does, and does it well enough, to make it easy for people to keep paying them money.

Before eBay sold Skype back to its founders, eBay reported $620 million in net revenue from Skype (eBay Inc. Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2009 Results, Jan 20, 2010) with a 24% margin (eBay Q3 09 Financial Highlights, October 21, 2009.

Maybe the company's blinkered product strategy is part of that success. 

Continue Reading...

I just read a review of the Microsoft's - what was it called? Now I remember - Kin at PC World. 

It seems that the Kin is the dumbest smartphone in a competitive lineup of contemporary devices that almost-but-not-quite do things. 

"You can't watch Web video, you can't send photos or video on Twitter," writes PC World's Jared Newman. "The Web browser doesn't support tabs, there's no native calendar or ability to sync other calendars, and there's no native GPS for accomplishing the very social function of meeting up with friends in real life. All of these limitations make the $30-per-month data plan requirement hard to swallow."

Let me guess how that's going to work out. A year from now the Kin will show up in Dilbert cartoons and "greatest blunders" lists - the one that includes New Coke.

The point here isn't the phone. Continue Reading...

Imitation, as they say, is the best form of praise. So it's no surprise that following on the heels of Apple's iPhone triumph, other computer makers are eying the handset to boost their bottom lines. The buzz is that Acer and Dell are working on high-end smartphones, according to Juniper Research's Analyst Xpress blog today. 

The Wall Street Journal has a story on Dell, as well, saying that "people familiar with the matter" indicate that Dell may launch a smartphone "as early as next month."
I say, the more the merrier. Computer makers bring a different POV to the table, as we saw with the iPhone. And that can only be a good thing. 

In his Fierce VoIP post on Monday, Doug Mohney reports that one of his takeaways from last week's CES is that your TV is morphing into a phone. Maybe so, but another - and potentially bigger - story at CES is how your phone is turning into a TV set.

The Open Mobile Video Coalition (OMVC) debuted the new ATSC candidate standard for broadcast - free-to-air - mobile TV rolling toward final approval later this year. At CES, the OMVC was showing live broadcasts on prototype handsets, mobile video players, PCs, and in-vehicle video players.

This just could be more important even than making a videophone call via your 54-inch HD TV. It might even be - dare I say it? - even more important than Skype's announcement last month about the VoIP's demise; a discovery, let me add, that is hardly original - Jajah co-founder Roman Scharf famously tried this attention-attracting gimmick back in 2006.

Why is the OMVC's announcement important? Because it's a potential game-changer.

Long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far way...in 1927, to be exact, American Telephone & Telegraph and Bell Laboratories demo-ed what the New York Times called "the first practical demonstration of television," in which live picture and sound were transmitted from Washington, D.C. Continue Reading...

I know it's a little late to be offering commentary on the recent election, but I just got back from the RealClearPolitics.com Recovery Center.

So I have to crow a little - OK, more than a little - about being right that Obama would win, and win big. And I do not think it was only because the financial system collapsed, turning everyone into a "socialist."

I'm sticking to my guns that the pollsters' November surprise was due in part to the "cell phone effect" I noted last summer. Of course, it's hard to prove - after all, it's logically impossible to take a telephone poll of people who don't have telephones. Maybe the pollsters will cotton to that by 2012.

But the fact of how communication has changed is indisputable - at least to those of us who know how to find the power switch on a computer.

Barack Obama has been hailed for his brilliance in using new media. But as highly as I rate the president-elect's intelligence, this gives credit where none is due.  It's the folks who think Obama's use of new media is breathtakingly clever who are out of the mainstream.

Personally, I rejoice that actuarial tables say there is virtually zero probability that anyone who remembers when direct dialing was state-of-the-art will ever again be president.

And speaking of guys who yearn for the bygone days of "Number please," the $50 transatlantic phone call, and the Bell System monopoly, Sprint Nextel CEO Dan Hesse told the Washington Post last month that "his [Obama's] stated position on network management 'should scare' executives the most." 

Perhaps Hesse failed to notice that ominous warnings of Stalinism on the March haven't been winners lately, or that we've recently nationalized the banking industry and the domestic automotive industry is asking for their turn at the public trough.

The Post continues: "Industry observers and executives say they believe Obama will focus strongly on telecom issues such as network management, as well as bringing broadband service to rural and other underserved areas."

Talk about scary. Continue Reading...