tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post7627836549948293441..comments2024-03-20T22:57:03.923+00:00Comments on Dean Bubley's Disruptive Wireless: The telecoms industry and a dual-dilemma problemDean Bubleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05719150957239368264noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-71760469569830500052012-05-25T10:12:07.899+01:002012-05-25T10:12:07.899+01:00Paul
Not *strictly* true. There are some non-netw...Paul<br /><br />Not *strictly* true. There are some non-network forms of voice communications such as walkie-talkies or private mobile radio. <br /><br />But in any case, plenty of other industries depend on private infrastructure. Take the road network, for example. It is built and maintained by governments or (sometimes) private companies, either from taxation or direct payments such as tolls. It is almost always decoupled from "OTT" applications of roads such as haulage, bus companies & private use of vehicles.<br /><br />Same thing with any industry dependent on electricity. The Grid gets paid for & maintained irrespective of the profitability of electricity-dependent ventures.<br /><br />The argument in telecoms is much the same.Dean Bubleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05719150957239368264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-48122261167716944372012-05-24T19:49:50.911+01:002012-05-24T19:49:50.911+01:00Dean, there is also a fundamental difference betwe...Dean, there is also a fundamental difference between telecoms and any other industry: all data/voice/text must travel over a network, and someone must maintain that network. This is very different from a traditional Innovator's Dilemma like Kodak's: film cameras are simply outdated and unnecessary for the vast majority of people. In telecoms, all of the competitors and innovators rely on the network.Paul Knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-7091037279356765492012-05-15T23:55:34.781+01:002012-05-15T23:55:34.781+01:00Dean,
I fully support what you say. Witness the ...Dean, <br /><br />I fully support what you say. Witness the launch of BobSled by T-Mobile USA, which is an OTT play and cannibalizes its own revenue to some extent.Madmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00816924392422212567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-72164020572782919372012-05-14T09:20:11.028+01:002012-05-14T09:20:11.028+01:00Dear Dean,
I think all technology leaders face bo...Dear Dean,<br /><br />I think all technology leaders face both dilemmas at a certain point of time; When old technolgy is being replaced by new. One recent example that illustrates this is Kodak, the 133-year old company that invented the hand-held camera and now files for bankruptcy protection. They actually were the company that invented the digital camera, but didn’t go to market with it because they thought it would cannibalize their existing business. Eventually, the market caught up (even cameras in virtually every phone) and Kodak has not been able to turn around their position, with the bankruptcy as a result. If they would have embraced the change, they probably would be one of the market leaders of today.Bob M. Hendriksnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-70593945724683859142012-05-12T08:55:10.205+01:002012-05-12T08:55:10.205+01:00Dean,
Regarding to your question, a native device ...Dean,<br />Regarding to your question, a native device client can co-exist with a Joyn App client if it can be configured (using menu) and not using autoprovisioning based on SIM. Then you can run 2 Joyn accounts (1 associated to the SIM number) and other "as OTT". The technology allows that.<br />We want users to have several Joyn accounts (SIM and non-SIM based) and created the App Server to manage diverts, rules, etc. We want users connecting natively, using apps, and also as web (HTML5, basic HTML in feature phones) and working in WebRTC.<br />And most important, to provide the right interface to engage developers, the language they speak: REST.<br />How many of the say so "TelcoOTT" right now are doing what internet companies do, make themshelves platforms with easy to use API to let 3rd parties add value as Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc? I give a lot of credit to Whatsapp, but not too much to the copies.<br />RCS-e is very flexible, and a lot of things can be created on top without needing ad-hons to the standard.juannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-67801291944350515492012-05-11T17:45:38.553+01:002012-05-11T17:45:38.553+01:00I quite agree. The one thing that I think that you...I quite agree. The one thing that I think that you're missing is that new services have to be disruptive *across* the industry. Having a messaging service which only works on your MNO is next to useless. Having a "disruptive" service which works in one country, on one network, on one handset.... that's the opposite of disruptive!<br /><br />I've had a play with RCS-e. It's pretty nice but, sadly, it's an over-engineered telco solution. Designed for interconnects and terrifying UML diagrams.<br /><br />Wide ranging simplicity, that's what's needed. Not sure how they get there, though!Terence Edenhttp://shkspr.mobi/blog/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-49449680563107836182012-05-11T17:00:31.859+01:002012-05-11T17:00:31.859+01:00Juan
I take your point, and OTT-flavour of a comm...Juan<br /><br />I take your point, and OTT-flavour of a common telco messaging base platform *might* still work. I still need to understand your exact proposition, and for example whether you could simultaneously have (say) Orange and AT&T RCSe apps running on the same device, if they were sufficiently different that the user wants both.<br /><br />And yes, politics *absolutely* plays a part in this. Usually it's the more powerful "traditional" part of operators that tries to kill the Telco-OTT division, but I guess that over time we'll see the reverse happen as well. One of the areas of advice Martin Geddes & I give on our Telco-OTT workshops is how to avoid the "white blood cells" killing the transplant organ. A lot of telcos are institutionally structured to reject this type of approach - eg dealing with the billing system, legal departments and so on. <br /><br />Telefonica is fairly unusual, in that Digital is empowered to "just do things" independently of the Mother Ship. It certainly appears that it speeds time-to-market. I haven't seen any evidence that it's actually slowed the other parts of the business.<br /><br />DeanDean Bubleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05719150957239368264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17500930.post-72114565359729007672012-05-11T16:47:37.168+01:002012-05-11T16:47:37.168+01:00Dean, just 2 comments:
It seems for you Telco-OTT ...Dean, just 2 comments:<br />It seems for you Telco-OTT means a telco creating an OTT solution.<br />In my personal view TelcoOTT is a solution that provides communication capabilities over the top (using normal data connectivity), and it could be created by a traditional telco or for another type of company (what people say "OTT"). I am not pro-telco as I suffer the "telco times of decission" and I like Whatsapp, but I think telcos may have their own rich messaging alternative based on their strenghts, and one of them is to deliver something common to all territories and all device tiers (not only smartphones). Whatever they can offer can be "flavoured" as OTT if they have 2 databases, SIM customer clients and non-SIM based customers. It is our bet.<br />Regarding your second point: I agree that it is better do something than do nothing, but I would like to know whether the ones promoting one option are not only promoting their option or also trying to stop the other alternative. You know, politics :-)juannoreply@blogger.com