Thoughts from eComm

It's coming to the end of another eComm here in SF.

I've been pretty saturated with the content from the presentations over the last three days, plus chatting to a broad range of people, some familiar friends and some newcomers.

It's difficult to pick out specific highlights, especially as some of the coolest stuff I've heard before. But some of the things that stick in the mind are:

• An endless procession of telecom web API platform providers, all of whom are talking about cool mashups, CEBP and assorted other voice apps. Ribbit, Jaduka (under new CEO-ship of Mr Mashup Thomas Howe), Adhearsion, IfByPhone, Voxeo, Metaswitch and others. All pretty cool, although they still seem to me to be very fixed-voice focused.
• iPhones everywhere. OK, there's huge uptake of them in the US, and they are very cool. But addressing the Apple market is still only a tiny slice of the world mobile phone user base.
• Surprisingly little about handset web runtimes & widgets
• A cool service called TokTok from DiTech Networks, which injects voice commentary as an extra overlay into live phone calls - allowing voice interruptions or whispers while you're on a live call ("Your football team just scored!") etc
• A supercool presentation from Ge Wang of Smule - the company that does the "lighter" app for iPhones. They do really clever things with the audio on the device, which also means they can do apps like the Ocarina flute, for which you blow into the handset microphone
• Rebelvox, which has an interesting "timeshifting" voice technology, which essentially acts as a hybrid between push-to-talk and voice messaging and telephony. This is essentially another form of "non-telephony" VoIPo3G.
• Lots of the usual rhetoric about net neutrality, lobbying on fibre and spectrum etc. It's always worth getting a reminder about how competition just doesn't work in US telecoms - and how much resentment the various carriers seem to be able to garner. Coming from the UK, with copper, cable, fibre, 5 3G operators and 20+ wholesale/unbundled local loop operators I still find it hard to get too exercised by this whole issue. Although I agree with Brough Turner that it would be nice to find a way to push 100Mbit/s to everyone.
• I still find it difficult to get excited - or even vaguely interested - by Twitter. Although I can't justify it yet as it's still growing, I'm enjoying using the term "legacy Twitter" just to annoy the more evangelical enthusiasts. (I also like terms like "legacy IMS" and "tyranny of the SIM card" - religious extremists usually have the least sense of humour about these sorts of things, so deserve to be wound-up occasionally). By next year's eComm, I expect to be able to say Legacy Twitter without the irony.
• A couple of speakers (including Alan Duric from Telio) have shown really cool fixed IP-screenphones for use at home. Someone else showed one from Verizon. I think that these sort of terminals (with integrated web services on a decent-sized screen, and useable videocomms) could well extend the life of the "landline" despite the usual "cutting the cord" rhetoric prevalent this side of the Pond.
• I've seen absolutely nothing new here to suggest that Android will be important, especially in 2009/2010. As before, I think it's foolish to write off Google, but I still can't see the appeal or relevance of the platform to anyone except a few developers excited by the prospect of open source.
• Some good commentary from Google's Washington counsel about net neutrality - "network netrality is about the outcome, not the path". Basically saying it doesn't need extra regulation -pointing out that most broadband providers currently don't mess about with access pipes.
• Fascinating presentation from Cullen Jennings from Cisco about the possibility of network operators limiting the numbers of TCP connections per user, as a sort of back-door way to do traffic and application management.
• The Calliflower platform from Iotum looked highly usable as way to do easy web-based teleconferencing and collaboration. I might actually try this out myself.
• Fonolo's "deep dialling" into IVR systems is still cool (as it was at least year's eComm)
• Interesting discussions & presentations about new approaches to spectrum management - especially extending beyond the "white space" paradigm to a better way of reclaiming and exploiting underused spectrum, even if it is currently licenced to someone. A lot of this seems to revolve around US issues in rural areas that are underserved by fixed broadband. As a native central Londoner I tend to switch off when people start talking about rural connectivity, but I recognise that the US has quite low population density so clearly this is an important topic here.
• Skype announced its free licencing of its wideband codec, which seemed well-received among people I spoke to
• Interesting presentation about "natural interfaces" from Microsoft, plus a great future-looking video, revolving heavily around e-paper, touchscreens, speech input etc.

Technophobes are useful indicators.....

We all know (or are) gadget-lovers and early adopters. They are the people with the coolest devices, playing around with new services and generally enjoying the whole experience of geekery. It's sometimes very tempting to extrapolate from these people to the rest of the market.


To be honest though, often these people are exceptions, not examples. It's sometimes more instructive to watch the behaviour of the laggards and late-adopters.


This post is about a single personal example, so obviously it's not appropriate to assume that it represents a cross-section of the entire marketplace. Nonetheless it's an interesting case study.


I have a friend of mine who is essentially a mobile Luddite. She still uses a three-year old RAZR, on prepay, almost entirely for SMS and the occasional phone call. Doesn't use the (very low res) camera. Hasn't been interested in content, Internet access and certainly not smartphones. Ignores most voicemails. Often is out of battery, call credit, or both. She has derided most phones with QWERTY keypads as being ugly.

She usually tells me off for spending too much time checking email or the Internet on my own phones at inappropriate times.


I sometimes use a question of hers at conferences, to shock attendees (usually themselves "enthusiasts") into realisation of how the real world thinks: "Is Orange better than Vodafone? They have a pretty pink phone & I'm tempted".


It's worth pointing out that from a PC point of view, she's technically savvy. She uses a Mac with software like Mathematica for calculating equations for fluid dynamics, Facebook, Myspace, iTunes and so on.

But until now, phones have been phones. SMS devices, with a secondary voice function.

So I was pretty staggered when she suddenly (a) declared a liking for iPhones, (b) declared a desire for mobile email, and (c) said how impressed she was by the ease of using Google Maps and getting directions on a handset (an iPhone, in particular).

To me, that's more of an indicator of the growing mainstream demand for, and adoption of, smarter devices and mobile applications than any number of enthusiasts.

It's also an indicator that handset vendors and operators seriously need to get their heads around better ways of dealing with prepay subscribers who don't want monthly subscriptions.

Nokia and Skype - the masters at game theory

Various mobile operators are allegedly "furious" that Nokia intends to put some form of Skype client on upcoming devices like the N97.

It's not immediately obvious to me whether it's a full two-way mobile VoIP service intended for use on HSPA, or whether it's an iSkoot-type circuit voice dial-around as seen on various of 3's phones (especially the INQ Skypephones and Facebook device).

Either way, it's clear that Nokia has hit something of a sore spot for the operators.

But although various operators seem to be waving sticks and threatening Nokia on this issue, I reckon it's all bluster.

Because if Nokia was *really* serious about VoIP as an important generator of revenue and traffic, it would have done it itself, not partnered with Skype. The possibility of adding voice into Ovi was something I wrote about over a year ago. An Ovi VoIP client could be perfectly integrated with the device, Nokia could even use SMSCs to create a good off-net SMS. I'd also bet that Nokia could create a really good multi-IMSI experience like Truphone's if it chose.

I reckon that the Finns are really, really good at poker.... or at least the more academic discipline of game theory.

The operators know that Nokia is large enough and skilled enough to "go nuclear" with VoIP if it really wanted. Apart from the devices, its relationship with NSN would help on interop testing and optimisation. And it's large enough to acquire a (struggling) operator with pre-existing roaming deals and number ranges.

I reckon we'll see a bit more grumbling about the Nokia/Skype thing - like we did with Ovi and its SIP VoIP capability and others. Nokia will probably add a "delete option" for the N97. But it will happen elsewhere, and Orange, O2 and co. will start to doubt the wisdom of their N97s being under-specced compared to the ones available elsewhere.

Of course, it's not a surprise that two of the most RCS-friendly operators are the ones with the biggest chip on their shoulders about this. What they don't realise is that Facebook integration on-handset is way more of a threat than Skype when it comes to "ownership". I reckon people would churn VoIP/IM provider (or multi-source) much more easily than social network. It's only the relatively small handful of paying SkypeOut users that's the real threat from a revenue standpoint.

Next week at eComm

Apologies for the slow posting of late - I've been utterly buried in a number of projects, plus MWC in Barcelona last week, leaving me less time to blog.

Next week, however, should be different. I'm away in San Francisco, for a mix of briefings, client meetings and, above all, eComm.

It's been a little while since I scrutinised the eComm website and agenda. I've just looked at it, and I'm staggered by the lineup that Lee Dryburgh has put together. It's going to be 3 days of bombardment by a fantastically diverse set of speakers, with background in everything from spectrum policy to social networks.

I'm speaking about the impending API overload in mobile - trying to reconcile the various operator initiatives, GSMA OneAPI, OMTP BONDI, smartphone OS's, assorted web services and so on.

I'll also try and blog about some of the more interesting companies that I see at the event, so stay tuned....

Quick thoughts on MWC

I haven't really had much time to write posts this week as I've been dashing about between dozens of meetings here in Barcelona.

But some quick things to mention;

• Nokia's 6700 Classic is a really nice small phone - I'm definitely a believer in nice well-engineered metals and other materials, rather than squeaky plastic.
• QVGA screens are really starting to look tired on handsets, especially for web browsing and heavy-duty email. I think iPhone-style 480x320 or VGA (640x480) or WVGA (800x480) are pretty much essential for decent smartphones from now on.
• Oberthur's integrated accelerometer-on-SIM is quite clever. But like most SIM innovations, it will suffer from the fact that most users keep their SIMs longer than their phones unless they churn, so it's easy to put new stuff in the handset itself.
• Lots of policy management and DPI products. Lots of different pitches and usage cases too. Some are pretty good as they focus on integration with customer intelligence, providing data to marketing teams. Still lots of unrealistic expectation of app-level policies, often backed up by a deep lack of understanding about application environments and user behaviour.
• Mostly realism about LTE, with timelines being pushed out a bit. Outside Verizon and Docomo, it's becoming clear that the only other big player in a rush towards it is T-Mobile. I'm wondering if any CTO-to-CFO friction will result in them dusting off their HSPA+ scenarios instead.
• Recognition that Voice over LTE is still not fixed, although various propositions are being suggested. Since I identified issues with VoIPo3G and VoIPoLTE more than a year ago, there's been fair progress, but it's still slow.
• ...although not as slow as IMS handset development. Yes, there's some release-1 RCS phones around, with trials being expected for H2 2009. But the really useful stuff like integration with Facebook, plus the addition of iPhone and Blackberry and other members remains at some indeterminate point in the future. There still seems a lack of thought about prepaid vs. RCS as well, while a 3rd-party SDK doesn't seem to be even on the horizon. There's a big risk that dedicated RCS clients will be made redundant by more full-featured browser and web runtimes that can access handset APIs, and which are more open to innovative developers.
• Truphone launched it's Local Anywhere service, based on multi-IMSI technology. Looks differentiated from the other VoIP / roaming offers., Will be interesting to see how this evolves as it looks to sign up partner operators in different countries
• Adobe is still quietly building up an impressive footprint for Flash and its Open Screen project.
• I met the CEO of possible the world's only prepay quadplay operator at the Highdeal round-table I moderated. Very cool business model & billing/charging system indeed.
• I'm a lot less surprised than many people about the announced Nokia / Qualcomm relationship for US Symbian phones, although I'd guessed that it would be Samsung rather than Nokia that would bring them into the fold.
• Lots of noise (and foot-fall on the stands) among the picocell and femtocell crowd. A lot of feeling that "it's actually happening!" now.
• The GSMA OneAPI platform for opening the network capabilities to third parties is emerging rapidly. I saw a good demo on the Aepona stand.
• Apple is conspicuous by its absence. Not that surprising really.
• A fair amount of noise about Android, as expected. But I've met one or two fellow unbelievers around. We'll probably be burned as heretics by the Googlistas.
• My little Samsung netbook has got a full day of battery life for undemanding tasks like writing meeting notes. No carrying around a charger & power cord this year.
• Not much mobile TV or NFC hype, although there's a bit of "digital money" and remittances talk.
• Continued interest in developing SMS as a service. Interesting pitch from Acision about it's new open platform for playing with SMS - for example delayed rather than instant deliveries. Forget the doomsayers predicting the replacement of SMS by IM - it's easier to grow a $100bn business by 20%, than a $10bn business by 1000%. Oh, and SMS over LTE needs to work just as well as voice.
• Less overall pessimism about the economy than I expected. Although that might be because the real doom-mongers all had their travel expenses cut this year.

And lastly, the "villains of the year" award goes to the GSMA Stasi demanding photo ID to get into the Fira precincts in the morning. Yes, I know security is an issue, but I'm not interested in attending any event that's based on Stalinist "We need to see your papers" approaches. Have they been taken lessons in authoritarianism from Gordon Brown & Jacqui Smith?

Prepaid data - my thanks to the Wiki

If you travel a lot, and you haven't seen it before, I'd heartily recommend checking out the prepaid wireless data resource here.

It lists prepaid data SIMs and tariffs in numerous countries - invaluable if you want to avoid ridiculous and unjustifiable mobile broadband data roaming prices.

Thanks to the Wiki, I managed to get hold of a Yoigo prepay SIM in Barcelona, and it gives me flatrate (albeit slowish) mobile data for €1.20 a day. The SIM costs €10 and comes with €10 of credit. It's great for email and web access on my phone, plus I'm finally able to use Google Maps and navigate myself in a foreign city, for less than the price of an equivalent taxi ride.

It was a bit of a pain to find and buy the SIM. I needed to take my passport as ID, and the sign-up process took about 15 minutes in the store. In other countries like Portugal, the process is a lot smoother.

It's a very good advert for the benefits of unlocked, unsubsidised smartphones. It's also highlighted that I need to get myself an unlocked or reflashed 3G dongle.

Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be an equivalent provider in the US - even on just with flatrate EDGE would be useful.

Time to ditch the phrase "over the top"

One of the big themes of this year's MWC appears to be the justification of LTE deployment business cases. The received (but largely whispered) wisdom seems to be that plain-vanilla "pipes" for normal mobile broadband just won't cut it. You might as well just stick with HSPA and sweat the assets. The CTO of an operator might like LTE's architecture, spectrum flexibility and overall performance - but I can imagine some interesting discussions when CFOs ask "So, what new stuff does it do? How much extra money can we make - or save - and in what timeframes?"

One answer is around operator-managed end-to-end device + service combinations, perhaps for in-car or healthcare sectors. That seems a reasonable target, although I definitely have my doubts about locked or "walled-garden service" laptops.

But I'm also hearing from various large vendors that LTE should enable new revenue streams from exposing QoS or other network assets to web-based businesses or software providers. Fair enough, that's very aligned with Telco 2.0, two-sided business model philosophies.

But there seems to be little emphasis on actually convincing those upstream providers that they really need these extra capabilities - or that the incumbents can be trusted. Given the issues around DPI and Net Neutrality, it would hardly be surprising if many of the Internet application providers viewed these "offers"with wariness. Perhaps they would be better off just lobbying for ever-bigger pipes?

One particular aspect stands out. I've never heard anyone from Google, Facebook, Skype or an enterprise PBX vendor refer to themselves as an "over the top" provider. It's a phrase only used by incumbent operators or major vendors - and usually in a disparaging tone. I get the distinct impression that it's usually used as a more polite alternative to "parasite", on the orders of the speaker's PR team.

I think "over the top" exemplifies the arrogance of the telecom establishment. Most operators wouldn't like their networks and services to be dismissed with hand-waving terms like "plumbing", "legacy" or "dinosaur".

Given that the telecom industry wants to convince these companies to spend money on enhancing "quality of experience", perhaps buying QoS-managed pipes, or advert insertion, or identity management services - shouldn't the industry start being a bit more polite towards their target customer base?

The computing industry refers to third-party applications by the neutral term "ISV" (independent software vendor). Perhaps an equivalent term like "IAP" (independent application provider) would be more appropriate in discussions like these?

There also needs to be an acknowledgement of symmetry. For every capability exposed by an operator and consumed by an Internet player (eg location or messaging or QoS guarantees), there is likely to be a reciprocal relationship in the opposite direction. Why shouldn't an operator use Amazon's data centres for hosted storage - or even use Skype or Facebook as identity and contacts management providers?

If the mobile industry (and also fixed broadband providers) continue to sneer down their noses at Google et al, they should expect to see a even more strenuous efforts by those players to force operators into being plumbers.

DPI and MVNOs - a question

A quick question for any blog readers who work in the area of deep packet inspection for mobile - is it possible to apply different policies to an MVNO's data traffic, vs. the host MNO's retail services? Also, are roamers subject to their home or visited network's policies?

The need for a new approach to roaming

I've spent most of this afternoon sorting out all my meetings and logistics for a week in Barcelona at NetEvents and MWC. One thing that's immediately apparent is that despite all the talk of VoIP, SIM-swapping and the like, I'm going to end up with a large bill for voice and SMS roaming.

I've got dozens of meetings, loads of people I'll need to contact (or be contacted by), inevitable changes to schedules and venues, plus all the usual work and personal call traffic I'd normally get in the UK. I'll be paying for both inbound and outbound roaming calls, which even at the EU's maximum 39p per minute is still likely to add up.

It's clearly not an option just to get a local SIM card - most of the people I need to contact will be outside Spain, and there are too many people likely to contact me, to inform everyone of a new number. For the same reason, one of the "roaming SIMs" is probably not a solution. I can't even have a 'regular' Spanish SIM that I keep year-in year-out, as it would expire after a few months without use.

Neither is WiFi an option. The congestion of the Kubi network at the Barcelona Fira is notorious - as is the pricing. And in any cases, much of the calling I'll need to make will be outside the MWC precincts, in the centre of town or assorted other venues in the evening. Even if it was working and relatively well-priced, many of the VoWLAN service providers have haphazard support of SMS, which is absolutely mandatory at trade shows where you have back-to-back meetings. I will have a voicemail message advising callers to text me, as it's the most reliable method to reach me during the show, rather than voice or email.

It's made me even more certain that the concept of paying a multiple of normal calling or SMS rates when you're travelling, rather than just perhaps a moderate % premium, is a complete anachronism. There is simply no adequate justification, either in terms of technology involved or the value to the user - even with the arcane setup of cellular VLRs and whatnot. The fact that a local SIM would work perfectly fine, barring the hassle factor of advising people of a new number, is a potent illustration of how well things could work, if the system didn't stack the odds against you. It's even more galling because my main number is with O2, which is owned by Spanish operator Telefonica, so I'm paying them huge sums to bounce my call around inside their own network.

I wonder what the regulatory view will be like when operators move to a full IMS or softswitch architecture, when it may not even be necessary for roaming calls or signalling to be "tromboned" back to the home network?

My situation (a frequent traveller, but to lots of different countries) is similar but not identical to those in which someone has two or three regular destinations. People living and working across land borders (eg Hong Kong and mainland China, or the Benelux countries in Europe) often need multiple phones, while people with foreign holiday homes, or students studying abroad, have similar problems. In some cases, their non-resident status may stop them from having postpaid subscriptions in a second country, even if they were prepared to pay for them.

What would be good would be a way to get a local SIM or account/number - ideally without physically having to buy one - and for this to automatically propagated to all your contacts when you were in-country. Or for it to somehow be linked to your existing home account in the network.

One set of possible solutions relates to what I was writing about the other day - multi-IMSI SIM cards could potentially allow two or more local mobile accounts to be tied together via a centralised meta-operator. In a way, this would be a more elegant approach than a dual-SIM phone as the meta-operator could essentially do clever things with call and SMS routing, caller IDs and so on, to give you the appearance of roaming but with local call rates.

I've heard various rumours over the last year or so about this type of "local roaming" concept, but apart from a variant used for telematics and M2M data connectivity, I haven't seen much real action. I suspect that actually getting it working, with all the various permutations for call flows, is pretty tricky - and it's also not obvious to me whether you'd still need some form of client software, or if it can all be tied together via on-SIM applications and menus. There may also be dependencies on different countries' regulatory and commercial stance on MVNOs, plus there are requirements for registration of all SIMs' owners in some markets.

I live in hope. But in the meantime, I think I'll just be very concise with my calls next week. Blame O2 if you call me and I sound abrupt or rude.

Cheap dongles still selling "like hot cakes"

I just went into my local Vodafone store - I was going to get one of their £39 prepay HSDPA dongles, as it's usable abroad for £10-a-day (ie less than hotel WiFi in some places), albeit with a 50MB daily cap.

Hopefully I'll have other alternatives next week while in Barcelona, but I thought that as a backup, that was a pretty good option - especially as it should also work in the US, where I'll be in 3 weeks' time. My usual mobile broadband provider, 3 UK, is great when used "on net" on other 3 networks in Sweden, Hong Kong etc (it's free, no roaming charges), but reverts to £3 per MB elsewhere - like Spain and the US.

Unfortunately, the shop had none in stock. They've sold 6 today - on a mix of prepay and postpay deals - especially to students at the various universities and colleges nearby. I asked the manager about embedded laptops (they sell Dell Mini 9's), and he said that although they sell a few a week, the overwhelming majority of customers are going for dongles.

Bought a netbook....

Given Barcelona's reputation for "tea leaves", especially around the time of MWC, I'm a bit wary of carrying expensive stuff around with me next week. I know several people who've been mugged, pickpocketed, scammed - and I've even seen a cyclist snatch someone's bag off their shoulder right in front of me on one occasion. I like the city, but it's not the safest, especially during an event when every crim in Spain knows there will be tens of thousands of extra laptops and phones in peoples' bags and pockets.

Add to this the fact that I want to take notes directly into a PC during briefings and meetings, but don't want to heft a big computer and the power brick around all the time.

The answer - join the throng and buy a netbook. After two of the most gadget-tastic people I know (Andy Abramson and James Body) mentioned it to me in the space of a week, the Samsung NC10 went to the top of the list, especially as I've had two Samsung PCs before and have been happy with them.

The main spec-related arguments are the big battery (7+ hours of light use apparently) and the 10-inch keyboard and screen which are pretty useable. There's no built-in 3G modem, but I'm happier using dongles anyway, or perhaps a handset with Joiku on it. Cost - £280+VAT

Some observations - although clearly a lot of netbooks are being sold through mobile operators or mobile retailers like Carphone Warehouse, the general PC channel also seems to be doing a brisk trade. The shop that sold me the Samsung said it was the 12th one that they'd sold that day, plus another lot of MSI Wind netbooks. Apparently, almost nobody asks about integral 3G modems at the moment. Most of the ones in CPW or PC World in the UK are sold with separate dongles, if they bundle them with an MNO contract.

The next step in multiplicity: Multi-IMSI SIM cards

I've written numerous times before about mobile multiplicity

• Multiple devices
• Multiple SIMs and users SIM swapping
• Multiple SIMs on the same account
• Dual number and dual personality devices
• Dual number SIMs
• Phones with dual SIM slots

What I haven't really discussed before is the concept of multi-IMSI SIMs. An IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity) is essentially equivalent to a mobile "subscription" or "account". It's not the same as the device identifer (IMEI) or a specific number (MSISDN).

Clearly, there are numerous scenarios where people might want a convenient way to have access to multiple MNOs. It could be because of coverage reasons, pricing, roaming, particular service availability, different purposes (eg work vs. personal accounts) and numerous others. Yes, many of the MNOs would prefer you to concentrate all your spend and mobile activity - but I'm talking here about what the user wants.

Generally the current SIM model, for all its security and convenience advantages, mitigates against this. It's difficult to balance a single experience - or payments - across multiple MNOs. There's no easy equivalent to flipping up a laptop lid & seeing 3 different WiFi networks available on the connection manager.

In the past, the only services used were voice and SMS - and so it made sense to have a single service provider, as you had to keep the same number in order for people to reach you. But for other services, there's no reason not to shop around - Internet access from one MNO, perhaps a music download service from another, an enhanced roaming service from a third. It's up to the operators to pitch a convincing bundle - but as phones get cheaper, most users will expect to be able to pick and choose to some degree, even if it just means having two or three separate devices, with one SIM in each.

This is why I refer to the 'Tyranny of the SIM card', especially around areas like data and roaming. The advantages of security start getting outweighed by the disadvantages of lock-in. Yes it's sometimes just a benevolent dictator, but if you take that analogy, then SIM-locked phones are the equivalent of political imprisonment, especially if they are unsubsidised.

The easiest way around this is just to have an unlocked device and SIM-swap, but frankly that's a bit of a pain for most people. The new dual-SIM devices are a more elegant way around the issue, although the range of products supporting this is currently very limited.

There have been various discussions in the past about "soft SIMs" (Intel seemed keen on the concept for laptops, for example), although these have generally been swept away by security concerns (and, behind the scenes, commercial concerns as well).

Multi-IMSI is something that's been mentioned to me quietly over the last 12-18 months, with increasing frequency. It essentially enables multiple accounts/subscriptions to be loaded onto a single (hardware) SIM. Now at present, it's not possible to have them running simultaneously (eg for separate voice and data connections), and you cannot just "download" multiple operator personalities (eg Vodafone + Orange + 3) as most major MNOs only issue their own, single-operator SIMs.

But I've been hearing about some interesting potential applications, in a variety of contexts. A number of SIM suppliers offer the cards, and various network-side companies have methods of working with them.

I also reckon that there are some interesting regulatory and competitive impacts of the technology if it works well: perhaps even the mobile equivalent of an "unbundled loop" in the long term.

I've got some more to say about some specific applications of multi-IMSI, but I'll leave that to a separate post.

MWC Panel Discussion: Surviving the economy in 2009, "Prospering on a Shoestring"

I am moderating a panel discussion next Monday in Barcelona, looking at various tactics and strategies that can be employed by operators to mitigate the worst impacts of the downturn. It is being organised and sponsored by Highdeal, the billing/charging specialist.

Speakers include representatives from HP, SAP, Telekom Slovenia and Mauritius Telecom, plus Highdeal's CTO.

We'll be looking at a broad spread of issues around the challenges being faced in 2009/2010, ranging from industry consolidation and potential delays in capex, through outsourcing and innovative business models. We'll also drill into how services can be priced and packaged to balance the shifting priorities and behaviours of end users, against the limitations and constraints of operators' OSS and charging infrastructure.

I've done a couple of similar sessions with Highdeal in the past, and they're very interactive and cover a lot of general material; there's no big "pitch", just good discussion and (I hope) a bit of gentle disagreement and debate. There's also a reception afterwards with drinks & canapes.

Details and a sign-up form are here.

Reverse engineering carriers' network policies

18 months ago, I predicted that "that operators will need to start to divulge more about their traffic-shaping policy. Otherwise they'll find that other people will reverse-engineer it and do it for them."

So I felt pretty self-congratulatory when I saw that Google had announced its Measurement Labs tools this week, which does that yet.

I've said before that I can't get too exercised by the whole Net Neutrality debate. There are some perfectly valid reasons to prioritise certain traffic (eg emergency services, to take an extreme example). There are also some perfectly invalid reasons to differentiate traffic types, and I am still confident the market will work out when that occurs, and punish the offenders where it hurts - their customers base and revenues.

Put simply - if carriers want to be viewed as honest and trustworthy, they need to be absolutely clear on their network policies and how/when they are enforced. Any covert throttling or articifical quality degradation should be considered contrary to consumer protection laws, and dealt with appropriately.

My MWC schedule is now full

My thanks to all the various AR people who've been in touch with me over the past few weeks.

My diary in Barcelona is now completely solid with meetings and briefings, so please refrain from additional offers in order to save ourselves wasted time.

(Obvious exceptions made for people who either want to spend money with me, or for invitations to really good parties or dinners)

I'll also be at eComm in San Francisco from 3-5 March, so if you have any representatives there you'd like me to talk to, let me know.

Repeaters vs. femtocells Part 2

I wrote a few months ago that I was hearing renewed noises about repeaters - essentially devices that boost outdoor mobile signals for better indoor coverage. They're generally disliked by many radio-planning traditionalists, especially where they are bought and installed illicitly by individuals.

So it's interesting to see that Nextivity has signed a deal with 3 Ireland for deploying its products for improved indoor coverage.

However, scrutinising what's been written, I don't actually think that this is a case of repeaters vs. femtos - it seems much more likely that this deployment scenario is about providing 3G coverage to places in rural Ireland that don't have DSL or cable, and which therefore couldn't support fixed broadband anyway.

Not only that, but for houses in remote districts - especially if they have thick stone walls - there is clearly likely to be a problem with decent indoor coverage from the normal macro network, plus the signal attenuation would effectively reduce the overall capacity of the base station.

It will be interesting to see if the solution is also used by 3 Ireland in urban areas, where the density of users and complicated urban propagation characteristics might make the overall RF planning more complex. (I also realised I missed an announcement a month or so ago about a similar solution being used in T-Mobile Netherlands retail stores)

Yes, handset WiFi is important - but dodgy surveys don't help make the case

Like many smartphone owners, I use WiFi quite regularly - although it's almost entirely for use at home. I find that iPhone users tend to be the most WiFi-savvy group, especially if they have come from the ranks of Mac laptop owners.

That said, I generally don't use WiFi hotspots on my phone - if I'm at a hotel or airport, I'd rather use my laptop if I've got 30-60 minutes. And if it's only 5 minutes, I'm certainly not going to sign up & pay money via a small-screen browser.

The solution is to have various automated auto-login options for devices, either via some for of embedded client (yes, even UMA has a role here), or an aftermarket app like DeviceScape's or Boingo's. On the other hand, this happens so infrequently, I'm certainly not prepared to have a separate paid-hotspot subscription for my phone - I don't even have one for my laptop, which would certainly be a higher priority.

Over time, this will continue to evolve, especially given roaming rates and the desire of operators to start offloading traffic from their macro networks.

On featurephones, it's pretty pointless having WiFi for all sorts of reasons - data consumption is almost zero, so the offload argument doesn't fly in particular.

In general though, I'm definitely in favour of smartphones having WiFi - it's quite possibly the case why the BlackBerry Storm isn't doing as well as many hoped, especially outside the US.

But what I do have a problem with is dodgy surveys to try and drum up interest. Honestly DeviceScape - what's the point in surveying your own user base (ie loyal WiFi smartphone users) and asking them if they like WiFi, and want it in more phones? Quite frankly, I'm curious about the 14% of people who *don't* want more WiFi in handsets, given the bias inherent in the survey base.

This just underscore a point I've made before. Any survey which is clearly being done specifically for PR purposes is generally not worth the paper it's written on. My standard expectation is that "90% of respondents don't know what they're talking about, and the other 10% lie". And that's where it's actually a representative sample, rather than "we asked people we could find cheaply and easily". In political polls, there is a branch of science called "psephology" that analyses election results. That's also an imprecise area - but at least it's treated with some level of rigorous oversight.

Surveys which are being done for real, internal, management information and product development purposes, but which have some data of external interest as well, can be a different story. Even then, you should always look carefully at the selection of the sample, and the "neutrality" of the question wording, as well as the number of responses.

Maybe there should be something like a "Technology User Survey Council" which sets down best-practice recommendations for sampling and questionnaires?

UK mobile broadband market slowing down

Sometimes not all the most interesting news is available online. I get the paper edition of the UK mobile trade magazine, Mobile Today - and a front page article from a week ago doesn't seem to have made it to the website.

The article is quite short, but the headline states baldly "Mobile Broadband Sales Flat". It states that growth in dongle sales have dropped off since the beginning of the year - presumably a mix of post-Xmas sales lull, coupled with economy-related concerns.

Fitting in with my view that there's only a limited pool of people wanting ongoing monthly contracts, the publication quotes an anonymous Vodafone person saying "Dongle sales are really just coming from prepay now." There is no mention at all of embedded-3G notebooks.

Clearly, the UK is one of the more mature markets for dongles, plus it's also one of the hardest-hit by the economic crisis (despite the protestations of our hapless prime minister). It's also been one of the most prominent in shifting to prepay - I was in Spain last week and tried to get a prepaid dongle, but none of the operators sold them. So it's perhaps not surprising that my domestic market is at the sharp end of any weakness in mobile broadband contract uptake.

However, I suspect that this will be mirrored elsewhere - although mobile broadband will continue to grow in user numbers in 2009, it won't be accelerating as hard as it has done up until now. I'm also expecting it to put further pressure on prices - although perhaps the silver lining in the cloud is that it could mean that radio network congestion risk starts to be pushed out into the future.

Enterprise UMA: Dead on Arrival. Enterprise Femtos: Come back in 2012

There seems to be a sudden flurry of activity around enterprise FMC version 2.0. I'm expecting to see a large amount of further hype over the next few weeks, especially around MWC in Barcelona.

In my view, it's all smoke and no fire.

Meru Networks has inexplicably partnered with T-Mobile US to offer a corporate version of the dual-mode WiFi UMA system. Its "distributed single access point" architecture makes it slightly less unsuitable than the more complex WLAN networks from other vendors, that would necessitate AP-to-AP handoff. It is highly notable that competing WLAN vendor Aruba put out a white paper about UMA a year ago which I discussed here, but has been very quiet on the topic ever since.

Quite why T-Mobile is still flogging the dead UMA horse is a separate question. It doesn't take much imagination to guess why it's made no mention of subscriber numbers to Hotspot @ Home. If it was even slightly successful, it would be shouting from the rooftops.


I've written many, many times over the past 4 years before about UMA's deficiencies for the general consumer marketplace. In the enterprise, there are even more challenges - security, PBX integration (please don't give me the substitution pitch yet again), devices, roaming, numbering, operator lock-in, WLAN vendor lock-in, WLAN coverage, TCO, management, monitoring and above all channel to market and support. Then there's the question of how the enterprise can use the WiFi on the devices for non-carrier applications. Oh, and most of the most popular dual-mode WiFi smartphones (except RIM's) don't have UMA. It's not in the G1, most obviously.

The only upside I can see is that unlike most of the PBX-centric approaches to corporate FMC, you can actually get SMS to work OK.


In a nutshell, I'm surprised that Meru is wasting its time and money on this. Yes I'm sure there will be a handful of demo sites, and maybe even some sort of commercial launch. But I'm utterly certain that in a year's time it will have had precisely zero effect on the overall enterprise comms market.


Enterprise femtocells are another emerging hot topic - but one which has slightly more "legs" - eventually. I've been hearing escalating buzz about this for the last 6 months or more. I first wrote something on this in May 2007, when my conclusion was that 2012 seemed like a reasonable timeframe for massmarket commercial offerings. Maybe I'm being optimistic given the economy, but I still reckon that's about right.

What appears to be happening is that the femto guys seem to have learnt some of UMA's lessons, and "get" the complexities of corporate integration. I've heard talk about PBX integration from day one, awareness of the issues around firewalls and network management, and definitely some cognizance of the difficulty of getting and retaining a channel. I'm expecting the lead routes to market to be hybrid fixed-mobile operators with large integration units and an loyal established base of corporate PBX customers.

It's still not going to be easy though - there's all sorts of little hidden issues to sort out in large buildings / enterprises (eg access to ducts and cables, do you need power-over-ethernet for femtos, what are the compliance and Sarbanes Oxley implications of 3rd-party infrastrucure etc). I'm expecting some others to go for the other end of the spectrum and start talking about SMEs. In theory, yes, SMEs could go "all wireless". But in reality it's not that simple, and there's the usual challenges of 10,000 channels to get to the buyers, high cost of sale per customer for little margin, and niggly annoyances like integrating/replacing landlines for faxes and security alarms.

To give an example of the complexities - what happens if a business gets femtocells installed on its premises... and then one of them gets stolen? Or hacked? Whose responsibility is it? I see lots of revenue for lawyers....

There's also a little bit of fuzziness about how "enterprise" gets defined here, and I expect to see a few "corner cases" emerge before the real massmarket. In my view, the main categories are:

- SME sites (small offices, shops etc)

- Private large-enterprise sites (corporate HQs, warehouses etc)

- "Public" business locations with lots of visitors (big retail stores, government buildings, HQ lobby areas etc)


The first point to make is that femtos are very poorly-suited to visitor-heavy locations, as they are single operator only. I'm not sure that a council would want to improve coverage or costs for just 25% of visitors. Obviously, they could confine the benefits just to employees, though - assuming the signal doesn't mess up macro-network coverage for visitors with interferece, deep inside the building. There's possibly some clever stuff that could be done with roaming - so maybe deals can be cut which enable Big Corporation Inc to say "cheap calls for all our overseas vistors while on the premises" although that's not as easy as it sounds either.

There might also be some other "hotspot" business cases for cafes or hotels or airports (eg the "free mobile broadband" business models I discuss in my recent report). I could certainly imagine a sign on (for example) Costa Coffee, saying "Free HSPA access for T-Mobile users". Is that "enterprise femto" if it's the coffee chain paying the bill?


I reckon that ip.access knows more than most in this sector about the corporate market. After all, it was pitching the concept of enterprise picocells back when I first met them in 2001. I remember mentioning to the CEO at the time that it wasn't as easy as it looked, and that the usual problems of attaching an operator-owned box to the corporate-owned LAN would apply (demarcation points, VLANs, firewalls, support, management, monitoring again etc). Over time, I was proved right, and the majority of its picocells in business environments (I think) have been put in singly, often with a completely separate backhaul connection rather than sharing the LAN. They've done some analysis on picos vs. femtos which I'm inclined to agree with as it reduces the need for things like femto-femto handoff - but neither is easy, either technically, operationally or commercially.

So, I wouldn't be surprised to see a few instances enterprise-ish femtos appearing in 2010-2011. But I'm not expecting to see "Company X deploys Operator Y's femtos throughout its new campus site and integrates with IP-PBX vendor Z's infrastructure" for a long time yet. It's not just a case of hanging a couple of cellular access points off an existing LAN.

NFC vs ordinary RFID in mobile phones

I saw an interesting presentation today about RFID tags, mostly pertinent to industrial applications like asset tracking, logistics and so forth.

It made me start thinking about where the applications for NFC on handsets might stop, and "plain vanilla" RFID begin.

There are a number of differences here - NFC is more secure, but shorter-range. It is also being standardised and tied into various business models with operators. Conversely, RFID has longer range (passives work at up to 10 metres, and powered ones considerably more), but is generally a bit less secure.

The issue I see is that most of the NFC applications are heavily dependent on the slow churning wheel of industry standards, as well as (probably) being tied to mobile operators. This is fine in concept for some of the more "sensitive" applications like banking, but probably over-engineered for things like "smart posters" and the like. There is also a huge elephant in the room about how NFC links in to handset UI and applications. If I have a stored-value card like an Oyster "in my phone", I ought to be able to check my balance from the phone screen, look at recent transactions and so on. At present, the UI/app side of NFC appears woefully weak to me.

RFID on the other hand could have lots of simple applications - simply attaching a passive RFID sticker to phone could be useful for things like anti-theft, for example, or tracking an employee inside a building (where's the closest cardiologist to a patient in a hospital, for example).

I'm wondering if NFC is over-complicating the whole "short-range access" part of handsets, by having too much focus on (mostly pointless in the short term) applications like digital wallets.

Carnival post - some great other stuff as well

Thanks to mjelly for including my post on the economy vs. mobile in this week's Carnival of the Mobilists.

There's some other top-notch posts this week too, including one of Tomi Ahonen's on Nokia, Visionmobile on telco APIs, and Ajit Jaokar on privacy.

Check it all out here

Lots of talk about Spectrum Policy 2.0. Don't hold your breath.

In the last couple of weeks I've been pitched with various concepts and philosophies about next-generation spectrum management.  The general view of some of the more jaded members of the industry is that "auctions don't work". 

So first we've had some suggestions about revenue-share models for spectrum - which I reckon is quite cool in concept but a nightmare to implement, given the consultative and legislative processes in place.

Next up, Lee Dryburgh has a cool interview with Sascha Meinrath who espoused the "White space" argument of using the spectrum more efficiently by "opportunistic access" and a more democratic view of the airwaves by which people can transmit without being beholden to major carriers or operators. Frankly I'm unconvinced - it sounds pleasingly democratic but overlooks minor issues like economies of scale in device and RF silicon production. It's difficult enough trying to make power-efficient phones with the fixed bands we have today, let alone ones that have extra cognitive & tuning capabilities to sneak broadband into other under-used slivers of spectrum. Let's see how the current white space initiatives fare before imagining "end-user empowerment" utopias.  (It is, incidentally, last orders for the eComm 2009 early bird registration tomorrow, so head over to book yourselves in).

Then, I saw in today's Sunday Times that apparently the UK government is contemplating giving away some of the "digital dividend" spectrum band after analogue-TV switch off rather than auctioning it. However, it will come with "strings attached" - basically that the new owners have to commit to doing a fibre rollout in tandem with the wireless deployment.

I've also mentioned before the idea of band-sharing of government spectrum (eg radar bands), in a similar fashion to the white spaces concept.

Overall, my view is that this is all very worthy, and we're starting to get the various technological enablers in place. But it's going to be an exceptionally long haul - 10 years or more - before we see any radical shift in the way that frequencies are allocated and used. I think there are distinct risks that any notional efficiency we gain by getting access to "wasted" spectrum, or by selling it in new ways, will instead just be wasted in a different way through fragmentation and poor user experience. 

I don't buy into the concept of "democratisation of the airwaves" for its own sake. In general, I think that market forces + occasional heavier fist of regulation seem to be doing OK at driving the current incumbents to improve accessibility and useability of mobile. A lot of the "net neutrality" rhetoric is tedious and irrelevant in sufficiently competitive markets. Maybe a bit less in the US, where there's more of an ideological belief that "openness" is somehow special, but at the end of the day I think there's something to be said for scale and large companies that have resources to iron out the complexities, as long as it's possible to hold them to account. 

That said, I think that 2.4GHz WiFi has been pretty good at providing a balance - having at least some unlicenced / light-licenced spectrum has helped keep the other licencees honest. It has, however, highlighted that large-scale "grassroots" deployments don't work.

Victory for commensense branding - HSPA+

OK, so HSPA isn't the most snappy acronym on the planet. But most people in the industry have grown to recognise and evn like it.

There's been a bit of a spat about the next step though - some companies (notably Qualcomm) have been using the fairly clean and intuitive HSPA+ .

Others (notably Ericsson and the official standards-definer 3GPP) have been using clunky terms like HSPA Evolved, HSPA Evolution and the like.

Commonsense has prevailed - Vodafone's announcement has pretty much nailed shut the coffin on this Evolution verbiage. Why use four syllables when one will do?

Now I'm hoping they go one better and go back to call "that" Barcelona event by its proper name, 3GSM, rather than its current bland moniker....

Nortel - an lesson in economic realities

Yesterday, Canadian network equipment market Nortel filed for bankruptcy.

I don't want to address the specific factors that have led to its downfall, but rather the possible consequences for the wider industry, which highlight the "interconnectedness" of the telecom sector.

There are lots of direct and indirect consequences:

• According to Reuters, one of Nortel's main creditors is Flextronics, a contract manufacturer. Its own statement yesterday highlighted that it had been undertaking "risk mitigation" with regard to Nortel for some time. Expect a lot more "risk mitigation" to occur in the industry - requests for cash upfront, reduced payment periods, perhaps leasing rather than sale and so on.
• "Risk mitigation" is a lot easier for large, diversified suppliers like Flextronics. It will be less obvious what happens to Nortel's other suppliers. There's a good comment on supply-chain fragility here, which talks about the possibile impacts on specialist chipmakers. Airvana, which has an OEM relationship with Nortel for CDMA equipment, put out its own statement yesterday, referencing unpaid bills. Its shares fell 9% yesterday, against 6% for Flextronics.
• Personally, I'm thanking good fortune that I don't have any outstanding bills with Nortel, which has been a client in the past. Things are tough enough for small businesses without dealing with bad debts - and it makes me certain to be wary about any other clients that seem to have cashflow issues in future.
• Irrespective of plans for job cuts, there will be plenty of Nortel CVs out with recruitment consultants. Many suppliers and partners will find that key contacts are no longer in position - adding more friction and uncertainty even where business continues.
• Its enterprise customers seem sanguine at the moment. Lets see if that attitude lasts if the company's corporate business unit gets sold - perhaps any new future owner will have a different attitude to support or pricing.
• Nortel has equity stakes in a number of other technology companies. It is possible that these may be sold to realise cash - but at what price? Indian company Sasken, another of Nortel's suppliers, also has the Canadian firm as owner of about 10% of shares. Perhaps in anticipation of a fire-sale of a large chunk of equity, its share price tanked yesterday. Expect analysts to be picking through the shareholder registers of publicly-quoted tech companies in weeks ahead, to see who else is "exposed" in this way. Even for private companies, the anticipation of sales of stakes may negatively impact the valuations of the other owners' shares. Trapeze Networks, for instance, has Nortel, Motorola and Juniper as investors. If Nortel sells its stake at a discount, Motorola and Juniper's accountants will probably have to reflect a write-down in asset value themselves.
• This is going to intensify the attitude of operators to restrict their strategic supply contracts to large and well-funded vendors. Mid-sized and startup vendors are going to find it much trickier to cut deals with carriers, and will be forced to approach the "big boys" as OEM partners or channels, or just focus on Tier-2 and Tier-3 customers.
• Now Nortel has falled, everyone (especially in the investment world, such as hedge funds) will think "Right. Who's next?". As we saw during the financial crisis last year, this can precipitate the failure of other relatively-healthy companies. It's certainly not going to help anyone looking for credit in the telecom sector.

Overall, it's not good news at all. While at one level, it is going to be necessary for some companies to fail in order to allow the rest of the industry to consolidate and maintain profitability, this is not a panacea. As seen in other industries, the interlinking of supply chains and other relationships has significant knock-on effects.

I'm hoping that the mobile industry doesn't have the sort of dense layout of dominos seen in the finance sector. There is good cashflow coming in at the top, after all. But Nortel provides an object lesson to us.

Mobile industry in a state of denial about the economy

I'm increasingly of the opinion that many in the mobile industry are being insufficiently pessimistic about 2009.

I keep hear people saying "Oh, nobody will ditch their mobile account". Well, yes, in the same way they won't ditch food, either. But I wouldn't want to be selling foie gras, or running an expensive but undifferentiated restaurant at the moment.

In particular, I'm curious to see if the sudden burst of growth and enthusiasm around smartphones will be the unstoppable bandwagon that some observers believe. Generally in a recession, people like "cheap luxuries" (pizza delivery does well, for example). I'm not sure that top-end phones and ongoing data plans fit into that category.

I also think that there will be a big focus on the cost side for operators in 2009. Handset subsidy and increasing customer support and returns costs will be a major focus. Some operators will also try to position themselves as saving costs for their customers - we already see offers suggesting people can "save money after Xmas", by deferring handset upgrades for a few months in favour of receiving a large cut in their bills instead.

At a retail level, there will be more shopping-around. Customers will start to question whether they really need 600 minutes, or free video-calling credit they don't use. There has already been a notable shift to rolling monthly contracts, and a broad range of SIM-only propositions for use with unlocked phones. I've seen that 3 UK now has a 6-month contract - perfect for economy-worriers.

The other thing I've been discussing with people concerns investment and capex. This year will see a range of spectrum awards - 2.6GHz in various other countries, 3G licences in India and so on.

I'm particularly interested to see whether bidding for UK 2.6GHz spectrum is much more muted than it would have been in the past - or whether impending capacity problems for mobile broadband will make the operators grit their teeth and do it anyway. I spent a lot of time looking at this are for a governmental body last year, but before the full grip of the recession hit. What's now clear is that any potential bidder relying on debt to fund spectrum purchase or network build-out will be having second thoughts. I'm not expecting too many adventurous expeditions from North American or Asian companies fancying their chances in a highly-crowded market, either. On the other hand there are 5 operators - and 2500-2690MHz isn't enough for all of them to get 2 x 20 MHz for future LTE deployments.

My friends over Telco 2.0 have been musing about whether we'll see a push to make spectrum purchases more linked in to commercial success, perhaps by revenue-share arrangements. I think that's an interesting notion, but would probably take years of consultation and hand-wringing by all concerned.

My bet is that the UK auction will be moderately successful (if it goes ahead, given the interminable legal wranglings about spectrum & reallocation of 900MHz GSM frequencies which are currently blocking its progress). I'll have a punt that total receipts will be in the £1.5-2bn range - reasonably substantial, but nowhere near some projections I heard last year.

Overall, I think that the industry is going to have a couple of wake-up calls in Q1-Q2, as financial results start to unveil the grim realities. I don't think that some company's share prices have enough pessimism built-in yet - too many analysts and investors see the sector as counter-cyclical. I'm not seeing many signs that the much-vaunted fiscal stimulus moves by various governments will be of direct benefit yet - if anything, I reckon the fixed side of telecoms stands to gain more, by pushing state-funded fibre build-outs.

As I've said before, I'm not taking a glass half-empty view because I really want to. It doesn't do my own business any good if nobody is buying research reports or consulting services or speaking engagements. But at the same time, I think I need to be realistic - and I still meet quite a few others who seem to be enjoying the warm glow of their rose-tinted spectacles.

And lastly, getting back to the question of whether mobile use really is sacrosanct in a recession, a tip-o-the-hat to Patrick for highlighting a story about someone who actually has binned his phone outright...

Mobile social networking - how I'll know when it's going mainstream....

This falls into the category of "amusing personal anecdotes" rather than "rigorous industry analysis". But it also reflects on the complexities of getting user experience right, and mapping telecom and mobile services onto the way people actually live their lives.

One of my close friends is, for want of a better term, "a bit of a player". Trying to keep track of the various females in his life is a fulltime job. One thing is clear though - FaceBook is pretty important to him, as is SMS, MSN, Gmail and obviously mobile voice. He doesn't have a landline, and his Blackberry is strictly work-only.

But although he uses FaceBook as a hub for his busy social life, he does not really appear bothered (yet) about getting mobile access to it. He'll ask people he meets "Are you on Facebook?", remember their name or email address, and add it later via the PC.

I'm the same - even though I do look at FaceBook on mobile, I think I've only ever once "added a friend" on a phone - and that was in the relaxed confines of a conference, rather than in a noisy bar. (Note to readers: I don't have work contacts on FB, so please don't request it).

Conversely, if my friend wants to swap phone numbers, he'll type in the number and "give the other person a missed call" so they get the caller ID. Sometimes he'll just hand the phone to a new acquaintance and invite her to type her own name & number directly into it. He might also add an email address or IM nickname.

I've seen various people suggesting that mobile "will become the new social network". I'm not 100% convinced, especially because of the incumbency of Facebook / Myspace / Bebo etc. On the other hand, whoever gets the "add friend" experience working first is probably going to get a huge advantage.

When I see my friend say "Hey, you're really cool, we should meet up some time. Put your Facebook ID in my phone" I'll know it's really going mainstream...

Dual-SIM phones - separating voice and data?

There are already a few dual-SIM phones around on the market, like the Samsung D880 and LG KS660. They are particularly popular in markets for which there are advantages to arbitrage between different carriers' networks, especially for prepay users. Some tariffs do not include "cross-network" minutes, so it's easier for users to simply have multiple SIMs and numbers than waste money on off-net calls.

Most of these phones have been 2G-oriented, although there are some 3G ones emerging as well.

It strikes me that there could be a large market for dual-SIM devices which are optimised to work with one 2G (voice+SMS) SIM, and another for 3G data. So, for example, you could keep your existing voice service while roaming, but benefit from a local cheaper prepaid data SIM.

In fact, even when not travelling, it would be good to be able to disaggregate the voice and data plans, and purchase them from two different operators if that offered better price / coverage / speed. Yes, it would mess up some of the ideas that operators are trying to push with mobile social networks and IMS concepts like RCS, but as an end user I'm not really bothered by that.

Clearly, this wouldn't be for everyone - and there would definitely be value in operators and device vendors offering innovative fully-blended services to try to keep people bundling everything in a single contract. But it would be good to have healthy competition to keep them honest.

Really, the best outcome would be to do away with the legacy SIM card altogether, so you could sign up for the access provider(s) of choice more easily - and switch without hassle. Or perhaps the ownership model for SIMs needs to change, so that you the user (or a neutral 3rd-party) own it, rather than the network.

Notifications and "keep-alives" from mobile apps - the battery issue

I've written before about the issues of power management in smartphones using Web 2.0 and other applications. Web services and widgets that use Javascript to pull down content in the background, presence clients checking for buddies' status updates. Social networking apps looking for new data, and so on.

The problem is exacerbated with smartphones that allow full multi-tasking, as they may have multiple applications pinging the network. This isn't too bad with 2G GPRS/EDGE, because of the way the radio channels are set up. But with 3G, and especially HSPA, there's a problem, because the radio has two "active" states (lets say "full" and "standby"), with different levels of power consumption, as well as a third state which could be called "off".

(If you want the full technical explanation on DCH and FACH channels, Martin Sauter has a great overview here)

Keeping the radio in the either fully-active or standby-active state is a battery killer.

This doesn't just impact "over-the-top" third party apps either. At the moment, it applies equally to "through-the-middle" operator services like RCS too. In theory, the operator should be able to control this a bit better, as it knows the various timings for the states on its network, and should in theory be able to configure the application to work around this.

But this would then need the application to be aware of the network state, and/or vice versa. And it would be complicated where the user had multiple operator clients running on the device (say, both email and presence).

As per normal, the handset, network and application areas of the industry don't really talk to each other. As with other themes in the industry, there's still the brick wall when you suggest that applications should be "bearer aware".

One option is to have some sort of "notification broker" that bundles up all the "keep alive" messages and sends them together, at times that optimise for battery life on the device and/or impact of the sheer number of these short messages on the network.

The next question is who controls the notification broker. And whether it's in the OS, a higher-level client, or even the radio. I think this may turn out to be a future battleground for the industry.

One thing to ponder on: Apple has been working on a push notification engine, although it's been delayed. And it also doesn't like background applications running on the iPhone.

It wouldn't surprise me to see an operator-sponsored approach as well. Possibly it already exists in some of the more "controlled" OS/app stacks like DoCoMo's. But I suspect that this will be more about protecting the network, rather than the handset battery - one solution optimising simultaneously for both seems unlikely.

This has huge implications for application developers, Internet players, handset vendors and operators.

I suspect the optimum solution would be a full two-sided version run by the carriers, used for internal apps like their own presence, but also with a completely open and standardised API for 3rd-party developers and hosted MVNOs. It might even be a new source of revenue. The other option is one run by the OS vendors - but even then, it would be preferable to have some sort of coordination with both operators and each other.

One to watch in 2009, I think.

Disposable mobile broadband - my experience

Someone close to me is going into hospital for an operation soon. They want to take their Mac with them for web and email access while recuperating. And it turns out that the institution concerned only has a paid WiFi hotspot service, at the typical extortionate rates, with the usual clunky credit-card sign up. It's also unclear whether the WiFi has ubiquitous coverage in the building.

Solution - as an alternative/substitute, I got them a 3G dongle as a gift. Obviously that's also a little hostage to coverage issues, but I'm finding central London not too bad unless I'm in a basement. Also, it's not necessary to have multi-MB speeds for HD video, or huge file download limits, in this case.

Given their expected stay in hospital, their existing 20MB ADSL + 802.11n WiFi coverage, and relatively infrequent normal out-of-home PC use (and iPhone ownership), there was no point in getting an 18 / 24 month ongoing contract. A packaged, boxed, prepaid dongle was ideal.

I saw that Vodafone announced a standalone prepaid dongle a week or so back, for £39 including an inclusive 1GB data allowance. You can buy more at £15 per GB through normal prepay channels. This seemed pretty good. Unfortunately, and despite what the first Voda store I visited told me, it doesn't currently support Apple Macs. Luckily, that one was out of stock anyway, and the second one on London's Oxford Street had some more clued-up staff who gave me accurate information.

Being two days before Xmas, with hordes of shoppers in London, I wasn't exactly getting personal service at some of the other stores. My patience ran thin in O2 and T-Mobile and Orange stores. But anyway, none seemed to have nice, convenient prepaid "in a box" dongles that didn't need contracts or other hard work to sign up, at least based on the display info and brochures. I was a bit surprised, as I'd though that T-Mo had a similar offer, but I couldn't find it.

So, my last port of call was 3 UK. They've been heavily advertising the dongle-as-Xmas-present offer all over London, so I was pretty confident they'd have what I needed. And yes, they have three pre-packaged options, based on Huawei E160 modem sticks (HSDPA 3.6 only, but that's good enough). They offer 1GB, 3GB and 12GB prepaid boxed bundles, with the data "credit" lasting 1/3/12 months respectively. Apple support was indicated on the outside of the box.

I was in store for about 10-15 minutes, was dealt with by two busy-but-pleasant staffers, who helpfully pointed out that the midrange 3GB bundle was, in fact, discounted to just £50 instead of the indicated £70. (Compared to £30 or £100 for the 1GB or 12GB offers). They also offered me the option of black or white dongles - obviously white to go with the MacBook.

Sold.

I paid £50 (ie €52 / $74) for the modem and 3GB / 3 months of access. At that rate, it's essentially disposable. Whether 3 is making any profit on it, if most of the 3GB gets used up, but the account doesn't get topped up afterwards, is another question entirely.

As a side-note - given that some London hotels still charge £10 or even £20 for a day's WiFi, anyone coming to London for a week or more would be insane not to use the same approach.

My 2008 predictions - how did they turn out?

I know it's become a bit of a cliche among analysts and commentators to do an annual set of predictions, and a post-mortem on the previous years. But for once, I'm going to go with the consensus, and go ahead anyway.

So without further ado, I'm going to revisit my 2008 predictions, originally posted here

1) There is a notable shift towards non-operator unlocked 'vanilla' handsets

Yes and no. There's certainly been a healthy market of people buying SIM-only mobile contracts in Europe, either with new handsets or unlocked legacy ones. On the other hand, operator exclusivity and better integration/optimisation on devices like the iPhone, BlackBerry Storm and T-Mobile G1, and 3/INQ 1 have ensured continued use of carrier channels for smartphones. The picture varies a lot by country and region, though.


2) The European Commission cracks down on data roaming prices.

Yes. You can't say you weren't warned.


3) Mobile broadand continues its rapid growth - but 3G-embedded laptops lose out even further to USB-based 3G modems

Yes. Enough said.


4) At least one mobile operator will face an investigation over reported numbers

No. Unless I missed anything, I don't think there has been any major incident of slapped wrists. I suspect investors are becoming a bit more savvy about interpreting reported numbers like ARPU, data revenues and "subscribers" for themselves.


5) Android... hmmm, it's just another platform

Yes. "We'll be back here in 12 months saying that Google's Android might be a big deal in 2009". Quite.


6) Technologies for exploiting end-user context and state become the hot topic of the year.

Up to a point. Lots of talk and conferences on APIs and presence and context-awareness, so yes it's certainly been a "hot topic". Plenty of discussion about possible business models whereby telecom operators can monetise their internal knowledge about their subscribers' context. But not that much real revenue or really impressive service launches yet.


7) Operators realise that knee-jerk attempts to block VoIP are counterproductive.

Yes, by and large. Many mobile operators have recognised that VoIP simply isn't a big threat, given complexity of use, and the fact that competitive and regulatory pressures are exerting much greater impact on circuit voice pricing. It varies by operator and region, but the DPI vendors' rhetoric is now much more about throttling video and P2P than blocking Skype.


8) Femtocells have a year of ups and downs. Some niche success, but practicalities will mean it's H2'09 or 2010 before massmarket deployment.

Yes. We're getting there on standards, and we're seeing the first soft-launches, but there are still too many optimists with steep hockey-stick curves. My forecast for 2009 shipments is still below one million units.


9) OK, this might be wishful thinking, but I'm hoping to see more pragmatism & innovation around the concept of mobile multiplicity.

Yes! There's a fast-growing acceptance that people will have multiple devices, and multiple operators. Even Verizon is talking about a 400%+ target for penetration. We're seeing dual-SIM phones, options for multiple numbers or personalities on a single device and so forth. Bundled phone+dongle contracts, too. We've still got a long way to go to get shared data plans across multiple gadgets, but even that is being discussed regularly.


10) No, No, No, No, No

- Mobile search. Still pointless. Yes. I know it's contentious, but I still see no evidence that people "want to find, not search" on their handsets. Tell that to Google with all their searches from the iPhone....

- Mobile advertising will definitely grow - but it's not going to get beyond a few % of ARPU in the foreseeable future. Yes. Definitely growing, but it won't solve world hunger.

- Mobile centrex. Yes. Still stuck on case studies of 11-person media agencies in Stockholm. No sign of massmarket uptake among either large businesses or SMEs.

- UMA dual-mode services. OK, maybe we'll get to 2-3 million users in 2008. Yes. No recent hard numbers from Orange or T-Mobile US - but I'm sure they'd be trumpeting loudly if they'd grown significantly. If anything, we may still be below 2 million in terms of actual active users.

- Unfortunately, we'll still have mobile industry dinosaurs referring to handsets as 'terminals'. Yes. As I said, it's a good filter for who "gets" mobile in 2009. Do you reckon Steve Jobs ever refers to the iPhone as a terminal?

- Unlicenced-spectrum wide area wireless. Yes. Nothing happening yet, although the white spaces discussion in the US is interesting, but still a way from real-world usage.

- GSMA's IPX. Actually, this is an interesting one. There's been much less emphasis on the IMS-based QoS-driven parallel pseudo-Internet this year. Instead, they're doing useful interoperability stuff around things like number translation and carrier ENUM.


I'll be working on my 2009 predictions over the next couple of weeks.

"Third-party pays" mobile data

One of the themes that I've started to explore recently is where someone other than the end user pays for mobile data access.

We're all familiar with this is when we use "free" WiFi in hotels or cafes - the venue owner picks up the bill, or a conference organiser.

I also saw a very good press release yesterday from mBlox, talking about the need for content providers to pick up the tab for connectivity - he makes an analogy with the sender of a letter or parcel paying for the stamp (sender pays), rather than than the receiver. mBlox's chairman, Andrew Bud, is a regular speaker at events like Telco 2.0 and articulates the need for this type of model very well.

However, my view is that the content-oriented "sender pays" model is just a narrow slice of a much broader opportunity for sponsored / third-party data. In general, mBlox and Andrew Bud tend to be very focused on "packaged" mobile transactions and content - downloadable videos, premium SMS, MMS, ringtones, songs, games and so on.

While these are undoubtedly important, in my view access to more open Internet mobile services will vastly eclipse that segment over time. Packaged content should grow, but I expect that ultimate demand is tiny compared with that for mobile access to FaceBook, Google search and maps, general web access, VoIP, corporate remote access and assorted web-based applications and widgets.

There needs to be a generic mechanism for mobile data - on phones, PCs and other devices - to be sold on a wholesale basis by mobile operators.

There needs to be a "free HSPA" capability to mirror "free WiFi" for notebook users at conferences (or across whole cities).

There needs to be a way to get free mobile web access paid for by advertisers.

There needs to be an mechanism that spans multiple operators and roaming, so for example a local tourist authority could sponsor free access by visitors to websites of local attractions and restaurants on their phones.

There needs to be a way for a new social network site to offer free mobile access, across all operators, to new users for their first month.

There needs to be a way that I can get a "global subscription" to the FT on my mobile device, without worrying about one-off charges.

There needs to be a way to be a way for the government to provide free mobile data for unemployed citizens without PCs, so they can check recruitment websites on their phones.

There needs to be a way to buy a mobile backup service, without the "sender" (ie the user) paying extra.

At the moment, the way to do this is typically a bit of a cludge - perhaps using a separate mobile APN, or trying to use content-based billing based on IP addresses or "application type". Or more usually, just giving people a flatrate bundle. But not everyone has flatrate data, and in any case it doesn't cover roaming, or multi-operator deals. As usual, the SIM gets in the way, which means at the moment it's easier to do all these things via WiFi instead of the cellular connection.

EDIT: Ideally, there also needs to be a way for the service/content provider to choose between different data wholesale products. So there should be different per-MB costs for fast vs slow access, extra-low latency connections for games or VoIP, options for peak vs. off-peak times of access, differential rates for macro vs. femto vs. WiFi access, and so on.

So while I agree with mBlox that "sender-pays" is a useful concept, let's not over-focus on a name and vision that it solely geared around delivery of packaged mobile content. My over-riding belief is that new business models for general mobile access and communication is always more important than mere content, and it's certainly the case here.

I cover sponsored / third-party pays data in the recently-published Disruptive Analysis Mobile Broadband Computing report.

Interesting FAQ about the Vodafone Dell netbook

Some interesting questions and answers from the Vodafone UK's FAQ about its Dell Mini 9 netbook here, which highlights various of the upsides and downsides of this model. Will be interesting to see how these (and T's and C's) vary between operators once this approach has evolved a bit more.

Some pertinent ones:

"Can I run Microsoft Office?" - essentially, no, it doesn't have a CD drive or the processor clout to give good performance.

" If I switch network operator, can I still use my Dell netbook? : After your agreement with Vodafone has ended you can use the netbook with another operator. You will need a USB modem from your new operator and will need to re-configure the settings to be able to access their network."

"Can I upgrade the Dell netbook, e.g. larger hard drive, faster processor, more memory?" - No.

Ericsson as handset API broker?

According to this article, Ericsson is talking up a new developer initiative aimed at trying to establish a common API across a variety of different handset platforms.

At one level, this is a very sensible concept - I've been trying to convince network-side manufacturers that they take the phones for granted for years. Numerous network technologies - 3G, IMS, UMA and potentially femtocells - have been delayed or rendered useless because the infrastructure or standards folk thought that the phones "were the easy bit". And while implementing some of the "hard" nuts-and-bolts protocols is occasionally simple, that certainly can't be said for the "soft" user-facing applications and all-round experience. I wrote about delays in creating IMS-capable phones 2.5 years ago, and we're still waiting for things like RCS.

In an ideal world, the network would be "exposed" to handset-based apps, and the handset "exposed" to network-based apps. The network would know (for example) what the phone's battery level was like, or if it was on charge, set to "silent" or had limited available free memory - all valuable data for applications. And it could help guarantee security through certificates or other mechanisms. Conversely, a handset-resident app could query different networks' levels of congestion, speed, price and choose the best one (obviously a lot of server-side APIs are already standard, courtesy of the web).

My concern is that Ericsson may not be the best-positioned or most neutral broker - especially if its proposition is based on Java and IMS as this other article suggests. If there is to be a successful common API, it absolutely needs to work in BOTH operator-controlled and 3rd-party-controlled fashions.

As a baseline, it needs to be absolutely neutral towards the philosophies of "over the top" or "through the middle" application architecture. It's fine if its *implementation* can be skewed one way or another in different contexts, though. For a handset provided by and subsidised by an operator, you'd expect there to be optimised applications and control/billing suited to the carrier's preferred platform, whether it's IMS or something else. But for an handset provided through other channels - and especially if it is subsidised or provided by a non-operator player (maybe Apple, Google, Cisco etc), the converse should be true.

There's also an large open question about how this fits with initiatives like OMTP's BONDI, which is "addressing the problem that an application written for one phone must be rewritten again and again if it is to work on all phones" (sound familiar?), but which is using a web runtime and browser/widget world-view, rather than Java or IMS. That said, Ericsson's also a sponsor of OMTP, so presumably there's some alignment going on in the background somewhere.

I haven't heard full details yet, so I can't really give a comprehesive opinion. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in their meetings with Apple and Google, though...

EDIT:I just re-read the last paragraph of the EEtimes article, which talks about browser-based application environments, so I'm now a bit confused between the mentions of web, Java, and IMS involvement. I'll try to track this down.

Handset brands moving into dongle market

The new Disruptive Analysis report on Mobile Broadband Computing forecasts continued medium-term growth for external USB modems for PCs, albeit after a recession-based flattening of demand in 2009. One of the comments in it is that more handset manufacturers should consider entering the USB modem market.

So it's interesting timing to see that Nokia has just announced entry into the HSPA dongle marketplace.

This follow on from SonyEricsson doing the same earlier this year, and adding in extra functions like GPS and decent industrial design. Then LG, its LTE chipset announcement the other day, also mentioned that it is working on a prototype data card. And Toshiba does this cool-looking dongle/basic phone/MP3/memory hybrid thing called a G450.

I wonder if we'll see any cool-looking Apple-branded dongles at some point....

Two famous places

I was honoured to be a guest of UK ITSPA (Internet Telephony Service Provider Association - the VoIP trade body) this evening for their awards ceremony, for which I was one of the judges. Some interesting entries and hopefully, next year ITSPA will have a dedicated Wireless VoIP category in the awards, as well.

Hats of to the organisers for the choice of venue - The Members' Dining Room at the House of Commons. I'm ashamed to say that despite being a native Londoner, it was the first time I'd ever been inside Parliament, and I definitely need to go back for a proper tour. 

There were speeches by Ian Taylor MP, who is a common fixture on most UK parliamentary committees on technology, a representative of Ofcom, and most fascinatingly, the Director of Bletchley Park.

(As an aside, he was a representative of the awesomely-named sponsor, Magrathea Telecom. Those readers who are Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy fans will know that Magrathea was the planet with the voicemail message "It is most gratifying that your enthusiasm for our products continues and we wish to assure you that the two fully armed nuclear tipped missiles currently converging on your ship are part of the special service we extend to all of our most enthusiastic clients...." )

I knew vaguely about Bletchley, which was the home of British code-breakers during WW2 and was, arguably, the single most pivotal advantage in winning the war apart from the Spitfire. But I hadn't made the link between that and the birth of computer-based coding & encryption - and its eventual impact on all digital communications including VoIP. Really interesting speech, and congratulations to Magrathea for eschewing doing a corporate pitch and putting this in its place.

So now, in addition to the houses of Parliament, I certainly intend to visit Bletchley Park as well. If you can't visit, I certainly agree that its preservation is a worthy cause - and exhort you to make a donation instead.

Who pays for an unused 3G module in a laptop?

If a laptop with built-in 3G or WiMAX is used, there's some form of services revenue stream that can go towards offsetting the upfront cost of the modem. Whether it's a subsidy, a revenue-share, a bounty paid by the operator, or an extra amount forked over by the user at the time of purchase is largely immaterial.

The service is used, a modem is needed, money is paid by the subscriber (or a 3rd party) for the broadband. There's cash coming in, so in theory at least, everyone should be happy, with a bit of decent negotiation among all the parties.

Now consider another scenario.

A laptop is bought from a retailer or online, with a built in module. But the end user either has no intention of using mobile broadband, or perhaps will just try the free trial period included at the time of purchase. So no money is spent on broadband access.

But someone's had to pay for the module. Either an operator, the OEM, or the end user themselves. And whoever it is (or a combination of them) has wasted perhaps $50-100. The user is unlikely to be wearing the cost directly, especially if they've shopped around for competitively-priced laptops, or configured it online. That cash would go on a higher-spec machine, or stayed in their pocket.

If it's bought through a non-operator channel as a "vanilla" embedded PC, there's no clear way for a particular operator to be involved, as the user could put a choice of SIMs in it. There might be a small payment for a "trial" SIM to be in the box, much like AOL used to put a CD in with PC's back in the 1990s. But I can't see an operator paying for the full cost of the module for the privilege of marketing in this fashion.

Which means that for the modules included in "default" notebook configurations, sold through ordinary channels, the OEM is essentially footing the bill, if it never gets used.

Now according to this piece of research, the gross margin on a high-end notebook ($1300) is about 30%. But Dell's overall gross margin is currently 19%, and references to higher-margin products in the mix in its earnings call referred to things like storage and services rather than notebooks. And Asus has been making 20% gross margins on eeePCs, but they are thought to be falling to 15% - and it has now warned that shipments may be lower than expected.

So for the sake of argument, lets say gross margin is 20% for notebooks. Probably lower on an ultracompetitive netbook, and certainly higher on an Apple Macbook Air.

So on a netbook, the gross margin on the wholesale price is, perhaps, $50. And on a mid-range corporate or consumer notebook, $150.

I'm really not convinced that putting in an extra $50-100 cost of an unwanted, unvalued, unused 3G module is going to make those numbers look very pretty, from a CEO's or investor's eyes. Frankly, even if the wasted cost is $30 it's still not going to make people shrug in indifference.

Now, I wonder why Apple hasn't put any WWAN modules in Macs yet, given their continued targetting of an average 30%+ gross margin?

This is one of the reasons why I'm predicting slow uptake of built-in 3G (and WiMAX) in my new report on Mobile Broadband Computing.

The danger of "cutting the cord" - where's the femtocell going to go?

I see many references to people wanting to "cut the cord", and have an all-mobile home. This is particularly the case in the US, where it is positioned as a sort of aspirational goal by some, while in Europe it is (often) just something that applies to people either living on their own, or who are in lower socio-economic groups.

There's also another big difference. When Americans say "cut the cord", they usually don't mean "cut the cable TV cord as well". They just mean the copper telephone line. But in markets which are ADSL-biased for broadband, that's not a realistic option for most household. Instead, they may be able to use an "unbundled local loop", and keep their fixed broadband, but get rid of their PSTN telephone subscription.

However, with the rise of mobile broadband, many operators' marketing teams are trying to get rid of ADSL connections as well. Obviously in markets with fully-converged operators and quad-play, that's less likely, but for mobile-only operators, they're possibly storing up trouble for the future.

At some point, the operator is possibly going to want to deploy femtocells, WiFi, or some other offload approach - especially if you're a heavy "mobile only" user. And at that point, the lack of an existing broadband connection is going to be a problem.

Not only that, but your copper line will be disconnected at the exchange - and so even if they want to offer you a new fixed+mobile package with a home gateway including a femto, someone has to pay for it to be reconnected and tested. It's even possible that they'll need to send someone to your house to check the wiring still works OK. (When I moved into my current house 2 years ago, I needed an engineer to reconnect everything & install a new socket, before I could get ADSL provisioned).

So for operators, although cord-cutting sounds like a great way to get more fixed-mobile substitution in place, there's a longterm downside with regard to future flexibility for macro network offload.