Produktivity

2006-04-27

A Chia thing...

Vodafone through their Senior Director of Vodafone’s US R&D Group, Dr Stanley Chia, are apparently not worried about the emergence of WiMax, but...

"That leaves mobile WiMAX’s main potential as giant hotspots. The concentrated nature of mobile usage – three quarters of most peoples’ activity occurs in three locations – means this threat cannot be totally ignored. Dual mode handsets, which permit switching between networks (mobile and WiFi), are being developed by Nokia (and Motorola), among others. Qualcomm seemed to concede 3G’s potential inadequacies by buying Flarion, which specializes in a rival but similar technology (Flash OFDMA) to WiMAX, last August. The basic strategy of most mobile operators of being married to 3G, but being open minded about flings with other technologies, thus looks correct.”


...doesn't exactly rule out getting involved!

I think the '...threat cannot be totally ignored...' part qualifies as understatement of the month.

The arguments in the article, (admittedly I'm reading secondhand), are somewhat contradictory. Reading between the lines I'd say it's a pretty good case for getting into the market, not staying out.

I have mentioned this in the past, Dr Stan says it, and I'll say it again. People used mobiles in distinct places, not ubiquitously, therefore why does everyone insist that there is a need for a ubiquitous network?
Even if you did build out a 99% coverage network, it's still going to cost you substantially less than a 3G network to build and operate.

Incidentally, I'm seeing a few more Intel stories about building global WiMax. I expect to see some more investment in rollout over the next months.

2006-04-26

SkypeCalSync

Posted over at Skype Forum (I was bored!)
I would like to get a calendar in Skype, so that I can schedule calls with other people. E.g. a call conference.
If I added my own mobile number to the conference then I could be on the road and still manage to 'attend' the call.

I suppose I could use the API and Google Calendar for this, but then features like:
- See all my contacted people for a particular day.
- Easily set up events through IM
- distribute files to attendees automatically (see another suggestion)
- Set reminders for me to call my father/mother on their birthday
- Set time delimited features, like call forward at particular times
...would be so much more difficult.

At the current innovation rate at Skype, I estimate this would take about 6 years to implement!


...and...

I'd like to be able to attach files to a user in my contact list (a link to a file or a folder).
Skype would then keep this file in sync in my contact's Skype, by synchronising every time we are both online. Ideally this would be bi-directional, but as that's quite hard, I would settle for master-slave only (I'd rather have something in my lifetime, thanks)

If I could attach the file/folder to a contact group, that would be even better.

This would stop me having to send the same file multiple times, whenever a small change is made (and would definitely be a big improvement over email!)

Might as well face it, you're addicted to hype...

"The lights are on, but you're not home,
you're mind is not your own" (from Robert Palmer's Marketing mantras)

I sometimes get concerned about the blogosphere's ability to be collectively objective as bright, new, shiny objects appear in front of them. "Google calendar, oooooo"
As Robert McRacken says "This kind of gossip is like crack to bloggers (who in this regard are largely like high-schoolers in older bodies)." when talking about why Google Calendar has received so much more coverage than Gdata

I like Gdata because it's new, shiny and it lets programmers (who I now regretfully count as a group excluding myself) do cool things with content publishing.
As far as not following the standards goes, well, it does implement Atom with extensions in a similar vein to the httprequest extension that MS put into Explorer. Look where that led!

I'm beginning to get a clearer picture of Google's plans, but whether they will succeed or not depends on developer acceptance of their platform.
It's a difficult thing to execute a strategy which involves dragging your customers with you.
Loyalty is everything, the community must support you every step of the way.

Does our love of hype and shiny new things blind us to the truth? Are we being manipulated down a path we don't see?
T'was always thus, I suppose...

2006-04-23

Convergence - when Worlds collide...

I sat in a pub about 11 years ago and described a scenario about product placement in online games almost identical to the one described here
Of course, I was very, very drunk, but it was a moment of clarity for me. I started to see the full potential of the internet, not as a respository of documents to be searched and viewed, but as a completely new continent, waiting to be exploited.

In those days you programmed CGI in pure C, and hardly anyone had email except at work.
When Ultima Online came along in 1997, it seemed to be a step along the road that I had imagined - so I signed up for an account and was immediately hooked! I had play sessions that lasted 7-8 hours, on a dial-up link! I think the last time I played was 3 years ago, but I still have the account...

The thing is that brands need to be in the places where people's attention is, and their appeal is not limited to the real world. If you had to pay online money in a game for a car, would you pay more money for a Porsche - of course you would? It really depends on the target marketing of the brand. Any lifestyle or exclusivity brand will do well in an online situation.

But there's more to just product placement and passive advertising in MMORPGs. Everquest built in a command that allowed the player to go to the Pizza Hut site, by just typing '/pizza'.
It can be better than this...
The real world marketing can be more immersive. Virtual worlds have real-estate and there are places where people congregate in these worlds (in Ultima it was around the banks). There are also objects in the games that people collect (e.g. statues, runestones).

Imagine an Ultima (or any other MMORPG) where you could walk into a shop, click on a relevant object and start a real world transaction. Your online character already has authentication built in, but probably doesn't have your address unless you are a subscription customer. Your bag of potions and weapons can also contain an object that you found which entitles you to a discount on the particular company's product. If I wanted to be really revolutionary I could, as a real world provider, accept payment in virtual currency (gold pieces) that I then sell on to a broker (perhaps MMORPGs would need better control of their money supply for this to be more than a promotional item!)

When penetration of MMORPGs gets to the levels of Lineage in Korea (subscriptions are around a third of the population), then it makes sense for companies to be there too.
Want to ask a question about our product? Come to the Great Hall in Trinsic, where our representatives are waiting for you. NPCs, but not as we know it.

It's a risky play for the Virtual World Operator (VWO), as too much of this could damage the ambience of the game. The question is how much of their audience would get upset by an encroachment of real world commerce into a fantasy world, and how many are there because it is a social event and an extension of their real world anyway.

To me, the idea of my character dashing into the virtual supermarket and putting a collection of items in my virtual bag, then dealing with an avatar at checkout actually appeals to me. I may also meet someone while fighting them for the last virtual loaf of bread (not entirely realistic, I know, given geographic distribution, but the image of zapping a virtual someone with my lightning bolt spell in order to get real bread delivered just tickles my fancy)

Web 2.0 is about Social interaction, perhaps Web 3.0 starts to take that to new levels. There are other ways to use the internet, browsers are not the only model.

Perhaps, in another 10 years...?

P.S. It helps if you read this post in the style of Rowley Birkin QC ;) Several glasses of Muga also helps significantly!

UPDATE: I wonder if there is a collective web consciousness? I just read an article in Wired, posted 10 days ago, with almost the same title (content is different). I swear I did not see it before writing this one! And look at this too!

2006-04-21

Why is it not USSD?

USSD is great, but for some reason has not been picked up to any large extent by the mobile operators.
They stumbled across SMS, but failed to extend the lesson to other areas.
Sure, some operators use USSD. There are roaming services that allow you to call by prepending a USSD code to the number you want to call.

Operators in Thailand have a great USSD recharge method for prepaid mobiles (dial *120*number on recharge card#), but in general it's not used as much as it could be.

In the US, it probably has most potential, because people are used to the number->letter transformation. Imagine *120*STARBUCKS# to give the address of the nearest coffee shop, or *175*METS# to get the latest score.

Or how about some Presence information as a USSD message? By setting up some USSD codes I could switch my presence status on a telco server.

USSD has a lot of limitations, but so did SMS and it hasn't done too badly!

2006-04-19

Gimme an I, P, T, V...

IMS (and specific hardware) is needed to deliver reliable IPTV and other multimedia services, say the IMS-proponents. IPTV is dead, says Telepocalypse (among others).

Well, if you really want to try stream high-quality multimedia on-demand to the users, then sure, you are going to need a lot of expensive infrastructure to make it into a good user experience. I would agree, that form of IPTV is pretty much dead.
You can just download a torrent of the file and watch it anytime, much easier, cheaper and you can share with your friends too! But somewhat illegal...
That's what scares the distributors and why they want the streaming option. They don't want to let go of the content. So then there's DRM. Typically this is highly restrictive allowing the purchaser to only play the content on specific devices. It irritates the customer. The price is also higher, because you get to own the content.

From a marketing perspective streaming is better for the media companies(telcos etc), it maintains the link with the consumer and enables usage based charging, better market data and possibilities for (time-sensitive) interstitials. I just can't understand why they are making it so hard for themselves!

Why do you need to stream the whole file?
Most of the content can be delivered in the background, ready for use whenever someone wants it. The streamed part just completes the picture. There are any number of algorithms that could be used to 'split' the content. Think layers, movement. What percentage of the content would you have to hold back in order to render the background content sub-standard? Probably around 5%.
So a multimedia supplier could still deliver streamed content(of non-live nature), but, with the reduced bandwidth requirements, you would not need a particularly fast link in order to view it. Perhaps I wouldn't need IMS to deliver a guaranteed bandwidth for 50fps, just 2.5fps! Perhaps I wouldn't need IMS at all...

If this is by any chance a new idea, then it's now public domain, so anyone can do it! (if anyone makes millions on it, then I hope they'll take pity on me and buy some consultancy!)

Here in Thailand, I can buy counterfeit DVDs of all the latest movies for around $2.50, but I don't - because 50-75% of them are atrocious quality, often created by someone with a camcorder in the cinema!
I'd rather pay $10 for something higher quality, but not $30...

2006-04-18

You want fries with that?...

Or, is IMS short for Internet McDonalds System?
McDonalds make hamburgers, and a few other things, but one of the amazing things about McDonalds is its ability to make a hamburger taste the same in Argentina as it does in Zambia (I didn't check if they are in Zambia, yet)
Now here is real QoS, I can be sure that what I get is pretty much what I pay for - so long as I want a hamburger! They have SLAs too, where I can hit the button and if my hamburger and fries are not delivered within 1 minute, I get a voucher for money off my next purchase (of ice cream!? - SLA as an upsell tool :)
McDonalds control everything in order to get the experience right for the final burger. They don't sell food for anyone else.
Recently they have been introducing products that are specific to local markets, but these are almost never rolled out globally. The product mix is typically simple and it fulfills a simple need.
IMS should enable operators to build a McDonalds menu of services where the burger always has the same taste, the fries are always thin'n'crispy and it's always delivered in under 2 minutes. Some people will love it.
But what if McDonalds was sold as an upscale restaurant? Would you go to McDonalds if it cost more than a local restaurant? I remember being in Poland in '96 where people were having business dinners in McDonalds; I somehow doubt that is the case 10 years later!
McDonalds scales, and that's what gives it the edge over the niche suppliers.
It is unlikely that internet access will be controlled by a small group of suppliers, anymore than all food outlets being controlled by McDonalds, BK, Taco Bell etc (though sometimes, when I am in the US, I am not so convinced!)
As with food, consumers will be free to choose the services they want from which suppliers. Sometimes the local flavour will be better, sometimes the big brand.
In the world of telecommunications, there is space for everyone, it's just about getting the target market right.
"Would you like Voice with that, sir?"

2006-04-11

Tropicaljantie missing!

Jan in Malaysia has gone missing!
Thousands of readers of his popular Skype and other internet-stuff related blogs, have been locked out of the site, and now have to go to Skype Journal to get Skype related news.
"The Skype ecosystem ...[is changing]" wrote (Dr?) Hans Blauw on Skypejournal. "Jan in Malaysia closed his blog for unknown reasons...the BIG h(sk)ype is over"

Rumour has it that Jan went in search of new Skype hardware species near the Thai-Malay border and was last seen entering the jungle in pursuit of a WiMax enabled Skype-handset of Paradise.

I'm sure he will be back...he's Belgian after all!

Skype me, it's skyping slow going!

Skype has 4 divisions now;
1. Skype for Desktop and Skype Hardware
2. Skype Mobile
3. Skype Telecom (working with termination partners)
4. Skype eCommerce

Sounds like a recipe for lots of employment, and it certainly seems like they have been spending most of their time doing stuff unrelated to product development.

If there was one thing you would want each of these 'divisions' to put in the product, what would it be? How would they prioritize between divisions?
How would they make sure they weren't all pulling in different directions?

Ok, here's my list of JFGID changes ( or should that be JSGID?) for release before end of June.
Skype Desktop and Hardware
- Extend communication: More offline communication options, e.g. send file. Alarms for people coming online/offline. Do groups properly!
Skype Mobile
- What's unique to mobile? Skype on Symbian... (functionality should be exactly the same as Desktop)
Skype Telecom
- SIP gateway and/or Jabber gateway
Skype Ecommerce
- Transfer from Skype balance to Paypal account (they can already do it the other way!)

Oh, and one more thing, build a Skypod, make it green and garish, and link it up with Fon

Simple, eh? Right, I'm off for a beer! Let me know when you're finished...