Innovate or Perish

Source :Innovate or Perish

Taking a clue from the oft-repeated notion of “publish or perish”, I talked of the need for “innovate or perish” in the Sun Technovate event in Mumbai, on the eve of Sun Founder & Chairman Scott McNealy’s second visit to India. There were nearly 200 CIO/CTO in the audience.
My pitch was simple; innovation is happening […]
-->
Taking a clue from the oft-repeated notion of “publish or perish”, I talked of the need for “innovate or perish” in the Sun Technovate event in Mumbai, on the eve of Sun Founder & Chairman Scott McNealy’s second visit to India. There were nearly 200 CIO/CTO in the audience.
My pitch was simple; innovation is happening all around in India, accelerating in the past 5 years, both inside and outside IT. It could be
Infosys Global Delivery ModelIttiam becoming the “world’s most preferred DSP IP supplier” within three years of starting in 2001 and retaining it for 3 years in a rowKashyap perfecting slowly but steadily the concept of “public toilet” through “Sulabh Sauchalay”Reliance launching Rs 777 Classic phonesRobosoft starting 700-seater Tech Park in sleepy Udupi (known only for low cost restaurants)HiCal Magnetics supplying components for NokiaCosmic Circuits re-designing low-end electronics items for ultra-low costlow cost eye surgery in Arvind Hospitalslow cost heart surgery in Narayana Hrudayalaorthe slew of low cost water purifiers.
Innovation is the only sustainable competitive advantage to serve the 5 billion people in the “bottom of the pyramid”; innovation provides 10-20 times (not percent) cost and time savings.
Naturally, without innovation India Inc cannot remain competitive in the long run

Reliance launches entry level phones at Rs 777

Reliance launches entry level phones at Rs 777
May 16th, 2007
It is interesting to see Reliance pursuing the low-cost, high elasticity market of offering new phones at Rs 777 virtually wiping out “second hand” phones in the low-end category. Such low cost option also reduces the entry barrier. It is interesting to remember the Rs 25,000 price point that the bulky Nokia 6610 had in 1996-1998 time frame; we have indeed come a long way.
Unfortunately the political establishment that talks of “aam admi” is so busy wasting money on all grandiose projects that do good neither to the Government nor to the citizens but never take a moment to celebrate the real benefits “aam admi” gets, thanks to technology. One hope to see a generation of politicians who will genuinely work for the common man and woman of India.

IMS dirty laundry

Source:http://www.oreillynet.com/etel/blog/2007/05/ims_dirty_laundry.html
We’ve talked about the controversies surrounding IMS here on ETel before (see Lee Dryburgh’s The IMS Debate for one interesting perspective). Brough Turner, one of the really smart guys out there in this field, has written up the notes from his recent talk about what he learned in porting his MyCaller ringback tones application from the Intelligent Network (IN) implementation to an “IMS” version. You may be surprised at what he found.

In Lessons Learned Implementing IMS, Brough really breaks down the details of where IMS is today, what it can offer, and some of the problems people will face in moving towards IMS. He presents a short and sweet executive summary of his findings, but the entire article is well worth a read.

For the impatient, here are the takeaways.

It’s very early days for IMS. Today’s “IMS” networks are combinations of SIP infrastructure with 3GPP Release 4 softswitch-controlled voice service.
IMS is about connection control, only. Only part of your application has to change. For MyCaller, ~90 percent of the software remains the same.
IMS enables multimedia ringback, i.e. video! So there is significant new functionality, versus today’s audio-only ringback.
Parallels with Intelligent Network are striking!
Most application–specific data remains outside of IMS. In particular, operators do not want to add data fields to their Home Subscriber Server (HSS).
Application–specific MRFs make sense. Operators tend to avoid sharing resources between diverse applications. And, for rich media, application–specific MRFs can be more cost-effective.
Operators await 3GPP Release 7. At least anecdotally, several operators have suggested that 3GPP Release 7 is the first complete, stable, and consistent version they will fully deploy.
And for more good analysis of the state of IMS and a deeper look at the R4 vs. R7 issue, check out Dean Bubbley’s response post, When is an IMS not an IMS?.

Will iPhone spark wireless wars?

Roy, a doorman for my apartment building, stopped me this morning to chit chat. Knowing my affection for all new mobile phones, I wasn’t surprised that he asked to play around with my Nokia N95. “Are you going to buy the iPhone?” he asked, seeking a second opinion since he has already made up his mind and is going to buy an iPhone.

Though he doesn’t have an iPod right now, he thinks an iPhone would give him two devices in one, despite the high price tag. He is seemingly undeterred by the questionable battery life. (One of the reasons why I have a more wait-and-see attitude towards this Apple device.) He isn’t the only one - as the interest in iPhone seems to be on an upswing.

Even if you disregard the rumors and fan sites - the population at large seems to have a considerable interest in the iPhone, indicated by the total search volume for keyword “iPhone.” According to Hitwise, a research group that tracks Internet traffic trends, iPhone related searches represent over 0.002% of total Internet searches per week for past three weeks, with iPhone release date and price being the specific information folks are looking for. (In comparison, MySpace was the #1 query and had 1.16% of the total search volume.) Just as an unscientific indicator the search volume is a good indicator of increasing commercial appeal of the device.

The big question, however, is how does iPhone impact the wireless market at large — and whether it will result in a market share shift, putting AT&T at an advantage.

AT&T is betting big on this device and is hoping to pull ahead of its rivals by riding the iPhone express. AT&T and Apple are going to be launching a big media blitz to promote the iPhone, and according to UBS Research, it will be a major reason why AT&T will be able to add approximately 2.8 million gross postpaid subscribers in the third and fourth quarters of 2007.

If Apple’s guidance of 10 million units in 18 months hits the target, UBS estimates that 2 million iPhones will be sold in the U.S. in the first six months of the launch. That works out to about 18% of AT&T’s post-paid additions and upgrades, UBS estimates. But these 2 million will have to come from somewhere - probably switchers from other wireless services.

At the end of Q1 2007, there were about 170 million postpaid wireless subscribers in the U.S., with Verizon the largest carrier (56 million) with AT&T at #2 with about 51 million, followed by Sprint (41 million) and T-Mobile bringing up the rear at 22 million. (These numbers don’t reflect wholesale and prepaid customers.)

So 2 million units don’t mean much in market share — a little 1.1% market share gain for AT&T in the first six months, but it is the residual impact that might cause the big upheaval in the wireless market.

There are some who believe that since iPhone isn’t going to get as much subsidy as other devices, AT&T can pass those subsidies to even further subsidize non-Apple phones, and making its service more attractive. That would be one way to capture the increased foot traffic to AT&T stores.

Will Verizon and Sprint take this lying down? Of course not, and will launch their own price subsidies, discount plans or whatever it takes to hang on to their subscribers. And whatever happens, consumers will come out ahead — nothing wrong with that. And even if Roy doesn’t end up buying the iPhone, he still might get a good deal somewhere else.

Six dang good reasons why you (probably) hate your cell phone provider

Six dang good reasons why you (probably) hate your cell phone provider
In the latest issue of Information Week, just out today, Elena Malykhina lists six reasons why you may hate your cellphone service.
I've been going down the list, and I gotta tellya: Elena is spot on with each reason.
Let's take it from the top:
Disabled features. Elena notes that Columbia University School of Law Prof. Tim Wu points some of these features as call timers, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, Advanced SMS, browsers, photo and sound file transfer, E-mail clients, and SIM card mobility. Yes, carriers work hard to get your business, but then what does that say that they disable features that would enable enhanced experiences? I think it is because they eventually want to debut their own features and nickel-and-dime you for them, rather than risk the success of third-party programs.
Phones "locked" to work on only one network. Once they have you, they have you. Sure doesn't speak well of any company that puts up electronic barriers to you leaving their lair.
"Walled garden" Internet access. Elena sees a deliberate inconsistency between the menu-driven wireless web content offered by most cell carriers, and the difficulty of accessing content from rival providers who haven't allied with that particular carriers. Sure, many advanced handset-based browserswill call up these rival sites, but not in versions optimized for mobile. Trying to view these sites often causes script-based lockups.
Unreliable service. Yup. Not only are there dead cell zones in my metro area (Portland, Oregon) but dead cell zones in my condo.
Incompatible products and services. Elena's referring to the fact that cell in the U.S. works with one of two basic standards: Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) used by Verizon Wireless, Sprint, and Alltel; and Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) used by AT&T and T-Mobile. "This compounds the problem of locked phones (see above), since a phone designed for one network may not work on another even if the carriers wanted that," Elena points out.
Cell phones generally can't be used as laptop modems even though it's technically feasible. This is most often accomplished by disabling the relevant Bluetooth technology that would let this happen. AT&T and SprintNextel will let you do this, but only for surcharged data plans. T-Mobile will let you do this, however.
Good on T-Mobile.

RFID tags to detect purloined school testsPosted

May 14th, 2007
RFID tags to detect purloined school testsPosted by Russell Shaw @ 8:32 am Categories: General, Security, News



The website ars technica reports that the UK-based Edexcel examination board has announced that the company will be adding electronic radio frequency identifier (RFID) tags to its GCSE (high school equivalency) and A-level (pre-university) exam papers.
These tags are going to be embedded in exam packages. These packages are delivered to schools and test centers in secure bags that are not to be opened until exams start.
Yet as I remember from my high college days, there were rich or well-connected students who tried to convince a lowly shipping clerk or fraternity brother in the mailroom to just take one exam out and photocopy it.
And I don't have to tell you how quickly those photocopies were distributed.
In this new RFID system, though, RFID tags will be able to detect if any of the bags have been opened prematurely and if exams have been taken from the bags.
I'd love to see this catch on in the U.S.

Microsoft’s (Beta!) VoIP Device Blitz

[Source : http://gigaom.com/2007/05/13/microsofts-beta-voip-device-blitz/#more-8984]
Microsoft’s (Beta!) VoIP Device Blitz
Written by Paul Kapustka Sunday, May 13, 2007 at 11:46 PM PT 2 comments
You can’t buy them yet, but if you are an enterprise IT exec who is kicking the tires on IP telephony offerings you might at least want to take a gander at the wide range of Microsoft-centric IP voice devices — phones, headsets, videocam monitors — being informally unveiled Monday at the Windows Hardware Engineering conference in Los Angeles.
All meant to work with the still-in-beta Office Communications Server software from Redmond, the VoIP device blitz from nine different vendors is Microsoft’s latest attempt to break into the corporate Voice over IP market, against established players like Avaya and Cisco.
While the devices — shown last week in pre-WinHEC press briefings in San Francisco — performed impressively in an all-Microsoft environment, many big questions remain, such as:
1) OCS still isn’t available, nor is pricing information;
2) Much of the functionality shown is already available from competitors; and
3) do you really want to trust your phone system to Microsoft software?
Despite our traditional skepticism of Microsoft’s commitment to communications, we should start out here by saying that the demo of phone systems cobbled together in a SF hotel basement last week all performed as planned, without any of the also traditional Microsoft demo glitches. VoIP phones rang crisp and clear, triggering on-screen synergy with Office Communicator, updating presence-based information for other Microsoft-based clients, etc., etc.
Impressive as it was for a Microsoft VoIP display, there wasn’t anything shown — customizable presence info, IM-to-voice-to-video call escalation — that isn’t already available from other IP players or even free offerings like Skype or Gizmo. So what’s the fuss?
For starters, the participation of tested device players — like Polycom, Plantronics, Samsung and LG/Nortel — shows that Microsoft has the pull to draw in trusted suppliers whose gear IT execs have likely already signed PO’s for. And by committing to a standards (SIP) based platform, Microsoft hopes to drive economies of scale to eventually sell itself as the low-priced alternative to Cisco’s Cadillac-priced offerings in the IP voice arena. (Again, no pricing yet from Microsoft. Trust them at your own peril.)
Certainly, toys like the USB Bluetooth headset (which Microsoft says will dual-home to VoIP and cellphones, a pledge that couldn’t be proven in the demo) from LG-Nortel will serve as momentary VoIP-candy, but there’s still a long road ahead of Microsoft in its attempts to A) convince enterprise IT that it’s serious about telephony and B) overcome products already in the market from playahs like Cisco and Avaya, not to mention the burgeoning open-source offerings in the Asterisk arena.
But while it’s easy to poke holes in Microsoft’s offerings — like, say, its five pre-configured “presence” states, which seem laughable next to the on-the-fly customizable “don’t bug me” field in Google’s Gtalk — it’s important to remember that people who buy Microsoft corporate software buy in the thousands, not by single downloads.
And with a host of interested device suppliers on its side, Microsoft might not be able to ignore its commitment to telephony any longer. Now all we need is pricing and availability to let the battle really begin.

VoIP’s “four obstacles”

Four obstacles to implementing VoIP
May 11, 2007
Source http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5102-1035-6183187.html
Takeaway: While VoIP's popularity continues to grow, it still has some obstacles to overcome before it becomes ubiquitous in corporate environments. Deb Shinder lists the four greatest obstacles and discusses how they undermine one of VoIP's biggest advantages -- the cost savings.
As the lower cost of calls -- particularly long distance and international calls -- attracts more and more companies, VoIP's popularity in the business world continues to grow. According to iLocus Research's annual report on the VoIP industry (which the company has been tracking since the late 1990s), the IP PBX market grew 52 percent from 2005 to 2006, and the number of worldwide voice over broadband (VoBB) subscribers (both consumer and business) almost doubled.
Those growth statistics are impressive, but a look at actual percentages tells a different story. Less than half of businesses use VoIP, and less than a quarter of small businesses do so. If cost savings are so dramatic, why haven't more companies -- especially small ones that don't have millions invested in their traditional phone systems -- made the switch?
In 2006, VoIP Magazine predicted that half of all small businesses and two-thirds of large businesses would be using VoIP by 2010 -- although not necessarily exclusively for all their telecommunications needs. To get there, VoIP providers are going to have to overcome the obstacles that have so far prevented many businesses from cutting the telco cord and moving to IP-based phone services. Let's explore some of these obstacles.
Reliability concerns
The performance of the long-established public switched telephone network (PSTN) has "spoiled" telephone users. While consumers and employees accept that computers sometimes go down, their expectations of the phone system are much higher. When they pick up the phone, they expect to get a dial tone. Users won't tolerate less than rock-solid reliability from their telephone systems.
Companies depend on the phones to stay in contact with customers, partners, and vendors -- as well as within the company for communication between employees. A phone outage can bring business to a halt -- or, at the least, slow it down considerably and cost the company big bucks.
VoIP is far more reliable than it was just a few years ago. However, there's still a perception of unreliability that providers must overcome before cautious managers will take the plunge.
And there's another aspect to reliability. The regular phone jacks in a building don't require electric service to work (although equipment such as PBX does). That means you can still have phone service during a power outage.
VoIP depends on both electrical power and Internet service. Interruption of either means losing phone service. You can ameliorate the problem by having redundant Internet connections and power backup such as a generator, but this adds to the cost.
Network quality of service
VoIP is far more sensitive to network "glitches" than data transmission is. If the network drops data packets, it just resends them. If the dropped packet results in an e-mail delayed by a few minutes, users likely won't even notice.
But if delays in transmission or dropped packets cause a disrupted phone call, you can bet the call participants will notice -- and complain. The data transmission process is much more transparent; because phone calls are real-time communications, problems are "in the face" of the users.
IP networks are subject to many variables, including:
Packet loss due to network congestion or corruption of the data
Variation in the amount of delay of packet delivery, which can result in poor voice quality
Packets arriving out of sequence, which can result in discarded packets and cause more delay and disruption
In addition, the analog-to-digital conversion process can affect VoIP call quality, causing users to experience unpleasant distortion or echo effects. Another culprit is signal level problems, which can cause excessive background noise that interferes with conversations.
To help prevent such problems, the IP network must support quality-of-service (QoS) mechanisms that allow administrators to give priority to VoIP packets. This means a VoIP network is more trouble to manage than a data network, and it requires a higher level of expertise -- or at least an additional skill set -- on the part of network administrators.
VoIP monitoring and management solutions are available that make it easier to optimize voice services, but that adds to the cost of deployment. It also negates some of the cost savings that motivate the move to VoIP in the first place.
Complexity and confusion
The complexity and unfamiliar terrain of VoIP communications presents another big obstacle for many companies. Network administrators well-versed in running a data network may not know much about how VoIP works, what equipment is necessary, or how to set up and maintain that equipment.
In addition, VoIP terminology quickly gets confusing -- media gateways, analog telephone adapter (ATA), audio response unit (ARU), interactive voice response (IVR), etc. Company managers and IT personnel hear about different VoIP protocols -- H.323, SIP, IAX -- and don't understand the differences or know which one they need.
Already overworked IT staffs may not be eager to undertake the task of learning a whole new specialty nor the added burden of ongoing maintenance of the components of a VoIP system. They may not be sure how to integrate the VoIP network into the existing data network.
Of course, there are answers to these problems. Consultants with the requisite knowledge can help set up a VoIP network, or companies can use hosted VoIP services to reduce both the complication and the upfront expenses of buying VoIP servers. However, once again, this ups the price tag of going to VoIP and eats into the cost savings that are one of VoIP's main advantages.
Security
Finally, reports on the security vulnerabilities of IP networks have bombarded companies, and the risk of intercepted calls and eavesdropping are a concern. In addition, providing another layer of vulnerability to a data network integrated with the VoIP network is also a worry.
While malicious users can tap traditional telephones, it's a fairly difficult process that usually requires physical access -- at least for anyone other than a government agency. Traditional phone communications travel over dedicated circuits controlled by one entity -- the phone company. But when VoIP packets go out there into the "Internet cloud," they go through numerous routers and servers at many different points.
Encryption and other security mechanisms can make VoIP as secure or even more secure than PSTN. But once again, it's perception that matters. (And, of course, extra security mechanisms mean extra cost.)
Summary
VoIP is gaining ground steadily. However, before it becomes ubiquitous, the technology needs to overcome some obstacles. VoIP providers must not only address the problems of reliability and quality of service, but they must also reduce the complexity and confusion inherent in implementing VoIP and address security concerns. And, at the same time, they must keep VoIP costs lower than the costs associated with traditional phone service.
Want more tips and tricks to help you plan or optimize your VoIP deployment? Automatically sign up for our free VoIP newsletter, delivered each Monday!
Deb Shinder is a technology consultant, trainer, and writer who has authored a number of books on computer operating systems, networking, and security. She currently specializes in security issues and Microsoft products, and she has received Microsoft's Most Valuable Professional (MVP) status in Windows Server Security.

I Asked myself what is IMPS

Answer was in WIKI asusual :)

IMPS
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the mythological beings, see Imp.
For Star Wars fan film, see IMPS The Relentless.
IMPS stands for Instant Messaging and Presence Service. It is an OMA enabler for Instant Messaging and Presence. The Wireless Village consortium developed the first cut of the specifications. After Wireless Village was merged with OMA, its specs became OMA IMPS 1.0 specifications. IMPS is widely deployed but not necessarily marketed. Interworking between several operators IMPS platforms is being performed under a GSMA initiave that encourages interworking and deployment of Instant Messaging.
Vanilla terminals often have IMPS clients.
On Nokia, the chat client is accessed via the "My Presence" menu.
On Sony Ericsson, it's called "’My Friends".
On Motorola, it's called "IM". The phones' chat clients are generally designed to be provider neutral, so you have to put in the Wireless Village server settings.
If your phone doesn't have an inbuilt chat client, you might still be able to get a third-party chat application that runs on your phone's Symbian, Java ME, BREW, or other application environment. You need to get a chat client which is "Wireless Village compliant presence-enabled".
Note that it is still necessary for the operator to provide the IM service and/or one will have to connect to a third party server for connection with others for IM'ing

[edit] Compatible terminals
This is only a partial list. Many phones sold today support IMPS, especially phones from these manufacturers.
Nokia 3220, 6020, 6021, 6220, 6230, 6230i, 6630, 6820, 5140, 6810, 7200, 7260, 7270, 7610, 8800, E50, E60, E61, E62, E65, E70, N70, N72
Motorola V500, V600, E398, V3
Sony Ericsson K310, J300i, F500i, K300i, K310i, K500i, K510i, K600i, K610i, K700i, K750i, K790i, K800i, S700i, T206, T630, T637, V800, W550i, W800i, W810i, W850i, W900i, Z500A, Z800, Z1010
Siemens CX70, CX75, M65, SK65, S75
BenQ-Siemens S68