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.
Monday, May 14, 2007
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.
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.
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.
Saturday, May 12, 2007
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.
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.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
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
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
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Great List of Open Source Telephony Projects
[Source:http://www.oreillynet.com/etel/blog/2007/04/great_list_of_open_source_tele.html]
Regular ETel readers know that we’re big on open source telephony around here. We regularly feature technical articles on open source telecom projects like Asterisk, FreeSWITCH, YATE, and OpenZoep, we like to discuss the issues around open source business models in our blogs, and O’Reilly Media has long been a champion and documenter for many of the most important open source projects. So I consider paying attention to open source telephony projects a major part of my “beat” as the editor of ETel, but even I was surprised at the depth represented in VoIP Now’s list of 74 Open Source VoIP Apps & Resources. Broken down by category, Jimmy Atkinson has collected what must be the most exhaustive list of open source telecom projects to date. I’m ashamed to admit there’s quite a few on this list I haven’t heard of. Thanks a lot for this Jimmy, now I’ve got my work cut out for me!
Regular ETel readers know that we’re big on open source telephony around here. We regularly feature technical articles on open source telecom projects like Asterisk, FreeSWITCH, YATE, and OpenZoep, we like to discuss the issues around open source business models in our blogs, and O’Reilly Media has long been a champion and documenter for many of the most important open source projects. So I consider paying attention to open source telephony projects a major part of my “beat” as the editor of ETel, but even I was surprised at the depth represented in VoIP Now’s list of 74 Open Source VoIP Apps & Resources. Broken down by category, Jimmy Atkinson has collected what must be the most exhaustive list of open source telecom projects to date. I’m ashamed to admit there’s quite a few on this list I haven’t heard of. Thanks a lot for this Jimmy, now I’ve got my work cut out for me!
Research firm: cable VoIP nearly doubled in 2006
Source : http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1559
Technology market research firm In-Stat has issued a new study that maintains that due to a big assist from VoIP, cable providers nearly doubled their number of telephone subscribers last year.
Of the 9.4 million cable telephone subscribers in North America, 6.6 million are VoIP users, In-Stat said.
In-Stat added that, with 42 percent of these cable VoIP users said they signed up for service in the last 12 months.
“In a growing number of markets around the world, cable TV operators consider telephony service to be an integral part of their telecommunications service bundle," analyst Mike Paxton said in a statement released with the findings.
In-Stat's study also says that worldwide cable telephony subscriptions jumped from 15.8 million in 2005 to more than 22 million last year. According to In-Stat, cable telephone service revenues are projected to reach $10.4 billion this year, up from $7.9 billion in 2006.
Technology market research firm In-Stat has issued a new study that maintains that due to a big assist from VoIP, cable providers nearly doubled their number of telephone subscribers last year.
Of the 9.4 million cable telephone subscribers in North America, 6.6 million are VoIP users, In-Stat said.
In-Stat added that, with 42 percent of these cable VoIP users said they signed up for service in the last 12 months.
“In a growing number of markets around the world, cable TV operators consider telephony service to be an integral part of their telecommunications service bundle," analyst Mike Paxton said in a statement released with the findings.
In-Stat's study also says that worldwide cable telephony subscriptions jumped from 15.8 million in 2005 to more than 22 million last year. According to In-Stat, cable telephone service revenues are projected to reach $10.4 billion this year, up from $7.9 billion in 2006.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The VoIP wars begins
The VoIP wars: Praveen Karadiguddi
[ Source : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/18/voip_wars_head_for_ofcom/]
Truphone boss James Tagg says his fledgling company will ask Ofcom to intervene if mobile networks continue to cripple VoIP-capable handsets.
Another VoIP provider told us today that Orange has been crippling its E61 handsets for SIP telephony "for several weeks".
As we reported earlier today, Vodafone and Orange have released a version of the hot new Nokia N95 handset with the native VoIP capability disabled. See Truphone's video here.
Tagg said he'd be making a representation to the UK telecoms regulator in a week if questions hadn't been answered satisfactorily by Vodafone and Orange. "We will formally complain within a week if we haven't got some sort of answer out of them by other routes," he told us.
The two giants are clearly flouting EU law, he said. "We're being blocked at the network level and at the device level."
Adam Beaumont, managing director of rival SIP service AQL said his company wouldn't be making its own representation to Ofcom, but gave his full backing to Truphone's complaint.
Beaumont also revealed that Orange has been crippling its Nokia E61 handsets.
"The N95 doesn't surprise me," he told us. AQL had noticed that Orange-branded E61 phones were unable to make SIP calls for several weeks.
New start-ups such as Truphone and AQL allow users to use a WLAN-aware handset with built-in SIP support - such as the E61 and the new E65 - bypassing the network. Nokia has integrated SIP calling deeply into the phone, which makes for a seamless experience for the user and better power management. The launch of Nokia's E65 and N95 handsets, combined with the growing maturity of services such as AQL and Truphone, is taking VoIP from the enthusiast market into the mainstream.
"We've got other fish to fry, but we'll be backing the Truphone complaint," Beaumont said today. "There's going to be a lot of disappointed subscribers out there."
Both Tagg and Beaumont said Nokia would be far from pleased to see the operators disabling premium features from their phones.
"Nokia's built a great handset with the E65, and are completely behind SIP and VoIP. You're not going to buy a £700 handset unless it does something cool," said Tagg.
Beaumont said: "It opens up a another can of words, really. Nokia won't be very happy supplying a phone to the networks that then had its functionality limited. They create a beautiful handset, and there's a promise to the consumer, then they get one and find it doesn't do any of those things promised."
Why Truphone and AQL aren't like Skype
"You can use a completely separate client like Fring, but it's impossible to make SIP calls using the Nokia stuff," Tagg explained today.
"We've always taken the view that the SIP client must be deeply integrated into the phone, and that these separate clients are novelties. Fring is impressive, but it's hard to write a client that's nice to your battery, and people want to use the contact book and call log that are already in the phone."
Users can still buy an N95 with a SIM from a supplier such as Expansys, but they'll pay more upfront and not enjoy the airtime subsidy.
"They're just defending their voice revenues," said Beaumont. "They say they're not worried about VoIP but this shows they are. Why remove it, otherwise?"
Ofcom had not responded to our request for comment by press time.
[ Source : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/18/voip_wars_head_for_ofcom/]
Truphone boss James Tagg says his fledgling company will ask Ofcom to intervene if mobile networks continue to cripple VoIP-capable handsets.
Another VoIP provider told us today that Orange has been crippling its E61 handsets for SIP telephony "for several weeks".
As we reported earlier today, Vodafone and Orange have released a version of the hot new Nokia N95 handset with the native VoIP capability disabled. See Truphone's video here.
Tagg said he'd be making a representation to the UK telecoms regulator in a week if questions hadn't been answered satisfactorily by Vodafone and Orange. "We will formally complain within a week if we haven't got some sort of answer out of them by other routes," he told us.
The two giants are clearly flouting EU law, he said. "We're being blocked at the network level and at the device level."
Adam Beaumont, managing director of rival SIP service AQL said his company wouldn't be making its own representation to Ofcom, but gave his full backing to Truphone's complaint.
Beaumont also revealed that Orange has been crippling its Nokia E61 handsets.
"The N95 doesn't surprise me," he told us. AQL had noticed that Orange-branded E61 phones were unable to make SIP calls for several weeks.
New start-ups such as Truphone and AQL allow users to use a WLAN-aware handset with built-in SIP support - such as the E61 and the new E65 - bypassing the network. Nokia has integrated SIP calling deeply into the phone, which makes for a seamless experience for the user and better power management. The launch of Nokia's E65 and N95 handsets, combined with the growing maturity of services such as AQL and Truphone, is taking VoIP from the enthusiast market into the mainstream.
"We've got other fish to fry, but we'll be backing the Truphone complaint," Beaumont said today. "There's going to be a lot of disappointed subscribers out there."
Both Tagg and Beaumont said Nokia would be far from pleased to see the operators disabling premium features from their phones.
"Nokia's built a great handset with the E65, and are completely behind SIP and VoIP. You're not going to buy a £700 handset unless it does something cool," said Tagg.
Beaumont said: "It opens up a another can of words, really. Nokia won't be very happy supplying a phone to the networks that then had its functionality limited. They create a beautiful handset, and there's a promise to the consumer, then they get one and find it doesn't do any of those things promised."
Why Truphone and AQL aren't like Skype
"You can use a completely separate client like Fring, but it's impossible to make SIP calls using the Nokia stuff," Tagg explained today.
"We've always taken the view that the SIP client must be deeply integrated into the phone, and that these separate clients are novelties. Fring is impressive, but it's hard to write a client that's nice to your battery, and people want to use the contact book and call log that are already in the phone."
Users can still buy an N95 with a SIM from a supplier such as Expansys, but they'll pay more upfront and not enjoy the airtime subsidy.
"They're just defending their voice revenues," said Beaumont. "They say they're not worried about VoIP but this shows they are. Why remove it, otherwise?"
Ofcom had not responded to our request for comment by press time.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
India's 25 best employers
[Source: http://www.rediff.com/money/2007/apr/17best.htm ]
India's 25 best employers
Rank
Organisation
1
Aditya Birla Group
2
Satyam Computer Services Limited
3
Marriott Hotels India
4
Eureka Forbes Limited
5
Cisco Systems (India) Private Limited
6
Godrej Consumer Products Ltd.
7
Agilent Technologies Ltd.
8
Standard Chartered Scope International - India
9
Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.
10
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
11
Wipro BPO
12
Covansys (India) Private Limited
13
Ajuba Solutions India Private Limited
14
Pantaloon Retail India Limited
15
Text 100 India Pvt. Ltd.
16
Domino's Pizza India Limited
17
Ford India
18
Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd.
19
Hardcastle Restaurants Pvt. Ltd.
20
HCL Technologies Ltd.- BPO Services
21
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited
22
Johnson and Johnson Medical, India
23
GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd.
24
HSBC
25
Monsanto India Limited
India's 25 best employers
Rank
Organisation
1
Aditya Birla Group
2
Satyam Computer Services Limited
3
Marriott Hotels India
4
Eureka Forbes Limited
5
Cisco Systems (India) Private Limited
6
Godrej Consumer Products Ltd.
7
Agilent Technologies Ltd.
8
Standard Chartered Scope International - India
9
Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.
10
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
11
Wipro BPO
12
Covansys (India) Private Limited
13
Ajuba Solutions India Private Limited
14
Pantaloon Retail India Limited
15
Text 100 India Pvt. Ltd.
16
Domino's Pizza India Limited
17
Ford India
18
Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd.
19
Hardcastle Restaurants Pvt. Ltd.
20
HCL Technologies Ltd.- BPO Services
21
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited
22
Johnson and Johnson Medical, India
23
GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd.
24
HSBC
25
Monsanto India Limited
iPhone: Harder to Build than Apple Thought
[ Source : http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2007/tc20070413_247721.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe_technology ]
iPhone: Harder to Build than Apple Thought
Reports that Apple has moved more hands to the iPhone team may mean yet another product launch delay for the company
The announcement that Apple would delay the release of its newest version of Mac OS X, known as Leopard, didn't surprise many people. A rumor suggesting such a delay was imminent had been circulating for weeks.
But Apple's (AAPL) Apr. 12 statement that it has redeployed some of its software engineering and quality assurance personnel away from Leopard to the team working on the June launch of the iPhone suggests that some last-minute problems are cropping up and raises questions about whether Apple has had to push back the iPhone release, if only by some weeks.
Running Into Snags
Various iPhone suppliers have been told that the iPhone may not be available until the end of June, according to Jagdish Rebello, an analyst with iSuppli, a market intelligence firm in Silicon Valley. Apple had never specified when in June the device would ship, but its wireless partner, AT&T (T), had been cited in published reports naming a June 11 target date, the same day of an Apple software developers conference. "We're hearing it's mostly an issue with the complexity of the device, and that all the component suppliers are making their deliveries on time," Rebello says.
Apple hinted in the statement that making the iPhone is no cakewalk. The cell phone "contains the most sophisticated software ever shipped on a mobile device," Apple said. It added that the device had passed "several" of its required certification tests and would ship in "late June."
Usually with two months or less to go before market release, a device like the iPhone would ordinarily be going through a heavy battery of testing in preparation for volume manufacturing. The apparently sudden shift of personnel away from Leopard suggests that a late wrinkle has emerged. "Typically the manufacturer and the service provider are making sure the phone meets all its specifications, and that all the production glitches have been ironed out," Rebello says. "It's clear they have found some issues that they need to fix."
First Time Is Right Time
Richard Doherty, director and co-founder of the Envisioneering Group, says he's tested the phone and didn't uncover problems with it. Apple may be beefing up software developer tools and fixing security concerns, he reckons. "Putting a powerful operating system on a phone took extra hands on deck," he says. "The last thing Apple wants is for the iPhone to be vulnerable to hacker attacks."
Apple hopes customers will use iPhone for online purchases, so it's making the operating system more powerful than existing mobile systems, such as Microsoft's (MSFT) Windows Mobile or Symbian, developed by a Nokia (NOK)-led consortium. "They don't want it to be a version 1.0 of the iPhone, but version 4.9," Doherty says. "Apple wants to get it right the first time."
Another challenge is giving the iPhone sufficient battery life. The battery will have to be powerful enough to handle a variety of functions, but it must also be compact, analysts explain. "There's a lot of skepticism about the iPhone's battery life," says Paul Sagawa, an analyst with Sanford Bernstein. The iPhone is expected to have two batteries, one for the phone and the other for the music player. The phone battery, which is very small, would have to power a huge screen, Wi-Fi network connections, and many other power-hungry features.
Wall Street's Not Worried
Wall Street analysts generally dismissed the Leopard release delay, saying there are plenty of other reasons to be bullish on Apple stock. Adobe (ADBE) will soon be upgrading its flagship creative software for the Mac, giving computer users another reason to buy new Macs. And barring any major glitches, many analysts are confident the iPhone will be a hit. "Although the push-out of Leopard is not ideal, we view iPhone as the delivery of the next leg to the Apple growth story," Goldman Sachs (GS) analyst David Bailey wrote in an Apr. 13 research note. Apple stock dipped 2.1% the day after the late afternoon announcement.
The delayed Leopard is the second rollout of a major Apple product this year. Apple also delayed the launch of Apple TV, which hit store shelves at the end of March. But Leopard's four-month delay is minor compared with the many delays that beset Microsoft's latest operating system, Windows Vista. The system was first due in 2005, but didn't hit store shelves until early 2007.
And the extra time means added weeks of speculation surrounding the features due to be included in Leopard, now slated for an October launch. "Our analysis indicates that if not for the 'secret' features, the core Leopard operating system would likely have shipped on time," American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu wrote in a recent research note.
However embarrassing the Leopard delay, the release of a bug-riddled iPhone would be disastrous, particularly since expectations have been set so high. "It's not easy to make a phone," Sagawa says. "The hype has risen to such a fever pitch that to disappoint people with the product would be quite a black mark."
iPhone: Harder to Build than Apple Thought
Reports that Apple has moved more hands to the iPhone team may mean yet another product launch delay for the company
The announcement that Apple would delay the release of its newest version of Mac OS X, known as Leopard, didn't surprise many people. A rumor suggesting such a delay was imminent had been circulating for weeks.
But Apple's (AAPL) Apr. 12 statement that it has redeployed some of its software engineering and quality assurance personnel away from Leopard to the team working on the June launch of the iPhone suggests that some last-minute problems are cropping up and raises questions about whether Apple has had to push back the iPhone release, if only by some weeks.
Running Into Snags
Various iPhone suppliers have been told that the iPhone may not be available until the end of June, according to Jagdish Rebello, an analyst with iSuppli, a market intelligence firm in Silicon Valley. Apple had never specified when in June the device would ship, but its wireless partner, AT&T (T), had been cited in published reports naming a June 11 target date, the same day of an Apple software developers conference. "We're hearing it's mostly an issue with the complexity of the device, and that all the component suppliers are making their deliveries on time," Rebello says.
Apple hinted in the statement that making the iPhone is no cakewalk. The cell phone "contains the most sophisticated software ever shipped on a mobile device," Apple said. It added that the device had passed "several" of its required certification tests and would ship in "late June."
Usually with two months or less to go before market release, a device like the iPhone would ordinarily be going through a heavy battery of testing in preparation for volume manufacturing. The apparently sudden shift of personnel away from Leopard suggests that a late wrinkle has emerged. "Typically the manufacturer and the service provider are making sure the phone meets all its specifications, and that all the production glitches have been ironed out," Rebello says. "It's clear they have found some issues that they need to fix."
First Time Is Right Time
Richard Doherty, director and co-founder of the Envisioneering Group, says he's tested the phone and didn't uncover problems with it. Apple may be beefing up software developer tools and fixing security concerns, he reckons. "Putting a powerful operating system on a phone took extra hands on deck," he says. "The last thing Apple wants is for the iPhone to be vulnerable to hacker attacks."
Apple hopes customers will use iPhone for online purchases, so it's making the operating system more powerful than existing mobile systems, such as Microsoft's (MSFT) Windows Mobile or Symbian, developed by a Nokia (NOK)-led consortium. "They don't want it to be a version 1.0 of the iPhone, but version 4.9," Doherty says. "Apple wants to get it right the first time."
Another challenge is giving the iPhone sufficient battery life. The battery will have to be powerful enough to handle a variety of functions, but it must also be compact, analysts explain. "There's a lot of skepticism about the iPhone's battery life," says Paul Sagawa, an analyst with Sanford Bernstein. The iPhone is expected to have two batteries, one for the phone and the other for the music player. The phone battery, which is very small, would have to power a huge screen, Wi-Fi network connections, and many other power-hungry features.
Wall Street's Not Worried
Wall Street analysts generally dismissed the Leopard release delay, saying there are plenty of other reasons to be bullish on Apple stock. Adobe (ADBE) will soon be upgrading its flagship creative software for the Mac, giving computer users another reason to buy new Macs. And barring any major glitches, many analysts are confident the iPhone will be a hit. "Although the push-out of Leopard is not ideal, we view iPhone as the delivery of the next leg to the Apple growth story," Goldman Sachs (GS) analyst David Bailey wrote in an Apr. 13 research note. Apple stock dipped 2.1% the day after the late afternoon announcement.
The delayed Leopard is the second rollout of a major Apple product this year. Apple also delayed the launch of Apple TV, which hit store shelves at the end of March. But Leopard's four-month delay is minor compared with the many delays that beset Microsoft's latest operating system, Windows Vista. The system was first due in 2005, but didn't hit store shelves until early 2007.
And the extra time means added weeks of speculation surrounding the features due to be included in Leopard, now slated for an October launch. "Our analysis indicates that if not for the 'secret' features, the core Leopard operating system would likely have shipped on time," American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu wrote in a recent research note.
However embarrassing the Leopard delay, the release of a bug-riddled iPhone would be disastrous, particularly since expectations have been set so high. "It's not easy to make a phone," Sagawa says. "The hype has risen to such a fever pitch that to disappoint people with the product would be quite a black mark."
A new angle on distance learning
[Source: http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/blog/bangaloretigers/archives/2007/04/a_new_angle_on.html#more ]
Anything that can be done over the Web can be done in India--so why not tutoring? I recently came across a company in Bangalore that's doing just that. The company, Tutorvista, started operations in a beta sort of way in late 2005, but only started marketing aggressively late last year.
This is a really interesting company. It offers families in North America and Europe a pretty compelling financial deal: unlimited tutoring in math and English for $100 a month. This is the first Indian off-shoring service aimed at consumers.
The tutors, 500 of them so far, work from their homes in 23 Indian cities. They all have masters degrees or dual bachelors degrees in education and a specialty. The tutors conduct online sessions with their students that include the ability to speak to one another via VOIP and to share an electronic whiteboard. So far, Tutorvista has about 2000 students. That doesn’t seem like a lot, but Ganesh Krishnan, the company’s CEO, says it’s ahead of the business plan. “We’ve made something that was unaffordable to the common man affordable—thanks to low-priced Indian labor and the Internet,” he says.
The deal certainly seems good for customers. Rather than pay local tutors $40 to $50 per one-hour session, they get all they can consume in a month for $100.
The business model is pretty sweet for Tutorvista, too. It recruits and trains tutors online and pays them $300 to $400 a month. It doesn’t spend much on marketing; most of its customers come to it via word of mouth.
The company faces some stiff challenges. How does a small, little-known Indian company convince people in the US and UK to shell out $100 for tutoring over the Internet? It’s all so new and unproven.
Still, Krishnan is confident enough in a gradual buildup in business that he’s already experimenting with new services. He’s piloting an English-as-a-second-language program in Korea, and plans on eventually selling it worldwide. Plus he plans on offering Spanish tutoring worldwide as well—with the tutors in Argentina, Costa Rica and elsewhere.
This is a really interesting company. It offers families in North America and Europe a pretty compelling financial deal: unlimited tutoring in math and English for $100 a month. This is the first Indian off-shoring service aimed at consumers.
The tutors, 500 of them so far, work from their homes in 23 Indian cities. They all have masters degrees or dual bachelors degrees in education and a specialty. The tutors conduct online sessions with their students that include the ability to speak to one another via VOIP and to share an electronic whiteboard. So far, Tutorvista has about 2000 students. That doesn’t seem like a lot, but Ganesh Krishnan, the company’s CEO, says it’s ahead of the business plan. “We’ve made something that was unaffordable to the common man affordable—thanks to low-priced Indian labor and the Internet,” he says.
The deal certainly seems good for customers. Rather than pay local tutors $40 to $50 per one-hour session, they get all they can consume in a month for $100.
The business model is pretty sweet for Tutorvista, too. It recruits and trains tutors online and pays them $300 to $400 a month. It doesn’t spend much on marketing; most of its customers come to it via word of mouth.
The company faces some stiff challenges. How does a small, little-known Indian company convince people in the US and UK to shell out $100 for tutoring over the Internet? It’s all so new and unproven.
Still, Krishnan is confident enough in a gradual buildup in business that he’s already experimenting with new services. He’s piloting an English-as-a-second-language program in Korea, and plans on eventually selling it worldwide. Plus he plans on offering Spanish tutoring worldwide as well—with the tutors in Argentina, Costa Rica and elsewhere.
Vonage cops to “no workaround”: which means they could be totally screwed if…
[Source : http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1537]
Vonage cops to “no workaround”: which means they could be totally screwed if…Posted by Russell Shaw @ 9:38 am Categories: General, Verizon, Vonage
Vonage now says they have no "workaround" that could be deployed if a U.S. Appeals Court does not grant a stay in its patent infringement dispute with Verizon.
That appeal for a stay will be heard a week from tomorrow.
"Vonage currently has no workarounds that moot the need for a stay," the company said in a statement cited by USAToday and also mentioned by BroadbandReports and on Alex Saunders blog.
"While Vonage has studied methods for designing around the patents," the company says, "removal of the allegedly infringing technology, if even feasible, could take many months to fully study and implement."
Me: If Vonage doesn't obtain a stay they are so totally screwed.
Karl on Broadband Reports.com is a bit less edgy. "As it stands, Vonage is simply hoping the appeals process works for them," he writes.
Alex adds:
The crows have come home to roost for Vonage. The company has admitted that it has no workaround to navigate past Verizon's patents, and that such a workaround may not even be feasible. Interim CEO Jeffrey Citron has declared that one of the first belt-tightening moves will be to axe former CEO Mike Snyder's dot-com era marketing programs. Customer acquisition costs have ballooned to $306 per subscriber in the most recent quarter.
Old-style telecom business model + new technology = incremental improvement, not disruption.
Jon Arnold adds:
Reading this article makes it very clear that it's going to be all or nothing with this Verizon patent claims issue. The language they're using indicates that if it all goes Verizon's way, Vonage simply does not have a future.
This just shows you how much their backs are to the wall. At this point, without a workaround, they have to convince the judge and jury that these broad, sweeping patent claims are indefensible, and that in essence, Verizon didn't invent and doesn't own VoIP. I think they have to bet the farm on it, and my guess is they will win.
Admitting they have no workaround may in fact, be true, but the way it's positioned now, this seems like a gambit to raise the stakes and show how one-sided this thing really is. If the ruling totally favors Verizon, then Vonage's days are numbered. And once that happens, they'll be emboldened to go after the cablecos. They could go after the other VoIP pureplays, but that won't be necessary, since once Vonage is vanquished, the others will simply go away on their own (mind you, 8×8 is rightly making a lot noise lately about all of its patents, so they may be spared).
The potential domino effect here is ominous, and while I don't think it will all come to pass, the possibility alone should be enough for the judge/jury to see things in a more balanced light. If Verizon gets all the spoils, competition would be crushed, the price of VoIP will surely increase, and consumers would have less choice and less innovation.
The plot thickens…
I agree with these observations, but I sort of sense that a week from tomorrow, Vonage will be granted a stay for both their ongoing services and new-signups.
What's your prediction?
Vonage cops to “no workaround”: which means they could be totally screwed if…Posted by Russell Shaw @ 9:38 am Categories: General, Verizon, Vonage
Vonage now says they have no "workaround" that could be deployed if a U.S. Appeals Court does not grant a stay in its patent infringement dispute with Verizon.
That appeal for a stay will be heard a week from tomorrow.
"Vonage currently has no workarounds that moot the need for a stay," the company said in a statement cited by USAToday and also mentioned by BroadbandReports and on Alex Saunders blog.
"While Vonage has studied methods for designing around the patents," the company says, "removal of the allegedly infringing technology, if even feasible, could take many months to fully study and implement."
Me: If Vonage doesn't obtain a stay they are so totally screwed.
Karl on Broadband Reports.com is a bit less edgy. "As it stands, Vonage is simply hoping the appeals process works for them," he writes.
Alex adds:
The crows have come home to roost for Vonage. The company has admitted that it has no workaround to navigate past Verizon's patents, and that such a workaround may not even be feasible. Interim CEO Jeffrey Citron has declared that one of the first belt-tightening moves will be to axe former CEO Mike Snyder's dot-com era marketing programs. Customer acquisition costs have ballooned to $306 per subscriber in the most recent quarter.
Old-style telecom business model + new technology = incremental improvement, not disruption.
Jon Arnold adds:
Reading this article makes it very clear that it's going to be all or nothing with this Verizon patent claims issue. The language they're using indicates that if it all goes Verizon's way, Vonage simply does not have a future.
This just shows you how much their backs are to the wall. At this point, without a workaround, they have to convince the judge and jury that these broad, sweeping patent claims are indefensible, and that in essence, Verizon didn't invent and doesn't own VoIP. I think they have to bet the farm on it, and my guess is they will win.
Admitting they have no workaround may in fact, be true, but the way it's positioned now, this seems like a gambit to raise the stakes and show how one-sided this thing really is. If the ruling totally favors Verizon, then Vonage's days are numbered. And once that happens, they'll be emboldened to go after the cablecos. They could go after the other VoIP pureplays, but that won't be necessary, since once Vonage is vanquished, the others will simply go away on their own (mind you, 8×8 is rightly making a lot noise lately about all of its patents, so they may be spared).
The potential domino effect here is ominous, and while I don't think it will all come to pass, the possibility alone should be enough for the judge/jury to see things in a more balanced light. If Verizon gets all the spoils, competition would be crushed, the price of VoIP will surely increase, and consumers would have less choice and less innovation.
The plot thickens…
I agree with these observations, but I sort of sense that a week from tomorrow, Vonage will be granted a stay for both their ongoing services and new-signups.
What's your prediction?
Monday, April 16, 2007
BSNL plans mega WiMAX rollout
[Source : http://www.telegeography.com/cu/article.php?article_id=17406&email=html]
BSNL plans mega WiMAX rollout
India’s BSNL is expected to float a tender to offer WiMAX services in 1,000 cities across the country. Unnamed sources said BSNL is awaiting the final policy announcement by the Department of Telecommunications on 3G spectrum and broadband wireless access. If the policy is announced this month, it hopes to finalise the tender by July so that deployment can begin by September. The planned tender would be for 1,000 base trans-receivers, which would be a mix of both non-line of sight (NLOS) and line of sight (LOS) BTSs.
BSNL plans mega WiMAX rollout
India’s BSNL is expected to float a tender to offer WiMAX services in 1,000 cities across the country. Unnamed sources said BSNL is awaiting the final policy announcement by the Department of Telecommunications on 3G spectrum and broadband wireless access. If the policy is announced this month, it hopes to finalise the tender by July so that deployment can begin by September. The planned tender would be for 1,000 base trans-receivers, which would be a mix of both non-line of sight (NLOS) and line of sight (LOS) BTSs.
Why Google bought DoubleClick
[Source : http://gigaom.com/2007/04/16/why-google-bought-doubleclick/#more-8752]
If there was any need for proof that Google considers advertising its core competency, then last few days provide ample testimony to that fact. The Mountain View, Calif.-based company has partnered with Clear Channel Communications to sell radio ads, a move that follows their decision to snap up DoubleClick for $3.1 billion which has been the big news of the weekend.
The DoubleClick acquisition showed that Google is willing to spend any amount of money to defend its advertising turf. The deal has also prompted AT&T, Yahoo and Microsoft to cry foul and whisper to media about an anti-trust investigation, a preposterous notion, considering that Microsoft had a chance to outbid Google.
To get a more realistic perspective on Google’s decision to buy DoubleClick, I reached out to Mark Kingdon, CEO of Organic, Inc., a leading online marketing firm that works closely with Fortune 1000 companies. Mark is an expert in Internet branding and online advertising. We met when I was reporting a story for Business 2.0, and since then I have come to rely on him as a barometer of sanity when it comes to online advertising. I did a short interview with him, to get his take on Google’s move to buy DoubleClick. Here are some excerpts.
Om: There are some who believe that this deal marks the return of the banner. What do you say to that?
Mark: Did it ever go away?
Om: Is this an attempt by Google to exert more control on the advertising market and at the same time keep competitors at bay?
Mark: DoubleClick is a very strong complement to Google’s dominant search offering. If Google develops an equally strong offering in video, gaming (AdScape), mobile and digital outdoor, they could offer advertisers a way of reaching consumers just about anywhere in the digital world.
Om: What is the real value of DoubleClick?
Mark: This was a strategic purchase. They locked out a competitor (Microsoft) and expanded their core business in a closely related area. It is Business 101. It’s about speed to competitive advantage. Google gets a leader in placing display advertising which brings along a very large advertiser base. Google has a big brain trust and will likely find new ways to aggregate, segment and optimize.
Om: If you look beyond today, how does this acqusition help Google? Does this buy them time, as the advertising industry tries and figure out its future models?
Mark: Advertisers buy what they know and they innovate on the edge so Google is expanding its relationships and market coverage. Everything that’s happening on the edge is having a gut-wrenching impact on the big middle. Think about YouTube and its impact on big media. Business models are slow to change when billions of dollars are at stake.
Om: Both Google and DoubleClick are moving ahead and setting up ad-exchanges. Are they a key component to this deal?
Mark: TBD. It sounds like an obvious direction for Google to take. Add in real- or near-real time optimization across different digital media and you have a mouth-watering concept. Everything from commodities to collectibles are sold on exchanges so why not ads? Here’s why: there is a big business built on the buying and selling of ad space. It comfortable, familiar and very profitable for the participants.
If there was any need for proof that Google considers advertising its core competency, then last few days provide ample testimony to that fact. The Mountain View, Calif.-based company has partnered with Clear Channel Communications to sell radio ads, a move that follows their decision to snap up DoubleClick for $3.1 billion which has been the big news of the weekend.
The DoubleClick acquisition showed that Google is willing to spend any amount of money to defend its advertising turf. The deal has also prompted AT&T, Yahoo and Microsoft to cry foul and whisper to media about an anti-trust investigation, a preposterous notion, considering that Microsoft had a chance to outbid Google.
To get a more realistic perspective on Google’s decision to buy DoubleClick, I reached out to Mark Kingdon, CEO of Organic, Inc., a leading online marketing firm that works closely with Fortune 1000 companies. Mark is an expert in Internet branding and online advertising. We met when I was reporting a story for Business 2.0, and since then I have come to rely on him as a barometer of sanity when it comes to online advertising. I did a short interview with him, to get his take on Google’s move to buy DoubleClick. Here are some excerpts.
Om: There are some who believe that this deal marks the return of the banner. What do you say to that?
Mark: Did it ever go away?
Om: Is this an attempt by Google to exert more control on the advertising market and at the same time keep competitors at bay?
Mark: DoubleClick is a very strong complement to Google’s dominant search offering. If Google develops an equally strong offering in video, gaming (AdScape), mobile and digital outdoor, they could offer advertisers a way of reaching consumers just about anywhere in the digital world.
Om: What is the real value of DoubleClick?
Mark: This was a strategic purchase. They locked out a competitor (Microsoft) and expanded their core business in a closely related area. It is Business 101. It’s about speed to competitive advantage. Google gets a leader in placing display advertising which brings along a very large advertiser base. Google has a big brain trust and will likely find new ways to aggregate, segment and optimize.
Om: If you look beyond today, how does this acqusition help Google? Does this buy them time, as the advertising industry tries and figure out its future models?
Mark: Advertisers buy what they know and they innovate on the edge so Google is expanding its relationships and market coverage. Everything that’s happening on the edge is having a gut-wrenching impact on the big middle. Think about YouTube and its impact on big media. Business models are slow to change when billions of dollars are at stake.
Om: Both Google and DoubleClick are moving ahead and setting up ad-exchanges. Are they a key component to this deal?
Mark: TBD. It sounds like an obvious direction for Google to take. Add in real- or near-real time optimization across different digital media and you have a mouth-watering concept. Everything from commodities to collectibles are sold on exchanges so why not ads? Here’s why: there is a big business built on the buying and selling of ad space. It comfortable, familiar and very profitable for the participants.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
iTunes streaming to mobile phone using Slingbox and Apple TV
iTunes streaming to mobile phone using Slingbox and Apple TV
[Source http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/gadgets/itunes-streaming-to-mobile-phone-using-slingbox-and-apple-tv.asp]Apple TV has become the ultimate hacker magnet allowing users to use the Apple TV in ways Apple hadn't intended. As discussed recently, Apple TV was hacked to allow Asterisk, the open-source IP-PBX to run on it. Check out the Apple TV Asterisk tut. Now it appears that just a few weeks after launch, CNet is talking about an intriguing new feature for that will allow you to stream music from iTunes on your home computer to your cell phone leveraging Apple TV and Slingbox.
Apple TV
It's a bit of a kludge since the iTunes music has to sync from your PC to the Slingbox and then to your mobile phone. Slingbox is actually working on making the Slingbox compatible with Apple TV. This would enable streaming of Apple TV content to a mobile device. In theory, both audio (mp3) and video content could be streamed from the PC to the Apple TV to the SlingBox and finally to a phone capable of running the SlingPlayer - i.e. Windows Mobile, Palm or Symbian. The Apple iPhone, due out soon supports EDGE (generally classified as a 2.75G network technology - not quite 3G) and is capable of 1 MBit/s peak speeds.
With these wireless speeds, if Steve Jobs ever permits the SlingPlayer to run on the iPhone, that could be a killer app for the iPhone when used in conjunction with either the Slingbox or the Apple TV. More likely, Apple will only permit their own DRM-infested audio/video player so you have to "pay up" to download music and videos from their iTunes store.
I could be wrong. I hope I am. Though it is perfectly plausible that since both the Apple TV and iTunes run the same DRM protection, Apple could permit direct streaming from the Apple TV to the Apple iPhone. I mean you paid for the content, right? So I don't see why Apple would prevent you from streaming content you paid for to another device you own.
Vodafone selects Ericsson for European-wide managed services contract for its network spare parts
http://www.ericsson.com/ericsson/press/releases/20070410-1117615.shtml
n a deal the companies say is worth millions ( millions! ) of Euros, Ericsson announced Tuesday that it will supply and manage the spare parts needed for Vodafone’s mobile networks. The deal covers both 2G- and 3G-flavored networks, the companies said.
n a deal the companies say is worth millions ( millions! ) of Euros, Ericsson announced Tuesday that it will supply and manage the spare parts needed for Vodafone’s mobile networks. The deal covers both 2G- and 3G-flavored networks, the companies said.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Pune leads country towards Wi-Fi age with WiMax - Financial Express
Pune leads country towards Wi-Fi age with WiMax - Financial Express
[http://hcilondon.net/hciserv/NewsIndex?source=newsdetails&NewsCode=5375]
03-04-2007
Print this page
PUNE, APR 2: Pune became India’s first wireless city on Monday when Intel Technology Pvt Ltd, Pune Municipal Corp (PMC) and Microsense joined hands to commercially roll out the first phase of a 802.16d Wi-Fi and WiMax network in the city. The first phase of the ‘Unwire Pune’ project deployment would provide wireless connectivity in a 25 sq km expanse of the city. “After the completion of the first phase, in around four months, Pune Municipal Corp is planning to make services commercially available to citizens at a cost of Rs 250 offering a speed of 256 kbps,” Nitin Kareer, PMC commissioner said. Intel India has been the chief technology and programme management consultant by PMC while Microsense would roll out the network to offer broadband wireless services. The rest of the city would be covered in the next 12-16 months. Kareer said that internet access would be initially be offered to 30 odd municipal schools in the city.
R Siva Kumar, MD, Intel South Asia said that Intel has been talking to other cities including Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Nagpur, Mysore, Jaipur, Dehradun and Uttarakhand for similar projects. S Kailashnathan, MD, Microsense said that the central government had recently delicensed the 5.8 gh for outdoor use. Since the Pune project was being delayed owing to change in the Trai guidelines, he said the company would currently manage with available spectrum in the 3.3gh, 2.4gh in 2008. and 3.4gh and 5.8gh.“There is a need for additional spectrum in the proposed policy and other spectrum is in the process of being identified,” he said. The Pune project cost has been estimated at Rs 100 crore over the next couple of years for setting up the infrastructure. Siva Kumar said Intel would begin to roll out WiMax on laptops in 2008 and mobile devices a year after.
[http://hcilondon.net/hciserv/NewsIndex?source=newsdetails&NewsCode=5375]
03-04-2007
Print this page
PUNE, APR 2: Pune became India’s first wireless city on Monday when Intel Technology Pvt Ltd, Pune Municipal Corp (PMC) and Microsense joined hands to commercially roll out the first phase of a 802.16d Wi-Fi and WiMax network in the city. The first phase of the ‘Unwire Pune’ project deployment would provide wireless connectivity in a 25 sq km expanse of the city. “After the completion of the first phase, in around four months, Pune Municipal Corp is planning to make services commercially available to citizens at a cost of Rs 250 offering a speed of 256 kbps,” Nitin Kareer, PMC commissioner said. Intel India has been the chief technology and programme management consultant by PMC while Microsense would roll out the network to offer broadband wireless services. The rest of the city would be covered in the next 12-16 months. Kareer said that internet access would be initially be offered to 30 odd municipal schools in the city.
R Siva Kumar, MD, Intel South Asia said that Intel has been talking to other cities including Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Nagpur, Mysore, Jaipur, Dehradun and Uttarakhand for similar projects. S Kailashnathan, MD, Microsense said that the central government had recently delicensed the 5.8 gh for outdoor use. Since the Pune project was being delayed owing to change in the Trai guidelines, he said the company would currently manage with available spectrum in the 3.3gh, 2.4gh in 2008. and 3.4gh and 5.8gh.“There is a need for additional spectrum in the proposed policy and other spectrum is in the process of being identified,” he said. The Pune project cost has been estimated at Rs 100 crore over the next couple of years for setting up the infrastructure. Siva Kumar said Intel would begin to roll out WiMax on laptops in 2008 and mobile devices a year after.
Top Mobile applications for 2007
[Source http://www.businessweek.com/technology/]
•WiFi
•VoIP
•Mobile TV
•TV-out
•GPS
•WiFi
•VoIP
•Mobile TV
•TV-out
•GPS
In VoIP, Cisco thinks small to go big
[Source : http://gigaom.com/2007/04/03/cisco-small-biz-voip/#more-8619]
Cisco is announcing Tuesday a somewhat expected push into the small-business Voice over IP market, one that enlists resellers as key allies in the search for the ever-elusive SMB.
The networking king joins an SMB VoIP race that is getting considerably crowded, with equipment and software manufacturers (Microsoft, Nortel, Avaya) and hosted-service providers (Covad, Best Buy) all angling for part of a market that is typically estimated to be in the multiple billions. While its offering has a bit of a Cadillac price tag, it may be Cisco’s game to lose since its strategy seems well thought-out with incentives on both the customer and reseller side of the equation.
Called the Smart Business Communication System (apparently telecom stuff doesn’t get any creative naming), Cisco’s package offers more than just an integrated voice system — it allows users (and resellers) to add in wireless infrastructure, small routers and integration with vertical-application packages.
Pricing is somewhat of a grab bag, since the final sticker may vary widely depending on what pieces-parts are delivered (IP phones, routers, wireless access points), or whether or not the reseller offers the bundle as a managed/hosted type service. Rick Moran, VP for Cisco’s unified communications marketing, estimates that typical SBCS deployments would cost around $600 to $700 per seat, phone included.
Cisco’s target for its SMB offering is in the just-under-99-seat range, a market segment that may be a bit higher in functionality needs than the businesses who might look at Microsoft’s promised phone-in-a-box offering, or to Fonality’s or Digium’s no-cost open-source PBXs. While Moran said ease of installation (”Our target is to have phones working less than 5 minutes after plugging the boxes in”) is still a criteria for Cisco’s intended SMB base, it’s probably more likely that a Cisco SMB VoIP sale will come through one of the company’s thousands of reseller partners, who may want to bundle wireless, Internet access and web hosting together as part of an integrated small-business communications package.
To that end, Cisco’s new plan (scheduled to be announced Tuesday at a partners meeting in Las Vegas) includes incentives for resellers to get up to speed via training, such as co-marketing plans and financing support. Those features, combined with the designed-in ability for the Cisco products to scale or integrate with larger corporate operations, makes the Cisco VoIP-and-more a probable solid choice for the IT manager who isn’t necessarily concerned about getting the cheapest system out there.
Cisco is announcing Tuesday a somewhat expected push into the small-business Voice over IP market, one that enlists resellers as key allies in the search for the ever-elusive SMB.
The networking king joins an SMB VoIP race that is getting considerably crowded, with equipment and software manufacturers (Microsoft, Nortel, Avaya) and hosted-service providers (Covad, Best Buy) all angling for part of a market that is typically estimated to be in the multiple billions. While its offering has a bit of a Cadillac price tag, it may be Cisco’s game to lose since its strategy seems well thought-out with incentives on both the customer and reseller side of the equation.
Called the Smart Business Communication System (apparently telecom stuff doesn’t get any creative naming), Cisco’s package offers more than just an integrated voice system — it allows users (and resellers) to add in wireless infrastructure, small routers and integration with vertical-application packages.
Pricing is somewhat of a grab bag, since the final sticker may vary widely depending on what pieces-parts are delivered (IP phones, routers, wireless access points), or whether or not the reseller offers the bundle as a managed/hosted type service. Rick Moran, VP for Cisco’s unified communications marketing, estimates that typical SBCS deployments would cost around $600 to $700 per seat, phone included.
Cisco’s target for its SMB offering is in the just-under-99-seat range, a market segment that may be a bit higher in functionality needs than the businesses who might look at Microsoft’s promised phone-in-a-box offering, or to Fonality’s or Digium’s no-cost open-source PBXs. While Moran said ease of installation (”Our target is to have phones working less than 5 minutes after plugging the boxes in”) is still a criteria for Cisco’s intended SMB base, it’s probably more likely that a Cisco SMB VoIP sale will come through one of the company’s thousands of reseller partners, who may want to bundle wireless, Internet access and web hosting together as part of an integrated small-business communications package.
To that end, Cisco’s new plan (scheduled to be announced Tuesday at a partners meeting in Las Vegas) includes incentives for resellers to get up to speed via training, such as co-marketing plans and financing support. Those features, combined with the designed-in ability for the Cisco products to scale or integrate with larger corporate operations, makes the Cisco VoIP-and-more a probable solid choice for the IT manager who isn’t necessarily concerned about getting the cheapest system out there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
