Tag: telco

  • Peak Wireless and the data paradox

    Peak Wireless and the data paradox

    Australia’s government research agency, the CSIRO, released a somewhat alarming media alert this morning warning that our cities are approaching Peak Data.

    Peak Data, which borrows from the ‘Peak Oil’ term coined in the 1970s to describe the point where oil production reaches a maximum, is where we run out available bandwidth on our wireless networks.

    The release is around the agency’s new report, A World Without Wires, where the agency lays out its view of the future of cellular and radio communications.

    “In the future, how spectrum is allocated may change and we can expect innovation to find new ways to make it more efficient but the underlying position is that spectrum is an increasingly rare resource,” says  the CSIRO’s Director of Digital Productivity and Services Flagship Dr Ian Oppermann.

    “With more and more essential services, including medical, education and government services, being delivered digitally and on mobile devices, finding a solution to “peak data” will become ever more important into the future.”

    The wireless data paradox

    It’s a paradox that just as we’re entering a world of unlimited data, we have limitations of what we can broadcast wirelessly as radio spectrum becomes scarce and contested.

    With fixed line communications, particularly fibre optics, available spectrum can be relatively simply increased by laying down more cables – wireless only has one environment to broadcast in –  so finding ways of pushing more data through the airways is what much of the CSIRO’s paper addresses.

    For telecommunications companies, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity; the challenge being squeezing more data into limited spectrum while the opportunity lies in charging more for guaranteed connectivity.

    The latter raises questions about network neutrality and the question of whether different types of traffic across wireless networks can be charged differently or given differing levels of priority.

    Distributing the load

    This also gives credence to the distributed processing strategies like Cisco’s Fog Computing idea that takes the load off public networks and can potentially hand traffic over to fixed networks or point to point microwave services.

    While M2M data is tiny compared to voice and domestic user needs, it does mean business critical services will have to compete with other users, both in the private Wi-Fi frequencies or the public mobile networks spectrum.

    Overall though, the situation isn’t quite as dire as it seems; technological advances are going to figure out new ways of stuffing data into the available spectrum and aggressively priced data plans are going to discourage customers from using data intensive applications.

    A key lesson from this though is those designing, M2M, Internet of Things or smart city applications can’t assume that bandwidth will always be available to communicate to their devices.

    For the Internet of Things, robust design will require considering security, latency and quality of service.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • Zuckerberg meets the telcos

    Zuckerberg meets the telcos

    One of the fascinations of this blog is how telecommunications executives desperately fight against the idea of their service being a basic utility.

    Should you scratch a tough, hardbitten telco executive; you’ll find a sensitive soul who desperately wants to be seen as a swashbuckling media tycoon or cool startup wunderkind rather than the manager of a staid old telephone company.

    Once you understand the buried desired of telco executives, it’s not surprising that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was invited to give the opening keynote of the 2014 Mobile World Congress.

    Sadly for the Telcos it wasn’t good news as the real life tycoon and wunderkind described how Whatsapp, the startup he acquired for $16 billion last week, is going to introduce voice services in the near future.

    Having seen messaging services like Whatsapp slowly strangle the telecommunications industry golden goose that was SMS, the telcos now face lucrative voice services being further eroded by these Over The Top smartphone apps.

    Which leaves them with data, the lowest margin service in the telco stable.

    Far from being the bravest man in Silicon Valley, Mark Zuckerberg is the telco industry’s future. Which is why the industry’s executives want to find ways to profit from developments like machine to machine (M2M) communications and media ventures.

    The worry though is most of the new telco opportunities don’t appear to anywhere near as profitable as now declining or stagnant services that have been so lucrative in the past.

    Which makes Ericsson’s partnership with Facebook in developing an Innovation Lab for the internet.com initiative intruiging.

    The objective of Internet.com is to make the internet more accessible to more of the world, which again threatens incumbent telco models.

    Transmitting data—even a text message or a simple web page—requires bandwidth, something that’s scarce in many parts of the world. Partners will invest in tools and software to improve data compression capabilities and make data networks and services run more efficiently.

    Efficient, compressed data means even less revenue for the operators so it’s no wonder they’re looking at those alternate revenue streams.

    No telco executive is likely to starve in the near future, but as revenues stagnate in their established markets it’s no wonder the industry’s leaders are wondering whether it’s worthwhile hitching their fortunes to Facebook’s success.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • People are the key to doing business in Asia

    People are the key to doing business in Asia

    The first Decoding the New Economy for 2014 is an interview with Carl Grivner, CEO of Asian data center and communication company Pacnet.

    Pacnet is unique in having an extensive Asian network of fibre links and data centres as well as having head offices in both Singapore and Hong Kong.

    Having two head offices in cities as different as Singapore and Hong Kong presents a number of challenges along with some advantages as Carl explains.

    The company’s combination of data centres and data links gives Pacnet an opportunity to offer some unique services in software defined networks, which Grivner describes as “the Pacnet Enabled Network”, that allows customers to create their own virtual networks.

    What differentiates Pacnet in Grivner’s view are the company’s people – an asset essential in diverse Asian markets.

    “What differentiates us are the people that we have in those locations,” says Grivner. “when you do business in Asia; doing business in Singapore versus Sydney versus Hong Kong everything is a little bit different, or a lot different for that matter.

    “The physical assets are the physical assets but the people that get know how to get things done in each of those markets is what makes us unique.”

    Grivner also explores the differences between Singapore and Hong Kong’s business cultures along with the diversity of the Chinese economy.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • Network neutrality and the internet of things

    Network neutrality and the internet of things

    Yesterday’s US Supreme Court decision ruling against the Federal Communication Commission’s regulations on network neutrality is a mixed bag for the Internet of Things industry.

    Network neutrality is the principle that all internet traffic is treated the same, regardless of its nature or destination.

    The FCC rules meant US based Internet Service Providers weren’t allowed to discriminate between different types of services, for instance blocking Netflicks or allowing faster downloads from Amazon.

    In the United States network neutrality has been a bone of contention between consumer groups, government regulators and ISPs for over a decade, although it hasn’t been much of an issue outside North America.

    For Machine to Machine (M2M) or Internet of Things (IoT) vendors and services there is some attraction in Telcos being able to offer prioritised traffic for mission critical systems.

    In applications like supply chain management and public safety, reliability of the connection is essential and something the ‘best effort’ services offered by ISPs are not well suited to.

    When networks are overcapacity, say at sporting events or during disasters, being able to shed non critical traffic may be important for emergency services and the devices they may depend upon.

    So for IoT and M2M services, network neutrality is not necessarily a good thing.

    However there is a downside should network neutrality be overturned, the risk of vendor lock in is high and it’s quite possible to see as situation where, for instance, AT&T enter into an agreement with Google to provide the public network capabilities for Nest home automation devices.

    This could see Nest customers suffering a substandard service if they choose another provider.

    Internationally the attitude towards network neutrality has been that competition will sort things out, however the IT and telco industries do have a habit of trying to enforce their own monopolies on customers – something we’re currently seeing in the Apple-Google battles over smartphones and connected vehicles.

    So it isn’t clear whether network neutrality isn’t a good thing for the M2M sector, however it’s something that’s going to play out as these technologies become more ubiquitous across the economy.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • A triumph over orthodoxy – Seven years of the iPhone

    A triumph over orthodoxy – Seven years of the iPhone

    “Once in a while a revolutionary product comes along that changes everything.”

    Those were Steve Jobs’ words when he launched the iPhone seven years ago.

    It was a strong opening that was reinforced by the event’s tag line, “Today Apple reinvents the phone.”

    It wasn’t an idle boast, the iPhone was a leapfrog development – using Jobs’ words – over the existing clunky smartphones and it changed the entire industry and spawned some new ones.

    Smart Company’s Yolanda Redrup asked me for a few comments on her story on the iPhone’s birthday and her questions triggered some thoughts on just how the iPhone changed the mobile phone and telco industries.

    A triumph over orthodoxy

    Apple’s iPhone triumph was born out of the established players’ orthodoxy; companies like Nokia, Blackberry and Palm were wedded to the idea that a tactile QWERTY keyboard was essential for a smartphone.

    Those keyboards took away nearly half the real estate on the phone, Jobs called it “the lower forty”, and it made surfing the net a painful task, let alone watching videos or movies.

    Full featured keyboards made making calls difficult as well. One of the barriers of adopting smartphones was that using the things as phones was quite difficult.

    By having software keyboard and dialling pads that only appeared when needed, Apple solved the problems that faced smartphone users.

    Disrupting the telcos

    The other orthodoxy in the smartphone industry was that the telcos were essential gatekeepers. Nokia and the other incumbents put the needs of telecommunications companies over users of their phones.

    As a consequence email and web browsing capabilities of the existing smartphones were crippled as the telcos tried to lock their customers into their own proprietary networks rather that giving them access to the public internet.

    With the iPhone, Apple broke out of that telco dominance and started to dictate terms to the phone companies. This wouldn’t have been possible if the iPhone hadn’t been a far better, and much more popular, product.

    Building the app store

    Another area where the iPhone disrupted the phone companies’ business was with the App Store. Every smartphone had its own add-on programs but they were expensive with poor functionality and developers had to build versions for every company’s operating system.

    Both the telcos and the phone vendors could see that app stores were a potentially lucrative area but systemically failed to execute on the idea with clunky and expensive software.

    The App Store showed how smartphones should work and coupled with music, another area where the handset vendors dismally failed, Apple is now earning over a billion dollars a month from iTunes.

    Technological change

    Some of the iPhone’s success was due to technologies maturing; earlier smartphones were crippled by slow data connections over 2G or CDMA networks and cloud computing, or software-as-a-service as it was then called, was just beginning to mature as a technology.

    Cloud services and 3G connectivity meant the iPhone could hand off most apps’ processing needs to the service provider, something that the earlier smartphones couldn’t do because the technology wasn’t there.

    That connectivity did come at a cost, the iPhone and its competitors created huge challenges for telcos as they struggled to meet the data demands of their enthusiastic web surfing customers.

    Looking at the future

    While the iPhone came to dominate the smartphone market, that dominance didn’t last as Google Android devices started to flood the marketplace. Now Samsung is as big a player as Apple and a wave of cheap Chinese products are now flooding the industry.

    For Apple and the other smartphone vendors the opportunities now lie in the internet of things (IoT) as connected cars, workplaces and homes require a device to control them. That device is often the smartphone.

    In the next few years the market battleground is going to be creating the applications, platforms and ecosystems around these IoT technologies and its no coincidence that Apple has partnered with BMW on providing software for their smartcar.

    Jobs finished his iPhone presentation with the Wayne Gretzky quote, “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been” and committed Apple to always being where the market is going to be.

    Where the market is going to be in the next seven years is anyone’s guess, but it would be dangerous to count Apple out.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts