Telco of the Future is a Software Company

"The telco of the next five years has to be a software company," says John Lazar, MetaSwitch CEO. That statement is rich with implications for business strategy, organization, investment and priorities, but must at least incorporate the ability to "create and tear down" whole applications, service or features very rapidly, without labor-intensive physical processes. That's why MetaSwitch believes in IP Multimedia Subsystem.

The meaning does not extend as far as the notion that access networks and a range of services related to voice, data and video services will be unnecessary. What Lazar means is that since nobody really can predict what the killer app of the future is, providers simply must have the ability to react quickly when users suggest demand exists for any application that benefits from network access.  

And the access and services platform has to transcend silos. "You have to innovate quickly and build links between things," says Lazar. "Things you don't expect will stick," he notes, reminding people that  "nobody predicted SMS (text messaing) would be the huge success it hsa turned out to be."

But addressing both the current recessionary climate, which has nearly everybody reacting caustiously, Lazar also warned that some "people are not thinking ambitiously enough." There are opportunities to be seized, but action is necessary. And Lazar predicts innovators will do well in this recession.

There are constraints, to be sure. "Damn the dollars, full speed ahead" may not be a strategy many firms can embrace. But keep in mind: when somebody, or a company, says "something can't be done," you have to translate.

What the speaker means is that "I, or my organization, for a host of very-real reasons, cannot do it." That is different than saying something really cannot be done.

Other speakers may well say "something is possible, and can be done," because they do not have barriers of one sort or another that prevent them from doing something others say "cannot be done."

Over the next five years, people will do things that "cannot be done." They will be done for one simple reason. Despite a host of reasons why one contestant says something "cannot be done," others will operate without those constraints.

IMS Realism

IP Multimedia Subsystem seems to be moving from concept to deployment, if recent observations by Manuel Vexler, IMS Forum VP, are any indication.

For starters, billing and operations support software firms are starting to be more active. That suggests their carrier customers finally are thinking about generating revenue from deploying IMS features (IMS is a platform allowing services providers to rapidly and cheaply create new services, test and then deploy them).

Carrier chief financial officers also seem to be asking tougher questions, which suggests carrier technologists are asking for authority to buy platforms. Many of the questions seem to be of the "you bought ATM 10 years ago, soft switches five years ago and now you want to buy IMS?"

IMS backers also now seem to be more aware that it really is infrastructure, and that the search for services will have to follow. "You don't have Google until you have the Internet," Vexler notes. Up to this point some have worried about identifying some "killer app" that would justify IMS deployment. Now there may be more awareness that until the platform is in place we won't really know what apps will resonate.

It probably still is a fair bet that wireless apps will be early candidates, as IMS originally was created by mobile carriers.

Mobile Carriers Will Dominate VoIP

Who will massively introduce mobile VoIP? Mobile carriers themselves, says Dean Bubley, Disruptive Analysis president. In fact, some 250 million VoIP over mobile accounts will be in service by 2012, he argues. Conversely, dual-mode mobile devices that work both on wireless networks and Wi-Fi will have been eclipsed, he argues. As for independent providers of VoIP over third generation mobile networks, get ready for something of the same thing that has happened to Vonage, he essentially argues.

In other words, as the mobile carriers increasingly move to provider VoIP as an alternative to legacy Time Division Multiplex services, it will increasingly be tough for independents to make a go of it, much as competition from cable has squeezed Vonage and other independents in the U.S. market.

Independents don have a window of opportunity, though, since the majors haven't yet moved.

Though some will find the analysis disturbing, Bubley's predictions fit well with the past history of technology innovations in the global telecom industry. That is to say, innovations at first are brought to market by upstarts. At some point, it becomes crucial for the majors to adopt, and they do.

Bubley's analysis rests on a couple of simple assumptions. Since mobile carriers are migrating to all-IP networks, voice necessarily will be in the form of VoIP. Either that, or keep running a parallel TDM voice network. The coming IP networks also will operate in more bandwidth-efficient mode than a circuit-switched network, possibly in the range of 100 percent to 200 percent, he argues. Given demands for more data bandwidth, that will be compelling.

Then there's the attraction of IP-enabled features not possible with TDM. Also, mobile providers will want to collapse multiple networks and switching fabrics. Just as wireline networks are moving to IP Multimedia Subsystems, so wireless operators, who initially were the impetus for the creation of IMS, will do so. And that means IP-based voice.

MySpace Opens Platform; What About IMS?

MySpace plans to open up its platform to external developers in the next few months, company CEO and co-founder Chris DeWolfe says. So here's the question for you: as global service providers creep towards IP Multimedia Subsystem as their next generation platform, who is going to develop for those IMS platforms if all the developers already are working for Facebook, MySpace and Google?

In fact, here's a prediction: by the time most global carriers have fully functioning IMS networks in place, the compelling applications IMS will enable already will exist someplace else. So the issue will be: what value to the application owners and distributors will accrue as the result of a business relationship with a carrier? Or can carriers create their own versions of these already-popular applications in a walled garden setting?

Is Voice the Killer App for IMS?

You have seen this story before: a new service rolls out and providers look for the "killer app." Then it turns out the killer app is something people already do, but the innovation allows them to do it in a new way, or maybe a better way.

To some extent, voice is a bit of that sort of thing for broadband Internet access, as email was something approaching a killer app for dial-up Internet access. Though the initial "killer app" for broadband was fast Internet access, voice becomes a very important incremental value.

"We are seeing a pattern in Europe of VoIP being delivered by companies that control the broadband infrastructure," notes Stephan Beckert, TeleGeography analyst. "It's an add-on feature to broadband."

So what is the killer app for fixed-mobile services? It's voice again, allowing legacy providers to hang on to more of their fixed-line business than otherwise; allowing mobile providers to displace landline traffic with mobile; or new providers to displace business phone systems.

So what is the killer app for IP Multimedia Subsystems? Wouldn't it be surprising if it turned out to be voice?

So what's the logic? Assume wireline carriers might lose as much as $13 billion in annual revenues by 2011, in part because 34 percent of U.S. households might elect to go "mobile only." So enter IMS, allowing mobile users to take advantage of cheaper Wi-Fi-based calling over their broadband lines.

Assume the landline carriers then lose just $8 billion in revenue to cord cutters. That's a $5 billion annual revenue stream. So put that in perspective. All U.S. multichannel video providers put together earn about $4 billion a year from pay-per-view and video-on-demand services.

So if wireline carriers just prevent landline erosion, they make more money than the whole U.s. VOD and PPV providers put together.