What Becomes of Microsoft?

Investors largely believe Microsoft will gradually become the equivalent of a technology utility, a boring but necessary provider of the software that runs the world's business community, says Henry Blodget. A smaller, more optimistic crowd is still arguing that, one day, Microsoft will be able to turn its fortunes around, and fight its way back into an industry leadership position.

Blodget suggests a much darker potential scenario, where difficulties in the company's core operating system and Office franchises simply become less important in the world which seems to be developing, Blodget argues.

The Internet has continued to free app-makers from dependency on Windows or any other desktop platform while Apple's iPhone has revolutionized the mobile business, unleashing a whole new wave of personal computing devices.

Apple's iPad seems on its way to supplanting the low-end PC business.

Importantly, none of these trends depend in any way on Microsoft's original monopoly and cash cow, Windows, Blodget says. "Microsoft is nowhere" in mobile or tablets, he says.

Google, meanwhile, is trying to do the same thing to Apple that Microsoft did to Apple 15 years ago: Separate software and hardware and create a ubiquitous software platform for the world's developers to build

To be sure, lots of smart people thought that was exactly what would have to Netflix, and the doomsday scenario has so far refused to play out. But analysts get paid to analyze and create scenarios. This scenario might seem far fetched as anything other than a scenario many analysts get paid to imagine.

But it does illustrate the dangers for any dominant franchise when computing models shift, as nearly everybody now believes is about to happen. Nor does history offer much optimism. Never in computing history has the leader in one computing era emerged as a leader in the new era.

That will not stop firms such as Microsoft, Cisco and Apple or Google from trying. But they will have to make history to emerge as leaders in the next era.

link

Are Mobile Apps More Like Songs or Software?

Nobody knows yet how the mobile applications will develop, and how big a business it might become for various ecosystem participants. So far, the Apple App Store has sold about $1.4 billion in apps, of which developers keep about 70 percent.

Some developers can point to mobile apps as a significant revenue generator in its own right. Most cannot make that claim.  But some might suggest the developing business is quite a lot more like the "song" business than the software business, according to Getjar.

On average, it takes about the same time to write a mobile app as it does to compose a song, says Ilja Laurs, GetJar CEO. Both cost about the same to download, $1.90 on average.

Advertising and e-commerce will add some revenue on top of actual sales revenue. But at least so far, most "for-fee" mobile apps appear to sell like single songs, rather than productivity or other apps people use on their PCs.

link

How iPad Changes Gmail Experience

One of the more interesting questions about the tablet device market, assuming it does develop as a new and discrete mobile device category, is how user experience and application design might change simply because of the new form factor and navigation method.

For Google, one of the changes it already has made is a redesign of the Gmail interface on the Apple iPad.

"When you write an email you’ll now get a big full screen compose window instead of splitting the screen between your inbox and the compose view," Google says. More text is visible at once and there are no more distractions with messages on the side.

As with adaptations made to format content and navigation for smartphone screens, it appears Google already has made adaptations of the email-compose layout specifically for the iPad form factor.

For application providers, all this suggests a possible need for a "third" way to format web sites and applications, including different rendering for large PC screens, small mobile phone screens and mid-size tablet form factors.

The Iterative Web App: New Compose Interface for Gmail on iPad - Official Google Mobile Blog

Online Video Consumption Catches Broadcast by 2020

By 2020 Internet video consumption will eclipse the consumption of broadcast TV programming, according to researchers at The Diffusion Group. Keep in mind that this is different from arguing the revenue earned by content or service providers will reach a cross-over point in 2020.

While the amount of time spent viewing TV has remained relatively stable, the amount of time consumers spent watching online video increased 84 percent between 2008 and 2009. When extrapolated across the entire TV-viewing population, the average time spent viewing online video in 2009 was 52 percent more than in 2008.

TDG expects that this rate of growth will actually increase during the next five to seven years due primarily to the increased use of the television as the platform of choice for in-home web video viewing.

According to Colin Dixon, senior partner and co-author of TDG’s new report, “The total amount of time spent watching video from all sources, including PayTV and Internet video, will hold constant during the next 10 years at around 32 hours a week. With online video usage accelerating we expect the amount of Internet video watched to eclipse the amount of live broadcast TV around 2020.”

The forecast may appear shocking to some, and will hinge on developments in broadband access pricing, bandwidth quality and deployment, both fixed and wireless. Wireless providers are unlikely to permit high video consumption on their networks without creation of new revenue models or a change in end user willingness to pay.

Fixed providers and content providers are unlikely to encourage online video consumption when it simply cannibalizes existing multi-channel video revenue and imposes higher network access costs.

“Keep in mind that during this period, Internet and broadcast delivery of video content will become blended in such a way that consumers will be unaware of which conduit serves which content," says Colin Dixon, TDG senior partner.

It is conceivable that today's multi-channel video providers, for example, will be able to shift in a relatively revenue-neutral way if "TV Everywhere" packages are accepted by end users on a wide scale. That doesn't speak to the issues of access providers who have to support the dramatically-increased infrastructure, though.

One suspects the revenue equivalent of this forecast would not show cross over in 2020 for a variety of compelling reasons, including a more-uncertain regulatory environment leading to less investor interest in access infrastructure, need to develop new business models and possible disincentives to consume online video, such as plan overages.

link

LTE of 100 Mbps at 75 Km

Telstra and Nokia Siemens Networks have conducted groundbreaking trials of Long Term Evolution networks in Australia, successfully achieving peak speeds of 100 Mbps download and 31 Mbps upload over a record-breaking distance of 75 kilometers in regional Victoria.

Performance of that sort helps explain why, after years of wrangling, Telstra has agree to essentially divest itself of its fixed-line network and become a wholesale buyer of capacity to support its fixed-line operations.

As has been the case elsewhere, incumbent carriers can be persuaded to trade away an access near-monopoly for something else of tangible value. For some, it is the ability to expand in non-traditional markets outside the existing footprint. For others it is a chance to invest in higher-growth or higher-margin businesses.

For Telstra, the LTE carrot is more appetizing than the structural separation stick.

IT-Online - LTE world-first trial achieves 100Mbps at 75km

TD-LTE A "Poor Man's" LTE?

Interest in TD-LTE is driven by one compelling reality. Because it can use unpaired spectrum, emerging and developing market operators could get lots more capacity into service at much-lower cost.

Since a single chipset apparently allows roaming between LTE FDD and TD-LTE networks, TD-LTE offers a more-affordable way to launch and operate a Long Term Evolution mobile network, while still offering roaming access to frequency-division LTE networks as well.

ZUMBEEL | Why The Sudden Interest In TD-LTE?

Netflix Faces Stiffer VODCompetition

Netflix faces competition in digital video-on-demand and pay-per-view offerings from players like Comcast, Time Warner Cable, DirecTV and Dish Network, according to analysts at Trefis. The reason is a
recent Federal Communications Commission decision allowing new films to be made available on-demand before such films are available on DVDs.

The FCC generally prohibits the use of so-called "selectable output control" technology, which encodes video programming with a signal to remotely disable set-top box output connections. But the FCC granted a waiver from those rules for Motion Picture Association of America members who want to protect copying of content if a new digital release window is created.

Allowing movie studios to temporarily prevent recording from TVs could pave the way for movies to be released to homes sooner than they are today. The FCC said the waiver is therefore in the public interest, because the studios are unlikely to offer new movies so soon after their theatrical release without such controls.

The FCC decision allows movie studios (like Paramount, 20th Century Fox, Disney Studios) to block analog signals on TVs and video recorders when consumers purchase their latest on-demand movies.

This decision was pushed for by Disney, Time Warner and Viacom to reduce the likelihood of content piracy, especially for new films where instances of piracy tend to be high. While this move gives movie studios more control over their content offering, it also gives a boost to cable providers that compete with Netflix to deliver the latest films to consumers, Trefis argues.

Will Common Carrier Regulation Lead to De Fato Price Regulation?

The Federal Communications Commission says it has no interest in applying price controls to broadband access services. But even if formal rules are not imposed, some executives believe de facto price controls are the logical consequence of any move to regulate broadband access as a common carrier service.

At a minimum, any such rules are likely to immediately slow investment in broadband facilities for years.

The last time the Federal Communications Commission altered fundamental rules in the common carrier area,  AT&T cut annual capital spending by more than half, from $12 billion to $5 billion dollars a year. That cut lasted for four years, until the courts threw out the FCC's mandatory wholesale rules, which created pricing rules service providers found highly damaging, says Dennis Kneale, CNBC media and technology editor.

This time around, the rules might affect a wider range of industry suppliers, including cable and wireless providers, with potentially much-greater damages.

The last time the FCC tried such a major incursion, in the mid-1990s, Stephenson, then the company’s chief financial officer, cut annual capital spending by more than half, from $12 billion to $5 billion dollars a year. That cut lasted for four years, until the courts threw out the FCC mandatory wholesale rules.

Some telecom execs say the FCC’s agenda is downright radical and could thwart high hopes for the wireless Internet, arguably key to the future of the entire U.S. communications industry.

The agency assault could restack the pecking order of winners and losers and reshape their stock prices, affecting the portfolios of millions of retirees and investors as well, says Kneale.

The immediate matter at hand is a prohibition on any type of packet prioritization. But at least some telecom execs also fear this would lead to de facto price controls, primarily because inability to prioritze packets would jeopardize the effort to create enhanced and new services that provide quality of service mechanisms of the sort businesses routinely use.

link

8 Liberal Groups Skeptical About Common Carrier Regulation of Broadband

Eight liberal advocacy groups signaled skepticism with a Federal Communications Commission plan for regulating broadband access as a common carrier service.

In a letter to Senate Commerce Chairman John Rockefeller (D-W.V.) and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), eight groups called for Congress to restore FCC authority over broadband after an April appeals court ruling appeared to undercut the commission's authority.

The Communications Workers of America, the Minority Media and Telecom Council, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the National Urban League, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Sierra Club signed the letter.

Doubts about reclassification stem from the possibility that it could complicate the regulatory situation and lead to protracted litigation, according to CWA spokeswoman Debbie Goldman.

link

Telstra Agrees to Structural Separation

Australia will join Singapore and likely New Zealand as countries in which there is a single wholesale provider of broadband connections and all retail providers lease capacity from the wholesale provider.

Telstra Corp. essentially has agreed to break itself up into distince retail and wholesale companies as the result of a new deal with Australia’s national government. A new framework agreed upon by both the government and Telstra, essentially results in Telstra selling its network to the government-backed NBN Co, which is building the new national broadband network, and putting its customer traffic on the network as well.

The new framework, which still must be ratified by a formal contract, a "yes" vote by Telstra shareholders, and approval by regulators, will launch Telstra on a new path. It essentially will not own and operate its own fixed networks any longer. It will not be required to provide universal service.

And it likely will be a much-bigger player in the fourth-generation mobile business than it is in the fixed business.

Telstra will be paid A$9 billion as part of the deal, which remains only a framework, not a contract, which will have to be worked out over the next few months. The deal also means Telstra is free to bid on new wireless spectrum, and can keep its 50-percent stake in cable operator Foxtel.

As part of the agreement, the NBN Co. will be able to use Telstra infrastructure, including ducts and backhaul fiber, rather than building duplicate infrastructure. Telstra also agreed to transition its current customers to the NBN network, becoming an anchor tenant.

NBN Co will operate as the wholesale supplier of last resort for fiber connections in greenfield developments starting January 1, 2011.

Telstra also will be shutting down its copper ADSL network as part of the new agreement.

A new entity, USO Co Ltd, will be established to take over Telstra’s universal service obligations starting July 1, 2012.

The terms of the lease were not disclosed but sources close to the negotiations told AAP the agreement was for a period much longer than 10 years.

Telstra and the government have been at odds about the  A$43 billion "fiber-to-the-home" broadband network, and the necessity of Telstra agreeing to at least a functional serparation of its wholesale and retail operations.

link

Does Moving Content Online Make Newspapers Viable?

Can you make an unattractive product attractive simply by moving it online? So far, the answer seems to be "no," at least for most newspapers with the salient exception of the Wall Street Journal.

Half or more of the circulation at most newspapers is composed of individuals who are aged 50 and older. This concentration means that newspapers on average have twice as many senior readers as exist in the population as a whole, and that, by logical extension, they are not engaging the younger readers that they must attract for a prosperous future.

There are implications here for the communications business as well. All products have a lifecycle. Several years we might have argued that legacy voice was a product in the declining part of its cycle, while VoIP was just at the start of its cycle.

These days, some of us might go further and argue that all forms of landline voice are in a mature phase in the developed world, and that mobile voice has become the replacement product, though mobile voice also is relatively mature in the developed world.

In part, it depends on how one defines the "market." One can argue VoIP is a new product, or view it as the latest version of an existing product. You would get different answers about where each of those "products" is in its lifecycle depending on your choice of definitions.

These days, I lean towards seeing VoIP as the latest version of an existing product.

Reflections of a Newsosaur: Make no mistake: Newspapers are still in trouble

Sprint T-Mobile: New mega-carrier or four-network nightmare?

Though the integration issues would be formidable, Merrill Lynch analysts say T-Mobile USA’s owner Deutsche Telekom might be interested in buying Sprint. But while such a deal might make financial and strategic sense, analysts said Sprint could become an operational nightmare for its new owner.

Merrill Lynch said Sprint’s operational problems might cause it to dramatically cut prices, which would put it in direct competition with T-Mobile USA, which has staked out that position among the big-four U.S. mobile carriers.

A takeover bid, Merrill Lynch analysts suggest, would avert such a price war. A positive: Sprint’s stock is priced low, while Deutsche Telekom could count on relative strength of the Euro.

Of course, the big objection has been the operational complexity. Sprint now operates three distinct networks with different air interfaces. Adding T-Mobile would make four. Ultimately, Long Term Evolution would the unifying air interface for all but the iDen network used by Nextel. But Nextel could be spun off.

It might be a long shot. But nobody thinks the market is stable at the top.

Sprint T-Mobile: New mega-carrier or four-network nightmare?

After 10 Years of Big Bandwidth, Where are the New Apps?

After a decade of fiber-to-the-home access, what do service providers have to show for it? Not as much as you might think, suggests Benoît Felten, Yankee Group principal analyst.

"Surprisingly perhaps, considering the decade’s worth of experience some Asia-Pacific countries have with FTTP, they face many of the same issues surrounding FTTP that have been prevalent in the West," says Felton.

The business model, for example, is no less an issue than in other markets. "Finding a sustainable business model" is as important for private players in the Asia-Pacific markets as you can guess it is for service providers elsewhere. High bandwidth provided at low cost might be great for consumers, but is challenging for providers.

Government subsidies and support in some markets is part of the answer for some providers, though.

Service innovation also is an issue. FTTH provides "more" bandwidth. But does it stimulate new applications and businesses that did not exist before? The answer, so far, seems to be "no." That is not to say broadband is unimportant as an enabler of economic activity.

But it is fair to say even after a decade of having FTTH, there is little to point to except online gaming, in terms of new and widely-used applications. "Even in Japan and South Korea, there aren’t that many disruptive or innovative services available to end-users, with the exception of online gaming," Felton says.

"While there’s been a vibrant development of Internet activities, especially in South Korea, this hasn’t necessarily resulted in the kinds of services that are generally expected, such as health care or connected communities," says Felton.

Sustainability, especially in a market context, remains an issue as well. While things have been slowly improving for early deployers, especially NTT, which announced at the conference that its average revenue per user  for FTTP services has increased from 4,800 yen to 5,590 yen between 2006 and 2009, the revenue from fiber-grade services that actually benefits the telco remains limited.

Regulators, on the other hand, must continually monitor the degree of competition in the access market as well, and Felton notes that NTT has 75 percent market share in the fiber access market, but only 30 percent or so in the digital subscriber line market.

Asia-Pacific is still by far the most advanced region of the world when it comes to fiber to the premises deployment and adoption. Asian FTTP adoption is estimated at 40 million subscribers, compared with just eight million in North America and 3.5 million in Europe.

The Korea Communications Commission and KT have ambitions to upgrade to a national target of 1 Gbps connectivity. That's an important national goal, but such government-lead policies arguably are not replicable in other markets that must rely on normal supply and demand constraints.

In some "state-lead" markets, the advantage for incumbent operators is an easier business case. In Malaysia, the government has decided to co-finance a fifth of the cost of an urban deployment of FTTP. As you would expect, Telecom Malaysia customers are able to buy service that is quite attractive compared to what one would find in a market where such subsidies are not available, says Felton.

In Australia and New Zealand, deployment models involve heavy government intervention, both in funding and investment structure establishment.

The biggest anticipated growth of this second wave is China. The Chinese government itself is not directly involved in the FTTP push, but all of the competing Chinese telcos are state owned, which imposes different constraints on their investment decisions compared to private players.

The somewhat discouraging news is that, after 10 years, FTTH has not produced unambiguously new and lucrative applications. That doesn't mean such applications will not develop, but simply that a private market cost-benefit analysis might suggest it still isn't so smart to charge ahead with a robust FTTH program at all costs.

Gulf Oil Illustrates Bigger Problem: People are Starting to See Govt. as Anti-Business

For over a month, Pres. Barack Obama watched the oil spill spread over the Gulf of Mexico with the same powerless horror as other Americans. Finally, lampooned by his countrymen for his impotence, he was spurred into action. He attacked the only available target—BP—and, to underline the seriousness with which he takes this problem, he gave his first Oval Office address on the subject.

The address got poor reviews; the attack on BP better ones. This week the firm bowed to pressure, and announced that it was, in effect, handing over $20 billion to the government to pay for compensation and clean-up, as well as cancelling the payment of any dividends this year and setting up a fund—of a mere $100m—to compensate unemployed oil workers.

This may do Mr Obama some good. Whether it will benefit America is more doubtful. Businessmen are already gloomy, depressed by the economy and nervous of their president’s attitude towards them. This episode will not encourage them.

American politics and business: Obama v BP | The Economist

FCC Moves Toward "Public Utility" Regulation of Broadband

Public Utilities do some things quite well. But innovation is not one of them. And that's the problem with common carrier regulation: it often results in good quality for basic services, but with high prices and very-low innovation beyond the basic service.

Electricity, water, natural gas, and until recently local telephone and cable services were usually classified as public utilities and regulated by government. Now, however, the Federal Communications Commission wants to classify the decentralized Internet as a public utility, as FCC chair Julius Genachowski tries to get around a Supreme Court ruling blocking his Net Neutrality ambitions.

FCC takes first step towards making the Internet a “public utility”