Does Device Screen Size Affect Data Consumption? Yes and No.

Is there a relationship between screen size and data consumption? One might think the answer clearly is “yes,” based on the difference between typical data consumption for smart phones and that of PCs.

Some studies of heavy smart phone users show consumption of perhaps 1.3 Gbytes. Other studies show average smart phone data consumption might already be up to 2 Gbytes. Still others suggest typical consumption runs between 600 Mbytes and 1.2 Gbytes a month. But smart phones on 3G networks might still consume a few hundred megabytes a month.

But PC users consume more data than tablet users or smart phone users. So it is reasonable enough to argue there is a relationship between screen size and data consumption.

Device Usage Growth, MBytes per Month

Device Type	2012	2017
Non-smart phone	6.8	31
M2M Module	64	330
Smart phone	342	2,660
4G Smart phone	1,302	5,114
Tablet	820	5,387
Laptop	2,503	5,731

Source: Cisco VNI Mobile Forecast, 2013

But there are nuances. As screen sizes get bigger, people consume considerably more data, at least when connected using a Wi-Fi network, a study by OpenSignal suggests.

The study also suggests that when connected using the mobile network, mobile device screen size actually does not have much impact on the amount of data consumed.

For example, data use over Wi-Fi doubles from a device with a six inches square surface area screen (like a Galaxy Ace) to a device with a nine inches square screen (like a Galaxy SIII).

On the other hand, there is only a weak correlation between screen size and data use over a mobile network connection. What this suggests it that people broadly use their mobile phones in the same way when on the move. Screen size does not change behavior.

Behavior does seem to change when larger screen devices have access to a Wi-Fi connection.  As screen sizes get bigger, people consume considerably more data.

SCREEN SIZE VS DATA USE OVER A WI-FI CONNECTION

Emerging Markets Take Lead for Smart Phone Growth

Global smart phone growth now is driven, in terms of volume, by buyers in emerging markets. 

In total, developing markets will contribute 70 percent to 80 percent of the growth in 2013. 

The BRIIC  (Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia and China markets) will drive much of the volume growth in the global market in 2013 and beyond.  

China likely  became the leading country-level market for smartphone shipments in 2012, moving ahead of the the United States,

IDC says.

By 2016, India and Brazil also will have entered the ranks of the top-five  country markets for smart phone shipments. India will be the third largest smart phone market by 2017.

But those emerging markets will require low-cost devices, in the sub-US$50 range, IDC estimates.

NPD DisplaySearch forecasts that l

ow-cost smartphone shipments will double every year from 2010 to 2016, increasing from 4.5 to 311 million.

Skype Users Consume 2 Billion Minutes a Day

Skype users now use two billion minutes a day. It's difficult to estimate how much of that usage represents cannibalization of international traffic or messaging. Not all of that usage would have occurred, were Skype unavailable.

But much of the usage does represent a shift of existing usage from the public network (cannibalizes existing demand) and some represents avoided usage usage (minutes of use that would have been added to public networks, but was shifted to Skype instead).

International Long Distance Traffic Growth, Carriers vs. Skype 

Source: TeleGeography

According to TeleGeography, international long distance traffic grew four percent in 2011, to 438 billion minutes. 

That growth rate was less than one-third of the industry’s long-run historical average of 13 percent annual growth. 

Mobile Commerce is Getting Bigger, Perhaps On Small Transactions

Some 29 percent of U.S. mobile users already have used their smart phones to make a purchase, according to Business Insider. 

You might argue that most of those purchases are relatively small transactions, and you would be right. 

But that might be the point. Lots of small transactions, conducted by lots of people, wind up representing large amounts of transaction value. 

Bank of America predicts $67.1 billion in revenue from smart phone and tablet retail purchasing by European and U.S. shoppers in 2015.

Galaxy Mega Will Have a 6-Inch Screen: Is There a Market?

The Samsung Galaxy Mega reportedly will have a 5.8” screen, with a second device sporting a 6.3-inch screen. Still, some surveys would suggest there is no market for "phablets." 

A recent analysis by Flurry suggests 16 percent of devices used by consumers have screen sizes that are 3.5 inches or fewer in diagonal length. 69 percent of devices are between 3.5 inches and 4.9 inches. About seven percent of the devices are full sized tablets such as the iPad. 

The study suggests 

phablets are a "fad," since only about two percent of users carry them. One might suggest that is not the only way to look at the adoption pattern. One might as well argue that the persistent overall trend for phones is toward larger screen sizes, and that it will take some time for a greater percentage of users to switch to phablet-sized displays.

Saudis to Regulate Skype?

The government of Saudi Arabia is seeking to regulate local use of Internet-based voice and messaging services such as Skype and Whatsapp.

Such moves are not unheard of. In fact, outright blocking of VoIP has happened in numerous countries, at numerous times.  Skype in the past has been blocked in the United Arab Emirates. Even Sweden's Telia has said it might block use of Skype on mobile devices. 

But blocking is only one problem faced by over the top voice applications, In other cases, over the top voice apps face regulation as providers of traditional voice services, moves which in most cases would destroy or vastly impair the over the top VoIP value proposition. 

Over time, the effectiveness of over the top VoIP blocking is questionable. But that never seems to stop some regulators or service providers from trying. 

Vodafone Once Tried to Buy AT&T. Will AT&T Now Buy Vodafone?

Verizon Communications denies the rumor, but reportedly had been considering a deal of as much as $245 billion to buy all of Vodafone. 

That deal, which Verizon would make with AT&T, would then have Verizon getting the U.S. assets, while AT&T got the rest of Vodafone's global assets.

That rumored deal would allow Verizon Wireless to fully own its own business, but might have even bigger implications for AT&T.

Vodafone is the second-largest global mobile communications company, with approximately 403 million customers in its controlled and jointly controlled markets.

Vodafone currently has equity interests in over 30 countries across five continents and more than 50 partner networks worldwide.

So even after losing the Verizon Wireless customers and assets, AT&T would still stand to expand in a major way as a global carrier. Any sale of Vodafone to the U.S. mobile giants would end speculation about “who will buy whom,” and not just for Verizon and Vodafone.

In September 1999, Vodafone Airtouch announced a $70-billion joint venture with Bell Atlantic Corp., which gave rise to Verizon Wireless. That partnership has been troubling for both partners, in some ways. leading to periodic rumors about one or the other partners buying out the other.

AT&T also figures into the story, though. In 2004, Vodafone made a bid for the entirety of AT&T Wireless when that company was for sale.

Had that bid been successful, Vodafone presumably wouldhave sold its stake in Verizon Wireless, and then rebranded the former AT&T Wireless business as Vodafone.

Cingular Wireless, at the time a joint venture of SBC Communications and BellSouth ultimately outbid Vodafone and took control of AT&T Wireless, which now is known as AT&T Mobility.  

So in an odd turn of events, Vodafone, which tried to buy AT&T Wireless, would then be acquired by its former target.

Earlier rumors (2012 and 2013) had Verizon Communications weighing a smaller deal to acquire more of Verizon Wireless equity, or buying out Vodafone’s stake.

The latest rumor has the two U.S. giants buying all of Vodafone, with Verizon essentially acquiring the remainder of Verizon Wireless, while AT&T gets the rest of Vodafone’s global assets.

Such a blockbuster deal would give the two U.S. mobile service providers a pathway to growth. For Verizon Communications, owning all of its mobile business would immediately boost earnings. For AT&T, the Vodafone deal would catapult AT&T into the global market in a new way.

Despite denials, it appears Verizon and Vodafone recently held full merger talks that apparently did not result in accord on matters such as leadership structure or where the corporate headquarters would be located. That is a common issue for mergers “of equals.”

So the recent rumor that AT&T and Verizon would instead simply buy all of Vodafone is a way around the impasse.

Strategically, the AT&T interest in Vodafone’s global assets is a clear sign that AT&T sees future growth in the U.S. market as problematic. Verizon first has to consolidate its U.S. business before it can consider looking overseas for future growth.

Ironically, any such deal would tend to confirm the belief of European mobile service providers that major consolidation is needed in the European Union markets if the surviving mobile service providers are to achieve economies of scale.

But the deal also would indicate that when government entities limit the amount of growth any single company can have in its home market, typically by mandating market share limits, those firms look offshore for future growth.

Ironically, by limiting domestic market share to preserve competition, regulators also create incentives for domestic providers to shift capital overseas.

Facebook's Plans an Android "Skin," Not a "Fork"

According to Josh Constine at TechCrunch, Facebook plans a "skin" over Android, not a "fork" as Amazon.com did for its Kindle. By "skinning," rather than "forking," Facebook simply provides a new layer of functionality over the top of Android, without making "custom" modifications to Android.

That probably gives Facebook what it wants--a deeper integration of Facebook on an Android device--without the hassle of a deeper modification of the Android operating system.

Will Aereo Redefine Video Service Provider Content Costs?

Aereo, the Web television venture that captures over the air broadcast TV signals and then makes them available as an Internet video stream, is a test case of whether service providers who do so are obligated to pay carriage fees to the broadcasters.

So it is no surprise that Aereo has discussed partnerships with major Internet service providers and video service providers. In principle, video distributors could make carriage deals with Aereo instead of each TV broadcaster in a local market, which might mean lower service provider content fees.

The other issue is that if Aereo can amalgamate a relative handful of additional channels, Aereo might emerge as a supplier of a new sort of low-cost tier of service, positioned somewhere between "antenna service" (broadcast channels only) and "basic cable" (broadcast channels plus 40 or so additional channels).

Video distributors therefore have an interest in seeing whether Aereo survives legal challenge. A new Aereo tier might appeal to some consumers who think a "full" expanded basic tier costs too much.

Will Aereo Redefine Video Service Provider Content Costs?

Aereo, the Web television venture that captures over the air broadcast TV signals and then makes them available as an Internet video stream, is a test case of whether service providers who do so are obligated to pay carriage fees to the broadcasters.

So it is no surprise that Aereo has discussed partnerships with major Internet service providers and video service providers. In principle, video distributors could make carriage deals with Aereo instead of each TV broadcaster in a local market, which might mean lower service provider content fees.

The other issue is that if Aereo can amalgamate a relative handful of additional channels, Aereo might emerge as a supplier of a new sort of low-cost tier of service, positioned somewhere between "antenna service" (broadcast channels only) and "basic cable" (broadcast channels plus 40 or so additional channels).

Video distributors therefore have an interest in seeing whether Aereo survives legal challenge. A new Aereo tier might appeal to some consumers who think a "full" expanded basic tier costs too much.

Cooks Worldwide Rely on Smart Phones When Shopping

What makes mobile "different" is the direct tie to "commerce." People use tablets to consume content, in many of the same ways they use PCs. But people tend to use their smart phones in a commerce setting more often, you might argue.

Cooks everywhere use their smart phones for meal planning and cooking inspiration, a new survey by Allreipes.com has found.

According to the survey results, mobile is a big factor in driving global growth. Nearly half of global consumers are turning to their smartphone for inspiration while shopping for food. 

That should come as no surprise. Increasingly, mobiles are being used for shopping, and merchants are responding. 

Christos Anesti

Apple, Android Lead Enterprise App Deployments, Microsoft Tablets Growing Fastest

Apple and Android seem to lead enterprise plans for deploying mobile apps, but there are indications the Microsoft Surface tablet an Windows Phone platforms are poised to get a wave of support, according to a new survey by Aberdeen Research.

Complementary Roles for Municipal Wi-Fi?

Municipal Wi-Fi networks perhaps are carving out a distinct niche that commercial providers might have little interest in serving. "No incremental cost" public Wi-Fi networks running at very low speeds, such as 1 Mbps downstream, and serving outdoor areas, provide one example. 

Santa Clara Power, the municipal utility serving Santa Clara, Calif. has launched just such a network, offering free outdoor access across outdoor areas of the city at speeds of 1 Mbps. The "free" service does not offer "for fee" tiers of service and is offered as an amenity. 

In large part, the positioning of such a service is complementary to most commercial high-speed access services, not competitive. And that might be important, going forward. 

Many initiatives and experiments now envision public-private partnerships or other "non-traditional" ways of spurring investment in very high speed (1 Gbps) networks. The key is finding some "win-win" pattern that provides incentives for commercial ISPs to invest, while providing some path to a sustainable revenue model. 

Technology advances make a difference. As is the case in every other field where computing and communications are used, the cost of building or using an outdoor Wi-Fi network now are lower than a decade ago. 

Vijay Sammeta, San Jose's chief information officer, said the San Jose, Calif. municipal Wi-Fi network cost only about $100,000 to install and requires around $20,000 annually to maintain. 

That has been a problem for many such efforts launched by cities and towns over the last 10 years. Operating costs have been a big issue. One might argue that especially has been the case for operations that intended to supplement "free" service with other "paid" tiers of service, or possibly sale of advertising. 

Very few consumers would pay for service running at such levels, and most public Wi-Fi public Wi-Fi networks operate at power levels that make in-building use an "iffy" proposition. But that is why such networks are complementary to commercial offers from Internet service providers. 

In some instances, success has been obtained in small towns where commercial service either is expensive or slow, and where a commercial carrier decides the municipal offer is not a big threat. 

Vodafone Could, But Won’t Pursue LTE Substitution Test in New Zealand

At least in principle, a major test of Long Term Evolution and its ability to provide a viable alternative to fixed network broadband access could occur in New Zealand, the big issue being tariffs.

Telecom New Zealand has launched its new “Ultra Fibre” services to businesses and consumers in New Zealand, offering consumers “up to” 30 Mbps service, with a 10 Mbps upsream.

Vodafone’s Long Term Evolution service in New Zealand already offers downstream speeds up to 70 Mbps, and upstream speeds up to 11 Mbps.

So all other things being equal, Vodafone should stand a fair chance of grabbing more customers than Telecom New Zealand.

Of course, all other things are not equal. Vodafone’s mobile broadband offers do not compare favorably with Telecom New Zealand’s offers, either on a “price per bit” basis or in terms of total usage that comes with a monthly bucket. For roughly NZ, $100, a Vodafone New Zealand customer gets a bucket of usage of 2 Gbytes.

The same amount spend on Telecom New Zealand’s new “Ultra Fibre” network would get a usage bucket of 50 gigabytes.

What Vodafone would have to decide, to make a serious run at the “Ultra Fibre” service is reconfigure its usage caps and price-per-bit packages to be more nearly comparable.

But Vodafone also owns a big hybrid fiber coax network in New Zealand, and would not want to risk upsetting market pricing for broadband overall, nor risk an order of magnitude potential increase in “typical” demand on its LTE network.