Can Open Access FTTH Work?

Open access can work for fiber to home access, says Yankee Group analyst Benoît Felten.

Most observers might tend to agree that the thesis works better in countries without robust cable TV broadband penetration, where construction costs are high and where regulators allow a reasonable rate of return on wholesale activities.

Felton argues a wholesale approach does not reduce overall take rates or average revenue per user for the network owne, an assumption that obviously makes better sense where virtually all retailers use a single access network.

"When DSL networks started opening in Europe in 2002 to 2005, although there was often a small impact on the incumbent’s ARPU in the early stages, that ARPU climbed back to its pre-unbundling levels within a few years due to offer differentiation and the development of value-added services.

Incumbent retail market share of course drops. Felton notes that very few incumbents in Europe currently have less than 50 percent market share of broadband, and there is little reason to think that opening the DSL network has impacted their ARPU or penetration negatively.

What is different about U.S. markets, however, is that cable competitors have their own, ubiquitous networks, with a majority of market share for video and broadband access services, with growing voice share. For this reason, U.S. incumbent telcos cannot hope to serve perhaps half of all retail broadband or video providers, and perhaps 20 percent to 25 percent of all voice retailers.

"What we are saying is that our economic analysis suggests that having more than one fiber infrastructure in the ground is hard to sustain," says Felton.

Social Networking Now Nearly Universal

More than 80 percent of online Americans are active in either creating, participating in, or reading some form of social content at least once a month, say researchers at Forrester Research.

About 24 percent of online users create content, while 37 percent post responses. About 21 percent use real simple syndication. Some 51 percent maintain personal profiles. Fully 73 percent of online users read blogs, watch online videos or listen to podcasts.

Among online users 35 or younger, social networking is nearly universal, with 90 percent participating in some way. Among those 55 and over, about 66 percent now are participating.

AT&T will Mandate Smart Phone Data Plans Sept. 6, 2009

Beginning September 6, 2009, AT&T will mandate subscribers who activate or upgrade to a smartphone to also pick up a data plan. One might argue that a smart phone without a data plan is about as useful as a PC without an Internet connection, or a TV without access to a multi-channel video plan.

Beyond that, as the mobile industry transitions to a revenue model based on data plans, not voice, the move is to be expected. There is no inherent reason why the cost of access to the global network, which increasingly includes Web services, should be based on use of voice applications.

On the other hand, users who simply want access to voice or text messaging only need phones with that basic level of functionality.

Will AT&T Wireless Support VoIP?

For Apple and Google, the recent inquiry by the Federal Communications Commission into VoIP blocking on iPhones and Android devices is a reminder that the communications business is rather more suscepible to political pressure than the software business.

For AT&T the inquiries are just part of the background of doing business, but AT&T's response to the FCC inquiry suggests that what typically happens, will happen again. Namely, when regulators decide it is time to do something, market contestants typically try to head off more onerous rules by making voluntary business decisions that reduce the need for such rules.

So it is that AT&T now says "we plan to take a fresh look at possibly authorizing VoIP capabilities on the iPhone for use on AT&T’s 3G network," says Jim Cicconi AT&T Services senior EVP.

That doesn't guarantee clearance for unlimited VoIP use on AT&T mobiles, but it is a sure sign AT&T does not want to regulated into such a position.

Google Voice for Active Duty Military Now Available

Any active U.S. service member with a .mil email address can sign up for a Google Voice account at and start using the free service within a day. It's a good thing.

Google Says Skype Not Blocked on Android Phones

As Apple now it admits it alone was responsible for the initial rejection of the Google Voice app for the iPhone, and AT&T reaffirms that it had no say in the decision, Google has found itself in a bit of the same position as Apple, as Android mobiles are alleged to use a "less than fully functional" version of Skype on Android devices.

Some have suggested that Skype had been similarly blocked from Android phones, but the issue really is the functionality of Skype on Android devices. Google says on its blog that the Android operating system did not, at first release, support any full-featured VoIP applications.

That now has been rectified, Google says. That said, both Apple and Android devices are subject to any existing carrier policies on use of VoIP over their mobile networks, though it does not appear any such policies are involved either in the initial attempt to make Google Voice available on the iPhone, or the initial attempt to get a full-fledged version of Skype running on Android devices.

Apple, Not AT&T, was Behind iPhone Google Voice Rejection

So it turns out AT&T was telling the truth all along: it had nothing to do with Apple's rejection of the Google Voice application for the iPhone.

"Apple is acting alone and has not consulted with AT&T about whether or not to approve the Google Voice application," Apple says on its Web site. "No contractual conditions or non-contractual understandings with AT&T have been a factor in Apple’s decision-making process in this matter."

AT&T has been insistent on this from the start of the controversy. "Let me state unequivocally, AT&T had no role in any decision by Apple to not accept the Google Voice application for inclusion in the Apple App Store," says Jim Cicconi, AT&T senior executive vice president for external and legislative affairs.

To be sure, Apple claims the rejection of the application was because of user interface implications, not a blanket rejection of VoIP or Google's approach to providing services, which is better described as Web activated than VoIP.

Apple says it has not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it. The application has not been approved because, "as submitted for review, it appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voicemail," Apple says.

"AT&T was not asked about the matter by Apple at any time, nor did we offer any view one way or the other," Cicconi said in a statement, accompanying a response to a regulatory inquiry into the rejection of Google's voice application by Apple.

On an iPhone, the “Phone” icon that is always shown at the bottom of the Home Screen launches Apple’s mobile telephone application, providing access to Favorites, Recents, Contacts, a Keypad, and Visual Voicemail.

The Google Voice application replaces Apple’s Visual Voicemail by routing calls through a separate Google Voice telephone number that stores any voicemail, preventing voicemail from being stored on the iPhone, Apple says.

"In addition, the iPhone user’s entire 'Contacts' database is transferred to Google’s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways," Apple says.

AT&T, Apple and Google have been asked by the Federal Communications Commission for clarification of the issue.

What is interesting is that most observers seemed to think AT&T was behind the ban, attempting to protect its mobile voice business. Some suggested Apple was developing its own voice service.

To be sure, the wording of the Apple statement seems to imply that if the user interface issues and data privacy issues can be worked out, that the Google Voice app would be reconsidered.

In fairness to Apple, its stated reasons for rejecting Google Voice--user interface and functionality--are things the company tends to be meticulous about. Given Apple's past fastidiousness on that score, the initial rejection is not unusual.

What remains to be seen is whether Google Voice can be reconfigured to Google's satisfaction, as well as to Apple's. The big news is that AT&T was not involved in the decision.