If you are considering creating a mobile app, the Apple iPhone and Touch still represent the single largest target.
But Android is growing fast. According to an analysis by Flurry, Android users now represent 14 percent of mobile Web sessions.
The iPhone represents 50 percent and the iPod Touch generates 35 percent of mobile Web sessions.
Android seems to be taking share from the iPhone, but not from the Touch.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Android Now 14% of Mobile Web Sessions
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Americans are Happy with their Products and Services, Sort Of
A new study by the Government Accountability Office suggests 84 percent of U.S. wireless users are "very" or somewhat" satisfied with their wireless phone service. That isn't to say there are no issues: there are.
The GAO says 10 percent of users are "dissatisfied" with their service. About 12 percent say they are dissatisfied with billing, 14 percent are dissatisfied with terms of service, 11 percent unhappy with call quality and 12 percent dissatisfied with customer service.
But 76 percent of respondents are satisfied with billing; 72 percent satisfied with terms of service, 85 percent satisfied with call quality and 70 percent satisfied with customer service.
In terms of complaints received by the Federal Communications Commission from end users, 55,000 were unhappy with billing and rates. About 14,000 were unhappy with call quality, 13,000 complained about contract early termination issues and 12,000 were unhappy with customer service, GAO says.
In terms of complaints, billing issues were more than 400 percent more common that complaints about call quality, contract termination or customer service.
In some ways, in fact, the GAO study suggests a higher degree of satisfaction with wireless service than other surveys might suggest. The American Consumer Satisfaction Index, which ranks consumer satisfaction on a scale running from zero to 100, with 100 being the top score, might suggest less happiness, not only with wireless, but also with cable TV and satellite service, with declining scores for wired voice service.
The GAO says 10 percent of users are "dissatisfied" with their service. About 12 percent say they are dissatisfied with billing, 14 percent are dissatisfied with terms of service, 11 percent unhappy with call quality and 12 percent dissatisfied with customer service.
But 76 percent of respondents are satisfied with billing; 72 percent satisfied with terms of service, 85 percent satisfied with call quality and 70 percent satisfied with customer service.
In terms of complaints received by the Federal Communications Commission from end users, 55,000 were unhappy with billing and rates. About 14,000 were unhappy with call quality, 13,000 complained about contract early termination issues and 12,000 were unhappy with customer service, GAO says.
In terms of complaints, billing issues were more than 400 percent more common that complaints about call quality, contract termination or customer service.
In some ways, in fact, the GAO study suggests a higher degree of satisfaction with wireless service than other surveys might suggest. The American Consumer Satisfaction Index, which ranks consumer satisfaction on a scale running from zero to 100, with 100 being the top score, might suggest less happiness, not only with wireless, but also with cable TV and satellite service, with declining scores for wired voice service.
Labels:
cable,
consumer behavior,
marketing,
satellite video,
voice
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Did U.S. Consumer Communications Spending Hold Up in 2009?
We will have to wait a while for 2009 figures to be compiled, but history suggests that, when the figures are available, U.S. consumer spending on communications will come in about where it always does, at about 2.3 percent of disposable income.
The reason is that, year in and year out, during booms or recessions, that is what U.S. consumers have spent on communications. The composition of spending changes: more for mobile, more for broadband, less for other services. But as a percentage of disposable income, behavior is remarkably consistent.
The reason is that, year in and year out, during booms or recessions, that is what U.S. consumers have spent on communications. The composition of spending changes: more for mobile, more for broadband, less for other services. But as a percentage of disposable income, behavior is remarkably consistent.
Labels:
communications spending,
consumer behavior
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
By 2012, "Closed" Mobile Business Will be Over
Today, the wireless sector is on the edge of a seismic shift, says Deloitte. A survey of wireless industry executives found that 53 percent of surveyed network service provider executives believe their current closed business models will no longer exist by 2012.
That is a shocking finding, for several reasons. Many in the policy community seem convinced the only way to "change" the mobile industry is to legislate more "openness." Mobile industry executives, on the other hand, already believe openness will be the normal way they compete, within a shockingly short period of time.
One way of putting matters is that before the major legal challenges to any new set of wireless "neutrality" rules can be clarified, the industry already might have moved to an open business model, and arguably would have done so without any government action.
If some readers believe this is highly unlikely, one need look no further than the last major revision of U.S. telecommunications policy, the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Despite the fact that many observers argue the Act "failed," you would be hard pressed to find any user of communications who argues their services, prices and features are "worse" or even "the same" as prior to 1996.
Despite the current mistrust of markets, the recent record suggests that "regulatory failure" did not impede market success, defined as better and richer services for end users.
It appears the same thing is happening in the mobile business, and that mobile industry executives widely believe a shift to open models, precisely the state of affairs many policy advocates desire, already is happening at rapid speed.
In just three short years, economic power in the mobile business will be held by third party application providers, not service providers, mobile executives themselves believe.
More than half of the executives surveyed believe by 2010 the future of mobile will be driven by open mobile content, with 67 percent of the respondents believing it will be a “game changing” force within wireless in the short-term, Deloitte reports.
"When asked which mobile operating system has the greatest potential to be the U.S. de facto standard in five years, Google’s open source Android operating system was the runaway favorite with 43 percent of all votes, more than double the score of the next highest finisher," Deloitte says.
"In fact, 27 percent of those surveyed say that Internet companies, rather than network
carriers and handset makers, will dominate the U.S. wireless sector in five years," says Deloitte.
Nearly 60 percent of industry executives surveyed agreed that the future of mobile will be driven by open content and mobile software application providers.
"While almost two thirds of the survey respondents believe that open access regulations will accelerate the commoditization of U.S. wireless network carriers, companies that focus too narrowly on regulatory issues as the key catalyst for change may in fact miss the real market opportunities being driven by open platforms and technologies," Deloitte says.
The regulatory debate over "openness" obscures what will happen, irrespective of any new regulatory intervention. "In fact, when respondents were asked on the best course of action for network carriers to sustain their competitive advantage, keeping network access, devices and services tightly controlled and retaining as much as possible current proprietary business models was the least popular response."
In fact, 74 percent of the executives said that the key to their businesses in the future was to embrace open application and content models. One can argue that regulatory protections to open up networks are important because they will help this "natural" state of affairs to develop on its own.
It might not be politically popular at the moment to argue that a regulatory "light touch" still is the best course of action. But industry executives themselves seem committed to a view that open mobile networks are in fact the fast-coming and basic industry realty.
Whether one agrees that the Telecom Act was a success or failure does not seem to matter. The market seems to have lead to success, in spite of regulatory failure. Maybe we should not be in such a hurry to tinker with the process too much. It looks like openness is the future, no matter what interventions happen, or do not happen.
That is a shocking finding, for several reasons. Many in the policy community seem convinced the only way to "change" the mobile industry is to legislate more "openness." Mobile industry executives, on the other hand, already believe openness will be the normal way they compete, within a shockingly short period of time.
One way of putting matters is that before the major legal challenges to any new set of wireless "neutrality" rules can be clarified, the industry already might have moved to an open business model, and arguably would have done so without any government action.
If some readers believe this is highly unlikely, one need look no further than the last major revision of U.S. telecommunications policy, the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Despite the fact that many observers argue the Act "failed," you would be hard pressed to find any user of communications who argues their services, prices and features are "worse" or even "the same" as prior to 1996.
Despite the current mistrust of markets, the recent record suggests that "regulatory failure" did not impede market success, defined as better and richer services for end users.
It appears the same thing is happening in the mobile business, and that mobile industry executives widely believe a shift to open models, precisely the state of affairs many policy advocates desire, already is happening at rapid speed.
In just three short years, economic power in the mobile business will be held by third party application providers, not service providers, mobile executives themselves believe.
More than half of the executives surveyed believe by 2010 the future of mobile will be driven by open mobile content, with 67 percent of the respondents believing it will be a “game changing” force within wireless in the short-term, Deloitte reports.
"When asked which mobile operating system has the greatest potential to be the U.S. de facto standard in five years, Google’s open source Android operating system was the runaway favorite with 43 percent of all votes, more than double the score of the next highest finisher," Deloitte says.
"In fact, 27 percent of those surveyed say that Internet companies, rather than network
carriers and handset makers, will dominate the U.S. wireless sector in five years," says Deloitte.
Nearly 60 percent of industry executives surveyed agreed that the future of mobile will be driven by open content and mobile software application providers.
"While almost two thirds of the survey respondents believe that open access regulations will accelerate the commoditization of U.S. wireless network carriers, companies that focus too narrowly on regulatory issues as the key catalyst for change may in fact miss the real market opportunities being driven by open platforms and technologies," Deloitte says.
The regulatory debate over "openness" obscures what will happen, irrespective of any new regulatory intervention. "In fact, when respondents were asked on the best course of action for network carriers to sustain their competitive advantage, keeping network access, devices and services tightly controlled and retaining as much as possible current proprietary business models was the least popular response."
In fact, 74 percent of the executives said that the key to their businesses in the future was to embrace open application and content models. One can argue that regulatory protections to open up networks are important because they will help this "natural" state of affairs to develop on its own.
It might not be politically popular at the moment to argue that a regulatory "light touch" still is the best course of action. But industry executives themselves seem committed to a view that open mobile networks are in fact the fast-coming and basic industry realty.
Whether one agrees that the Telecom Act was a success or failure does not seem to matter. The market seems to have lead to success, in spite of regulatory failure. Maybe we should not be in such a hurry to tinker with the process too much. It looks like openness is the future, no matter what interventions happen, or do not happen.
Labels:
network neutrality,
open access,
open networks
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Global Revenue Now Lead by Mobile
Global telecom services revenue now is lead by mobile services, at 46 percent of total revenue, say researchers at Analysys Mason.
Wired voice revenues now account for 21 percent of total revenues.
Business services account for 14 percent of revenue, while consumer broadband now represents eight percent of total, the firm says.
Video represents about eight percent of total.
Wired voice revenues now account for 21 percent of total revenues.
Business services account for 14 percent of revenue, while consumer broadband now represents eight percent of total, the firm says.
Video represents about eight percent of total.
Labels:
broadband,
business model,
marketing,
mobile
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Net Neutrality and Free Speech: Issue More Complicated Than You Might Think
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."Most of us likely think we understand what the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution actually means. Most of us might be surprised at how complicated the matter has proven to be. It comes as no surprise that there is vociferous debate about what speech is, what a "speaker" is and whose speech is to be protected.
Among the issues jurists and courts have had to wrestle with are "whose" rights of speech are protected. Originally, it was the rather narrow right of political speech, a right possessed by the speaker, that was protected. Over time, though, there have been refinements or travesties, depending on one's point of view.
The classic example is free speech restrictions based on time or place, for example. There is no constitutional fight to "yell fire in a crowded theater," settting off a panic.
Over time, courts have had to grapple with what a "speaker" is. Under the law, a corporation, for example, is a "person." Does a person have the right of free speech?
Over time, the definition of "speech" has widened, and now is a mix of the rights of the speaker and the "rights" of the listener.
To the extent that network neutrality touches off yet another round of debates about how the right of free speech applies, we likely will find serious debate yet again. It's a lot more complicated than most of us might think.
Labels:
network neutrality
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Junction Networks Adds Standard Conferencing Features
Junction Networks has added new features to its business voice service packages at no additional cost, providing users features they have asked for, the company says.
“Our goal is to deliver the most cost effective, business-class phone service for 5-100 users. Now, our customers benefit from more features like conference bridging for 15 people and acd queues while still paying under $20 per user, monthly,” stated Michael Oeth, CEO of Junction Networks.
The "Small Business" OnSIP package, which costs $99.95 a month, now includes 15 voicemail boxes; four attendant menus; four groups; a conference bridge and an ACD (automatic call distributor) queue.
The "Medium Business" package, selling for $199.95 a month, now includes 50 voicemail boxes,
six attendant menus, six groups, five conference bridges and two ACD queues.
The OnSIP Conference Bridge has also been reduced to only $19.95 per month, with a 15 user limit.
The changes are based on customer feedback, especially demand for conferencing features.
The enhancements are examples of two fundamental trends. First, IP telephony providers continually strive to provide more value to their users, often at no incremental cost, sometimes at low cost.
Second, end user demand for conferencing features illustrates the more-important role one-to-many and many-to-many communications now are assuming in the business world. Though much voice and email communications continues in one-to-one mode, lots of other activity has moved to one-to-many channels. Blog posts, microblogging, social network updates and podcasts, for example, are augmenting traditional one-to-one communications.
“Our goal is to deliver the most cost effective, business-class phone service for 5-100 users. Now, our customers benefit from more features like conference bridging for 15 people and acd queues while still paying under $20 per user, monthly,” stated Michael Oeth, CEO of Junction Networks.
The "Small Business" OnSIP package, which costs $99.95 a month, now includes 15 voicemail boxes; four attendant menus; four groups; a conference bridge and an ACD (automatic call distributor) queue.
The "Medium Business" package, selling for $199.95 a month, now includes 50 voicemail boxes,
six attendant menus, six groups, five conference bridges and two ACD queues.
The OnSIP Conference Bridge has also been reduced to only $19.95 per month, with a 15 user limit.
The changes are based on customer feedback, especially demand for conferencing features.
The enhancements are examples of two fundamental trends. First, IP telephony providers continually strive to provide more value to their users, often at no incremental cost, sometimes at low cost.
Second, end user demand for conferencing features illustrates the more-important role one-to-many and many-to-many communications now are assuming in the business world. Though much voice and email communications continues in one-to-one mode, lots of other activity has moved to one-to-many channels. Blog posts, microblogging, social network updates and podcasts, for example, are augmenting traditional one-to-one communications.
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
DIY and Licensed GenAI Patterns Will Continue
As always with software, firms are going to opt for a mix of "do it yourself" owned technology and licensed third party offerings....
-
We have all repeatedly seen comparisons of equity value of hyperscale app providers compared to the value of connectivity providers, which s...
-
It really is surprising how often a Pareto distribution--the “80/20 rule--appears in business life, or in life, generally. Basically, the...
-
One recurring issue with forecasts of multi-access edge computing is that it is easier to make predictions about cost than revenue and infra...