U.S. Mainland to St. Thomas Route Upgraded to 20 Gbps

The Americas I North Submarine Cable System between Vero Beach, Florida and St. Thomas, USVI; and the Columbus 2b Submarine Cable system between West Palm Beach, Florida and St. Thomas, USVI has been upgraded from  a single 2.5 Gbpschannel to 20 Gbps using Xtera Communications gear.

This upgrade project significantly increases capacity between the United States and the Caribbean. The consortium parties participating in this upgrade are ANTELCOM, AT&T, SETAR, Tricom and Verizon Business.

Are Apple and Google Reshaping Mobile Phone Competition?

At a deep level, the developing contests in the high-end smartphone business are less about the devices, and more about the applications and business ecosystems the devices will help to support.

Mobile app stores have become the surprise success of the smartphone business. Unfortunately, it isn't a business for most, as most of the apps available on popular app stores are offered free, and most sell for less than a dollar.

And that's where advertising might be important. If developers cannot profit at all, or not much, from direct app sales, perhaps advertising might develop as a key revenue model. Some skeptics will note, rightly, that "advertising" is the magical business model many free Internet app providers have claimed would be their ultimate revenue model.

Some will make it work, but most will not. On the other hand, who would want to bet against Apple and Google being at the very forefront of firms that could find a way to make it work?

So how could Apple or Google make advertising work much better? By vastly improving the relevance of every message, using location and existing profiles of user behavior, and by making "advertising" a more entertaining experience.

To do so, Apple needs a network of advertisers and the technology to target ads to customer behavior, which most observers would say Apple now has with its purchase of Quattro.

Nor might Apple necessarily be thinking of "out-Googling" Google in mobile search. That isn't the way Apple's executives think. Rather, they think about creating whole new businesses, not improving existing businesses.

That is the thinking many have in asserting that mobile apps might someday replace search in a mobile context. The reason is partly the chores of interacting with small screens and text input. Apple will be looking at that, and so will Google. The whole idea will be to automate the process of finding things, so it is a more natural, certainly more easy process.

The other angle is simply screen real estate. Some would argue display ads work better on small screens, as the ad might sometimes occupy the entire screen. Users are likely to see such approaches as intrusive.

Oddly enough, the new shift to app stores and mobile advertising might lessen the value of hardware ingenuity, because the new game is monetizing applications and creating commercial transaction potential using location. There is a sense in which the mobile device battler is shifting from hardware to software.

Right now, it would be hard to argue that Apple and Google are in the strongest positions where it comes to software and advertising.

Do People Expect Too Much from Nexus One?

The Nexus One launch has not gone flawlessly, that is clear enough. Users report their devices are randomly switching between the T-Mobile USA 3G and the EDGE network. Early Apple iPhone devices had the same problem, some niote.

Others are disappointed Google wasn't "more disruptive" of the retail pricing regime, or the lack of multi-touch support for the screen (an input capability using input from two fingers, used to enlarge a section of the screen image by pinching or sweeping the touch points apart or together.

Despite the "earned media buzz," Nexus One's first-week sales appear to fall far short of sales of the Apple iPhone, for example. Flurry estimates the iPhone sold more than a million units in three days when first introduced, and 1.6 million units in its first full week,  while the Nexus One might have sold only 20,000 units.

The Verizon Droid sold 250,000 units the first week it was available, while the HTC "myTouch" sold 60,000 units in its first week of availability.

To be sure, Nexus One, myTouch and Droid all are available on just a single network in a single coutnry. The iPhone initially was available in eight countries and eight carriers.

That's no coincidence. After the iPhone hype, it is proving more difficult for each competing device to illustrate how it is similarly "revolutionary." There's just no way to get around the fact that the iPhone was revolutionary, and so far, the other devices, though unique in many wasy, simply are following in the general mode.

Apple might have seized such a mindshare lead that there simply is no way any other device can "challenge" iPhone. That isn't to say many other touchscreen smartphones will fail to be built and marketed, but simply that the "buzz" hasn't been matched by the same sort of enthusiastic consumer resposne as the iPhone received, simply because no subsequent device, so far, as proven to be such an advance over the earlier generation of devices.

So far, all the other models are "like the iPhone." So far, that hasn't been enough. That's one reason why at least a few of us might think the challenge for all the other devices is to create a unique identity in the market, not to "be the next iPhone." That probably cannot be done at this point.

What device promoters can do is what Research in Motion achieved with th BlackBerry. RIM created an email-optimized device that syncs seamlessly with key Microsoft applications such as "Outlook," in additiion to handling email, capturing a specific segment of the mobile device market and end user base (business users).

But there's more to it than just that. The mobile is a mass market retail business, where marketing, distribution and customer support all matter. As much earned media attention as Nexus One has gotten, it is nothing like what Verizon was apparently able to do with a huge marketing and advertising blitz for its "Droid," or what Apple was able to do, not just with its own earned media campaign, but with a follow-on marketing campaign and network of highly-trafficked retail locations.

The Nexus One is being sold through a Web site, with only earned media support. Verizon launched a $100 million on marketing blitz, including the key Christmas selling season. Suffice it to say many many millions more people know the name "Droid" than "Nexus One."

T-Mobile, whose currernt role in the Nexus One ecosysem is largely indirect, does not appear to have supported the Nexus One launch with its own marketing funds, though it did for the myTouch.

Also, with a few new Android devices now competing for attention, there may be some fragmentation of the message. There's just one iPhone; there are several Android smartphones.

Also, Google might not have priced the device at levels that would drive more volume, though it also is battling the known resistance most end users have to paying $500 or more for an "unlocked" smartphone that only works on one U.S. network (with full access to all the frequency bands) anyway. What does "unlocked" mean to most consumers when the device can only be used on one network?

Beyond that, there is the simple fact that device hype likely outstrips ability to deliver, at this point. Everybody is looking for the first true "iPhone competitor." That might be asking too much.

http://blog.flurry.com/bid/29658/Flurry-Special-Report-Google-Nexus-One-Launch-Week-Sales

Next Broadband Round Will Be Heavy on Middle Mile Projects

The National Telecommunications & Information Association and the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service have announced the second round of bidding, as well as a specialized third round specifically for satellite projects. These rounds will dispense about $4.8 billion in grants and loans  to expand broadband access and adoption.                    

NTIA’s program allocates $2.6 billion in this funding round of which approximately $2.35 billion will be made available for infrastructure projects. In this round, NTIA is adopting a “comprehensive communities” approach as its top priority in awarding infrastructure grants, focusing on middle mile broadband projects that connect key community anchor institutions – such as libraries, hospitals, community colleges, universities, and public safety institutions.

That is a significant development. NTIA projects, which have been seen as aimed more at metro areas than the Rural Utilities Service program, which exclusively aims to support rural projects, seems to have concluded that actual upgraded access projects are less valuable than middle-mile trunking services.

In other words, much of the spending in both the first and second rounds will go not to any new broadband access facilities, but to intermediate trunking networks that later can be used to provide actual broadband access.

The other interesting change is the new emphasis on a "third round" that specifically will accept satellite projects for the most-isolated locations.

In addition, NTIA plans to award at least $150 million of the funding for Public Computer Center projects, which will expand access to broadband service and enhance broadband capacity at public libraries, community colleges, and other institutions that service the general public.

NTIA also plans to award at least $100 million for Sustainable Broadband Adoption projects, which include projects to provide broadband education, training, and equipment, particularly to vulnerable population groups where broadband technology has traditionally been underutilized.

The separate Rural Utilities Service program will allocate $2.2 billion in this funding round. A second funding window will open later which will provide grants for satellite service for premises that remain unserved after all other Recovery Act broadband funding is awarded.

That round also will award grants for regional economic development projects using broadband, as well as make grants to rural libraries.

RUS will focus its round on last mile projects, which are anticipated to receive the vast majority of funding.

RUS will also fund middle mile projects involving current RUS program participants. RUS has decided to use a 75 percent grant, /25 percent loan model for all projects.

The application window opens Feb. 16 and closes March 15, 2010.

AT&T Announces New Pricing for Unlimited Mobile Plans

AT&T has announced new unlimited plans across all of its devices. The new plans, available beginning Jan. 18, 2010, feature an unlimited voice plan for $70 a month. "Family Talk" customers (two lines) will be available for $120  a month.

Texting plans remain unchanged at $20 for unlimited plans for individuals and $30 for Family Talk plans.

"Quick Messaging Device" (feature phone) customers can buy unlimited talk plans for $70 a month and Family Talk customers can buy unlimited talk plans for $120 per month (two lines).

These plans also require a minimum of $20 per month for individual plans and $30 per month for Family Talk plans for texting or Web browsing packages for new and upgrading customers.

All smartphone customers, including iPhone customers, may now buy unlimited voice and data for $100 a month.

For smartphone customers on Family Talk plans (first two smartphones), unlimited voice and data is now available for $180 a month. Texting plans remain unchanged at $20 for unlimited plans for individuals, $30 for Family Talk Plans.

Beginning Jan. 18, 2010, existing AT&T customers can change to any of the new plans without penalty or contract extension

Is Nexus One A Particular Threat to Service Providers?

Does Google's Nexus One launch mean anything in particular for mobile service providers? That might be a matter of some debate at the moment. Some observers were expecting something "more disruptive." Perhaps an ad-supported voice service; maybe a completely unlocked device able to work on any carrier's network; maybe a business model that clearly delineates a new role for the handset provider.

That didn't happen. Some observers think the bigger innovation is the way Google is selling from a
Web site. Some might see too much difference there, either. Selling from a Web site isn't too unusual these days, and Apple's retail stores and existing carrier Web sites.already provide models for handset distribution aside from the branded mobile carrier stores.

To be sure, an "unlocked handset" strategy always will be tough in the U.S. market until such time as most carriers are using one single air interface and handsets are equipped with enough frequency agility to adapt to whatever network si providing access. An unlocked handset today means a choice of no more than one or two major carriers (one WiMAX, two CDMA and two GSM).

The other angle is that U.S. consumers have not yet shown any desire to pay full retail price for a handset, when they can get a subsidized device at the price of a two-year contract. People might gripe about the existence of contracts, but they have choices. They can pay full retail for their devices and avoid the contracts. Not many make that choice.

The more interesting observation is about what various Android devices really are. A BlackBerry is an email device; an iPhone is a Web surfing device. Many feature phones are texting devices. Some models are social networking devices, or at least highly optimized for that purpose. Some devices are optimized for navigation.

Could a new niche be developing for a "search" device? Is "finding stuff" a sufficiently robust need that at least one of the Android devices becomes recognized as the single best device for finding things? That seems to me the most interesting question about what the Nexus One or broader family of Android devices might raise.

Matters always can change, but at least for the moment, it does not appear the Nexus One is especially disruptive of the existing mobile business model or standard practices, either.

http://connectedplanetonline.com/mobile-apps/news/googles-nexus-effects-0115/?imw=Y

Real Estate Advertising Trends: Newspapers Will Gain, Online Will Not

It might be true, at a strategic level, that newspapers are a declining medium while the Web is a growing medium. At a tactical level, that does not automatically mean ad spending always, inexorably is shifting from print to online.

The newspaper business, for example, might see a 16 percent increase in real estate advertising in 2010 while online real estate advertising actuall drops about four percent, more than it declined in 2009.

Ironically, media segments that have generally been perceived as weak, including newspapers and broadcasting, are set to do better. Conversely, those that have been otherwise least affected by the economic downturn, cable and online, are poised to do worse.

Real estate spending on broadcast TV will surge 39 percent in 2010 after declining 44 percent last year. Cable TV will drop 16 percent this year. In 2009, cable TV real estate ad revenue fell just two percent.

Part of the reason for the disparity among the major media segments is that local real estate advertisers have been increasing their spending, while national, out-of-market realtors are decreasing their spend.

The other angle is that so much money has shifted to online formats that there isn't a much room to grow, when other alternatives are more affordable.

About three of every five online ad dollars are currently spent by real estate agents and brokers. Not 60 percent of real estate advertising; 60 percent of all online advertising.

Another reason for the decline in online spending by realtors and brokers also is the result of a tactical shift. More money is being spent on less-costly paid search programs, less on display ads.

Sometimes the conventional wisdom can be wrong. It appears it certainly will be wrong about real estate ad spending in 2010. Newspapers and broadcasting will get more growth; cable and online less.