Executives highly familiar with mobile broadband network operations know that radio networks can, and do, become congested for reasons having to do with signaling, rather than bandwidth consumption. Executives at Spirent and Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs, for example, have pointed out that mobile phone design can itself cause problems.
As it turns out, that is true of the iPhone as well, which tries to save power by disconnecting from the network whenever possible.
Now engineers at U.K. mobile provider O2 point out that the iPhone uses more power-saving features than previous smartphone designs. That's good for users, but bad for radio networks.
Most devices that use data do so in short bursts—a couple e-mails here, a tweet there, downloading a voicemail message, etc. Normally, devices that access the data network use an idling state that maintains the open data channel between the device and the network.
However, to squeeze even more battery life from the iPhone, Apple configured the radio to simply drop the data connection as soon as any requested data is received. When the iPhone needs more data, it has to set up a new data connection, O2 engineers say.
The result is more efficient use of the battery, but it can cause problems with the signaling channels used to set up connections between a device and a cell node. Simply put, the signaling overhead congests the network, not the bearer channels. It is signaling load, not bandwidth consumption, that causes much congestion.
It's important to note, however, that this technique is not limited to the iPhone. Android and webOS devices also use a similar technique to increase battery life. While the iPhone was the first and currently most prolific device of this type, such smartphones are quickly becoming common, and represent the majority of growth in mobile phone sales in the past year.
Networks designed to handle signaling traffic dynamically, shifting more spectrum to signaling channels when needed, can mitigate this problem. But even with more signaling capacity, network nodes may not be able to set up a data session, or may have problems getting a valid network address from an overloaded DHCP server.
In fact, the fact that Europe embraced heavy text messaging and data use far earlier than users in the United States meant that the signaling networks were configured early on for heavy signaling traffic.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Mobile Signaling Causes Congestion, Not Bandwidth
Labels:
Alcatel Lucent,
bandwidth,
mobile network congestion,
Spirent
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.
Neustar Lauches 2D Barcode Clearinghouse
Neustar recently launched a "Mobile Barcode Clearinghouse Services" operation intended to ensure that any mobile barcode can be read by any mobile phone or application.
That might not seem like a big deal, but history suggests that penetration and use of any technology, no matter how useful, never gets routine and widespread use so long as the information cannot be communicated effortlessly across the entire base of people, applications and devices.
That was true for railroads. It was true for phone service. It was true of text messaging and email, and it won't be different for 2D barcodes.
"The clearinghouse is an important component of Neustar’s mobile internet solutions strategy, which bridges network operators and enterprises and simplifies their delivery of value to customers," Neustar says.
Neustar is right about that.
Labels:
barcodes,
mobile marketing,
Neustar
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.
Intel Tries to Join Apple Among Innovator Ranks
Here's another example of the fact that truly-significant innovation sometimes comes from the largest and most-influential firms, not from upstart firms. Apple is probably the best-known and most-apt example. Google once was an upstart, but these days is a deep-pocketed incumbent.
Now Intel appears to be preparing a ferocious assault on the underlying chip-level technologies that will power the next generation of mobile-based Internet and computing.
"The going rate for a state-of-the-art chip factory is about $3 billion," the New York Times reports. And those are just table stakes. Predicting a "bloody" war, the Times points out that, in this next phase, the manufacturers will be fighting to supply the silicon for one of the fastest-growing segments of computing: smartphones, tiny laptops and tablet-style devices.
The fight pits several big chip companies against Intel, and the winner or winners will be assured a significant place in the emerging mobile computing ecosystem, which most observers predict is the next era of computing to come.
Now Intel appears to be preparing a ferocious assault on the underlying chip-level technologies that will power the next generation of mobile-based Internet and computing.
"The going rate for a state-of-the-art chip factory is about $3 billion," the New York Times reports. And those are just table stakes. Predicting a "bloody" war, the Times points out that, in this next phase, the manufacturers will be fighting to supply the silicon for one of the fastest-growing segments of computing: smartphones, tiny laptops and tablet-style devices.
The fight pits several big chip companies against Intel, and the winner or winners will be assured a significant place in the emerging mobile computing ecosystem, which most observers predict is the next era of computing to come.
Labels:
Intel Corp.,
mobile computing
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.
Are Broadband, Voice, TV and Mobile Services Really Commodities?
Both industry executives and consumers might sometimes be accused of viewing mobile, voice, broadband and multi-channel TV services as "commodities." Whether that is true, and to what extent, is, and ought to be, a matter of debate, not certitude.
Consider Verizon and DirecTV, for example. You might say that both provide services that other key competitors also provide, and that the features and prices are, at some level, comparable and even similar.
But their offerings are not identical with the offerings of their key competitors, and that appears to be by design, not accident.
DirecTV is the biggest satellite pay-TV provider in the United States and competes with other satellite and cable providers. But that doesn't mean it competes for an identical set of customers, even though there is much overlap.
The company is not exceptionally distinct in aiming to grow revenues in the future by focusing on average revenue per user growth more than growth in the number of subscribers. Indeed, virtually every provider expects to do that.
Nor is DirecTV distinct in that regard. In a competitive, multi-product market, virtually every provider seeks to get more revenue by selling more things to existing customers, not simply adding new customers.
But DirecTV and Verizon seem to be focusing on higher-spending customers, compared to the other competitors in each of their markets.
DirecTV focuses on "higher-quality" subscribers who tend to pay extra for its advanced services like high-definition and digital video recorder service. In the fourth quarter of 2009, about 70 percent of new DirecTV subscribers signed up for HD and DVR services, for example. Overall HD-DVR penetration amongst DirecTV’s subscriber base amounting to about 60 percent.
Some observers expect DirecTV’s HD-DVR penetration to increase to 80 percent by about 2016.
DirecTV plans to offer new services include mulit-room viewing and new broadband applications as well. DirecTV Cinema is a movie service that will allow subscribers to watch certain films through DirecTV as soon as they are released on DVDs.
Verizon likewise tends to focus on higher-spending customers as well.
The point is that even as broadband, mobile, voice and multi-channel TV services are highly competitive, they are not, in the strict sense, "commodities." It might not matter whether a sugar product was made from beets or sugar cane. It can, and often does matter, that a firm's customer service, features, devices, packaging or pricing are distinct.
Consider Verizon and DirecTV, for example. You might say that both provide services that other key competitors also provide, and that the features and prices are, at some level, comparable and even similar.
But their offerings are not identical with the offerings of their key competitors, and that appears to be by design, not accident.
DirecTV is the biggest satellite pay-TV provider in the United States and competes with other satellite and cable providers. But that doesn't mean it competes for an identical set of customers, even though there is much overlap.
The company is not exceptionally distinct in aiming to grow revenues in the future by focusing on average revenue per user growth more than growth in the number of subscribers. Indeed, virtually every provider expects to do that.
Nor is DirecTV distinct in that regard. In a competitive, multi-product market, virtually every provider seeks to get more revenue by selling more things to existing customers, not simply adding new customers.
But DirecTV and Verizon seem to be focusing on higher-spending customers, compared to the other competitors in each of their markets.
DirecTV focuses on "higher-quality" subscribers who tend to pay extra for its advanced services like high-definition and digital video recorder service. In the fourth quarter of 2009, about 70 percent of new DirecTV subscribers signed up for HD and DVR services, for example. Overall HD-DVR penetration amongst DirecTV’s subscriber base amounting to about 60 percent.
Some observers expect DirecTV’s HD-DVR penetration to increase to 80 percent by about 2016.
DirecTV plans to offer new services include mulit-room viewing and new broadband applications as well. DirecTV Cinema is a movie service that will allow subscribers to watch certain films through DirecTV as soon as they are released on DVDs.
Verizon likewise tends to focus on higher-spending customers as well.
The point is that even as broadband, mobile, voice and multi-channel TV services are highly competitive, they are not, in the strict sense, "commodities." It might not matter whether a sugar product was made from beets or sugar cane. It can, and often does matter, that a firm's customer service, features, devices, packaging or pricing are distinct.
Labels:
consumer behavior,
DirecTV,
marketing,
Verizon
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.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Is "Access" Where Most of the Revenue Is?
Fretting over whether people will pay for content is based on a mistaken assumption: that people have ever paid for content in the past, says Forrester Research VP. "They actually haven't," he says.
Instead, people have paid for access to content. You have to think about this some. People buy newspapers, so isn't that a content purchase? Well, he argues, not really. The cost of the newspaper purchase never covers the full cost of the content, which is mostly paid for by advertising.
One had to think about a "newspaper" as a distribution channel and a content aggregator, not an actual "content product" in that sense.
So what about cable TV? McQuivey argues even monthly video subscriptions are about "access" to content, not direct content purchasing. "Pay per view," where a show or movie is bought a la carte, on the other hand, is a content purchase. Subscriptions to linear channels are a form of access, he argues.
If one looks at matters that way, "access" constitutes 77 percent of what the average household spends for "content" each month is spent on content access, not content itself.
Some will argue with the notion that a cable, telco video or satellite video connection is "access" rather than content. On the other hand, having linear video streaming in the background, even when one is not watching, is somewhat akin to voice "dial tone" or broadband Internet access. It's there, one can use it when one wants, but it is not a discrete "content"purchase.
I'm not sure I'd go so far as to classify cable TV as "access" rather than content. People pay for their voice services using a flat-fee subscription, as they pay for linear video. Some of us might not think a different payment method, or retail pricing plan, changes the nature of the product.
But it is an interesting way of looking at the relative value of various revenue streams. Back in the early days of the tramnsition from dial-up to broadband, I gave a speech to a group of ISPs very concerned about the difficulty of the business model.
At that time, most of the actual revenue was earned by providing access. There was some amount of value-added service and products. For better or worse, I said then, "access" was where most of the money was, despite the difficulty of the business case.
The business ecosystem was simpler then. Google had not grown to its current state, for example. Looked at broadly, it may no longer be true that most of the money is in access.
Instead, people have paid for access to content. You have to think about this some. People buy newspapers, so isn't that a content purchase? Well, he argues, not really. The cost of the newspaper purchase never covers the full cost of the content, which is mostly paid for by advertising.
One had to think about a "newspaper" as a distribution channel and a content aggregator, not an actual "content product" in that sense.
So what about cable TV? McQuivey argues even monthly video subscriptions are about "access" to content, not direct content purchasing. "Pay per view," where a show or movie is bought a la carte, on the other hand, is a content purchase. Subscriptions to linear channels are a form of access, he argues.
If one looks at matters that way, "access" constitutes 77 percent of what the average household spends for "content" each month is spent on content access, not content itself.
Some will argue with the notion that a cable, telco video or satellite video connection is "access" rather than content. On the other hand, having linear video streaming in the background, even when one is not watching, is somewhat akin to voice "dial tone" or broadband Internet access. It's there, one can use it when one wants, but it is not a discrete "content"purchase.
I'm not sure I'd go so far as to classify cable TV as "access" rather than content. People pay for their voice services using a flat-fee subscription, as they pay for linear video. Some of us might not think a different payment method, or retail pricing plan, changes the nature of the product.
But it is an interesting way of looking at the relative value of various revenue streams. Back in the early days of the tramnsition from dial-up to broadband, I gave a speech to a group of ISPs very concerned about the difficulty of the business model.
At that time, most of the actual revenue was earned by providing access. There was some amount of value-added service and products. For better or worse, I said then, "access" was where most of the money was, despite the difficulty of the business case.
The business ecosystem was simpler then. Google had not grown to its current state, for example. Looked at broadly, it may no longer be true that most of the money is in access.
Labels:
access,
ISP,
telecom revenue
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.
U.S. is "Most Mobile" Workforce
The U.S. workforce is the most mobile in the world, according to researchers at IDC. As early as 2008, about 72 percent of U.S. workers worked at least part of the time on a mobile basis.
The percentage of mobile workers will grow to about 76 percent by 2013, IDC projects, representing about 120 million workers.
The world's mobile worker population will pass the one billion mark in 2010, IDC says, and grow to nearly 1.2 billion people, more than a third of the world's workforce, by 2013.
The most significant gains will be in the emerging economies of Asia and the Pacific region.
The Asia and Pacific region, excluding Japan, represents the largest total number of mobile workers throughout the forecast, with 546.4 million mobile workers in 2008 growing to 734.5 million or 37.4 percent of the total workforce in 2013. At the end of the forecast, 62 percent of the world's mobile workforce will be based in the APeJ region.
Western Europe's mobile workforce will reach 129.5 million mobile workers, about 50 percent of the workforce, in 2013, surpassing the total number of mobile workers in the United States.
Japan's mobile worker population will total 49.3 million in 2013, representing 75 percent of its total workforce.
The rest of the world will see its mobile worker population grow to 153.2 million by 2013. But mobile workers will represent 13.5 percent of all workers in those markets.
The percentage of mobile workers will grow to about 76 percent by 2013, IDC projects, representing about 120 million workers.
The world's mobile worker population will pass the one billion mark in 2010, IDC says, and grow to nearly 1.2 billion people, more than a third of the world's workforce, by 2013.
The most significant gains will be in the emerging economies of Asia and the Pacific region.
The Asia and Pacific region, excluding Japan, represents the largest total number of mobile workers throughout the forecast, with 546.4 million mobile workers in 2008 growing to 734.5 million or 37.4 percent of the total workforce in 2013. At the end of the forecast, 62 percent of the world's mobile workforce will be based in the APeJ region.
Western Europe's mobile workforce will reach 129.5 million mobile workers, about 50 percent of the workforce, in 2013, surpassing the total number of mobile workers in the United States.
Japan's mobile worker population will total 49.3 million in 2013, representing 75 percent of its total workforce.
The rest of the world will see its mobile worker population grow to 153.2 million by 2013. But mobile workers will represent 13.5 percent of all workers in those markets.
Labels:
mobile,
mobile enterprise
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.
NARUC Calls for Controls on "Unreasonable" Packet Discrimination, Not "All" Packet Discrimination
The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners has called for protecting “the right of all Internet users, including broadband wireline, wireless, cable modem, and application-based users, to have access to and the use of the Internet that is unrestricted as to viewpoint and that is provided without unreasonable discrimination as to lawful choice of content.”
The key language there is "unreasonable" discrimination. NARUC is not calling for network neutrality rules that ban "all" packet discrimination. The problem is that some traffic types are "latency sensitive" and can suffer at times unless packet discrimination mechanisms are used. Applications such as video, gaming and VoIP would suffer, at times of peak congestion, without priority mechanisms that users themselves may wish to have in place.
NARUC therefore has asked that policymakers and regulators keep in mind that "unreasonable restrictions or unreasonable discrimination" be areas of protection, not "all" forms of packet discrimination.
NARUC also asks for rules and regulations that will give providers incentive for continual innovation and a fair return on their investment, without jeopardizing consumer access to, and use of, affordable and reliable broadband services.
Discrimination that is solely, or primarily intended, to protect business advantages, is an area of valid concern for policymarkers. But the Internet has changed. It is a network increasingly used to support isochronous applications (real-time applications) that are highly susceptible to degradation from latency, for example.
NARUC's position will seem to many a well-reasoned and balanced approach.
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/02/naruc-resolution-on-net-neutrality/
The key language there is "unreasonable" discrimination. NARUC is not calling for network neutrality rules that ban "all" packet discrimination. The problem is that some traffic types are "latency sensitive" and can suffer at times unless packet discrimination mechanisms are used. Applications such as video, gaming and VoIP would suffer, at times of peak congestion, without priority mechanisms that users themselves may wish to have in place.
NARUC therefore has asked that policymakers and regulators keep in mind that "unreasonable restrictions or unreasonable discrimination" be areas of protection, not "all" forms of packet discrimination.
NARUC also asks for rules and regulations that will give providers incentive for continual innovation and a fair return on their investment, without jeopardizing consumer access to, and use of, affordable and reliable broadband services.
Discrimination that is solely, or primarily intended, to protect business advantages, is an area of valid concern for policymarkers. But the Internet has changed. It is a network increasingly used to support isochronous applications (real-time applications) that are highly susceptible to degradation from latency, for example.
NARUC's position will seem to many a well-reasoned and balanced approach.
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/02/naruc-resolution-on-net-neutrality/
Labels:
broadband access,
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.
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...