Computing Product Life Cycles

If you study consumer adoption of technology professionally, or just enjoy learning about product life cycles, this is useful, tracking adoption of various computing devices. It sure looks as though the PC is entering the peak of its product life cycle, doesn't it? PC product life cycles





Another way of visualizing PC lifecycles

International Long Distance Prices Decline 5% in 2011

"Prices in international long distance only go down," says Telegeography VP Stephan  Beckert. The only issue seems to be the rate of decline.

But that wasn't anything unusual in 2011. International long distance rates have been dropping since about 2000, though there are regional variations.

The declines are a serious issue for retail service providers, who are seeing increasing amounts of traffic "growth" siphoned off by Skype.

As a percentage of overall global bandwidth, though, video and Internet traffic now is what drives capacity requirements, not enterprise data or voice.

Will Mobile and Fixed Network Broadband Prices Start Increasing?

Scarcity, which many would say has been a key reason network owners have had business advantage, has generally been declining over the last several decades, as regulators have allowed competition for the first time, as public firms have been privatized, as cable, satellite and wireless firms have entered markets and as new technology has lowered costs.

But some would argue that a degree of scarcity is returning to both mobile and fixed markets, which could have important ramifications for the extent of competition and therefore pricing in broadband access markets.

In some markets, the capital requirements of competing in a fiber to customer environment, or fourth generation mobile network business, might actually reduce some competition, as some contestants find they cannot afford to make capital investments of their own.

You might well expect telecom executives to say that “scarcity” does convey business advantage, and that network owners are behaving rationally in making access to their networks as “scarce” a possibility as they possibly can.

In fact, analysts at HSBC argued early in 2011 that “a degree of pricing power is (at long last) becoming apparent in the telecoms sector, at least in Western European markets, thanks to scarcity emerging as a factor on both the fixed-line and the mobile sides of the industry.”

In fixed line, the capital required in the shift from copper-based infrastructure to fiber
platforms is reasserting the importance of scale at the expense of the un-bundlers, and resulting in a more benign pricing environment,” HSBC said.


Meanwhile, in mobile, the finite nature of mobile spectrum has already led operators to begin rationing capacity based on price.

Scarcity is the reason telecom always had been a monopoly in the past. It was deemed too expensive to build more than one network. In essence, that remains the thinking, in countries where there are robust mandatory wholesale requirements.

“We believe that this vital ingredient has been largely missing in both the fixed line
and mobile elements of the sector over the last decade, but is now making a reappearance; as a consequence, we think that telecoms should – at long last – begin to enjoy a measure of pricing power,” HSBC has argued.

The new element is the need to upgrade copper networks to optical fiber access, an undertaking expensive enough, with financial returns risky enough, to make would-be competitors think very hard about building their own networks. In fact, even regulators seem cognizant that the capital investment decisions are highly risky, encouraging rather new thinking about allowing investors to reap more of the rewards of their investments.

The point is that if scarcity does re-emerge in access, prices and revenue should improve.

Social and Mobile are Hard to Separate

The U.S. domestic social network audience represents 66 percent of U.S. Internet users in 2012, according to eMarketer. So it is safe to say that social networks are a foundation application for most Internet users.

Increasingly, it also is correct to note that social networking is a lead mobile application as well. Social networking increasingly is used on mobile devices.

Mobile social media usage across the five leading European markets (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom) grew 44 percent in 2011, with 55.1 million mobile users in those countries accessing social networking sites or blogs using their mobile devices during September 2011.

In September 2011, 55.1 million EU5 mobile users made use of social networking sites or blogs on their mobile device, representing 23.5 percent of the total mobile audience. 

Nearly half – 46.8 percent – of this audience reported accessing social networking sites on a daily basis.

Mobile social media consumption might be even higher in the U.S. market., according to comScore, which reports that 72.2 million Americans used social networking sites or blogs on their mobile device in August 2011, an increase of 37 percent in the past year. 

The study also found that more than half read a post from an organization, brand or event while on their mobile device.

“Social media is one of the most popular and fastest growing mobile activities, reaching nearly one third of all U.S. mobile users,” said Mark Donovan, comScore SVP.

In August 2011, more than 72.2 million people accessed social networking sites or blogs on their mobile device, an increase of 37 percent from the previous year. Nearly 40 million U.S. mobile users, more than half of the mobile social media audience, access these sites almost every day, demonstrating the importance of this activity to people’s daily routine.

Some might say that the Internet is social; social is mobile; mobile is Internet.

You Cannot Keep Up with Google, in Mobile or Desktop Mode

Marketers spend inordinate amounts of time, it seems, trying to figure out better ways to convince Google that content they want to share is important, and ought to rank favorably and high in search results.


And, as you might fear, some people spend lots of time just trying to "game the system," something Google also spends quite a lot of time attempting to prevent. 


One might argue that such efforts are doomed to fail, in the long run, simply because the environment changes so quickly, and because Google works virtually every day to weed out such attempts at manipulation. 


About 20 percent of daily queries are new requests; specific terms or questions Google has not seen before. That means a losing battle for anybody who really tries to insert such "trending" key words into copy. There simply are too many changes in trends to keep up with, and those trends change all the time. 


Ultimately, all you can do is product interesting, relevant content, frequently, and let the cream rise to the top. Search engine optimization "experts" always will argue that SEO works. You'd expect them to say that; it's how they make their money. 


As a purely practical matter, few people or companies will ever have enough time to do all, or most, of what SEO experts recommend. What works today might not work in a couple of months. What worked two years ago doesn't work today. Nobody knows how the algorithms will change tomorrow. 


So some of us are simply going to do the best we can, without worrying about "optimization" beyond a few simple pointers. Google says it conducted more than 6,000 discrete search algorithm and performance experiments in 2010 alone. 


It is safe to say no other content producer has time to match that, or even much ability. Most of us can barely keep up with even the broadest of trends, such as the growing shift to mobile consumption of content. Even that is complicated, since "mobile" now includes small screen phones, medium screen e-readers and full-screen tablets and notebooks, plus "big screens" such as TVs. 


Then add the changes in user interface, touchscreen versus keyboard-and-mouse being the most important, and content producers have lots to consider, just in terms of form factor and user input methods. And mobile access, which implies a greater trend to touch interfaces, is getting to be more important.


Google says mobile search has grown 500-percent over the last two years, replicating the rate Google saw with its desktop search engagement. 


Overall, including mobile and desktop searches, Google queries amount to more than a billion requests every day.

Inside Google Search

Can "Freemium" Model Work for "Access"

Freemium, where no-cost versions of a product are offered, with a revenue model built on incremental services or more-robust features, is a well-established model in the content, application and gaming businesses. So the issue is whether freemium can work in the retail telecom business or mobile business.

To be sure, entrepreneurs have thought about, and some have tried, to create sustainable "free calling" services that are supported by advertising. It really has never worked, but the notion continues to appeal. 

Over the last decade or two, lots of entrepreneurs have tried to create "free" broadband access services that are funded by advertising or sales of additional products. Municipal Wi-Fi networks are recent examples.

In some ways, the model has been tweaked by some firms that use free Wi-Fi as an amenity to boost sales of other products, ranging from coffee and food to hotel stays.

FreedomPop, for example, hopes to use the LightSquared network, which has not yet received permission to operate, as a way of offering "free broadband and voice services to all Americans."

FreedomPop is lead by Niklas Zennstrom, co-founder of Skype, and his venture capital firm Atomico. The company hopes to launch in 2012, in what it calls "under-served markets."  FreedomPop

In the communications service provider space, it arguably has been the case that there have been more experiments with advertising-supported approaches, but we will probably continue to see some variants of the freemium model in telecommunications.

Over the past decade and a half, for example, lots of U.S. firms have contemplated, and a few have attempted, to create “free” broadband access services, with the intention to make revenue by advertising or selling premium tiers of service. There are no examples of outstanding success one easily can point to, though.

But that is not going to keep firms from trying. FreedomPop, a start-up backed bySkype and Joost co-founder Niklas  Zennström, hopes to create a freemium service for broadband access in the U.S. market.  

FreedomPop says it will launch in 2012, with a revenue model similar toDropbox, the cloud-based storage service that also uses a freemium model. Dropbox offers up to 2 Gigabytes for free, and sells access to additional storage for a monthly fee in different tiers. Netblazr, a Boston-based access provider, uses a co-op model, giving small businesses free best effort digital subscriber line in exchange for the right to to put a microwave radio at that location, helping Netblazr create its network. Netblazr

Advisory Committee Maintains LightSquared Will Cause GPS Interference

The Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing national executive committee, which is made up of nine federal agencies that coordinate GPS issues, has concluded that LightSquared's proposed wireless network would significantly interfere with GPS devices.

Based on two rounds of tests by federal agencies and separate tests by the Federal Aviation Administration, the group said it had unanimously concluded that LightSquared's original and modified network plans "would cause harmful inference to many GPS receivers." LightSquared interference

"Based upon this testing and analysis, there appear to be no practical solutions or mitigations that would permit the LightSquared broadband service, as proposed, to operate in the next few months or years without significantly interfering with GPS," the group told the Commerce Department, which continues to study the interference claims. GPS receivers, rather than mobile phones, seem to be most affected. 

Some speculate that LightSquared faces little chance of gaining approval from Commerce Department officials or the Federal Communications Commission.