How Much 5G Mobile Substitution?

AT&T is preparing to launch commercial 5G mobile service using millimeter wave spectrum and the NETGEAR Nighthawk 5G Mobile Hotspot.

AT&T says the device is the first standards-based mobile 5G device in the world able to access a live millimeter wave 5G network.

At least in principle, the use of a 5G hotspot, on a millimeter wave network,  with retail pricing plans that are comparable to a fixed network plan, allow a mobile 5G network to compete with fixed networks.

As a practical matter, that might not happen in ways that make mobile 5G an effective substitute for fixed service. As has been the case for 4G, some users will find 5G a functional substitute; others will not. In the 4G era, perhaps 20 percent of U.S. households are mobile only for internet access.

And at least some observers believe such mobile substitution could reach 30 percent to 40 percent by about 2022.

source: Deloitte

67% Use Connected Devices; 64% Say They Do Not Depend on Them

Even though 67 percent of people surveyed by Clutch own a connected device such as a smart refrigerator, oven, or TV. But 64 percent say they do not depend on their connected devices to accomplish daily activities, a survey by Clutch has found.

On the other hand, 64 percent of people use their connected devices daily, typically to access important personal information regarding health, home, and news.

Nearly 40 percent of those surveyed say access to important information is the primary benefit of using a connected device, Clutch says.

Some 36 percent say they do depend on their devices to get through their daily lives. About 35 percent own a wearable device and 27 percent own a digital assistant such as a Google Home or Amazon Echo.

source: Clutch

What is the Difference Between Edge and Fog Computing?

New concepts, including fog computing and edge computing, which in many ways appear to be similar, can be hard to define. And, sometimes, the explanation of differences can increase, rather than decrease, confusion.

Fog computing is the harder concept, some would argue, as it often is described as a framework or standard for edge computing. “Edge” computing includes both computing on an edge device as well as computing “close to” the edge device, but not at a traditional remote cloud data center.  

source: Win Systems

The phrase local area network almost always occurs when “fog” is defined. And that is where some confusion can occur. In a traditional sense, the local area network is a privately-owned, indoor or campus-wide network separate from the public “access” network.

But in a more general sense, some might refer to the “local” area network as some intermediate point in the access, feeder or distribution portions of a public network (downstream of a central office, for example).

Some might say the fog concept involves computing where it makes most sense (remote cloud data center, computing somewhere in the access network, at a premises server or on an actual end user device.

For me, that works best. In cases where a former central office becomes an “edge computing center,” that is computing within the fog architecture. But so is edge computing at some other intermediate location between a single end user device or appliance and the place where the wide area network is encountered.

Just “where” that computing location occurs in a fog framework is somewhat indeterminate. So the phrase “local network” will cause some confusion, sometimes. Are we meaning the traditional “inside the building” private network, or what we know as the public network “access” network.

In the fog framework, that can mean either of those uses. Edge computing might occur at a server on the premises, outside the premises, or at the edge device itself.

Will New Indoor Connectivity Specialists Develop in 5G Era?

In the communications business, distinct distribution strategies always have been needed to serve the different consumer, small business, mid-sized organization, enterprise and carrier segments of the business.

Channel strategies have relied on mass media advertising for the consumer segment, augmented in the case of mobility by retail stores. Small businesses often are reached the same way. Mid-sized businesses use channel partners (business phone systems, local area networks). Enterprises and services for other communications carriers are sold using direct sales forces.

In the indoor mobile coverage or Wi-Fi access use cases, distributed antenna systems (DAS) have been feasible, but only for very-large sites, such as AT&T Stadium in Dallas, a stadium of 3.1 million square feet. That venue requires 1,700 DAS antennas and 1500 Wi-Fi access points.

Most business and organization locations are far smaller than that, and likely cannot support indoor connectivity strategies based on DAS. About 95 percent of U.S.  commercial real estate sites feature less than one million square feet.

source: NAICS

And since tier-one service providers have--for good reasons--stayed away from their own investments in infrastructure for small organizations and businesses, there remain niches for in-building coverage that are larger in the 5G era, when many more small cells will be used.

Some believe new shared investment approaches between integrators and property managers are needed. Others might argue the opportunity for new types of in-building connectivity services providers will emerge. And at least some believe “do it yourself” private networks might actually become a major trend, illustrating the concept that infrastructure and service suppliers often compete as much with their own customers as with rival suppliers.

“Small cells were conceived as a way to improve the mobile operator business model, but they may now become weapons for challengers to MNOs, particularly broadband players with established backhaul such as cable operators,” Rethink Research says.

By 2022, enterprise units will account for almost half of all small cell deployments, up from seven percent in 2014, argue researchers at Rethink Research.

The installed base will reach 14.8 million sites in 2022, up from 185,000 in 2014.  

Neutral host networks, owned by enterprises, third party specialists, perhaps cable operators and private network operators, might find commercial traction in larger buildings and campuses that are part of the broad mid-market segment of the commercial real estate market.

You might think of these potential new businesses as “indoor connectivity” providers. In some instances, and probably on a local or regional basis, new mobile virtual network operators could emerge whose specialty is indoor coverage.

Vodafone Ponders Outcomes-Based Pricing

Vodafone is at least considering “outcome-based” pricing for IoT services, where customers are billed according to the outcome of the messages sent over the MNO’s network, rather than billed on a monthly cycle based around a usage limit.

A related idea is “output-based pricing,” essentially a cost per transaction, such as test scripts executed or tickets resolved. Many would argue that is related to, but different from, outcome-based pricing. Still, the logic is similar: tie pricing to business process results.

That would be particularly important when Vodafone operates as a non-facilities-based service provider in markets such as the United States, where it will not have inherent cost advantages over many of its competitors.

“Outcomes-based” charging is an idea that has become more common as products increasingly embody services as a key part of the value proposition.  

As understood in the pharmaceuticals business, outcomes-based pricing is about the notion that retail prices should be set in relationship to outcomes (perceived value).  

There are lots of challenges, not the least of which Vodafone and other service providers would have to argue there is a direct causal link between a service provider’s efforts and the outcome.

Actual outcomes-based pricing also is complex. It requires end-to-end control of any number of processes, each of which contributes to a completed outcome. It always is hard to attribute results in such instances.

What is the supplier responsible for, and in control of? How does one distinguish between outcomes enabled by the service provider and instances where the client did or did not do something essential for the service provider to fulfill on an outcomes result?

Also, cost predictability tends to be lost when real outcomes-based pricing is used. That is the same problem consumers encounter for any usage-based billing system, where there are no caps on total cost.

Full outcomes-based pricing is an interesting idea. But probably few observers think it will be too common, as the sole method for charging. More likely is the incorporation of some outcomes-based or activity-based charging on a more-standard contract based on usage.

Netflix, YouTube Accounts for About 71% of Daily Viewing by U.S. Teens

U.S. teenagers video consumption includes 38 percent of time spent on Netflix, about 33 percent of viewing happens on YouTube and linear video services represent about 16 percent on a daily basis, according to Piper Jaffray.

source: Piper Jaffray

Global Video Entertainment Subscription Revenue Will Hit $265 Billion in 2018

Global revenues from traditional pay TV and OTT TV episodes and movies will reach $265 billion in 2018; up from $254 billion in 2017 and $234 billion in 2015, says Simon Murray, Digital TV Research principal analyst.

Revenue growth is coming from over the top streaming services, as linear subscription revenue falling $4.4 billion in 2018.

OTT TV episode and movie revenues will climb by $15.4 billion in 2018, the company says.

OTT’s share of the total will double from 13 percent in 2015 to 26 percent in 2018.

The total number of TV subscriptions will reach 1.51 billion by end-2018; up by 38 percent from 1.09 billion in 2015. SVOD subscriptions will climb by 304 million over the same period to reach 474 million. Therefore, SVOD’s share of the total will double from 16 percent in 2015 to 31 percent in 2018, Digital TV Research predicts.  

source: Digital TV Research