Amazon provides amazing customer service, I've never had to call them through the hundreds of transactions, everything is just there online.  Its respectful of my time and lack of patience.  Comparing this to my latest TMO (T-Mobile) experience has me wishing Amazon would take over TMO's customer service.  The week before last my wife had her unlocked iPhone pick-pocketed at Short Hills Mobile in NJ, I called TMO on Friday 9th to report the theft and request a new SIM be sent through.  I couldn't do it online so I had to call and navigate an immensely frustrating IVR (Interactive Voice Response) system.  It took until the 15th for the SIM to arrive, there was no order status on TMO's website, I had to again call to find out what's happening.  The IVR kept misinterpreting what I said, it was like a comedy, it was the worst and most frustrating customer service experience this year.  I was left thinking their call center provider was a competitor.  And through all the frustration I was reminded of my transparent, near real-time, online Amazon.com experience that simply works and leaves me feeling satisfied as a customer.
 
This comparison to Amazon is important because operators not only need to copy Amazon's online customer service they also need to copy Amazon in how they use their vast repository of customer data.  I've been a customer of TMO for many years, they've earned thousands of dollars from me and not once have they contacted me.  Amazon tells me about tons of good, relevant things, like stuff for my 7 month old son just before it turns out I really do need it - they're amazing.  TMO are not in the same league, and they should be. 

Operators have access to an immense range of data, they know everything Google / Amazon knows plus: where you are at all times of the day, how fast you're driving, where you like to go on weekends, where you have dinner, where you had lunch, how long you were at lunch.  When you entered a country, how often you enter that country, how much you spend on communication services, what web services you use when in that country.  When and where you use value added  / web services.  If you use lots of data services at home.  The phone numbers of your friends, who you ignore, when you ignore calls.  The phone numbers of your business associates, who you talk to most.  Your favorite TV programs, when you like to watch TV, what interactive TV services you use.  All your SMS (why are they not searchable and stored in the network?)  All your voice messages (why are they not searchable?)  The list goes on...  Yet operators some how believe they can monetize this information without first proving they can use it.

What's stopping telcos adopting what Amazon has done for years?  Its actually a mind set issue not a technology or business issue.  Jumping up a level and comparing telecom and IT to explain that I mean.

From a technology perspective we're witnessing the ITization of Telecoms, not a merger: IP was an enterprise technology (when it achieved scale) that is now the core of telecoms, not ATM; SOA is an IT work-flow bus that is now the core of an operators' service delivery and business operations.  Similarly, the TMF will be replaced with ITIL, because enterprises use ITIL not TMF.  Operators must talk the language of their customers.  Its a scale / TTM (Time To Market) issue, enterprise has scale and rapid evolution (starts small and feature rich and rapidly evolves into 5 9s).  Telecom continues to try to create a custom world in 7 days and fails.  As an example the Apple iPhone app store implements an on-device portal that telecom operators had offered to them since 2002!  As an industry we're missing opportunities because of an insular attitude that ignores the methods of IT's success - start small, focus on a high value problem and grow from there. 

Put simply operators should copy Amazon's service development model, putting small 5-6 people teams together to solve a specific high value problem.   For example in customer relationship innovation, perhaps examining a segment of small medium businesses and finding ways to save them costs through the operator's services using the business intelligence the operator has available.  Granted Amazon has a loosely coupled service oriented framework to make this work efficiently, but there's nothing stopping operators doing the same.

The communications industry continues to struggle with its IT spend.  Compared to industry averages, operators spend 9% of revenue on IT compared to an industry average of 4%.  70% of that spend is on legacy systems, and 75% is on custom systems rather than COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf).  Are operators' business processes so different they require custom systems?  Are customers even aware of such differentiation?  The answer is no.  These figures are perverse, 80% of spend should be on new customer facing platforms and COTS - a minority on legacy and custom solutions.    We've got to fundamentally change the industry's mindset else customers will choose Amazon - as they already are for VAS (Value Added Services) such as movie rentals.  Just compare the Amazon on Demand experience with that of your IPTV provider - they're not in the same league. 

Its not a technology or business issue we've got to fundamentally rethink how we solve problems.  No grand all-encompassing architectures that take 5 years to build, rather a loosely coupled service oriented system with lots of small teams solving high value problems that if successful grow and if not die.

With a new child at home I've been limiting travel, well trying to, so this year only the two most important conferences in my calendar are attended: Mobile World Congress (MWC) in Feb and Broadband World Forum (BBWF) in October.  Informa have taken over BBWF so their massive conference machine, and in particular Gavin Whitechurch, have put together a great event.  I consider BBWF to be the key event in the broadband calendar, and though not yet the scale of MWC in the mobile world, its well on its way.

The conference brochure is now available for download here.  By the numbers there will be 6000+ attendees, 280+ exhibitors, 200+ speakers, 125+ global carrier case studies & presentations.  The latter number is key, like MWC this is one of the few events operators attend.  In particular, there will be the leadership figures of:

• DooWhan Choi, President Corporate Technology Group, Korea Telecom;
• Mike Quigley, CEO National Broadband Network, Australia;
• Hugh Bradlow, CTO Telstra, Australia;
• Olivier Baujard, Chief Technology Officer, Deutsche Telekom; and
• Dr Shyue-Ching Lu, Chairman & CEO Chunghwa Telecom.

Then more importantly from my perspective the people that make the decisions at the coal-face (in particular from my sessions):

• Mark Hahn, Systems Architect, Verizon;
• Christophe François, Vice President, Mobile Multimedia Products & Services, Orange; and
• Colin Pons, Senior  Strategy & Business Analyst, KPN Telecom.

I show below the two sessions I'll be chairing at the event.  The SDP session will have Mark from Verizon and Colin from KPN presenting their experiences.  On the panel session will be the presenters and Ty from Oracle and Lucia from Huawei.  I've known all for most of this decade, they are the leading implementers and thinker in this space, so we're going to have a stimulating discussion to say the least on the first day.

On the last day of the conference is a session I think will be great fun: Developer Communities and Service Innovation.  Mark, Colin and Christophe from Orange will be giving rapid fire 'elevator pitches' on what they're doing, then with Varun Arora (CEO HomeCamera, winner of last year's InfoVision Award) and Sean O'Sullivan (CTO Dial2do) we'll have a frank and open discussion between operators and developers.
 

Tuesday 26th Oct 1430-1545: Service Delivery Platform Evolution Revolution, Convolution, Amalgamation, Elimination or Virtualization?
Examining the impact the confluence of several critical technologies / developments have on the SDP such as: cloud computing / managed services; and open initiatives such as Joint Innovation Labs, GSMA's OneAPI, OMTP's BONDI, Open IPTV Forum, and OSGi (Open Services Gateway initiative).  Reviewing key trends in operators' requirements and their competitive environment as web and telco converge. Present a view on the current and likely future evolution of the SDP: will it change, get more complex, will silos finally consolidate, or will it simply go away?

14.30 Chairman's Introduction

14.35 Verizon's SDP Experience - Mark Hahn, Principal Member of Technical Staff, Verizon, USA
Verizon is the leading converged operator with one of the largest IPTV deployments in the world of 3M subscribers in Q1 2010, and a mobile customer based of 93M customers. Their Service Delivery Ecosystem (SDE) is fundamental to Verizon's vision of services available across all its networks. Verizon's service vision results in customers considering their services as independent of a particular device and network: whether it be mobile, broadband or legacy networks. Services will be able to access common and shared infrastructure such as an identity management framework; finally removing multiple logons and conflicting security settings which plague most multiplatform services today.

14.55 KPN's SDP Experience - Colin Pons, Senior Strategy & Business Analyst, KPN, Netherlands
KPN vision is to provide services to any device on any network at anytime. Eventually, it moves to "Everything-is-a-Service" model. From a user perspective consistent, on-par (Apple setting the bar) UX is one of the most important buying (and usage) motivation. Customer satisfaction efforts demand co-operation/partnership with others in the value chain, among which are (independent) developers, VARs, users, verticals, etc. Hence, services will encompass assets and capabilities from many
different sources. Critical for this paradigm is fulfillment(including activation, registration, log-on), assurance and billing.

15.15 Panel Discussion: SDP Evolution
• Discussion of issues raised in the the presentations with the audience.
• Are SDPs relevant in a web-centric delivery model?
• Will the multiple SDP silos across mobile, IPTV, legacy and broadband converge?
• Are there gaps in the current standards?
Mark Hahn, Principal Member of Technical Staff, Verizon
Colin Pons, Senior Strategy & Business Analyst, KPN
Lucia Gradinariu, Chief Market Strategist, Consumer Software and Services, Huawei Software Company
Ty Wang, Senior Director, Oracle Communications Business Unit, Oracle

15.45 Networking Break & Exhibition Visit


Thursday 28th Oct 1430-1545: Aligning to Developer Needs Using Developer Communities to Lead the Service Innovation Race
2009 was the year of the app store and developer community.  In 2010 how are we doing as an industry? This session brings together the leading developer community managers with leading developers to frankly discuss what's worked and how to improve upon what has been achieved.

14.30 Chairman's Introduction:

14.35 Verizon's Application Network Interface and Open Development Initiative: Mark Hahn, Principal Member of Technical Staff, Verizon
Verizon is working to tap into the innovative energy of their customers, suppliers, and partners; and to leverage the combined power of IMS, the Web, and attached devices/networks. They have defined an Application-to-Network Interface (ANI) to expose key enablers (location, presence, conference, profile, address book, etc.) such that they are easily incorporated by developers into innovative new services; examples include Verizon's Open Development Initiative (ODI) and Verizon's
Developer Community (VDC).

14.45 Case Study: Orange Partner: Christophe Francois, VP Multimedia Services and Head of Orange Partner
Orange wants to play a stronger role in the applications eco-system. Its Orange Partner program is being reshaped to offer an end-to-end set of services and a comprehensive Toolbox combining various APIs for developers wanting to use the Orange Application Shop as a distribution channel for their apps.

14.55 Practical aspects of Operators 3rd Partner Development Initiatives: Colin Pons, Senior Strategy & Business Analyst, KPN
In theory asking a third party to create a service for your network for free sounds quite appealing from an operator's perspective. But for the developer is it really that interesting? This presentation will explore the practical challenges operators face in working with developers / third parties. What are the viable business models? Can an operator simply copy Apple? And if not, what should be their model?

15.05 Panel Discussion: What are Developers' needs?
• Why haven't operator developer communities taken off like Apple or Android?
• What should / can an operator do to change the situation?
Varun Arora, Co-Founder and CEO of HomeCamera
Christophe Francois, VP Multimedia Services and head of Orange Partner
Sean O'Sullivan, CTO, Dial2do
Colin Pons, Senior Strategy & Business Analyst, KPN
Mark Hahn, Principal Member of Technical Staff, Verizon

15.45 Networking Beak & Exhibition Visit

I've been a long time proponent on the importance of APIs (Application Program Interfaces) to operators' evolving business models, in fact, of APIs for any web based business model as discussed in this API Management Whitepaper. However, time is moving on and operators continue to struggle with implementing the basics given their business model (charge before the customer even knows they want / need the service, not sharing the love with developers) and lack of board level commitment (most developer communities and API initiatives remain window dressing for investment analysts not a strategic objective).  As evidence on the latter point just look at the relative size of investments in LTE and APIs, they're different by orders of magnitude.

Operators have been working at developer communities for nearly a decade with little success beyond a few strategic partners. Given the success of Apple and Android, we're seeing renewed operator effort in developer communities, e.g. WAC (Wholesale Application Community). Yet the mistakes of the past continue to be made. I've discussed developer needs and the core advantage operators have in engaging developers, but operators remain focused on nickel and diming their customers and developers in the face of a clearly winning model from a customer engagement perspective.

We're now in 2010 and Apple and Android have fundamentally changed the world's perception of where the value resides. People pay for expensive devices and the apps / services / VAS (Value Added Services) are free. Its just like the web, you pay for the laptop and then all the cool stuff of the web is available for 'free.'  We had our chance and blew it because of the telcos' business model and a lack of board level commitment - I apologize for the repetition.

The technology behind the app stores created by Apple, Android, RIM, etc. has been available to operators for most of this decade: ODPs (On Device Portals), device management, content ingestion, location, presence, charging, trial to buy, ad support, etc. Device fragmentation was and remains an issue, but it was compounded by the silly notion that the ODP had to work across all of the operators devices.

Operators continue to make good business out of selling content (games, ring-tones, movies, wallpapers, etc.) especially in developing nations, its a $70B business. So the OTT (Over The Top) app stores of Apple and Android have some commercial catching up to do, but that's really not their focus, rather its about delivering customer value so more devices are sold or OS (Operating System) users gained to spy on. The death knell has sounded as Apple/Android have won the customer engagement battle.

So where does this leave operators? Cricket (mPortal) and Bharti Airtel (Cibenix) provide good examples of what to do in developed and developing markets: APIs are important but forget about per dip charges; an operators' developer community is no longer relevant rather focus on ingestion and partnering; and its all about the customer experience, i.e. making it easy for customers to do stuff. These examples are showing ARPU increases in the multiple 10%s, as discussed in the original API ARPU uplift analysis.

On the enterprise side we have CEBP (Communication Enabled Business Processes) as discussed in this whitepaper, and there's the M2M (Machine to Machine) opportunity: security, mHealth, connected car, connected home, etc. This is where Amdocs jNetx impressed me with their vision of how their SDP enables an operator to play a role in the internet of things, see diagram below. And yes, both Apple and Google have a clear plan on how they will move into that space. Hence, operators need to get their act together and really commit to service innovation, get board level commitment, and execute before the web service providers run rings around them yet again.

 

This old weblog article from 2008 discusses the cost structure of a typical mobile operator, and I show below the structure graphically.  The key figure is transport costs (backhaul) are roughly 7% of total costs back in 2008.  Some operators have seen that jump to over 15%-20% of total costs in under 2 years.  The reason is the tipping point achieved in mobile broadband adoption, discussed in this article. 
Backhaul is the transport link from the radio base station into the mobile network's core.  Its generally leased line (copper or fiber), microwave or metro Ethernet; the choice is highly influenced by the incumbent fixed operator's role in the mobile market, level of competition and local regulation. For example, BT has been aggressive in its metro Ethernet pricing to keep its backhaul business in a competitive market, while in the less competitive French market France Telecom is able to keep backhaul costs significantly higher (outside Paris.)

At the moment we're seeing lots of excitement around LTE (Long Term Evolution), which requires operators to deploy a third radio access network (after 2G and 3G) and a separate core network that is claimed to somehow magically lower operational costs.  Back in 2008 this weblog article discussed that fallacy.  Unfortunately the NEP's marketing engines have kept on rolling in the face of common sense and we're now seeing some operators realize that its not an air interface issue, HSPA and HSPA+ are perfectly adequate for their customers' needs.  Its a backhaul issue, those 3 sectors running at 20Mbit/s require 50+ Mbps of backhaul, while there had only been 8 Mbps in place.  Quadrupling the capacity has doubled / tripled the transport cost, hence the jump in backhaul costs from 7% to 15-20% depending on the market.

To alleviate this problem Sycamore Networks have come up a very smart technology, IQStream - props to Scott Hilton, Talbot Hack, Yang Cao and the rest of the team for their excellent innovation.  As shown below it can provide up to 90% capacity saving in the backhaul, of course the design rule will be more conservative. At least Sycamore Networks are focusing on the key part of the problem, rather than encouraging operators to make decisions not in their best interest.  For the sake of our industry the NEPs must stop conning operators, and act in their customer's best long term interest not their own short term interests.

Interesting innovations regularly come from island nations, for example the first 3G trial on the Isle of Man (where I grew up), from Singapore (Goto Camera), and most recently Sri Lanka with hSenid's SDP in the Cloud, which was recently released and then deployed with Etisalat - Sri Lanka (formerly known as Celltel & then Tigo) the country's first cellular network commencing operations in 1989. It is a subsidiary of Etisalat, UAE, a global telecommunications investor with cellular operations in over 18 countries and a subscriber base of over 100 million.

The SDP in the Cloud from hSenid Mobile allows Operators to open their services and capabilities to developers to implement and deploy applications that the operator's customers can immediately use. Developers are abstracted from the complexities of connecting to the Telco network and its underlying protocols.  Instead they focus on building apps ranging from simple entertainment, information and communication applications, to complex enterpise apps.

Being cloud based means all the software and hardware to implement the online tools for the Developer Community, as well as the SDP to deliver the applications to their customers is available on demand. This removes any barrier to entry an operator could raise about return on investment risk.

Quoting Etisalat's Chief Executive Officer, Dumindra Ratnayake.  "We are excited about the revolutionary deployment of mChoice™ Aventura, hSenid Mobile's Cloud Enabled Telco Platform, especially its potential efficiencies and versatility. mChoice™ Aventura's Mobile Application Developer Portal we believe, will revolutionize the sphere of Mobile Applications by opening opportunities to anybody with even a basic knowledge to develop mobile phone applications to take the industry to greater heights. We are therefore delighted to have been associated with hSenid Mobile, with its dynamic and relevant approach towards the telecom industry."

Etisalat was able to get the platform up and running in weeks as it does not require an expensive SI (System integrator) to specify, plan, project manage, install, configure and integrate the platform - they simply rent the platform and hSenid manages the integration.

hSenid Mobile, is a multi-national Mobile Software applications company, that provides next generation telco platform consisting of messaging, mobile money, OSS/BSS and core signaling. Along with its cloud enabled telco platform hSenid Mobile offers a comprehensive product portfolio that includes a cloud enabled subscriber created VAS platform, open source app store, end-to-end customer churn management, multi-channel top up, location based services, mobile commerce, and telco reporting.

Nokia recently announced its to ditch Symbian software for its high-end smartphones, instead using MeeGo that was announced at Mobile World Congress this year. The N-series has been Nokia's crown jewel for years and dominated the smartphone space before the arrival of Apple's iPhone (be-careful how you hold it) and HTC's Android-based devices. "Going forward, N-series devices will be based on MeeGo," said Nokia spokesman Doug Dawson.

MeeGo is in a tough position as it was positioned as fulfilling the Smartbook category (ARM based laptop) which will likely be squeezed between the smartphone and PC/Mac/Linux OSs.  The decision to have high-end smartphones use MeeGo rather than Symbian will likely have limited impact on MeeGo, while its impact on Symbian will be much more devicisive as it essentially splits Nokia's ecosystem which will put off developers even more.  Critically, in some of the latest MeeGo presentations the kernel isn't presented as Linux, see below, rather calling it the MeeGo kernel as they are likely creating a tightly controlled vertical like iPhone, RIM and increasingly Android and Microsoft.  Also its unclear Nokia and Intel are converging their value ecosystems, that is the vertically integrated solution from app ingestion; through discovery, delivery and device management; to a slick integrated user experience - creating yet more division thus putting developers off further.

With this announcement I've revised the smartphone OS projections I maintain, see below, which I started maintaining back in 2006 when I was helping A la Mobile - who demonstrated the industry's first applications based on the open source Android application framework, running on HTC's Qtek 9090 advanced smartphone back in January 2008 (I'll not discuss how Google reacted).  Andreas Constantinou has an excellent weblog entry entitled "Android is Evil", where its clear the term open source in Android is really for marketing purposes from an OEM's perspective.  But back to Symbian, this latest mis-step by Nokia will ensure Symbian looses its smartphone OS lead by around 2014.

My good friend Mac Taylor is conducting an industry wide survey on operator relationships with developers and what developers expect and want from operators.

The survey is here: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CGGMPY7

Some of the questions he's asking include: Is capability and service exposure relevant? Will operators be able to attract developers and build a developer community? What help do you expect from operators?

He's added some incentives to encourage completion including a free copy of results and the chance to win a Netbook. 

I was reviewing some old slides last night and saw some material I put together nearly 3 years ago that made me both happy and sad.  Funny how three years later telcos are still struggling, whereas the consumer electronics / OS / web service providers have done and moved on...

1. Without direct Customer Access nothing matters

2. Do not charge, share in revenue stimulated

3. Mitigate device fragmentation - it's the only technical issue

4. Keep the process Simple, Stated, Time-lined, Online and above all Followed

5. Create a class of Showcase Developers - quality matters

6. Focus on Enterprise as much as Consumer

7. Partner with the Platform Developer Communities

8. Market Showcase applications and those developers willing to share 50:50 rather than 70:30 in revenue

9. Accept Platform Developer Certifications (e.g. Java certified) wherever possible

10. App Store must be front and center of all operator customers' experiences - just like Apple iPhone

In previous articles I've discussed the three dimensions upon which a customer pays: cash, time/attention and privacy.  As we're seeing with Facebook and Google's problems, society is starting to realize the value of privacy - businesses of all sizes should be even more concerned.  Google has caused significant market disruption using a very old business model of ad-support - this business model can be traced back to Egyptian / Babylonian times with sponsored tablets (not the iPad type), more recently classified adverts in the Times newspaper from a few hundred years ago, and of course today those creepy (according to the Australian Government) little text boxes advertising something you'd rather not click on.

The ad-sponsored model is very effective in disrupting many industries, enabling web service providers to come in and shake up industries from OS (Chrome OS / Android) through enterprise applications (Google Apps) and telecoms (Google Voice), to advertising and newspapers.  But nothing in life is for free, in the ad-sponsored model people pay in time / attention and privacy rather than in cash.

Operators have a business model based around the customer paying in cash, and its quite a big industry at $2T per year.  There's an important psychology around what happens when someone pays cash for a service even if its only a few pennies, they develop expectations.  When things do not work, or are a pain to use because of annoying advertising they complain.  So an operator's business model based on the customer pays is great ($2T per year), but it is also at risk from disruptive business models (ad-sponsored), and its limited in practice on how far it can extend into ad-support.

So getting to the point of this article, third party application / API business models for consumer; note I'm not focused on the enterprise or B2C segments, that's another story.  Over the past couple of years I've been trying to persuade operators that their business model provides them with a unique opportunity to attract developers that can not be copied by the web service providers.  That is when an application stimulates revenue earning traffic the operator "shares the love," say 5%; that's potentially billions of dollars for developers, this wipes out anything the web service providers can offer.  So there's no need to charge for most APIs, and in any case all the APIs offered by Google/Android, Apple/iPhone/iPad, RIM and Nokia/Symbian are for free.  So there's simply no way operators can charge for most APIs without looking silly, the purpose of APIs is to simply to make applications easier to use.

There's a critical point we need to consider about the importance of third party applications / content: they are value added services which have caused the terminal decline in ring-tones and games sold from operators' portals as operators have simply not responded to the change in customers' behavior.  It will not be long before the VAS of SMS and voice are also under attack from these third party applications.

To date no operator has adopted this approach of "sharing the love" with developers and not charging for most APIs - its not an alien concept as they do "share the love" with resellers.  Instead they continue to nickel and dime developers with API charges and reject any notion of sharing the love, hence a fundamental advantage is lost.  The clock is ticking on when third party VAS move on from ring-tones and games to something juicier.

I recently responded to a friend's weblog post, Ric Ferraro, when I read through his article about a day in his life in 2020.  I thought I'd use this article to give my perspective on how some technologies and behaviors may look by then, as well as some ramblings on a few related topics.

An important point I want to raise at the start is diversity in consumption, most new technologies never completely replace old consumption models, they may replace the technology used around a particular form of consumption, but the consumption model remains; as a society we change our habits very slowly. Take watching movies as an example, in 2010 I can go to the cinema, buy a DVD or bluray to watch at home (VHS is dead), or avoid leaving home and download the movie to watch via Verizon, Amazon on Demand, Sony Store, Netflix to my TV or PC and I guess in time my mobile. 

There is also a current plague of 'black and white' thinking on the internet.  I guess related to the phenomenon referred to in Nicholas Carr's new book, The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains.  Examples of 'black and white' thinking include such statements as "iPad changes everything," or the "future is 3D."  Do a search and you will see people trying to be credible and saying such weak-thinking statements.  The future is more subtle, its about shades of gray, and in the future there will be a few more shades of gray.  The key is understanding which shades grow in frequency, which do not, and which diminish.  Lacking such hype may not 'attract' as much interest in the attention economy, but for the people that take note - they're likely to have a better chance of making money and protecting their future.

I thought long and hard about whether the laptop would disappear into the cloud in 2020 and we'd just use whatever screen was at hand or a dumb terminal.  But the mobile network capacity to support most laptops / tablets / computing devices in that mode is simply not there, plus international roaming will likely remain an issue (granted more of a niche issue).  And storage is just so damned cheap having it at your finger tips no matter where you are (e.g. on a plane, or anywhere coverage is not great) makes me think the cloud will not replace the laptop in the next 10 years.  Rather the cloud will complement as it does today for an early adopter group just more people will be in that group, my contention is most of us will be in that group.  And let's face it, even Larry Ellison has stopped ranting about cloud computing and come to terms with his private cloud that Oracle can manage on behalf of its customers - so its here to stay.

I think a significant leap will happen in battery technology over the next 10 years, combined with solid state memory in mobile computers making them an always on personal area hub.  A headset with UWB (Ultra-Wide Band) or bluetooth is the phone and MP3 player, the 'phone' just becomes a service of my PAN.  Of course the personal area hub can be phone sized, or laptop sized; its just personal preference based on your workstyle.  For me it will be laptop sized so I can work wherever I am in the world.  Flexible screens and reliable voice control will be viable by 2020, so in your pocket could be a screen wrapped up in something the size of a pen or just a simple lightweight dumb terminal that uses UWB back to the personal area hub, the screen would be your equivalent of a smartphone / PDA, and if the headset battery runs out also your phone.  I doubt HUD (Heads Up Displays) will be pervasive for the risk of Yuppies walking into old ladies; just like the Segway remains niche with 5k annual sales per year and no sign of profitability.  Yuppies (an '80s term) today are those people that blather loudly on Twitter (just like Yuppies did on their mobile phones in the '80s), and the same insult still applies to them, they're tw*ts.

We will still use voice in preference to video communications in 2020, as people do not need nor want to see the person they're talking to in most business situations.  Video will be used more for personal communications.  Also the technology will in general not be 3D or holograms, just simply a better quality picture than today, ultra high definition will start to enter the market and the cameras will be intelligent to cope with the poor lighting in most real-world situations, unlike webcams today.  And for watching TV, ultra HDTV will be the focus, not 3D as the glasses are a pain.  3D will be there as an option, mainly used for kiddies movies, but what will have most impact is making the movie look real, HDTV is only a first step in that direction.

People will still read books in 2020 as they're so convenient - you can share.  Reading books on a dedicated reader or tablet, laptop or desktop will increase, but not replace book consumption.

Augmented reality will go the same way of virtual reality did in the '90s - niche.  Remember when the video game Doom allowed you to customize to real world locations and make the baddies pictures of your friends - it was fun but user experience is key.  Clicking on an app/bookmark (they're the same thing) is just so easy; rather than using the camera to take a picture, getting the AR app to recognize what you actually want as there's a lots of extraneous information in the real world that we humans so effectively ignore.  It will just make it easier to select what you want than do anything more fancy.  Keeping it simple is critical to success as Apple continues to demonstrate, e.g. they've made bookmarks look like apps through a simple presentation.

WiFi/UWB will start to finally get into the high end appliances, WiFi's already there in HDTVs.  Next on the list should be fridges, so when the delivery comes with your groceries, they can pack it and upload its contents.  Finally we'll know what's in the freezer - down to the shelf and if its front/back.  Though I think this is more a personal wish than a practical reality.

I'm also hoping Google's strangle hold over search will diminish over the coming decade, lists are so primeval.  Remember those mind-maps of the 1990s, in 2020 they're back but 3D (mapping - no need to glasses unless that's your preference) and color; make finding stuff so easy, just follow chains of thought.  WolframAlpha, though limited, makes accessing numerical based info just so damned easy.  Type in your first name and it shows the stats on how many people are alive (in the US) with your first name, the age distribution and lots of other cools stuff.  We need more innovation like this, so use WolframAlpha to encourage search innovation.

What always surprises me in looking back on shows from just 10/15 years ago is seeing fashions, language and idioms that dates the show.  So its not just technology but our perceptions across social norms, use of language, and fashion that keeps changing.  Though I'd argue technology has a trajectory, the others are more random.  For example, the current WMD (weapon of mass distraction) Twitter is a fashion that preys on people's need to be seen to 'know' about something as soon as possible.  I remember when I worked in large organizations there was always a contingent of corporate politicians who made it there business to know about the latest announcements and let everyone know, and would have no filter on whether the announcement was relevant or just marketing BS, essentially they created noise for the people who could analyze and then explain to them why its not that important.  Which they would promptly ignore as they got more attention from shouting fire several times a day.  Twitter is just feeding that human need, which like alcohol is OK in moderation, but I think at present people are partaking a little too much of low grade booze.

Hybrid TV is not new; it's been within the industry's lexicon for many years, the transition should not be a surprise.  However, for many executives the shift to hybrid TV has been a quiet revolution.  Especially given two of the telco industry's most successful TV deployments, Verizon FiOS (2.9M customers in Q4 2009) and Orange TV (2.1M customers in 2009), are both hybrid TV.  The whole of the payTV industry is now taking notice of what this means.

The report is available from Mind Commerce.  It brings together work performed on hybrid TV over the passed year through over 200 operator and supplier interviews and online questionnaires, gathering information on deployment experiences, market requirements, competitive landscape, and technology trends.  I'd like to thank everyone who helped in creating this report.

Report Structure
This 114 page report including 57 figures examines the current status of hybrid TV and Over The Top (OTT) TV with the following sections:

• Introduction: providing definitions and a brief global round up of hybrid TV activities, including standardization.
  
• Understanding the TV ecosystem: an important section for all readers from the telco industry.  Neither IPTV nor hybrid TV can be treated as an isolated industry; they're the delivery pipes for the much larger, complex and well established TV industry.
  
• Deployments and learning: reviewing hybrid TV deployments and the lessons learnt.
  
• Drivers for and business case of hybrid TV: based on market research in understanding why operators are moving to hybrid TV.
  
• Interactive services and STB (Set Top Box) applications: understanding an important category of services enabled by hybrid TV.
  
• OTT market status: examining this complex and rapidly changing Internet TV market.
  
• Hybrid TV suppliers: reviewing both solution providers and STB suppliers.
  
• Operator rankings and requirements: based on market research of operators' perceptions of suppliers and their requirements for hybrid TV solutions.
  
• Future of hybrid TV and recommendations for members of the ecosystem.
  

Target Audience

• PayTV operators (telcos, cable operators, satellite TV, and terrestrial TV) providing insight into the factors behind hybrid TV's success, and recommendations in retaining value in the evolution of the TV industry.
• PayTV and telco equipment providers: understanding the emerging hybrid TV opportunity and operators' requirements.
• STB application developers: helping understand where to focus in building STB applications.
• Investors: where the investment opportunities reside in the emerging Hybrid TV landscape.

The report is available from Mind Commerce.
 

Firstly, thanks to the over 150 survey responses to the Telco Business Model Evolution Questionnaire.  Responses came from all around the world with a even split between Americas, EMEA, and APAC; from mobile, converged and cable operators; their suppliers, application developers and a few web-based service providers.  The responses to the multi-choice questions are available in this PDF.

Just quickly reviewing the results.  There's a strong consensus (87.5%) that operators must take a different approach to Google in how they sell their users' eyeballs / privacy to advertisers, though there was 9.4% that disagreed.  For operators adopting an OTT (Over The Top) business model there was lower agreement of 55%, with a significant neutral vote at 34.4%.  On whether the customer would choose the operator as their trusted agent the vote was split with 56.3% agreeing and 36.3% disagreeing, so its clear there is still much debate on that point.  

Operators adopting a freemium model has support with 70%, the rest voting neutral.  In being able to make a business out of API exposure; with 79.4% agreeing its clearly seen as a real business opportunity for operators.  But as discussed in a previous article operators still have much work to do on basic business planning.  Then on where they'll be successful in API exposure the votes broke down: enterprise (75.6%), local content owners (57.5%) and internal development (56.3%) scored strongly; with consumer applications only gathering 18.1%.

On WAC, "The Wholesale Application Community will be successful," there is some uncertainty to its success with 50% neutral and 32% disagreeing with the statement.  I guess too many cooks in the kitchen, which to be frank remains the main problem for mpayments in developed markets.

Interestingly 83.1% think operators will be unable to make a business out of app stores as the consumer electronics manufacturers do not need to make money in the stores, only in the devices they sell.  With a similar score (84.4%) that operators' app stores must focus on applications that use their network, as all other applications will be commoditized by the consumer electronics manufacturers.  Some good steer on where operators should focus their efforts.

Nearly 80% think the trend of operators sharing networks will increase from radio towers and access equipment, to sharing complete networks.  Only the services layer and billing will be unique.  

There was more of a split on the question "An incumbent operator's ability to have an engineer at a customers' home potentially with their purchased consumer electronics, e.g. buy the TV at Amazon and have it delivered and set up by the operator.  Means operators can make a business out of home network solutions and services."  With 67% agreeing and 22% disagreeing.

"Churn will increase once all operators offer triple/quad play?"  had strong disagreement of 55%. This is an interesting discussion point, currently bundling does reduce churn.

Generally neutral response to "Canoe Ventures, the US cable industries attempt to work with the advertising industry on targeted advertising, will be a success."  I thought the neutral response was in part mobile / converged operators being unaware of Canoe, but MSOs had a similar profile.  So a cause for concern in the industry for being able to find a way to make targeted advertising work in a meaningful way for advertisers.  Then on which operators can make advertising work, the bias is towards mobile operators rather than cable. 

This was just a bit of fun, but I hope provides some insight into what the industry is thinking at the moment, a PDF of the results is available here.

In a previous weblog article, "Unmuddling APIs, Developer Communities, Developers, Third Parties, App Stores, App Warehouses, and Widgets....."  I discussed the confusion around the terms and set out some of the categories of third parties that could use operators' APIs:

• Enterprises (e.g. where an enterprise's IT developer may want to use presence for their corporate communications);
• Trusted third parties (e.g. local SIs that can use the APIs for the solutions to their SMB (Small Medium Business) customers);
• Trusted third parties that can help operators work better (e.g. someone helping T-Mobile analyze their customer data to they finally start treating me as a customer not a credit card to be billed monthly);
• Content owners that can use APIs to make their audience relationship stronger (e.g. Real Madrid giving up on email and now using SMS to great effect); and
• Developers / service providers who need a channel to market through the operator or web-based developers / service providers who have their own channel.

What I'm seeing in the market is because of the current confusion a serious mistake is being made, most operator API initiatives are trying to use their developer community as customers with the wrong business model.  The problem is their developer community is full of developers looking for the operator to be a channel to market, and expect to share in the revenue stimulated, not be "nickeled and dimed" on APIs,  Apple and Google do not charge for their APIs.  Operators are missing the bulk of the potential customers for the network APIs, those third parties with their own channel to market who just want to use the operator as a network.

So operators need to look at two sets of API business models:

• One for third parties with their own channel to market with straight forward API charges that discount in volume (enabling a wholesale model); and
• A pure revenue share model for developers looking to use them as a channel to market.

If an operator wants to make its API business successful, and not a fashion accessory, operators needs to sell their network APIs to third parties with their own channel to market.  This is not a developer community, these third parties will not come to the operator.  These third parties are paying their hard earned cash, they're business customers and must be treated as such.  Some of the example services enabled by network APIs include communication enabled business processes, M2M, home security, and content charging using the mobile account.  Operators need to package a number of solutions together and get out there and sell what their APIs can do.

If operators do not want to dirty their hands by having to sell their APIs, they need to get partners on board such as Kore Wireless (M2M), HomeCamera (security), Voicesage (CEBP), Oracle, and SAP as soon as possible.  Critically, operators must make make clear their API business models (both of them) and go to market plans for the different groups of third parties to stop the current confusion and frustration.

For a bit of fun I've put together a questionnaire around telco business model evolution.  With questions on advertising models, app stores, API exposure, operator as a trusted agent, sharing of networks, quad play, etc.

If you have the time I'd be grateful if you'd complete, and I'll share the results in a few weeks time.

I've had several people talking to me about how the mobile internet is the next wealth creation cycle, a new category of equal importance to the creation of the internet.  When I respond with, 'There is no such thing as the mobile internet, only mobile access to the internet.  Calling it the mobile internet is a bit like saying the ubiquitous ubiquity.  I've been able to access the internet from my laptop all round the world for over a decade so how is this category new?'  I'm treated like an apostate, i.e. someone who directly attacks a belief system, which is even worse than a heretic, who only dares to question. 

When I then start questioning, digging into what is meant, I then find at work the self-interested hand of investment analysts.  Whose sole purpose is to over-inflate a category that inevitably causes its crash so they can make money through those irrational cycles; they do not create value only leech upon the industries' that create value.  Given the bad M&A deals, the dot com bust, and the current fiasco; I remain perplexed why these analysts are held in any esteem.  So I thought I'd set out why I disagree with the argument that the mobile internet is the next wealth creation cycle.

In their analysis Japan is often cited as a leading example of where the market will go.  It is a special case,  i-mode did not work outside Japan because the model is broken for the rest of the world.  Its important to understand the history of a market.  Back in the '90s, when we used dial-up to access the internet, Japan was in a sorry state with respect to internet access.  Most young people did not have a fixed phone line at home because it required a large deposit to NTT, so they did not access the internet.  i-mode (NTT DoCoMo) provided a convenient way to access Japanese content, email and did not require a big deposit.  In addition, NTT DoCoMo controls the value chain in Japan unlike any other operator in the World, even Verizon.  So they could define the handsets, the software, the business models and had a hungry market.  This is an example of local market factors creating a unique situation.  I think we've seen enough i-mode failures outside Japan to realize it is specific to the Japanese market.

Then iPhone sales data is presented with an unusual spin.  Firstly, operators have been selling content and apps for phones on their portals for years, it was a $30B business that's now on the decline as people are no longer willing to pay for ring tones or even games. The iPhone is about selling consumer electronics, the iPhone app store is simply about generating customer value to buy the device.  I've discussed developer frustration on the race to zero in the crApp store in previous articles; so we're seeing overall value destruction not creation. 

Another point raised with the iPhone is the speed of adoption of this 'new' category, compared to desktop internet.  But this is comparing apples and oranges to make pears.  The desktop internet was creating a category, Apple's iPhone moved into an existing category of smart phones and handset apps; and with a closed proprietary system with a great user experience was able to fulfill the stifled demand.  So the 'urgency' with which this new mobile internet is going to overtake us appears a little over stated.

Most of the analysis I see quoted is from a US perspective.  Many developing markets are taking a quite different route to the US.  China Mobile's revenue is $65B while Vodafone is $67B, China Mobile's valuation is much greater than Vodafone's.  Given growth is with China Mobile, India and many other developing markets (e.g. LATAM), its a mistake to assume what happens in the US happens everywhere else and not treat developing markets as an equally important category in their own right.  For example, India is taking a distinctly different path to the US, just look at Bharti Airtel's approach and success with its version of the app store, or the struggles of the iPhone App Store in China.

Companies the investment analysts put in the 'mobile internet' category are consumer electronics, operators and web service providers.  Google is extending its value from the desktop to the handset, which increases the amount of time eyeballs spend at their site, but there are few 'new' eyeballs.  Most people with an iPhone or Blackberry also have PC access.  An exception is in some developing countries where it becomes their 'laptop,' but even in those cases they still use internet cafes.  So where are the new value creators in this mobile internet category such as Google for the desktop internet and Microsoft of the PC era?

In the investment analyst definition of mobile internet, it doesn't mean only mobile networks, it means any internet connected device as they include all the devices in the home.  So the mobile label is rather misleading.  Really they're talking about the internet being accessible by most consumer and enterprise electronics, the internet of things.  So let's look at an example, TVs becoming internet connected.  Essentially content owners can now have a direct relationship with customers, Disney's dream for many decades.  This bypasses the TV networks and payTV providers.  So two industries potentially face a tough future, but its going to take people to change their behavior from channel to programmatic consumption for this to come about.

In summary, a lack of experience of working in the industries they track, a lack of understanding of specific market's history, a US bias, comparing apples and oranges to make pears, and not digging into the specifics of what happens when most consumer electronics gets internet access means false categories are created which actually may have as much value destruction and creation.  Perhaps what their talking about is really the next phase of the internet's evolution, which is not really a wealth creation cycle rather the evolution of an existing industry.  So beware the self-interested hand of investment analysts talking about future wealth creation cycles - they're only after your retirement funds!

At MWC 2010 there was a workshop on OneAPI were the GSMA announced the launch of a commercial pilot in Canada with the country's operators Bell Mobility, Rogers Communications, and TELUS to demonstrate the viability and benefits of providing third parties with standardized application programming interfaces (APIs).

Through the OneAPI initiative, the GSMA is promoting the adoption of a common, lightweight and web-friendly set of APIs to provide third parties with easy access to network capabilities. The Canadian pilot is the first time commercial access to network assets of multiple operators is possible through a single gateway, in a consistent and simple way using OneAPI.  What this means is a third party does not need to worry about which operator the user is with, its a single API framework with common authentication, common terms and conditions, and common charges.  Pricing is yet to be announced, which is a critical issue - I hope they've listened to third parties on what they require.

A few examples of what this means.  

• HomeCamera, the world's easiest to use internet home surveillance service, is one of the services being launched through this pilot; throughout Canada HomeCamera now have a single API to access, making it simple for customers: they just enter their mobile number and can receive motion detection alerts by SMS or MMS as well as clips from their webcams.  So in a matter of a few minutes, with NO modification to the service platform HomeCamera is available to all Canadians.
• If an Enterprise wants of add SMS alerts to its internal approval process to speed up decision making.  An internal IT developer can add the capability with just a few lines of code.  There's no complexity of working out which network the employee is on, building three versions of the interface and trying to get the CFO to sign off on three separate charging plans.

This is a critical step in the industry getting its act together and a necessary step in working with third parties, which is a much broader category than simply web developers as discussed in this previous article.  No operator has an excuse in not following the Canadian lead, unless they have decided being a pipe provide is their preferred business model, and are happy to forgo up to 36% of their revenue to OTT (Over The Top) providers.  I show below the slides presented at the workshop to get the message out to the industry - we need to act fast.

Entry through Barcelona airport was strange this year, no queue at immigration, no queue for the taxi, and there were even a couple of spare seats on the plane. This uncrowded entry was in line with the number of people letting me know they were not attending this year.  Many western European operators had only 2 to 5 people attending when in the past it would have been 50 or so, and American operators remain notably absent except for a few senior execs.  Its the impact of operator cost controls and many suppliers cutting marketing budgets to focus on regional rather than global events.  Though, with that said, there was good operator attendance from Middle East, Eastern Europe, APAC (those countries not celebrating Chinese New Year, as a festival think of it like the western Christmas and New Year combined then doubled) and LATAM.  This re-disribution of operator attendance calls into question whether MWC should permanently reside in Europe.  Compared to last year, attendee numbers were up by perhaps 10%, most of my customers were happy with traffic to their stands by the end of Wednesday.

But back to my entry into Barcelona, the experience at the airport contrasted to a city organized fun-run that closed the roads into the city.  There were some heated discussions between the taxi drivers and guards stopping their entry, which the snow shower didn't cool down (that's right, snow in Barcelona).  Sunday-Wednesday were cool (compared to NJ it was warm) and overcast, but the sun did finally come out on Wednesday afternoon.  Last year in a discussion with a local policeman to report with a friend his stolen bag, the policeman revealed that thefts are tolerated by the locals because the thieves only target visitors, this avoids it becoming a political issue.  I pass no comment on the rule of law being a 'political' issue.  His advice was to look like a local to avoid being targeted.  Its a sad indication on Barcelona that I consider MWC the most dangerous conference I attend, a view shared by attendees from many other parts of the world.  But with that said, MWC remains the only conference I must-attend every year.

Getting down to the meat of what happened at the show...

WAC (Wholesale Application Community - not Committee) was the biggest news of the conference, its 5 years late, but at least the fragmentation issues are being tackled.  24 operators have signed up to create an application warehouse including América Móvil, AT&T, Bharti Airtel, China Mobile, China Unicom, Deutsche Telekom, KT, Mobilkom austria group, MTN Group, NTT DoCoMo, Orange, Orascom Telecom, Softbank Mobile, Telecom Italia, Telefónica, Telenor Group, TeliaSonera, SingTel, SK Telecom, Sprint, Verizon Wireless, VimpelCom, Vodafone and Wind.  Together, these operators have access to over three billion customers around the world. The GSMA and three device manufacturers (LG Electronics, Samsung and Sony Ericsson) also support this initiative.  The release looks like it was done in a rush, so there are many more questions than answers, some of my views on the announcement include:

• Enables operators to efficiently fill the crapp-store part of their inventory.  That is copy the apps in the Apple Store which are racing to zero price.  This is a key point, Apple is a CE (Consumer Electronics) manufacturer so does not care about the profitability of its app store (iTunes is different); Apple cares about selling more devices.  I use the term crapp-store as the margin generated for operators is likely to be low to negative, however there's lots of customer value -  especially those free apps.
• Enables operator developer community / open innovation programs to focus on the 'fat middle' of services that use and differentiate their network compared to OTT (Over The Top) services; and focus on partners as well as app developers, e.g. enterprises, local content, local system integrators, local authorities, etc.
• Enables the industry to focus on specific platforms and form factors, e.g. Java, Symbian, Android, to minimize fragmentation.
• Endorses OneAPI and BONDI as the supported network and device APIs.
• JIL has joined WAC, perhaps they realized the error of their ways in their widget obsession?
• Must start with a 70:30 revenue split as per other stores, with a business plan that can support 80:20.
• Must have a common ingestion process into a warehouse that allows developers to select the operators; and the app just goes into those stores.  No ifs, ands, or buts.
• Must support updates, this is very important, updates show the customers they're continuously loved and reminds them of their applications; but sensible limits should be applied, e.g. max update of once per month.
• Operators must sort out the confusion WAC generates with their development / open innovation programs.  Each operator should state clearly the focus given WAC, they still need both if they want to innovate.  WAC will help fill the crapp-store, and depending on its focus enable innovations from other markets to be available to all.  
• Operators must focus on creating a compelling store front across the handset, web, STB (Set Top Box), CSR (Customer Service Rep), and retail stores.  And build an engaged customer base for that store.  Store must including search, rating and community features to make finding apps / services as easy as the web, and critically ensure adequate performance of store - some browser based solutions may struggle.  
• In the limit there will be as many 'apps' as their are web sites, web games and web services, its all just the internet not the "mobile internet."  I'll do an article on the evils of the investment house analysts creating the contrived category of the Mobile Internet soon, it is their attempt to continue to steal money from our retirement accounts.
• WAC must be more than widgets (a current obsession of some operators).  A widget running on a widget engine in a browser on a mobile OS has significant  limitations in performance compared to a native app.  Operators need to be very careful in not focusing on technology, user experience is orders of magnitude more important.  Apple has a highly optimized proprietary stack, so just choosing 'widgets' will not give an Apple-like experience.
• I currently put WAC's chances of success at 20%, JIL I had down at 5%.  Once operators start to announce how WAC works with their open innovation programs, we understand better WAC's focus, and operators better understand the difference between the 'crapp store' and their 'network services store' (apps/services that use their network and make money for them) I'll revise the chances.

Set against the WAC fragmentation reduction opportunity we have increasing OS fragmentation: Bada from Samsung, MeeTo (sorry MeeGo the Nokia/Intel OS) and Windows Phone 7 Series.  Hopefully WAC can help focus this fragmentation.  Windows 7 now looks like a 2 year old mobile OS with the inclusion of some community aggregation features and a rather 'square' looking start screen.  As its not available until the end of the year it will only be 3 years behind the pack at launch.  In playing with many of the devices at the show, it still looks like functionality is being pushed in preference to performance, e.g. app switch times, time to fire up the browser, and importantly scrolling through the address book all feel a slightly sluggish compared to my acid test of the good-old Nokia 6310i address book experience.

Ericsson came late to the table with its app store - that's so 'last year.'  Ericsson Mobility World, sorry Developer Connection, is a great way to waste a developers' time.  To be relevant, the store must have direct access to an engaged customer base; sitting in a demo lab is of little value.

Applications / Services I'd like to highlight that operators should have deployed last year include:
HomeCamera - world's easiest to use home surveillance service;
Dial2do - voice control to text, tweet, or conference;
4dk - context aware communications;
Aonta - next generation software based conferencing; and
hSenid - customer created VAS.

All of the above services use the operators' networks, they need the operator to be the trusted agent, and will make significant margin for operators, rather than the 'race to zero' crapp store.  Open Innovation is about enabling operators to launch tens/hundreds of these services per year by working directly with these companies who obsess about their services.  Operators should really only be wasting one or two junior engineers' time on having one hundred thousand bookmarks (sorry widgets) in a store.

During Eric Schmidt's speech there was some churlish questions, Google is entitled to compete in whatever markets it chooses using all available legal means, though its been quite naughty with Buzz and EPIC will sort them out.  The industry must realize Google's model is not aligned to the end users' best interests as Google's customers are the advertisers and they will pass that information to whomever will pay.  As scams get more sophisticated people will realize the risks of being a 'means to an end,' rather than an 'end in itself,' and the Buzz incident is just one small example.  Telcos must focus on how to remain the trusted agent for their customers in this emerging web 3.0 world, rather than stamping their feet in front of a great competitor that forces us to step up our game.

Congratulation to Huawei for winning the Best Service Delivery Platform at the GSMA awards, as the global SDP (Service Delivery Platform) supplier to Telefonica group this is great endorsement by the industry.  Congratulation to Ecrio for winning the best RCS (Rich Communications Client) mobile client and second place in the PC client; and congrats to WIT software for the best PC RCS client.

At the NEPs (Network Equipment Provider) stands LTE, femtocell, mobile advertising, WiMAX, and IMS were still being talked about, and the problems were again being swept under the carpet.  Such an approach does not move the industry forward.

Some of the BOSS (Business and Operational Support Systems) vendors appear to be moving away from the scary-complex TMF architecture and putting a customer centric model in its place.  That is lining up telco operations around the value delivered to the customer, rather than continuing to fuel the IT and Network Operations internal war.  All Telco CEOs should but network ops and IT under the CIO as its all just "software running on servers", including the switches, messaging gateways and many other network elements.  This bring me back to Google, they understand that in the limit costs of operations will be dominated by the data center.  Operators should compare their data center economics to Google's ('Gloud' economics) as in the limit they're both service providers with software running on servers.

On industry sentiment: optimism is up, but the skies are not blue, clouds still linger.  There's a tiredness from many of the large organizations as further consolidation / downsizing is inevitable. Yet there's still much dynamism from the small and medium companies that are the factories of service innovation for this industry and which operators need to work with much more closely to capture that energy, rather than crushing it through a strategic supplier.  Hence why an open innovation program remains critical - props to Jose Vallez for what he's doing on open Innovation with Open Telefonica.

Overall, I think MWC is a global show in transition.  Devices are really now the focus of CES (Consumer Electronics Show), the crapp store is a passing fad, this is not the right location / forum to engage the web development community.  The core of MWC is the mobile network, its operations, and the gap is a serious focus on the services that use the network.  There should be halls dedicated to Enterprise, M2M, Smart Grids, Telemedicine, Green networks, Open Innovation, etc.  Where not just the suppliers to mobile operators, but the other ecosystems members are there.  Mobile is no longer an ecosystem to itself, to survive it must work with other ecosystems.  It must not impose self-focused standards, but work together with those ecosystem.  Just like Canoe Ventures is working between the cable and advertising industry in the US for targeted advertising.  And serious consideration should be given to a new location given the shift in operator attendance away from Europe.

As a final note, around the show and outside in the hotels (because its cheaper than being in the show), there were lots of incremental innovations taking place in mobile backhaul congestion mitigation; the tying together of operators' channels across web, physical stores, devices and CSR in selling services; low energy technologies; batteries; cloud services; well thought through on-device store experiences; and cute user interaction technology. This time next year it looks like we'll finally be able to point to specific operators who are making the necessary first steps in remaining their customers' trusted agent and service provider. Keep an eye on what operators are doing in India, Canada, Nordics, Singapore and possibly the UK.

I've covered Fonolo in previous articles since 2008, last year they were one of Time Magazine's top 50 websites of 2009, in the same league as Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc.

If you need to call your bank, airline, operator, car rental agency, travel service, or one of those many other companies that waste your time by making you wait on the phone.  Fonolo does all the IVR (Interactive Voice Response) navigation and waiting for you, then once connected to an agent calls you back.

They now have an iPhone app, here's the announcement on their site, and below I show the UI (User Interface).  Its an obvious service for operators to provide - call mediation between enterprise and their customers - yet they have not.  For enterprises, connecting with customers is important, hence why they have 800 numbers.  But customers' time is much more important than a call which is generally at zero incremental charge given today's phone plans.  Fonolo intelligently connects enterprises to their customers, in a way that helps respect the customer's time and ensures more accurate call center navigation.

This service bypasses the operator from providing value in connecting enterprises and customers.  This is a core value proposition of operators, yet they have missed the boat in delivering value around their core product.  They can be forgiven for struggling with handset centric games and content, its a fragmented business where they lack control.  But in the core voice product no such excuses apply, this is a clear signal to the industry that unless things change soon and fast operators are heading towards commoditized pipes.

I presented at a recent sales conference for a large security / IT solution provider on the evolution of the telco industry and the role security and protection plays in that evolution.  I show below a cut down version of the slides I presented, removing the discussion on specific market opportunities and actions.

In the discussion on telco evolution I focused on 4 area:

• Web evolution: discuss the 3 phases of web evolution and the emerging role of a "trusted agent." Operators know much more about their customers than web service providers.  Critically, ad-sponsored models mean the advertiser is the customer not the user.  However, for telcos the users are the customers, hence telcos have far better fit in being the trusted agent than most web service providers. Yet operators remain dumbfounded on how to adopt this role.  TiVo and Amazon are two examples of trusted agent, e.g. with TiVo I turn on my TV and my favorite shows as well as suggestions of shows I may like are there.  TiVo uses my data to create a vastly better experience than flicking through uninteresting channels.  Operators can do what TiVo does but on a much broader scale.
• Power of devices: we've moved to the PC model for mobile devices, and as STBs include Java so that will be the case for IPTV within a few years.  In mobile we'll likely consolidating onto 5 OS (Operating Systems), significantly reducing the fragmentation that's stifled growth in mobile applications.  However, end devices will need protection.  An operators' security layer must focus on the device, as well as the network and services.
• Customer perceptions:  I've covered this in several previous articles, customers no longer make a distinction between web and voice services they're all just services.  For operators to remain relevant as service providers they must play a role across a broader range of services, and not just act as a pipe-provider also a trusted agent.
  
• Rate of service innovation:  Operators are opening their networks to increase the rate of service innovation, but in doing so its never been easier to get malware onto a phone and in time a STB.  The 'elephant in the room' in opening the network is security.  Operators must take an integrated approach using their SDP (Service Delivery Platform): including network, devices and services - because its about their customers NOT just their network.
  

In summary: customer data, trust, security and protection are critical for operators to get right in this emerging environment.

Operators need an integrated security and protection layer, not point solutions for each service as is the case today.  That is protection from malware across all network services e.g. IP, SMS, MMS, WAP push, widgets, apps, etc.  And protection in the network, in devices and in services.

SDP vendors need an integrated security solution across network, services and end-points, which means a partnership with a leading security/protection technology provider is key.  Its a rapidly growing problem as its a highly profitable and more importantly safe criminal business compared to drugs or prostitution; hence a specialist security/protection partner is essential.

Even though M1 is a small mobile operator, roughly 1M customers, it remains one of the most innovative mobile operators.  M1's business strategy is simple: to constantly deliver value to its customers by rolling out new and innovative applications and services.  In mid-2008, M1 began its search for a next generation service delivery platform (NG SDP) to provide a framework for traditional telecommunication services, next generation of value-added services, and enabling it to remove its old IN that limited its ability to innovate.

M1 selected an open source JAIN SLEE (Java™ APIs for Intelligent Networks Service Logic Execution Environment) solution provided by its long-time IT partner hSenid, called the mChoice SDP.  M1's relationship with hSenid goes back to 2002. For nearly eight years, hSenid has helped M1 implement major projects such as the deployment of MySQL cluster, mChoice Rewards, mChoice Recharge, and mChoice Reporting - a comprehensive business intelligence system to help M1 to make strategic decisions and revenue calculations. These solutions were built on open source, resulting in significant cost savings in terms of licensing and maintenance fees.

The standard application programming interfaces (APIs) help M1 provision, control and bill for all the value-added services they provide, whether the services are developed in-house or created by third-party application.  This is a key point the APIs are not just for third parties, they're for internal consumption as well.  M1 set out with the objective of looking for a SOA (Service Oriented Architecture) based solution, given their enterprise architecture.  I discussed SOA in this article.

For M1 its main benefits in adopting a NG SDP are:

• Opens up service innovation, letting third parties offer services to M1's customers or using M1's network capabilities to their customers, which opens up 1000s of new applications and services;
• Launch new services faster, moving from months to days in launching new services (factor of 10 improvement);
• Protects existing investments while enabling future growth, i.e. reusing amortized equipment, e.g. SMSCs, while putting growth onto lower cost platforms (a 10/100 factor cost reduction for growth); and
• Lower operational overhead by simplify on-boarding, contracts, etc. enabling M1's limited people resources to launch 100s more services each year.

hSenid's whitepaper provides more details on the M1 case study. 

There's an interesting discussion the industry needs to have on whether a SOA or a looser web-centric integration framework is the right long-term approach.  For smaller operators this distinction is mute, but the larger the operator, the closer its cost-basis need to tend towards Google - as in the limit they're both service providers.