Gizmo is taking another stab at the mobile space.  Gizmo for Mobile looks like it combines IM, Presence, and some form of low-cost long distance, but the beta release has more than a few holes.  At first glance, it look as though Gizmo has the waterfront covered (see the apparent range of phone supported via the animated GIF).  But reading the Gizmo Forum reveals numerous issues such as lack of support for the Palm Treo Windows products.  In the end, I found the biggest problem to be confusion over mobile clients.  As one poster on the Forum put it, “… can they make this any crazier?”

1. Gizmo for Mobile is a call back system, not SIP.  This client is also known as “Gizmo5″ and is a Java-based application.  As the Gizmo Forum explains, “Gizmo for Mobile can do instant messaging and callback, but it cannot do SIP calling. The instant messaging occurs over your mobile providers data connection, and the callback occurs over the mobile network. The advantage of callback is that in many cases (like international calls) it may be cheaper than what your mobile provider would have charged you for the same call.”  It goes on to say “Our network is calling to both parties, and you do get charged for both legs of the call at our standard Call Out rates.  Many posters are already complaining about the cost of paying for both legs, and are asking why this client doesn’t operate like the laptop verison.

2. Gizmo VoIP uses SIP, but doesn’t do IM.  The Gizmo VoIP client also seems to be known as Gizmo for Nokia.  The client uses the Gizmo SIP network, runs on Nokia phones running Symbian S60 only, and allows users to make free Gizmo calls to other Gizmo users via Wi-Fi.  The supported phones listed presumably have the embedded Nokia SIP stack – hence the reason for Gizmo VoIP using a SIP-based client.  Where this product appears to be going is not is not clear.
3. Gizmo for Palm Treo appears to be different yet again.  This client is supported only on the PalmOS versions of Treos, offers interop with the usual list of most popular IM clients, and seems to offer free calling with other standard Gizmo PC-based clients and Gizmo for Palm Treo.  Though there is little technical information about the protocols in use, the IM and call traffic is all carried via the standard data services offered by mobile operators on these phones.

What next for Gizmo Project?  Rationalize the product line.  This is a mess.  I can only imagine what it must be like for the developers – trying to keep this all straight – let alone potential customers.  Up against Skype and Google, I hope they can keep innovating without tearing themselves apart internally.

Full disclosure: No position in Skype, Google, Nokia, or Palm at time of writing.

Directory Tags: | Wireless | Nokia | Google | Palm | VoIP |Gizmo |Mobile |

I’ve mentioned Truphone in the past as a mobile VoIP by-pass pioneer and declared “advantage Truphone” for the moment.  In fact, I said, “what’s a poor poor Euro-cellular operator to do?  Not much.”  Wrong.  Of course, I was being facecious, but now the tables are turned.

T-Mobile has decided to significantly raise the temperature in the Truphone kitchen.  Om Malik and Jesse Kopelman write about T-Mobile not allowing connections to the VoIP startup.

Now it’s a case of “what’s a poor little startup do do?”

Here is an idea for Truphone CEO, James Tagg.  Drop the whole by-pass strategy and use Truphone’s established infrastructure to deliver a different media service.  I dunno, why not offer a photo sharing system with music and voice over add-ons using the SIP protocol?

Truphone has proven that their infrastructure works and they have absolutely cracked the nut on how to install third party apps in a hostile handset environment. Why not use that expertise for something that won’t send the incumbents into a frenzy of revenge?

Full disclosure: No position in T-Mobile or Truphone at time of writing.

Technorati Tags: | Wireless | WiFi | Wi-Fi | VoIP | 3G | Mobile | T-Mobile |

Let’s face it, Europe is a different market.  But with daily assertions that the-world-is-flat and one big market, I am still struck by regional interpretations of technology.

Take mobile VoIP, for example.  Though it hasn’t rolled out yet, mobile VoIP for the North American market promises: 

• Presence applications.  VoIP-based apps display the state of the user you are trying to reach: I am on the phone, I am in a meeting, don’t bother me, I am on-line.
• Higher average revenue per user (ARPU).  Operators charge more for market-specific applications. Every contractor and warehouse worker needs push-to-talk (PTT) — which has one of the highest ARPUs in the mobile industry.
• Lower infrastructure costs.  Operators save money on all-IP core networks and get higher voice capacity per cell tower.

But in Europe, mobile VoIP means only one thing at the moment:

• Users by-pass long distance, arbitrage mobile minutes, save money. Mobile operators take it in the shorts.

Witness Truphone’s recent round of financing of $24.5m.  Download the Truphone client to your dual-mode Wi-Fi/GSM phone and make free Wi-Fi mobile-to-mobile calls or save a bunch of money on a salad bar of other VoIP-style deals.  Bottom line, Truphone is establishing itself as a by-pass service provider and there is nothing that Euro-operators can do about it.  How can that be? 

Unlike the US market, customers can buy any GSM phone insert their operator-supplied SIM card and they are off to the races.  If the user chooses to buy a dual-mode phone with both GSM and Wi-Fi, the mobile operator has no control over the Wi-Fi portion of the phone. 

Hmm…Then it must stand to reason that Nokia pushing a pile of Wi-Fi/GSM phones could rub the Euro cell operators the wrong way.  So what?  What’s a poor Euro-cellular operator to do?  Not much.  Since GSM SIM cards have nothing to do with Wi-Fi authentication and authorization, there is almost nothing the operator can do to stop Truphone-style mobile VoIP operators from springing up.  I suppose they could try modifying the ancient GSM standard to somehow gain control over the Wi-Fi radio.  But don’t hold your breath on that one.

Is this a permanent trend?  Definitely.  Truphone’s funding will further legitimize the fledgling “software-only network operator.”

On the horizon, I believe Euro-operators will respond with GSM and UMTS-based femtocell base stations for the home, and with UMA-based services over Wi-Fi.  Until then, advantage Truphone.

Technorati Tags: | Wireless | WiFi | Wi-Fi | VoIP | EVDO |3G | HSDPA | Nokia | Mobile |

Mobile operators are wringing their hands over the use of VoIP in mobile phones.  What are they afraid of?

• Eroding minutes.  Long the dream of the Fixed Mobile Convergence (FMC) crowd, VoIP-equipped mobile phones could avoid burning minutes by using enterprise Wi-Fi connections.
   
• More Skypes.  Microsoft, Skype, and others are demonstrating free SIP-based VoIP clients for smart phones running Mobile Windows.  With Google in the mix, the sky is surely falling.

I don’t get it.  Traffic is traffic.  And carriers get paid for transit. 

1. Carriers will get paid for data.  VoIP calls are just voice calls in data clothing.  And last time I checked, mobile broadband and mobile data was very expensive stuff.  Verizon charges $80 per month for its EVDO-based mobile broadband service, and it certainly doesn’t care if you choose to use EVDO to carry Skype or Microsoft’s Office Communicator Mobile traffic.
2. FMC will be under carrier control.  I do not — for one second — believe that corporate IT will install FMC gateways on premise to handle mobile traffic over Wi-Fi.  Instead, carriers will install gateways in their networks to originate and terminate FMC calls.  Faced with the proposition of using carrier based FMC gateways or wrestling with their own gear on-site, the choice will be easy.  XO is already stepping up the pace for VoIP wholesale offerings.
3. VoIP/data traffic should improve the bottom line.  Mobile VoIP will be more cost efficient than today’s circuit-based networks.  No one will argue otherwise.

I can’t think of any realistic mobile VoIP scenario in which mobile operators do not get paid.  Bring on SIP.  Bring on FMC.  Bring on the Skype wannabees.

Directory Tags: | Wireless | WiFi | Wi-Fi | VoIP | EVDO |Sprint | Verizon | Microsoft | Google | Skype | Mobile | DMOZ Wireless |

Most Fixed Mobile Convergence (FMC) efforts to date are focused on the wrong usage scenario, usually one in which a mobile voice call (GSM or CDMA) gets handed off to in-building Wi-Fi or VoWi-Fi.  The real application is elsewhere.

Look at the raging success of the Blackberry.  RIM started with data — corporate email pushed to PDAs — and added voice later.  Do the math on your monthly corporate Blackberry bill.  It is probably somewhere in the vicinity of 50%-75% higher than the equivalent voice-only national flat rate service.  In other words, simple email data provides a significant add-on to revenue per user (RPU) for mobile operators.

In that scenario, it doesn’t take a genius to see that arbitraging voice minutes doesn’t really matter — and it certainly will not be the driver of FMC.  Data will. 

Mobile data:

1. Is where the money is.  Data add-on services will support the overall RPU of the service while mobile voice rates continue to drop.  Broadband mobile apps like TV news and entertainment will be thrown in to prop up service prices as faster 3G data services such as CDMA’s EV-DO rev A and GSM’s HSDPA continue to roll out.  Wi-Fi will offload 3G data, not arbitrage the cost of voice minutes.
2. Always needs more bandwidth.  You can argue until you are blue in the face over which serves up better performance per user — 3G or Wi-Fi.  But Wi-Fi’s next gen 80 Mbps (802.11n) won’t do you much good driving down the highway or on a commuter train, and 3G doesn’t always work in big buildings.  In the end, the common driver for both technologies is the fact that data applications usually need more bandwidth than they can get.

Despite all the hoopla, VoIP is a data application for the metro or muni-wireless environment.  Live handoff of voice calls is a lot less forgiving than data but it is not that important.  Live handoff will be nothing more than a technical tax that must be paid by FMC gateway providers Avaya, Azaire, BridgePort, Kineto and others — a tax for the privilege of being in the game.

Directory Tags: | Wireless | MuniWi-Fi |Mobile | Convergence | HSDPA | GSM | 3G, | CDMA | EVDO | Wi-Fi | WiFi | DMOZ Wireless | Yahoo Wi-Fi

Given Linksys’ recent announcement of a Wi-Fi SIP phone, I was interested in getting more information on Netgear’s Wi-Fi Skype phone.  Here are some answers.

1. How does the phone handle Wi-Fi authentication in hotspots?  Most hotspots use an authentication Web page with user name and password, but Netgear’s phone will not have a Web page. Users will need to find either a free hotspot, or one that supports authentication via WEP or WPA.  The phone is targeted more for home use, than for hotspots — and Netgear believes the Wi-Fi Skype phone will end up as a second line phone for the home, or in some cases even as a replacement for current phone service.
2. Does the phone have any dependency on a PC?  The Skype phone will be a fully independent Skype client and will not need to synchronize with a computer.  The phone will interact with the Skype network in much the same way today’s Skype softphone does and will automatically download contacts when it connects.
3. Is the firmware upgradable?  All upgrades will be direct via the net.  Because the phone connects via Wi-Fi, it will not require a PC connection in order to upgrade firmware.
4. What about SIP?  Netgear’s phone will not support SIP.  Netgear says it does not rule out providing a SIP-based phone in the future.  If Netgear does produce a product, it will launch with a specific carrier — and its phone will ship pre-configured for a VoIP service provider.
5. What about battery life?  Netgear estimates a 3 hour talk time, a feature deemed to be important for typical Skype calls — hour long international calls versus 2–3 minute local calls.  Idle time battery life is estimated at 48 hours.

Netgear says that it has been overwhelmed with interest in the Skype phone since the CES announcement and expects to ship this spring.

How do I think this market will pan out?

Wi-Fi Skype phones will see strong sales — but they will be a drop in the pond compared to the annual volume of today’s mobile phones at 80 million units.  Wi-Fi phone volume for 2005 was probably under 50,000 units world-wide.  And an optimistic forecast for 2006 would put Skype and SIP Wi-Fi phones in the range of 200,000 units.  Even so, if I had a brother or sister in Europe, or a son or daughter at college, I’d probably buy a pair.

Technorati Tags: WiFi, Skype, Netgear, Linksys, VoWLAN, VoWiFi, VoIP, SIP

So far, this is what we know about Google’s plans for free Wi-Fi in San Francisco.  Apart from making network access free of charge, Google plans to:

1. Make it a playground for devices.  Attract as many users in the widest range of devices as possible.
2. Put it up and see how it’s used.  Gather data on what users search for from Knob Hill or how many X-boxers are gaming in Cole Valley.
3. Allow other Service Providers (SPs) to sell services over it.  But if they want to reach Google’s Wi-Fi users, SPs may need to pay. 
4. Provide location-based ads and maps.  Initial location tracking may be crude — within two city blocks — but must inevitably improve to provide mapping.

What’s this all about?

Extending the franchise to the physical world

If capturing intent on the Internet can make money, why not take it to the physical world?  Better yet, combining the physical world with the Internet will yield rich new data about the behavior of the masses.  If the vast majority of Google Wi-Fi users search for doughnuts when passing through Union Square in San Francisco, Google doesn’t need to explain why.  Data is data.  This is what people do when they are in that vicinity.  Once the data is firmly established, the value of the advertising space in that rough location goes up and up.  If Krispy Kreme wants an ad in that wireless zone, it will have to pay more.

Establishing Google as a peer

Google admits to building its own ISP in the article cited above.  This what a gigantic market cap will do to the brain — cause an attack of hubris that could create a major distraction for the company.  But I think it actually makes sense.  Even if Google only builds out the municipal Wi-Fi portion of the network and skips the construction of a nationwide backbone, the company will have built a network with inherent value to other ISPs.  The offer will be to peer with Google, establishing a balance of power between Google and other ISPs.  The real question will be this: Will Google offer more than connectivity to other ISPs?  Will Google offer a subset of its collected data, namely, where the users of the network are, and what they look for when they get there?

Cisco became a dark horse when it entered the metro wireless market with products derived from its acquisition of Airespace.  But this generation of Cisco’s metro products look like the Airespace enterprise Wi-Fi products in a new suit of clothes and won’t have much of an impact.  The next generation could be dangerous.

But two startups already have a strong lead, Tropos and BelAir, and are going nose-to-nose over their fair share.  Glenn Fleishman’s recent article on Tropos gave me a chuckle.  In his article, Tropos did its level best to undo the positive spin on Comcast Interactive Capital’s investment in BelAir and all that it implies.

By all accounts, Tropos has excellent early market capture with a low-cost product, a heavy-weight technology partner (Motorola), and good sales and marketing.  But Tropos must be feeling the heat from BelAir, because as William Shakespeare once wrote, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”  Why?

1. Cable plus metro wireless is a big market hammer.  With captive high-end broadband customers and established support models, metro wireless gets to ride in on the coattails of undeniably strong brands for broadband.  Cable deals should break this market open.  If BelAir lands Comcast and begins a major roll out in major US markets, downplaying the importance of cable won’t help Tropos.
2. Nobody’s mesh is perfect.  Wireless mesh products all need periodic back haul over the wire.  Convenience of deployment and network resilience are the best features of mesh, but in the end everyone’s wireless mesh is addicted to the wire.  Tropos’ argument that broadband is becoming symmetric or that cable infrastructures can’t handle the load of a mesh network is a credit to their marketing chutzpah.  But I can’t for the life of me figure out what Internet-based application has recently arrived to so radically alter that traffic pattern.  How much upstream traffic does it take to fetch a Google video?
3. Cisco’s purchase of Scientific Atlanta (SA) was a big blow.  Tropos needs a replacement partner for the cable market.  And both vendors need to establish major customer bases before Cisco delivers its next generation of metro mesh and begins pitching the “nobody ever got fired for buying Cisco” story to SA’s cable operators.

Having corporate investors on your board is always a crap shoot.  I admit it.  At a minimum, having the investment arm of Comcast on BelAir’s board is good marketing.  In practice, some corporate board seats bring in deals, others yield next to nothing.  The results are highly idiosyncratic, but perception is reality.

Some cable operators may see Comcast’s involvement as a competitive alliance and steer clear.  Others may read it as an endorsement of the coming wave of cable-plus-metro-wireless roll outs.  DSL/Telcos should see this as incentive to put the truck in gear.  Either way, the combination of broadband cable and wireless mesh will have an undeniable impact on the market adoption of metro/muni-wireless.

Technorati Tags: WiFi, Metro, Tropos, BelAir, Mesh, Motorola

Why little networks will have bigger impact

The big networks are done…bring on the weenie nets

The Internet equipment business is still growing at a healthy clip, but try thinking of a new product to build for big networks that isn’t already in the Cisco or the Juniper price book. Going forward, the little networks of the world — the weenie nets — are more interesting.

Wi-Fi was first

Today, the most popular weenie net on the planet is Wi-Fi. Millions buy Wi-Fi because it is:

• Really cheap. Wireless LAN (WLAN) products were expensive door stops before they were standardized by 802.11.  Now they are built for next to nothing in China, a place where a really good software engineer earns $15K a year.

• Just good enough. Wi-Fi can keep up with your cable or DSL connection and basic web content. What else do you want? At those prices, nothing for the moment. Yes, I know, you need Wi-Fi coverage that reaches to the end of your house, but most suppliers have that problem solved with a new generation of antennas and chips.

• Connected to something good. Without the Internet’s content, plus IM and gaming apps, nobody would have cared about Wi-Fi — enterprise, SMB, or consumer.

Dreams of Smaller, Smaller, More, More

Okay, Wi-Fi has a proven market dynamic and some of the attributes for little networks. What’s next? I can only report on the dreams of the technology community at the moment. Unfortunately, many of these dreams are not roiling, boiling markets yet. Even so, they currently include:

• Passive RFID dream. As a replacement for bar codes, Walmart and others take delivery of pallets of Coca-Cola and Kleenex with passive tags (current cost ~$.10) that answer back when hit with radio waves at the door of the loading dock. Analytics engines sit behind the scenes to manage inventory and location.

• Active RFID dream. Picture a 50-acre facility for shipping containers, each with an active radio tag chirping about the contents of the container, or a hospital that can locate its defibrillators because they have little radios stuck to them. Once again the analytics engines are the brains of the bunch.

• Sensor network dream. Tiny network nodes, or smart dust, are dropped out of an airplane onto a battlefield. The nodes wake up when they hear human voices and self-organize into a mesh network that transmits surveillance. The landlord of a high-rise saves $.50/sq ft/month by distributing 50 temperature sensors per floor without pulling any wires.

• Home net dream. Whole-house audio and video, dueling game cubes, lighting control. Fun toys you’d like to have but don’t want to pay a lot for.

Watch out: dreams can turn to religion

Like Wi-Fi, next-gen weenie nets had better be really cheap, just good enough, and connected to something good. Beyond those key attributes, inventors are currently enamored with the following beliefs:

• Arbitrary topologies. When you throw surveillance sensors out of an airplane, you can’t predict where they are going to land, so next gen weenie net inventors believe they should support arbitrary topologies.

• Self-organizing behavior. Next-gen weenie net inventors believe the nets should be able to manage themselves without any central authority if necessary. If a central authority shows up, then the nodes should salute the flag, but until then they should be able to live on their own.

• Small. In addition to being low cost, weenie net elements should be small relative to the environment. The Star Trek communicator went from flip phone to badge, right?

• Always on. If they aren’t alive, what good are they?

• No maintenance. No tinkering and tuning, please. Especially, if I’ve got thousands or millions out there.

Like I said, I put these last attributes squarely in the category of belief systems. In the coming weeks and months, I will be writing about whether these matter or not — and how they fit as these technologies develop.