 | Issue: | Asia-Pacific II 2005 |
| Article no.: | 7 | |
| Topic: | Mobile warming | |
| Author: | Neville Street | |
| Title: | President and CEO | |
| Organisation: | Mobile 365 | |
| PDF size: | 92KB |
About author
Neville Street is the President and Chief Executive Office of Mobile 365. Before joining Mobile 365, Mr Street served as CEO of Macrobridge, a strategic consulting firm for international wireless services companies. Previously, Mr Street served as a Vice President at BT Wireless and mm02, the leading European mobile carrier, and as the CEO of OmniSky International, a News Corporation joint venture and an early leader in wireless data services in both the USA and Europe. Mr Street was also Vice President International at Palm Computing and 3Com, taking them to the number one market position in international markets. Mr Street earned an honours degree in Business from Sheffield Hallam University in the United Kingdom and is a member of the Institute of Directors.
Article abstract
Messaging systems are drivers of mobile growth throughout the world. MMS (Multi-media Messaging Services) are growing rapidly. They provide a wide range of innovative applications. Nevertheless, although users can send photos on their own network, they cannot always send them to subscribers of other networks. Interoperability between all operators is essential for MMS growth. Full-service MMS interoperation intermediaries connect an operator to all others, ‘translate’ the messages from one network for use on another and provide security and value-added services.
Full Article
Consider a new phrase that addresses the amazing growth in the wireless industry: mobile warming. This phrase accurately reflects the social and geopolitical shifts generated by the global expansion of mobile networks. When asked ‘what’s the next mobile killer app?’ I am tempted to give an easy answer: digital media centres, or the advent of MMS. But I point to today’s regional social practices as the real industry drivers. Users themselves are better at defining what is hot, hip or of interest than any would-be marketer. Ring tones, picture sharing and mobile dating all were once dismissed as frivolous or transitory. Instead of the next killer app, we should study the regions, and related social practices, most likely to ‘go mobile’. Markets such as Africa, China, India, Eastern Europe and Latin America still have a low combined mobile phone penetration of roughly 10 per cent. As penetration increases, social practices will drive which applications evolve. In developing countries, an application might be about creating a society with the desire to vote, an emerging democracy. Mobile subscribers use phones in three basic ways: √ To communicate with each other; √ To entertain themselves; √ To transact with businesses, employers, etc. The next hot apps among 4 billion users may include Bollywood film clips in India, sent via mobile. In Eastern Europe and China, mobile phones may become the political instrument of choice – true ‘mobile warming’. These are just educated guesses; time and the evolving mobile community will dictate true results. With that in mind, we prepare for this brave future, one where we envision mobile phone adoption by billions of new users, but the applications remain a mystery. MMS: the IP global proving ground As we prepare for the rollout to these new users throughout many expanding regions, we face a very practical test: the successful implementation of global MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service) interoperability. The successful preparation of global networks for MMS is a precursor to the exciting, unknown applications that will follow. So it makes sense that our ability to make MMS ‘work’ worldwide will set expectations for years to come. Because users found MMS easy to understand, especially in the form of picture messaging, a wave of phone upgrades reflected this enthusiasm. In reality, MMS interoperability remains a sizeable challenge. For three years, operators throughout the world have aggressively launched MMS, while others are still working to define their MMS offering. Today, virtually all major North American operators have launched some level of MMS. Users had high expectations for MMS, right from the start. They expected MMS to be fully interoperable from day one, regardless of operator. To date, this is simply not the case. For example, in North America users can snap pictures with a camera phone and send those photos to another user within the same wireless network, but not to handsets on other networks. Needless to say, this comes as a shock to many users – when they must consider which network a friend or family member might be using, just to ascertain the chance of a picture message ‘getting through’! The media has not been particularly kind to MMS, and many cite the lack of MMS interoperability as a prime concern. In a March 16 2004 article, Forbes magazine wrote: “By the end of 2004, consumers will have sent 3.8 billion multimedia messages, which are mostly photographs, according to research outfit IDC. That’s astounding considering that camera phones didn’t even hit the USA market in a meaningful way until 2003 (…) The volume of pictures sent wirelessly is expected to explode when interoperability becomes mass market (…) By 2007, (…) Americans are expected to exchange 39.5 billion of such messages.” Imagine paying several dollars to send MMS messages only to have them not reach their intended destination. Consumers will be far less tolerant of such an experience in light of the higher transaction cost, and given their new ability to port their wireless number to another operator, customer churn associated with a poor service experience such as this could increase. European operators have been wrestling with quality of service issues since MMS was first launched. There are still numerous instances of handset-to-handset interoperability issues within a given operator’s network – never mind cross-operator interoperability. One of the problems lies within handset penetration. In the GSM-world, there are so many MMS-capable handsets available, with new and exciting features, that it is sometimes difficult to identify and address all of the transcoding problems. When subscribers send messages or ask for MMS content, the result is often unsatisfactory. The key to creating viral, infectious, growth in MMS, just as has taken place with SMS, is to implement interoperability, not just between some operators, but also between all operators. Subscribers will embrace MMS in much the same manner they have SMS, and will then grow to ‘trust’ MMS as a medium, not only for P2P (Person-to-Person) messaging, but for content delivery as well. SMS and MMS messaging will ultimately converge, with a unified approach to messaging where handsets contain a single inbox, and no longer need to distinguish between SMS and MMS. While the underlying technology will still be either SMS or MMS, the handset will decide how to best render the message. Bearing in mind that MMS is IP-based, it is quite possible that many handsets will eventually send all messages via MMS. As such handsets become more prevalent, MMS interoperability will become as ubiquitous as SMS is today. Interoperability options Wireless operators have several choices for MMS interoperability: direct peer-to-peer, through a GRX (GPRS Roaming Exchange) provider or through a dedicated MMS-interoperation intermediary. Of these, a full-service MMS interoperation intermediary is the clear choice. The intermediary solution offers a number of value-adds that neither direct peer-to-peer nor GRX providers can provide, including routing messages via SMS to operators that are not directly connected, message retrieval and traffic analysis and visualization software. In the highly competitive landscape of the wireless industry, it is important for operators to be able to confidentially execute on their network operations. One of the hallmarks of an MMS interoperability intermediary service is the ability to keep confidential information just that confidential. For example, if one operator experiences network trouble, that fact is isolated from all other connected operators. Traffic affecting results and issues is mediated and isolated from other operators. With a connection to a specialized intermediary, operators can establish and work within their own schedules and support inter-operator MMS. Deployment and launch schedules are coordinated with a single source that is dedicated to ensuring their customers can quickly launch new subscriber services. Furthermore, since the intermediary is impartial, messages may be delivered as SMS notifications to other operators who are not yet connected to the MMS interoperability ecosystem. The recipients may retrieve the messages from a neutrally hosted web portal or WAP portal, without regard to operator. An intermediary normally charges a small fixed per-message charge or a sliding scale of charges, depending upon volume. Charges typically account for less than 5-10 per cent of retail pricing, thereby providing a cost-effective alternative to in-house solutions. Intermediaries also provide value-added services such as traffic monitoring, inter-network filtering and transcoding and 24x7x365 NOC coverage. Forbes magazine, in the March 16 2004 article titled ‘The next picture messaging boom’, writes “while operators could facilitate interoperability themselves, they’ll likely use middlemen to manage what can be a complicated process (…) when that routing must be done between wireless operators, which are why operators will probably outsource the process to clearinghouses that specialize in it (…) A clearinghouse will identify phone numbers outside an operator’s networks, ‘translate’ the picture messages between different kinds of wireless networks and handset picture formats, and settle billing issues (…)”. In the intermediary model, the intermediary acts as an independent representative for each operator. There are a number of distinct advantages to operators using an intermediary model to launch MMS interoperability services, including: √ Single source connection for operators to reach multiple destinations: each operator makes a single connection to the intermediary. Each operator connection may also be redundant. Messages from operator subscribers may reach many more destinations than otherwise possible; √ Isolation from competitors: the intermediary protects each operator’s confidential information, including state of the network, network elements, maintenance schedules, etc. The intermediary is fully accountable if there are network, or traffic-affecting problems; √ Flexible connectivity options: an intermediary should be able to offer a number of physical connectivity options to the operators, e.g. VPN (Virtual Private Networks) or Frame Relay, and provide these in a timely, efficient manner. Otherwise, operators would have to negotiate with each other and come to some agreement. The intermediary can conform to whatever standard each operator requires; √ An intermediary can support multiple types of number portability options: in a direct-connection scenario, there may be issues as to who is responsible for number portability. Using an intermediary, operators only need to determine if a message is destined for their network or some other network. A good intermediary will be able to provide the appropriate routing solution based on message destination using countrywide, IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity) based or ENUM (Electronic Number Mapping). Once A2P (Application-to-Person) MMS becomes more prevalent, the intermediary can easily support routing to value-added application providers via short codes; √ Common mediation for GSM and non-GSM networks: in a direct peer-to-peer relationship, all operators must conform to the ‘lowest common denominator’ for cross-operator messages. Not so with an intermediary. During the delivery process, the intermediary should be able to provide a level of filtering, or transcoding, prior to delivery to the destination network. This alleviates the need of each operator trying to support elements of every MMSC (Multimedia Messaging Service Centre) that it is connected to; √ Better security: intermediaries use a dedicated network for P2P and A2P MMS traffic. Consequently, the potential for any security violations or SPAM is greatly reduced. In fact, there are few, if any, advantages of a GRX network over one provided by the intermediary. And the intermediary model is simpler in terms of start-up costs and ongoing network management; √ Value-added services from the intermediary: an intermediary must be able to offer additional services above and beyond basic message routing. These services can include real-time traffic tracking and reporting, delivery to non-affiliated operators through SMS notifications, hosting retrieval Web portals as well as a 24x7x365 NOC for proactive handling of any issues that may arise. From MMS to the future The real beneficiaries of the intermediary model will be subscribers who will finally be able to fully utilize the features of today’s advanced phones and can send picture messaging, and much more, without regard to user and network interdependency. With higher-speed 3G networks, applications ‘heavier’ than text will flourish. So higher speed connections, redundant servers, secure firewalls, expanded geographic coverage and enhanced customer support is needed. This does not come cheap. No sociologist can predict where this brave new wave of mobile users, from Asia to Latin America, will hit, but in this era of mobile warming the industry must be prepared.
