Yesterday I had a call from ABP Tech, the US distributor for SNOM products. Their initial shipment of the new M3 Cordless SIP/DECT phones are about to be unpacked. They expect that I might have one in my hands some time in the next week!
Its many advantages not withstanding I was driven to use VOIP for other reasons. Understanding my motivation will perhaps help you to also understand why I’ve gone in some of the directions outlined elsewhere on this site.
I despise AT&T…
…and if at all possible I will never spend another dollar with them.
In the mid-1990s my wife had local phone service from SBC and long distance from AT&T. When we started dating AT&T was pursuing her over what they believed was a bad debt. The matter was eventually tracked to an internal accounting error. However, in their zeal to pursue her they badgered us for weeks with threatening phone calls. Their threats included variety of possible actions, some of which were in fact illegal. If only I had recorded those calls!
The common understanding is that VOIP benefits from network QoS. So by extension QoS over the internet backbone would be a good idea, right? Well, maybe…and maybe not. Here’s some interesting reading.
Why there’s no Internet QoS and likely never will be by Brough Turner
I live in Houston. It’s the fourth largest city in the USA. Further, I live “inside the loop” in the area that was the cities first suburb back in 1910 (ish.) Clearly, I don’t live in some out of the way place. Yet I am dismayed to find that my broadband options are about the same as they were about ten years ago. Just more expensive.
A couple of weeks ago someone posted a link to a some ZDNET VOIP resources to a mailing list that I read. The link (here) brings up a page called ZDNET News At The Whiteboard where there are posted some short videos explaining various topics.
The first video in the series is “The future of VoIP: CoIP” where COIP is their term for “communications over IP.” The speaker, someone from Yahoo, goes on to explain how text (meaning IM), voice and video are converging. More specifically he says that all of this is centered around the instant messaging client. Watch the clip, it’s not that long.
It’s also not that insightful. I mean, really, what is their point? How is this news? To put it into mathematical terms easily displayed on their whiteboard:
IM + Voice + Video > Voice….which is true.
Voice > IM
Voice > Video
I find it interesting that companies in the IM space presume that communications will naturally cluster around the IM client. This is not necessarily true. An IM client is not necessarily a productive or sensible approach. Consider people not at a PC. Consider even smart phones, like my Blackberry Pearl. I have a couple of IM capable clients loaded but I rarely use them. It’s just not convenient. Making a call is just more effective. IM is better than a long email thread back and forth on a topic, but even then email provides more permanent history.
I think that they also overvalue video as a component of the solution. People just don’t think that it’s worth the trouble. Skype has offered video for a long time. Many people I know, myself included, bought the hardware and tried it out…then just don’t bother most of the time. The Video Phone was introduced in the 1960s and has never really caught on in a big way.
Ultimately these people are underestimating the value of the voice portion of their solution. I would argue that phone calls are essentially universal…everybody makes them. IM and Video chat see dramatically less uptake amongst real users. Not that there aren’t numbers there, but in that little mix of channels voice is still the king by a wide margin.
Furthermore, Jeff Pulver has been talking about “IP Communications” for a long, long time. COIP seems just to be some marketing pitch for their IM-centric view of the world.
It also bears mentioning that all this convergence is happening in the realm of IP. But then, the whole world is migrating to IP networking so that’s not exactly news either.
I’m left asking what was their point? I don’t get it? Why all the excitement? Or better yet, who needs this explanation?
I expected better from ZDNET. Their IP Telephony blog by Russell Shaw is usually excellent.
Kerry Garrison of Fonality appeared on The Voip Users Conference Friday December 21 to address the recent fervor over the matter of Trixbox implementing a script to automatically send system details back to Fonality. Kerry did a good job in front of a tough crowd. As a company they have admitted their error and appear to be redirecting themselves to a more appropriate approach. “Mea culpa’s” are hard, but they appear to be doing the right thing in this case. You can listen to the MP3 recording of the call to get the details.
Presuming that the opt-in version of the program is launched there is no doubt that the information that they could gather from their user base could be very interesting. They will be able to tell what sort of phones are being deployed, what version of each app is being used, what sort of connectivity is deployed, etc. Very interesting stuff.
In particular Kerry was able to say that in 2007 around 40% of their users are leveraging VOIP providers for core services. And further, this is double the uptake from the previous year. That is, people are using IP-based DIDs and termination services instead of, or addition to, traditional TDM (T-1, E-1) or analog lines (FXOs.) So it appears that confidence in VOIP service providers is increasing.
This certainly echos my own experience. I have not had a traditional land line in over two years. I’ve used a number of ITSPs, some good and some not-so-good. But I also find that they are steadily improving. To a degree this flies in the face of the spectacular and much publicized collapse of Sun Rocket earlier this year, as well as a number of others.
The past few months there’s been an increasing amount of FUD circulating about VOIP service providers. Vonage, Sun Rocket et al have impacted public perception of the space. This information reveals that there is good news as well, it’s just not as well known.