Dean Bubley

2009 Will Be a Painful Year for Mobile Device Vendors

The amount of memory really isn't going to be the determinant of Apple's lower-end price point.

Bear in mind that the $200 iPhone price points only apply on long-term contracts (usually 2 years), that imply a large subsidy by the carrier.

The "real" price of the iPhone 3G is more like $350-500. Certainly, if you buy it on prepay, it's a $500+ device, and in some countries more like $800.

I certainly think that there's a reasonable opportunity for Apple to expand its market share, but of the overall global 1-billion phone market, it's probably chasing realistic addressable target of 5% or so for the foreseeable future, although 50m phones is a pretty tempting target.

A more interesting prospect is if Apple introduces a smaller "iPhone Nano", or better still a clamshell version, as there is a large part of the market that would never go near a large tablet-type device.

With WiMAX and 3G on Your PC, What Will Happen?

Thanks Stricklybiz

Fair point - although that's possibly because I spend most of my time looking at the mobile industry, for whom pretty much all the computers of interest are notebooks. Certainly I hear a lot of folk in the wireless business talking about PCs as a synonym for laptop or notebook.

Another case of the tech industry using the same words in different ways, in different contexts.... (you should see the range of possible uses of the word "application")

As it happens, it wouldn't surprise me to see more desktops getting used with mobile modules or external modems as well.

Dean

Just How Late Is Nokia with HSUPA devices?

I agree that it's not immediately obvious what the applications for UPA are - most of the ones I can think of are not necessarily operator-friendly: VoIP, filesharing, using the phone as a web server etc.

On the other hand, it could be used for *operator* VoIP or other rich communications, managed P2P, decent-quality realtime video uploads & as a means to compete with home DSL/cable in some places.

Some operators have been quite aggressive deploying UPA - especially T-Mobile in Europe, Vodafone, some of the 3 subsids, AT&T etc.

Either way, it's unusual for Nokia not to have at least *some* devices supporting it before its main competitors do. It's been first to market with radio technologies like UMTS900 before.

Handset OS Fragmentation is Here to Stay

Baba

Of course arbitrage is not a networking term. It's a general concept in business and commerce, whereby *users* or *customers* can play off differential pricing of what is essentially the same good or service.

It applies to handsets where there are multiple ways for the *user* to choose between to achieve a specific objective, be it making a phone call or downloading/sideloadin... an MP3 file. For a music download, realtime is (usually) not important, so the user can look at exploiting the differential pricing between an operator-mediated portal and transferring a file from a PC.

The *user* or the *user's software agent* is starting to call the shots, facilitated by ever-more powerful devices which when combined with IP networks & the Internet can decouple access from service.

Increasingly, real-time services are becoming less important than non real-time capabilities in terms of the perception of user value (and also payment). This is already true in the fixed line/Internet world, with the exception of voice. But to deliver scalable realtime voice it clearly is *not necessary* to have IMS. Existing circuit services, over-the-top VoIP, and standalone operator-managed SIP VoIP app servers work well enough already and scale.

In any case, we are already starting to see voice calls fragment between QoS-essential (999 / 911 calls, important B2B communications, medical etc) and QoS-optional calls (phoning a mate in Australia for an hour's chat). There's no point "wasting" QoS and network resources - consumers already know this, which is why they use Skype or SMS or VoIP callthrough instead of needlessly expensive cellphone calls.

Real time mobile video is near-irrelevant. There's no massmarket business model in mobile, and I haven't seen anything that even remotely demonstrates that this is likely to change. Video should be treated as an add-on, not a core design objective for mobile-centric NGNs.

Conversely, non-realtime applications - SMS, web access, email, music/content downloads, social networks, filesharing and so on - are becoming proportionately more valuable in mobile.

*Therefore* future network investments will start to become more *optimised* for non-realtime capabilities. Realtime will still be valuable, but over time it will become secondary. This in turn will drive network capex and handset architecture decisions.

Sure, we will probably always see some form of QoS-managed network for the stuff which absolutely, positively has to be realtime. But it won't drive the overall investment decisions & certainly not define the underlying architecture for the majority of traffic for which that would be over-engineered.

This is why various of the radio-access network evolutions are evolving to some form of split-access mechanism. The stuff that matters goes to the QoS-managed operator core. The stuff for which best-effort is good-enough gets piped straight out to the Internet.

And in many cases it will be the handset (& its software & above all the user) that defines any instance of communication in terms of whether or not QoS or realtime is important.

Dean

Handset OS Fragmentation is Here to Stay

Let me clarify - outside N America I don't see the iPhone being particularly important in shipment volume terms, especially compared with high-end Nokias, and especially given the lack of subsidies. The revenue-share model also means that I can't see it easily being sold to the 70% of customers who prefer prepay to monthly subscriptions. It's also too large for many people who live in countries in which it's socially unacceptable to use a hip holster for phones.

On the other hand, I agree that the iPhone has had a fair amount of impact in terms of the industry's expectations. And yes, it has certainly driven more browser usage on handsets than most earlier phones.

Let's see if v2 or v3 iPhones are more appealing to people beyond the current fashion/tech-driven group, though.

Baba - interestingly, I've had a lot of discussions recently about the possibility that in future, yes, handset capabilities will drive the network rather than vice versa. There is already more "intelligence" at the edge than in the core measured in raw compute power - 3bn devices x maybe 150MHz processors on average, moving to 500-1000MHz in high-end devices.

In this case, the tail wagging the dog is inevitable, thanks to Moore's Law, especially where the devices now have multiple ways of routing voice, data or content (cellular, WiFi, Bluetooth, USB, memory card etc) and can act as a hub for arbitrage and least-cost/best-perfor... routing.

Obviously, those markets with greater operator control over handset architecture & distribution will be able to retain more network-centric control, compared to those where the device & service provision are decoupled.

No, Web 2.0 won't "ride on top of IMS". In most cases, it is more likely to be the other way around. I'd expect to see an IMS Rich Communication client as a good FaceBook plug-in, for example.

Thanks

Dean