Archive for April 5th, 2007

Aikido, Retreat or War. What’s your Microsoft strategy?

One of the more interesting trajectories to watch in the communications space over the last decade has been the growth of the Microsoft ecosystem. Literally a decade long strategy, it was conceived at the time that I ran the Windows CE planning group in the late 1990’s, when the first Microsoft smart phones were being designed.  From the beginning, the core strategy was to tie the phone to the Microsoft Office and BackOffice product lines – Outlook, Exchange, and to a lesser degree the core productivity applications like Word and Excel.

Fast forwarding to today the biggest growth area in Microsoft’s Office Systems Division is, unsurprisingly, communications. That strategy, coined a decade ago, lives on. Live Communications Server, the newly announced Office Communications Server, Office Communicator, and the total integration of these technologies with the Office 2007 suite suggest a world where communications and productivity applications are inextricably entwined. 

With the delivery of these products, we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the transition of communications systems from yesterday’s PBX and desk phone solutions, to complete software solutions.  Pioneers in the market, using systems such as the Open Source PBX Asterisk, have long been proponents of this vision, but the entry of a market dominant player like Microsoft, with its deep pockets and channels, will drive the adoption of software solutions at a much faster rate than any grass roots movement can.

Even so, Microsoft is careful to position their solution as an adjunct to existing phone systems, rather than a replacement.  Adjunct yes, but it’s really only required by those who wish a staged transition.  The software stands alone, a fact that was driven home to me earlier this week when I chatted with Microsoft Unified Communications program manager Kyle Marsh.  Kyle told me that some months ago all of his PBX phones had been removed from his office, and he was relying solely on software communications solutions  –  Office Communications Server and Office Communicator.  The Unified Communications Team blog describes how this done, stating:

"The admin can use the same approach to move groups of internal users to OCS for pilots and departmental deployments. After the move, OCS will take care of all the voice features for the user, including basic calls, advanced call controls, anywhere access, and voice mail. The desk phone won’t ring any more."

"Fundamentally, the specification is all about letting customers keep their existing systems as they migrate to a fully-software based communications platform over the long term."

Three years ago, upon first seeing Live Communications Server and the RTC platform, I called back to friends in Ottawa and told them that I thought Mitel and Nortel’s PBX business would be in trouble.  They scoffed.  Microsoft would never get voice right, they said. My friends failed to internalize the fact, articulated in the Voice 2.0 Manifesto, that voice is just a big application. Intellectually they understood this fact, but software isn’t in their genes – not the way it is at Microsoft.  You can get a glimpse of Microsoft's genetics from this excerpt on the UC Team blog, announcing the Communicator 2007 beta:

And of course VoIP, VoIP, VoIP: With this release Communicator is a full featured soft phone allowing you to finally get rid of that plastic device called a telephone you were forced to have. Not only does Communicator have all the functionality you need – including Hold, Transfer and Conference – it also has features you haven’t seen in the telephony world – like adding a subject line to a phone call or marking the call as important.

The economics of software are powerful, far beyond legacy hardware businesses.  Testifying to that fact, last year both Nortel and Mitel announced partnerships with Microsoft, integrating their PBX and handset businesses with Microsoft’s communications business.  A time will come when their hardware businesses will be reduced to mere rumps of what they are today, supplying plastic phones to fogies who can’t get used to headsets, and attaching those phones to server based communications systems… likely built by Microsoft, or perhaps IBM or Cisco.  Their futures are as applications suppliers and ecosystem partners in somebody else’s channel.  How far the mighty have fallen.

Omnivorous as ever, Microsoft has also extended its reach into embedded platforms.  The Windows Mobile and Smartphone platforms have continued to grow at a rapid rate, leveraging the .NET APIs from the Windows desktop to gather developers, and adding capabilities like push email to the Exchange server.  Naturally that puts pressure on RIM, the market leading wireless email company.  In fact, in third quarter of last year Gartner group said that Microsoft’s unit shipments surpassed RIM for the first time in North America.  Their strategy is textbook Microsoft – engage developers with an army of evangelists to write programs for their platform, work with hardware vendors to deliver the end user product, and let the ecosystem do the heavy lifting. Can RIM transform themselves into a software company, and weather this onslaught, or will they go the way of the PBX manufacturers? It’s unclear, but one tremendous asset RIM and no other vendor has is the RIM network operations center, which acts as a central clearinghouse for all wireless email on RIM devices. And what of Nokia, the dominant wireless handset player the rest of the world over? How will they fare in a world where backend service businesses are dominated by others?

Microsoft’s recently announced Response Point embedded PBX for small and medium business is following a nearly identical strategy. Early pioneers in this market, like Epygi, have watched as first Linksys, then Digium, and now Microsoft are entering this space with offerings focused on small business. Prior to Microsoft, the only OEM strategy for building an embedded PBX was Digium. Microsoft’s focus on enabling a hardware channel – putting D-Link, Quanta and Uniden into direct competition with Digium for the OEM dollars, and enabling an ecosystem to compete against Linksys and smaller players like Epygi – is bound to pressure the market from every direction.

In each case, enterprise, smartphone and embedded, Microsoft is commoditizing the underlying platform. By building shared media, signalling and API infrastructures in these environments, they can achieve economies of scale and attract developers and OEM partners at a rate which others will be hard pressed to match. It’s going to force the players already in these spaces to re-examine their strategies, inevitably causing consolidation.

So how do you avoid becoming roadkill in this environment? Where are the opportunities?  There are three strategies that make sense:

  1. Aikido – using Microsoft’s momentum to launch complementary businesses.  For instance, when I asked Microsoft evangelist Kyle Marsh about the federation model for Live Communication Server, he acknowledged that a more efficient strategy would be to have businesses federate against a global communications clearing house, and revealed that they know of several companies who might want to build such an asset.   Even so, businesses built around the strategy of carrier interoperability with Microsoft will have to carefully ensure that they aren’t also reduced to lowest common denominator bit pipes. One way to guard against this is to take the “Geneva” option, integrating broadly with assets from Microsoft and others.
  2. Retreat to safety, by building vertical market applications that integrate with the enterprise communications server.  Historically, Microsoft has done a great job of delivering a common platform, but have been ineffective at delivering market-specific solutions. 
  3. War. There’s always room for a second and third player in any market.  Expect to see consolidation in the market as other players scramble to accumulate the breadth of assets that will be necessary to compete with this juggernaut.  And, expect to see some business fail and the field of play narrow as time goes on. 

iotum’s strategy is an aikido strategy – positioning ourselves in the gap created by Microsoft’s momentum. From the beginning we’ve pursued the Geneva option, integrating broadly with products from a variety of vendors. For example, today we integrate with BlackBerry handsets, but shortly we will deliver a web based client, and later this year additional handset implementations for platforms like Windows Mobile, Symbian and Linux, leaving the door open for partnerships with the likes of Microsoft, Nokia, Ericsson, Sony and others.

iotum’s New Presence vision and the iotum Relevance Engine fit very neatly into this space. The evolution of iotum’s business is to be the central, global presence platform for converged networks. The iotum Relevance Engine is a hosted platform for New Presence applications in mobile, web, or enterprise environments. When coupled with applications like iotum Talk-Now, it’s also a hosted presence server for individuals and small businesses. Moreover, over time the Relevance Engine will become, through interoperability with enterprise presence servers from Microsoft, Cisco and others, a clearinghouse for enterprise presence which will allow enterprises to extend presence information beyond the walls of their organizations so that (for example) sales reps and their customers can know the others presence.

You may be wondering about the position that the portal players – AOL, MSN, Google and others – occupy in this world. They’re doing a great job on consumer presence, but are less useful in our always-on always-available business lives. As Jim Courtney pointed out in his February 2007 interruptions manifesto :

Bottom line: I want to be able to participate in the conversations essential to my lifestyle and my business operations - when, where and how I choose.

Microsoft’s plan is a 10 to 15 year view of the market, which is only starting to be visible today.  Taken in totality, it’s a plan to dominate every aspect of enterprise communications, with the exception, perhaps, of the carrier network. In their ideal scenario, Microsoft technologies would be embedded in that network as well, although Microsoft won’t itself be the network operator. It’s exciting, and perhaps a little uncomfortable, for some.  It’s important enough to Microsoft that one of their key generals,  Office President Jeff Raikes, has taken on the role of leading that team directly himself.

If you’re in the communications space today, what’s your strategy for this new world? Aikido, retreat or war? It pays to know.

2007-04-05 4:24 pm | 9 Comments »

Tags:

The Talk-Now feedback loop

When we first shipped the iotum Talk-Now technology preview in January, one of our goals was to solicit feedback from users on how to improve the experience.  Howard and I decided that the best way to do that, for a small company, was essentially "build to suit". We encouraged people to try our software, give us their feedback, and we would try to build in the requests.  That's how additions (to name just one) like the Notify area in Talk-Now were created.

The feedback takes many forms. For instance, after reading Synnex CEO Jim Estill's excellent personal blog Time Leadership I sent him a Talk-Now invitation also. I figured there was a good chance that he might be a BlackBerry user, since he sits on RIM's board of directors.  In addition, because he writes about the challenges of time management, there seemed to be a good fit with Jim's areas of interest.   In email, he suggested a feature that would allow Talk-Now users to share their availability with others who aren't Talk-Now users and to allow the other person to temporarily subscribe to a notification.  Great idea!

Local industrial designer Mitch Brisebois has seen many demos of Talk-Now, and provided his feedback in a review on his blog, finishing with a wish list.  He says:

As for the mobile user experience - I have a wish list! Being a J2ME app - the designers have a lot of flexibility in the GUI. There’s not as many constraints as you’d find in a Windows Mobile environment for example. So… spice up that UI! The only major problem with Talk-Now’s design is the sole use of color as a coding mechanism. Color alone is not very salient for users - and it breaks any compliance to accessibility rules (ADA 508 etc…) It’s an easy problem to fix!

Little did he know that we'd invite him around the office to share his views in more depth… we have a lunch date next week.

If you're a BlackBerry user and haven't tried Talk-Now yet, give it shot. Just point your browser to http://www.iotum.com/blackberry, and sign up. If you're not a BlackBerry user, stay tuned to this space. Shortly we will have a solution which will extend Talk-Now beyond the BlackBerry handset.

Most of all, thank you to all those who have previously downloaded the software and provided feedback.  We couldn't have built this without your support.

| No Comments »

Tags: , ,

Three worthwhile pieces on “Presence”

The value of presence is one of those topics that gets lots of debate.  Three recent examples that I'd like to draw your attention to include:

  • Gary Kim's Why "Presence" is Coming, which appears in IP business.  Gary runs through a dollars and sense analysis of why presence technologies are valuable to business, including providing data about who uses mobile devices in an organization.  He quotes Cap Gemini's John Parkinson talking about their study of mobile usage patterns, and paints a clear picture of what presence technologies could mean. 
  • In The Absense of Mobile Presence is Really Useful Matt Lambert notes that allowing people to deduce the fact that he is mobile from the away indicator on his desktop presence has already resulted in fewer, but more valuable mobile conversations for him.  He argues that presence tools, especially mobile presence tools, need to convey that information. 
  • Ken Camp in turn argues the case for richer presence, in his piece The Personality of Presence.  He notes that many different variables drive our decision making processes, more information is better, and heuristics will drive these decision making processes in the future. 

They all point to a future of rich and intelligent presence tools — the "New Presence".  They all argue, indirectly, for a common presence cloud as well.  Else how could you extend enterprise presence to mobile devices, or non-employees like customers and suppliers?

| No Comments »

Tags: , , , , , ,

VoIP isn’t a business category anymore

How much of a problem are the patent and competition issues surrounding VoIP?  Red Herring says that they're a big deal.  If Vonage was struggling against cable before, then this latest patent loss to Verizon is surely one more nail in the coffin. Meanwhile, enticing bundles from the cable operators continue to gain ground. And what of all the other players in the sector - SunRocket, Packet8, JoiPhone, and VelocityTel to name a few?

Perhaps the real issue is simply this.  VoIP isn't the reinvention of the telephone which we all foresaw five years ago.  At least, not the VoIP peddled by the likes of Vonage.  It's ordinary telephone service… delivered on IP. While popular, it has failed to deliver the revolution industry types envisioned. "Innovations" like web-based dashboards are long in the tooth, and the truly revolutionary applications which could have been delivered have never seen the light of day.

It's time to stop talking about VoIP as a business category, or an industry.  Companies using VoIP to deliver service to customers are really just one more instance of a competitive service provider, albeit with different tarrifing and competition rules.  Viewed from that vantage point, it's no wonder that this "industry" is struggling. 

| 2 Comments »

Tags: