Andy Abramson pointed me to his post and another on the state of the video conferencing Industry this morning. What’s wrong with the Video Conferencing Industry? and his post “Taking Aim and Telling the Truth”. Fact is, I all but ignore the Video Conferencing Industry now. What I don’t do is ignore video and the impact it is having on people’s lives and communications. The Video Communications Industry was companies like Polycom and Cisco. They are looking a little like dinosaurs now. A few years ago we were also all talking telepresence. We can still wish for teleportation! These pioneering companies ended up with incredible expensive solutions that required rooms in different locations and more. Meanwhile I just kept Skyping my friends and colleagues. In that time it has become easier and easier to have a video call and Skype today makes a multiparty video conference pretty cheap. Video is more likely to be very distributed than 6 people in one office talking to 4 in another etc. Even the logistics of getting people there on time makes it a hassle.
Andy notes the impact of Tango and FaceTime. These are mobile solutions! If there is a power video user then I’d hold up Andy and his firm Comunicano as a good example. He notes multiple endpoints and knows the enterprise need. Yet I’d go further. The future of Video in all forms starts with the mobile device. Like the PC and Skype proved effective video conferencing mobile will drive the next generation solutions. The cost comparison I’d use versus Scott’s ruminations would be:
Three employees enter the room. 5 colleagues are in the field. All have iPhones (true now in an increasing number of companies). Our three colleagues sit at a table. You can now go with three or one phone for them… and the TV screen in the room which has some AirPlay+ features. It’s not going to be that hard to see screensharing, a presentation, the people in the room, etc and then all the colleagues in the field. Even in the field we will see projectors on phones closing the gap. The cost of this was some AirPlay device or it came preinstalled with the screen – the employees brought their gear and always have it with them. The big telecom companies can give up on big switch gear now. It really is in the software.
That’s perhaps part of Scott’s challenge in the future. Right now VidTel has a solution that works across the cloud and enables various different video services to connect. I’m not sure how optimized or HD that makes the interconnect. I suspect better quality exists on some one to one solutions. Still a key benefit of this solutions is the ease in which other enterprises can connect their video systems with each others and remote users. It’s not really for consumers. It gives everyone a little leverage of their video assets before they perhaps disappear or are really superseded by the mobile evolution. It may also make some users more happy in their companies as they can now use the device and hardware of their choice.
The biggest problems for mobile video are still social and a lack of bandwidth everywhere. If I’m a manager with a rep in the field and I want to see the example or help re talk them through a situation or make suggestions then video is just a natural extension. We see it in shopping, and I’ve been using it with research respondents. Video is going to save time and open up new conversations. The most important element of why the old models is dead is their static location. Mobile video may be more flawed; of a lower quality (although I’d hardly ever complain about that) that’s just part of it’s disruptive nature. The big benefit is… there is no setup cost. It potentially works at anytime and anywhere, in anyplace. iPhones and iPads make it particularly easy. I believe the majority of video conferencing minutes will soon be via mobile devices.
This type of discussion like many makes me wonder why our focus isn’t more on simplicity and simplification. As users carry more and more powerful devices in their pockets building or adding the same functionality to our environments (car, office, home) seems redundant. The office doesn’t need video conferencing. People do. The car doesn’t need a radio or music player – it does need great speakers. Does the car need a video? Perhaps not. It needs a dock for my phone and it can video everywhere I go and only save if I have an accident etc. Will that reduce my insurance cost? The revolution in video is now in mobile. From video social networks (socialcam), to recording apps and editing options. Even broadcast TV has been a mobile option for awhile.
Ask yourself. What mobile video conferencing system would you build today? And then ask, how you can make it functionally different? Video is just core basic functionality. I’d look to Camera+ for video and conferencing options perhaps. Video has a live feed component. Yet the point is… Create an API for usage like Camera+ and then video is integrated into other apps more quickly. Look at Viber or Tango. With an API on their app that functionality could be added to others. If you ever looked at Pair you will see the developers integrated FaceTime. That had zero cost to them. It’s more important how people use it and make it quickly available when required. Video today is just there. It’s not quite ubiquitous although it soon will be.
Here’s a PC/Mobile data set below to make you really think about the web world order. David’s not specific on the companies in his sample although knowing him it’s likely to be very accurate data point for the English speaking world. See his chart below, and his framing. What’s really important here is how a “mobile centric” / “iOS” view increasingly will frame how your company / organization is seen. Few businesses think mobile first. Fewer pivot on location signals. Few have worked through how to simplify and augment their services for mobile.
Mr Blog » Blog Archive » I’m calling BS on “Android Dominance” meme
Apple now owns 45% of the surfing experience, already surpassing Microsoft Windows at 38% – and it’s only getting worse for Windows, as iPad sales continue to steamroll PCs. This “Android Dominance” meme is utter fiction and wishful thinking. Windows Phone? Get real. Unless you’re fine playing in a niche space, if you’re building a product or service and it isn’t designed with mobile first, it’s time to re-think it – throw out your plans and start over. I’m dead serious. What’s more, if it doesn’t thrive in an Apple-dominated mobile ecosystem, it’s also time to go back to the drawing board.
See David’s post for more of his thoughts and a link to 2010 data. How things have changed! This data is an indicator. It matters not if it is exactly right, we know everything is moving in this direction and if you are not – let it be a wake up call.
Observations:
Are you surprised? I’m not really. The smartphone is having a dramatic impact on behavior. Mobile also makes exchanges with many sites easier not harder. Example signing in, or providing or getting directions etc. Mobile has the potential to reduce points of friction with customers and deliver a more pervasive experience.
Another theory is “time pass” and “check on that”. David doesn’t state his data from a POV of time on a site. That’s probably owned by Window’s still. What he states or counts is number of visits by device. For many of us… the number of visits to a site has gone up exponentially since the arrival of smartphones. Wait for a train… click. Get to the doctors… click… watching kids play soccer… click… etc. Mobile is expanding both the occasions and the situations in which organizations serve up data.
If there’s a third element in this… It is convenience. It’s just quicker to look it up on your iphone. No booting, no time to connect. Quick and easy responses. Perfect for a generation of people that never look much past the top 10 items in a google list. Often this means that the “visit” was more social in context. Eg looking for a movie, settling a discussion, finding a fact or making plans. Plus in many cases we’ll just go to an app for that…
“What’s your mobile strategy?” has been one of my big questions for a few years. It’s coming home to roost faster than expected. I’m fairly certain that exchanges with mobiles will drive more “human” interactions and expectations than the PC/Laptop ever did. Whether that is all better for humanity or for Apple we can discuss another day.
Thanks for sharing David!
My del.icio.us links and notes.
My del.icio.us links and notes.
I’ve been selling iPhones as each new generation comes along. In December I upgraded to an Apple unlocked iPhone 4S. So I had a spare iPhone 4 32GB to sell. I thought about taking it to India, as I’ve gotten good money on my old ones in the past. Yet in the end I decided to put it on Craigslist. Generally they were priced around $350 for one with box and all original accessories. I priced mine at $325 hoping to get rid of it quickly. Which I did.
Of note. All the calls I got were from people with friends overseas, or for someone not in the US. I stated in my Craigslist add that my iPhone was running iOS 5.01 with the latest modem firmware etc. To my knowledge you can jailbreak it today although unlocking is difficult to impossible. I tried, for the technically minded, I have SHSH blobs recorded and should have been able to revert to earlier iOS 4 software and then one of the unlocks. After a few hours of playing around – it just wasn’t worth it.
Some potential buyers know all the right questions. Some apparently didn’t. I don’t know what the plan was for the final buyer that collected my phone. It was sold AT&T locked without SIM. I got the impression it was going to the middle east. They didn’t ask me about what I know about jailbreaks or unlocks and after so many calls I stopped providing advice. My guess is they have someone that can do it and that’s the difference between someone that does a little messing around on the web hunting for solutions and someone who’s making a living out of repurposing these devices.
How do I see the economics. I bought three iPhone 4′s on the first day of it’s original release. It cost with subsidy about $250 each. I’ve run mine for 18 months approx. My contracts on all accounts clear at the end of February. I don’t really want to renew. I needed an unlocked phone for travel. I typically carry an Android – Samsung Galaxy S for that purpose. However, I always found I was just using it as a hotspot to keep on using the iPhone. So I may as well slip a sim in the iPhone. The new iPhone 4s wasn’t cheap. From Apple (the only real unlocked ones) it cost $811. So my outlay is now 811 – 325 or $486.
Now my guess is… when the next iPhone arrives I will get about the same value – around $500 for this “factory unlocked” phone. So other than my interest (nothing) and tie up of capital, I get the latest iPhone 4S experience for almost nothing, little risk and no additional carrier lock-in. We could look further forward. Then new iPhone 5? will require another out of pocket. $300 plus although that’s similar to what AT&T will charge me subsidized while locking me in for years.
Trading in and trading up has been common practice in many other countries around the world. In watching prices over the last few years in India traditionally Nokia phones provided this type of resale. Today I’m sure that is iPhone and one of the reasons is… even the 3GS is still being sold.
I’m pleased with the choice I made. I know this is a luxury item. I also wanted this upgrade more than an iPad2 or upgrading my 2008 15inch MacBook Pro. Those I can make do with. The 4S – it is the thing that is bringing new experiences and behaviors. That’s much more important to me.
On the other hand… I should really be getting a lower rate from AT&T on my plan as they are no longer providing a subsidy.
I’m sure I saw a comment or fact the other day on how mobile is impacting and changing the way we purchase services. I think the example was movies. The data point reminded me to write up why mobile will quickly (it is already for some users) become the dominant medium for interacting and buying services, booking restaurants, going to the movies, airlines, and why it is already changing shopping etc.
You may have remembered sitting in the kitchen a few years ago and talking about movies. Which one will we see? You then went off to the PC/Desktop to confirm what you had seen in the paper, the times and to try and secure a few seats. You may have been using Fandango or anther service. You’d print out the details after and be ready to go later. It took a few minutes and eliminated the risk of not getting a seat.
Now contrast it with the mobile experience. The mobile comes out and the conversation almost seamlessly moves to times and movies. There’s no need to move, find a PC or boot it up. Fandango is launched, it already knows your location, and provides details on all the theaters around. Various listings of movies appear. It is easy to share the “trailer” and collectively make a choice. This little act is an example of where the mobile creates a better conversation, saves time, and is more responsive – re environment, task at hand, and easy to use than the PC. Which means the mobile has an inbuilt conversion potential vs the PC that accelerates the adoption of online services. Add to that the pervasive nature of mobiles and their always on capability and we have a tsunami in the making.
This shift is effectively a one time deal. Assuming you once booked a movie on a PC, once you have booked one on your smartphone using an App like Fandango, you will probably never go back. As for breaking movies… unless you are a real buff it easier to find the trailers on the phone than on the PC when you don’t know what to search for. There are plenty of apps for that.
What’s my point?
- Mobile Apps are creating new conversational moments and exchanges that require or present opportunities for more responsive services.
- The PC is no longer the main delivery vehicle or mechanism for these services
- The “when I’m out” use case may now be the most important – spur of the moment.
- Easy to use, simplicity is in. Simplify! Simplify some more.
- Get a strategy for getting your APP on smart phones. Then keep it relevant.
- Occasional use is ok.
Really none of this is really new. The reason for making the point today is my perception that we have hit a tipping point, and the result will redefine many services over the next few years.
Andy Abramson pointed me to his post and another on the state of the video conferencing Industry this morning. What’s wrong with the Video Conferencing Industry? and his post “Taking Aim and Telling the Truth”. Fact is, I all but ignore the Video Conferencing Industry now. What I don’t do is ignore video and the impact it is having on people’s lives and communications. The Video Communications Industry was companies like Polycom and Cisco. They are looking a little like dinosaurs now. A few years ago we were also all talking telepresence. We can still wish for teleportation! These pioneering companies ended up with incredible expensive solutions that required rooms in different locations and more. Meanwhile I just kept Skyping my friends and colleagues. In that time it has become easier and easier to have a video call and Skype today makes a multiparty video conference pretty cheap. Video is more likely to be very distributed than 6 people in one office talking to 4 in another etc. Even the logistics of getting people there on time makes it a hassle.
