Voice 2.0 Manifesto Reflections and Progress

Back on October 21, 2005 Alec Saunders pulled a post together (Voice 2.0: A Manifesto for the Future), that built on many of the VoIP innovations we were seeing at the time. More recently there have been presentations “VoIP is Dead” by Skype’s CEO and questions that lead one to ask whether the Voice2.0 manifesto is indeed dead? I’ve also been part of some discussions recently asking whether the iPhone factor and mobility have radically impacted on Voice2.0 concepts.

To recap. Voice 2.0 was described as the titanic clash between the internet and the telecommunications industry. Where ultimately voice will just become part of internet applications. The things mentioned then continue; including continued landline losses to VoIP and mobile solutions. The VoIP PSTN clones are still in trouble if they have not folded. Lots of money has been burned (Vonage) and value written down (Skype).

Alec outlined some key elements, some fiction, and some fact at the time. My purpose today is to contrast the then with Phweet now. It is not alone in taking VoIP forward; however for me, it is a useful update and simple positioning exercise.

1. Talk is the Foundation and Metering is Dying or Dead:
Skype took minute costs to zero and expanded the market for conversation. However by design and privacy settings Skype is not really open and much of its success traces to its PSTN interconnect revenue. It works best with a closed circle of buddies.

2. Three Billable Entities: Connectivity, Directory, and Applications
Alec wrote connectivity and directory will be low margin commodity businesses. Applications will be the value creators. The voice web is still very relevant to applications. It suggested that we want applications that can enable and escalate to new voice connections with both, more context and improved background data. Concurrently, most web applications will be built on top of sharing rules that are already understood by you and me.

• What we’ve seen is users route to lowest cost. Where users can route around tariff barriers they will, although they also trade-up for quality and convenience.
• I’d take issue with directories as being low margin. Directories were worthless as long as they are controlled by the telecoms. Richer directories have now clearly emerged amongst the social networking services. They provide complex identity layers and controls over how data is shared. However, these directory services (Facebook, LinkedIn, Bebo remain evolutionary from a business model perspective.) Their current biggest issue is lack of an effective method to escalate to voice without exiting the system or creating a value added session component.
• Web apps were seen as creating a market bigger than the web itself. This is still likely in my view when the apps work for you and me.

3. Signaling and Control Components
“Presence, to determine availability; directory, to determine addressing and routing;  and XML web services for call control, and integration with computing assets.  These are the true value creation components in
the architecture.” Alec then laid out Presence, Directories, Web Services and Value Networks. I’ll provide my take on these today.

Presence:
Available, busy, or away are not going to work in a presence-centered world. In 2006 I worked on a context-aware telephony project. I’ve also written papers on a “Sense of Presence” which today is more meaningful when I look at Twitter streams which are contextual in the aggregate, and we are coming to understand how to use them more effectively. What we have learned is voice mail is a failure case. What’s also been impossible is broadcasting who you are talking to and even what that is about. More importantly unless you use IM or SMS it is impossible to set up an integrated voice call request today.

Phweet addresses all of these issues. It enables contextual updates and talk requests which may be managed by the recipient based on their context and choices at the time. This shift in behavior is likely to increase the number of calls people make. Presence was always more important when mobile. Mobile is much more personal and more intrusive. Privacy and interruptions are growing issues. Telephones weren’t originally built or designed to address presence.

Phweet doesn’t make calls – it creates an exchange where two parties may escalate to a call without further exchange of channel information. It requires “context” to set it up.  Tell X why you want to talk!. It then attaches a directory listing and creates a URL that can be augmented with other data that will add to the richness of the exchange. In the future this may be customized by the individual or organization to context and much more complex rules and filters which suggest the additional opportunity for apps.

Directories
Alec was clear that in a 2.0 world we own our directory listings and thus our identity. We will want to manage it. The directory is the enabler for value-added conversations. In fact when we can bring directories or individual listings together for the call we augment the session with real-time sharing of additional information. I first saw this in the simplest way with Skype. You got a picture when the phone rang! Then you began sharing links over IM. But nowhere (I know of) is it done where the dating site combines two profiles and presents “options” that you may both like or information that you have each bookmarked today etc. and translates this to mobile. That’s because directories have been static and thus they have little real value after the initial and periodic networking flurries. After a while you have your listing of your friends etc. However, for the great majority these directorise and their data don’t play a role in everyday life.

Phweet currently uses a Twitter profile however there is no reason you cannot craft your directory listing from a myriad sources. I can see a future where you reveal yourself in layers or filter the connection for a “sharing contract”.  This is important where location based services are involved. Directories have a huge role to play, increasingly they are solving our identity layer problem. In the end I’m not going to rely on just one service and they too will relate to my context. What I believe I’ll want is much more seemless controls over what I’m sharing based on relationships.

XML based Services:
A world of API’s and mashups will emerge. “In the voice 2.0 world any application, within the bounds of permissions set by the subscriber, can access presence; initiate, accept, and redirect calls; and query directories”

Phweet does much of this already. It started as a mashup and we have plans to expand our API. Managers of large-scale directories are yet to see the real opportunity. Basically the more your directory service is used to augment real-time conversations and create new sharing space or add value the more valuable your directory. If you already know that calls are happening off and around your directory then you are missing an opportunity. Without a PhweetURL to create an exchange point there is no way to merge disparate profiles or to begin creating Alec’s next stage of new Value Networks.

User Centric World View:
YES YES YES! Then many of us have screamed and plotted this element for years. What Alec said then and we we are working to  address with Phweet is providing users with control over communication in a world where communications are more complex and yet the delivery must remain as simple as the old number system.

Alec wrote. All of the technical underpinnings I’ve described so far exist today. One element still missing is a common, standardized, presentation layer.  Standards exist for this layer — VoiceXML, SIP, SALT etc all read on presentation.  However, at this point there is no ubiquitous equivalent of the HTML browser.  The closest yet are Skype (completely proprietary) and Gizmo Project (well below ubiquity, but very complete standards implementation).  It’s most likely that one of the VoIM players, (Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, AOL) will drive this.

Phweet shows a way forward with its solution. We have a common and simple approach. Phweet turns every exchange into a relationship contract with a URL. That URL need not be a PhweetURL after the session signal is delivered and operating. Importantly it reverses something that we’ve not thought about overturning much until now. The user can only be in control when the receiver is in control. That can still be seamless and immediate, however it means that the “setup” of the exchange and who controls it will be the defining factor.

WHY Phweet is Voice 2.0:
Phweet provides the bridge between directory services and communications channels. A world of names with a world of numbers. It does this without owning any channels rather by merely defining the exchange controlled by the users as a URL.

By changing the signaling method we have enabled the shift to user centric communications without clumsy privacy controls or adding to personal exposure to interruptions and breaches of privacy. This is only the beginning.

Tagged as: directories, facebook, phweet, SIP, skype, voice2.0, VoIP