Am busy on project work and writing articles this week, but the following two weeks I'll be at conferences, so ours paths just might cross.
Next week is PTC 2007 - Pacific Telecom Council. It's my first time there, and am quite looking forward to it, least of which being in Hawaii in January. What's not to like?
The week following, I'll be at TMC's ITExpo, and like last year, it will be in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Again, what's not to like for being there in January?
I'll be moderating panels at both shows, and I've posted a list of the sessions I'm doing on my website.
Feel free to drop me a line if you want to connect at either event.
Technorati tags: Pacific Telecom Council, Jon Arnold, TMC ITExpo
Tuesday, January 9, 2007
Monday, January 8, 2007
Andy on "Instant Journalism" During CES
I wanted to share a thought-provoking piece by uber blogger Andy Abramson as he prepares for the show-of-shows, CES. If there ever was a showcase for new technology, this is it.
Well, Andy is talking about a different type of new. Having been in the communications business over 30 years, Andy has seen a lot of evolution, and his post is a great read on how the new media tools like blogging and video messaging are changing the dynamics of journalism in a big way.
I have no doubt that he and many others will do a great job proving the value of these tools at CES, and hopefully this will elevate new media a little closer to the standards of traditional media, which conventional media types hold as sancrosanct. There's certainly room for both, and all new media wants is some respect. Let's see how the week unfolds.
Andy's post has a nice stream of commentary from readers, which really adds to the mix. There have also been supportive posts today from Jeff Pulver and Alec Saunders.
I'd just like to comment on something Alec said in his post - that for him, newspapers are an afterthought, as he gets his morning news primarily online. Fair enough - I'm still old school about reading the paper, and I rely equally on print and online sources. There's room and merit for both, and it's not an either-or thing for me. Online sources are far superior in some ways, for sure, but for me, a lot of things in the newspaper don't have a 3 hour life, and I just can't read anything that's longer than a page or two online. I'll stop there - this topic has a lot of legs, but not now....
Seems the whole world is at CES, but not me. However, I will get a taste of the show second-hand, and so will you. Jim Harris is a colleague of mine here in Toronto, and he's at the show. He's an interesting author - more on him later. Anyhow, he'll be my podcast guest next week, and he'll give me his recap of the show then.
Technorati tags: Andy Abramson, Jon Arnold, CES
Well, Andy is talking about a different type of new. Having been in the communications business over 30 years, Andy has seen a lot of evolution, and his post is a great read on how the new media tools like blogging and video messaging are changing the dynamics of journalism in a big way.
I have no doubt that he and many others will do a great job proving the value of these tools at CES, and hopefully this will elevate new media a little closer to the standards of traditional media, which conventional media types hold as sancrosanct. There's certainly room for both, and all new media wants is some respect. Let's see how the week unfolds.
Andy's post has a nice stream of commentary from readers, which really adds to the mix. There have also been supportive posts today from Jeff Pulver and Alec Saunders.
I'd just like to comment on something Alec said in his post - that for him, newspapers are an afterthought, as he gets his morning news primarily online. Fair enough - I'm still old school about reading the paper, and I rely equally on print and online sources. There's room and merit for both, and it's not an either-or thing for me. Online sources are far superior in some ways, for sure, but for me, a lot of things in the newspaper don't have a 3 hour life, and I just can't read anything that's longer than a page or two online. I'll stop there - this topic has a lot of legs, but not now....
Seems the whole world is at CES, but not me. However, I will get a taste of the show second-hand, and so will you. Jim Harris is a colleague of mine here in Toronto, and he's at the show. He's an interesting author - more on him later. Anyhow, he'll be my podcast guest next week, and he'll give me his recap of the show then.
Technorati tags: Andy Abramson, Jon Arnold, CES
HP and Tandberg - "Federated" Videoconferencing
I've been out the blogging groove a bit, and wanted to draw attention to a brief post on Friday from Andy Abramson (and others) about some news from HP and Tandberg. The news was actually announced last Wednesday, but hat tip to Andy for spotting it.
Basically, the two companies have agreed to make their videoconferencing solutions interoperable. I've been posting about this space a bit lately, and these companies have - for the time being - been left in the wake of Cisco's TelePresence launch, which I've also been following.
I just wanted to say I think this could be a smart move, as Tandberg has the installed customer base, and HP has the super-duper high end Halo system. Tandberg has a complete product family for all levels of videoconferencing needs, but they do not have something as high end as HP or Cisco. With a $425,000 price tag, Halo has a pretty limited market, so there could be a good strategic fit here.
Of course it remains to be seen if and how this could be a win/win. By exposing Halo to Tandberg's huge customer base, HP gets a great demo opportunity, which could lead to more Halo sales, possibly at Tandberg's expense. On the other hand, Tandberg gets to extend the Halo experience to its customers without having to invest to build it themselves.
I'm sure they'll figure this out - these are pretty smart companies, and no doubt they're all watching closely to see how the new kid on the block, Cisco does with TelePresence. What I find interesting here is that Tandberg and HP are doing a form of video federating or peering, much like what carriers are starting to do now with VoIP. This, to me, is very much in the spirit of IP, and supporting open systems and standards. They see the benefit of strength in numbers, and I think they're right.
Cisco, on the other hand, is taking more of a Voice 1.0 approach, with a proprietary, self-created system. You have to have Cisco infrastructure to deploy TelePresence, and it's a stark contrast to what HP and Tandberg are doing. It's too early to tell whether one or both of these models will work, but you have to give credit to these twp companies just for trying to figure out how to work together.
That begs the question about the other big player in this space - Polycom, who has a high end solution of their own. I can't see them throwing their hat in with Tandberg - that's just too competitive. And don't see Cisco opening up their tent to them either - they're trying to conquer this market themselves right now.
Thoughts?
Technorati tags: Tandberg, Jon Arnold, Hewlett Packard, Videoconferencing
Basically, the two companies have agreed to make their videoconferencing solutions interoperable. I've been posting about this space a bit lately, and these companies have - for the time being - been left in the wake of Cisco's TelePresence launch, which I've also been following.
I just wanted to say I think this could be a smart move, as Tandberg has the installed customer base, and HP has the super-duper high end Halo system. Tandberg has a complete product family for all levels of videoconferencing needs, but they do not have something as high end as HP or Cisco. With a $425,000 price tag, Halo has a pretty limited market, so there could be a good strategic fit here.
Of course it remains to be seen if and how this could be a win/win. By exposing Halo to Tandberg's huge customer base, HP gets a great demo opportunity, which could lead to more Halo sales, possibly at Tandberg's expense. On the other hand, Tandberg gets to extend the Halo experience to its customers without having to invest to build it themselves.
I'm sure they'll figure this out - these are pretty smart companies, and no doubt they're all watching closely to see how the new kid on the block, Cisco does with TelePresence. What I find interesting here is that Tandberg and HP are doing a form of video federating or peering, much like what carriers are starting to do now with VoIP. This, to me, is very much in the spirit of IP, and supporting open systems and standards. They see the benefit of strength in numbers, and I think they're right.
Cisco, on the other hand, is taking more of a Voice 1.0 approach, with a proprietary, self-created system. You have to have Cisco infrastructure to deploy TelePresence, and it's a stark contrast to what HP and Tandberg are doing. It's too early to tell whether one or both of these models will work, but you have to give credit to these twp companies just for trying to figure out how to work together.
That begs the question about the other big player in this space - Polycom, who has a high end solution of their own. I can't see them throwing their hat in with Tandberg - that's just too competitive. And don't see Cisco opening up their tent to them either - they're trying to conquer this market themselves right now.
Thoughts?
Technorati tags: Tandberg, Jon Arnold, Hewlett Packard, Videoconferencing
Friday, January 5, 2007
Skype Journal is Back Online
Just a short note to say that Skype Journal is back online this week, and it's nice to see that a number of bloggers have picked up on this already. SJ mainstay Jim Courtney had the honors of putting up the first post, and fills us in on the changes.
I'm just half-working this week, so I'm not quite up on the news. However, having posted about SJ's absence recently, I feel compelled to close the loop.
Briefly, the new site has a different look and feel. The text is bigger and bolder, with a bright white background, so it's easy to read.
The logo/header - that's another story. It's really quite bland, and hopefully it's a work in progress. The tagline - "Independent News, Views and Service" - what does that mean? For those of us familiar with SJ, we probably don't give it any thought. But if not, I'd say it doesn't make much of an impression. At minimum, I'd have the Skype logo up there, guys. Most people recognize that right away, but a plain sans serif "Skype Journal" header doesn't really grab your attention.
SJ is a labor of love, but the contributors are also open for business and do consulting. You'd never know it from visiting the blog - but maybe they want to keep it that way. I guess that's the "Service" part of the tagline, but wearing my Marketing hat, I'd say most people won't make that connection.
On that note, the site right now is just content and search categories. There's no "About Us" or "Contact Us" info, or even a blogroll, so it's not very engaging beyond reading the posts. Again, maybe this is in the works, or maybe it's not. I hope it is!
Finally, I don't know much about how blog pages are formatted, but who came up with these layout templates? There is SO much wasted real estate here. Basically, only 2/3 of the vertical space is available for the content, which is what really matters. Why devote the other 1/3 to the LONG list of categories that readers can search on? This seems so wasteful, especially since the content within this column only scrolls down the page a little bit. After that, it's just empty space, and from that point on, you have to keep reading all the good stuff that's squished into the left side of the page, while everything on the right is a sea of white. Is it just me? There's gotta be a better way to do this.
All told, it's great to see SJ back, especially with all the management changes going on recently. Hopefully, you'll take my comments in good spirits. SJ is a very important voice in the blogosphere, and to me, the updated website sells SJ a bit short, and could stand to be more engaging.
Technorati tags: Skype Journal, Jon Arnold, Jim Courtney
I'm just half-working this week, so I'm not quite up on the news. However, having posted about SJ's absence recently, I feel compelled to close the loop.
Briefly, the new site has a different look and feel. The text is bigger and bolder, with a bright white background, so it's easy to read.
The logo/header - that's another story. It's really quite bland, and hopefully it's a work in progress. The tagline - "Independent News, Views and Service" - what does that mean? For those of us familiar with SJ, we probably don't give it any thought. But if not, I'd say it doesn't make much of an impression. At minimum, I'd have the Skype logo up there, guys. Most people recognize that right away, but a plain sans serif "Skype Journal" header doesn't really grab your attention.
SJ is a labor of love, but the contributors are also open for business and do consulting. You'd never know it from visiting the blog - but maybe they want to keep it that way. I guess that's the "Service" part of the tagline, but wearing my Marketing hat, I'd say most people won't make that connection.
On that note, the site right now is just content and search categories. There's no "About Us" or "Contact Us" info, or even a blogroll, so it's not very engaging beyond reading the posts. Again, maybe this is in the works, or maybe it's not. I hope it is!
Finally, I don't know much about how blog pages are formatted, but who came up with these layout templates? There is SO much wasted real estate here. Basically, only 2/3 of the vertical space is available for the content, which is what really matters. Why devote the other 1/3 to the LONG list of categories that readers can search on? This seems so wasteful, especially since the content within this column only scrolls down the page a little bit. After that, it's just empty space, and from that point on, you have to keep reading all the good stuff that's squished into the left side of the page, while everything on the right is a sea of white. Is it just me? There's gotta be a better way to do this.
All told, it's great to see SJ back, especially with all the management changes going on recently. Hopefully, you'll take my comments in good spirits. SJ is a very important voice in the blogosphere, and to me, the updated website sells SJ a bit short, and could stand to be more engaging.
Technorati tags: Skype Journal, Jon Arnold, Jim Courtney
Thursday, January 4, 2007
Podcast Updates - From Both Sides of the Mike
Just a quick note about 2 posts about podcasts � one about one of my recent pods, and one about a podcast where I was the guest for a change.
First, during Cisco�s C-Scape Analyst Conference, I was interviewed by Blair Pleasant of COMMFusion. She and I are both contributors to Jim Burton�s Unified Communications Strategies portal. The topic was current trends in UC, so if that�s of interest, you might find this a good listen. It runs about 18 minutes, and you can access it from the UCS portal. If you�re not a member, it just takes a minute to register, and it�s free.
Second, just before the Xmas break, my most recent podcast was with fellow blogger Dan York, who is a great go-to guy for VoIP security. Dan was nice enough to do his own posting about it to the VOIPSA blog page, called Voice of VOIPSA. Thanks Dan � what goes around�
Technorati tags: Podcasts, Jon Arnold, Unified Communications, VoIP Security
First, during Cisco�s C-Scape Analyst Conference, I was interviewed by Blair Pleasant of COMMFusion. She and I are both contributors to Jim Burton�s Unified Communications Strategies portal. The topic was current trends in UC, so if that�s of interest, you might find this a good listen. It runs about 18 minutes, and you can access it from the UCS portal. If you�re not a member, it just takes a minute to register, and it�s free.
Second, just before the Xmas break, my most recent podcast was with fellow blogger Dan York, who is a great go-to guy for VoIP security. Dan was nice enough to do his own posting about it to the VOIPSA blog page, called Voice of VOIPSA. Thanks Dan � what goes around�
Technorati tags: Podcasts, Jon Arnold, Unified Communications, VoIP Security
Canadian VoIP Adoption Data - Trending Up, But...
This morning's Globe & Mail "Click Counter" poll was about VoIP. They publish a regular series of these polls, drawn from an online sample of Globe readers. This poll was based on 454 readers, so it's a pretty decent indicator of general market sentiment.
While the overall data is favorable towards VoIP, the wording of the question really bothers me, and is another typical example of how the mainstream media doesn't quite get it with VoIP. More on that in a sec - first, here are the numbers...
Question - "Do you use/have you used VoIP services like Skype to make calls?"
Absolutely, VoIP rocks - 54%
No, traditional telecom all the way - 38%
What the heck is VoIP? - 7%
So.... at face value, the news is good - just over half the sample use VoIP - whoo hoo, whoo hoo hoo....
On the other hand, almost 4 in 10 prefer to stay with PSTN, thank you very much. Not a big surprise there, and we all know that VoIP has a long way to go before taking over the world.
And finally - only 7% don't know what VoIP is. No doubt that's well below what most general population polls would show. Even though I'm living in a VoIP world, I'd have a hard time believing that 93% know about it overall. I think that just speaks to the fact the Globe & Mail demographic is pretty upscale, and that it's an online poll. So, I think we're a bit removed from the true Main Street audience here.
Enough on the numbers - I think you get the idea. Now for some well intentioned critical thinking....
First off, I've been a marketing research practitioner for over 20 years, so I instinctively feel a need to put some qualifiers in here.
The biggest thing about statistics, of course, is that you can get any result you want, so long as you word the questions a certain way. I know this is just a simple reader poll, so it's not fair to get too worked about things. However, you first need to keep in mind that the question asks about "using" VoIP services. It doesn't ask whether it's at home or at work, or whether it's on a landline or the PC, or whether it's a paid or free service. And that's where I have to put in my two cents.
I've often commented about how problematic I find it when the media lumps Skype and Vonage together when talking about VoIP, as if they were equivalent services. Sure, they're both VoIP, but as I've said over and over, Skype is a complement to subscriber-based services like Vonage - and not a replacement.
Sure, SkypeOut is now a paid service - I just signed up myself - but even Skype makes it clear on their website that this is not a landline replacement service.
So, WHY, WHY, WHY does the question in this poll use Skype as the example for a VoIP service? I'll bet virtually all the respondents to this poll who have used Skype have only used the free service - and with the question being asked in such a leading manner, people are probably going to be thinking about Skype when answering this question. So, is it any surprise that so many people said "Absolutely, VoIP rocks". Well, I think that really means "Skype rocks" - after all, what's not to like about a free VoIP service? Furthermore, you know that virtually everybody using Skype in this poll is either making free Skype-to-Skype calls, or only making SkypeOut calls for PSTN connectivity. Canadian area codes are not available for SkypeIn service - it's a 911 issue - so I highly doubt many of these readers are receiving PSTN calls on Skype. Enough said.
Well, in my mind, that's a very different type of VoIP from what the pureplays like Vonage, Primus Canada, etc. are doing with their subscriber-based services. These truly are landline replacement services, and I don't think this poll is being very fair to them in the way the question is worded. On that note, I'm having a real hard time determining what people's frame of reference is when thinking about their answers. Is it in comparison to Skype, or a replacement service? In my mind, the answers would not necessarily be the same - maybe yes, maybe no.
Argggh. Don't get me wrong - I'm a big fan of both Skype and the likes of Vonage and Primus - I just have a problem when the question uses Skype as the example for VoIP. Is it just me?
And finally, I just wanted to comment on the wording of the options for answering the question. Again, the market researcher in me can't leave it alone. Even though the question is worded to elicit a simple Yes/No response, with these choices, you either love VoIP or love your carrier. To me, it's a bit of leap to say one or the other if your experience with VoIP has just been making free calls on Skype. Again, it's a case of mixing apples and oranges, and I think at the end we're just getting fruit punch.
Technorati tags: Skype, Jon Arnold, VOIP
While the overall data is favorable towards VoIP, the wording of the question really bothers me, and is another typical example of how the mainstream media doesn't quite get it with VoIP. More on that in a sec - first, here are the numbers...
Question - "Do you use/have you used VoIP services like Skype to make calls?"
Absolutely, VoIP rocks - 54%
No, traditional telecom all the way - 38%
What the heck is VoIP? - 7%
So.... at face value, the news is good - just over half the sample use VoIP - whoo hoo, whoo hoo hoo....
On the other hand, almost 4 in 10 prefer to stay with PSTN, thank you very much. Not a big surprise there, and we all know that VoIP has a long way to go before taking over the world.
And finally - only 7% don't know what VoIP is. No doubt that's well below what most general population polls would show. Even though I'm living in a VoIP world, I'd have a hard time believing that 93% know about it overall. I think that just speaks to the fact the Globe & Mail demographic is pretty upscale, and that it's an online poll. So, I think we're a bit removed from the true Main Street audience here.
Enough on the numbers - I think you get the idea. Now for some well intentioned critical thinking....
First off, I've been a marketing research practitioner for over 20 years, so I instinctively feel a need to put some qualifiers in here.
The biggest thing about statistics, of course, is that you can get any result you want, so long as you word the questions a certain way. I know this is just a simple reader poll, so it's not fair to get too worked about things. However, you first need to keep in mind that the question asks about "using" VoIP services. It doesn't ask whether it's at home or at work, or whether it's on a landline or the PC, or whether it's a paid or free service. And that's where I have to put in my two cents.
I've often commented about how problematic I find it when the media lumps Skype and Vonage together when talking about VoIP, as if they were equivalent services. Sure, they're both VoIP, but as I've said over and over, Skype is a complement to subscriber-based services like Vonage - and not a replacement.
Sure, SkypeOut is now a paid service - I just signed up myself - but even Skype makes it clear on their website that this is not a landline replacement service.
So, WHY, WHY, WHY does the question in this poll use Skype as the example for a VoIP service? I'll bet virtually all the respondents to this poll who have used Skype have only used the free service - and with the question being asked in such a leading manner, people are probably going to be thinking about Skype when answering this question. So, is it any surprise that so many people said "Absolutely, VoIP rocks". Well, I think that really means "Skype rocks" - after all, what's not to like about a free VoIP service? Furthermore, you know that virtually everybody using Skype in this poll is either making free Skype-to-Skype calls, or only making SkypeOut calls for PSTN connectivity. Canadian area codes are not available for SkypeIn service - it's a 911 issue - so I highly doubt many of these readers are receiving PSTN calls on Skype. Enough said.
Well, in my mind, that's a very different type of VoIP from what the pureplays like Vonage, Primus Canada, etc. are doing with their subscriber-based services. These truly are landline replacement services, and I don't think this poll is being very fair to them in the way the question is worded. On that note, I'm having a real hard time determining what people's frame of reference is when thinking about their answers. Is it in comparison to Skype, or a replacement service? In my mind, the answers would not necessarily be the same - maybe yes, maybe no.
Argggh. Don't get me wrong - I'm a big fan of both Skype and the likes of Vonage and Primus - I just have a problem when the question uses Skype as the example for VoIP. Is it just me?
And finally, I just wanted to comment on the wording of the options for answering the question. Again, the market researcher in me can't leave it alone. Even though the question is worded to elicit a simple Yes/No response, with these choices, you either love VoIP or love your carrier. To me, it's a bit of leap to say one or the other if your experience with VoIP has just been making free calls on Skype. Again, it's a case of mixing apples and oranges, and I think at the end we're just getting fruit punch.
Technorati tags: Skype, Jon Arnold, VOIP
Wednesday, January 3, 2007
2007 is Here - Back to Work - Almost
This is my first post of 2007, and I haven't blogged since December 22. That's a few years in blog time, but I'm not that kinda guy. I do try to post daily, but as mentioned on my last post, I'm more or less off duty until January 8, when everyone goes back to school. Am just half-working this week, and when I took a look at my blog page today - for the first time since Dec. 22, I realized I should get something up there.
Being the beginning of a new month and a new year, the opening page of my blog is a total blank white space, since I haven't done any posting yet in 2007. Never thought about that before - in terms of how that would look - and it sure looks weird. So - I haven't fallen off the earth - I'll be back running hard next week, but felt I should get some signals out there that I'm still here!
When I say I'm off duty, I mean it, so I'm really out of the loop with what's gone on in the past week or so - so apologies if I've missed commenting on any big stories. I know there are loads of people out there who just don't stop blogging, but I'm not one of them. So, if you're still with me, thanks for bearing with me.
I just wanted to comment quickly on two things since my last post.
1. On Dec. 21, I picked up on a post by Mark Goldberg about how Skype isn't always the cheapest way to make a phone call. I thought that was an interesting - and valid observation - and BusinessWeek seemed to think so too. Olga Kharif added her take there on The Tech Beat column, which was really nice to see.
2. Without doing a lot of digging, I noticed that a number of my posts have been getting picked up and cited by other bloggers. I know this happens all the time to all of us - as it should - but it seems to be happening more than usual, which I think is a sign of how broadly blogs are proliferating. Also interesting that many of these bloggers and blogs are not familiar to me, and from places I don't know all that well. Anyone else noticing this lately?
If you're interested, examples are here, here, here, here, and here.
Oh - did I mention? There's another Jon Arnold out there writing about this stuff. Interesting, huh?
Technorati tags: Skype, Jon Arnold
Being the beginning of a new month and a new year, the opening page of my blog is a total blank white space, since I haven't done any posting yet in 2007. Never thought about that before - in terms of how that would look - and it sure looks weird. So - I haven't fallen off the earth - I'll be back running hard next week, but felt I should get some signals out there that I'm still here!
When I say I'm off duty, I mean it, so I'm really out of the loop with what's gone on in the past week or so - so apologies if I've missed commenting on any big stories. I know there are loads of people out there who just don't stop blogging, but I'm not one of them. So, if you're still with me, thanks for bearing with me.
I just wanted to comment quickly on two things since my last post.
1. On Dec. 21, I picked up on a post by Mark Goldberg about how Skype isn't always the cheapest way to make a phone call. I thought that was an interesting - and valid observation - and BusinessWeek seemed to think so too. Olga Kharif added her take there on The Tech Beat column, which was really nice to see.
2. Without doing a lot of digging, I noticed that a number of my posts have been getting picked up and cited by other bloggers. I know this happens all the time to all of us - as it should - but it seems to be happening more than usual, which I think is a sign of how broadly blogs are proliferating. Also interesting that many of these bloggers and blogs are not familiar to me, and from places I don't know all that well. Anyone else noticing this lately?
If you're interested, examples are here, here, here, here, and here.
Oh - did I mention? There's another Jon Arnold out there writing about this stuff. Interesting, huh?
Technorati tags: Skype, Jon Arnold
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
RSS Feed
