Google Voice Comes Out of Beta

by Mielle Sullivan, Janus Networks

Recently, Google took its unified voice service, Google Voice, out of Beta and into invite. The service is likely be available to anyone in the US in a few weeks. Google Voice allows you to have one number ring on multiple devices, so you can have one number, at home, at work and on the go for life. The convenience Google Voice offers users has some analysts believing Google Voice could relegate mobile service providers to the much feared “dumb pipes.”

Google voice works by giving you a number that becomes your new “universal” number. When someone calls your universal number, the call will be routed to your pre-selected devices. If you move or change mobile carriers, just change your Google Voice settings and the number will follow you. Likewise, when you want to make a call, you use the local Google Voice access number which then routes your call through the Google cloud to its end receiver. An app will make this process seamless on most smartphones.

Beyond a universal number, Google Voice has a myriad of other impressive features : You can set calls from specific numbers to ring on certain devices or go straight to voicemail; you can have a number ring on one device at one time of day and another at a different time of or day; your voicemails can be automatically transcribed and sent to you via email and text; you can personalize greetings and ringtones to individual callers; you can store and send your text messages online; you can call anywhere in the US for free, record calls, make conference calls….the list goes on. And more is in development. What’s most impressive? It is all free.

As per usual with Google, the service will be ad supported. The company has filed patent on a software that serves ads based on location to callers when they are on hold or before the receiver picks up a call.

Will Google Voice soon turn mobile carriers to be “dumb pipes”? In my view, the “dumb pipes” term is more hyperbolic than descriptive of the challenges mobile service providers face. Phone companies will always want to charge for as many services as they can. While customers, increasingly, want to use their cell phones as just another Internet portal. But that doesn’t mean that every time innovation creates a better way for users to better manage their mobile communications, that mobile providers lose their value. There will always be tension to do more on phones for less, that’s just economics. Phone companies will just have to continually re-bundle their data packages to keep up with innovation.

You can contact the author at press@janusnetworks.com

Visit our blog: http://janusnetworks.wordpress.com/

Follow us on twitter: JanusNetworks

The Rhetoric of Behavioral Targeting

by Mielle Sullivan, Janus Networks

In March, I wrote a piece about Google’s behavioral ad targeting and possible legislative action in the works to insure customers understood Google’s (and other advertiser’s) privacy policy. There is still not a bill on the table, but congressional hearings were held in mid-June and Rick Boucher (D-Va.) has been vocal about his plans to draft a bill. Although, Boucher insists: “My overall purpose is not to interfere with the legitimate practice of people who are doing targeted advertising. My goal is to try to create a greater sense of confidence on the part of consumers.”

The definition of what exactlyA qualifies as behavioral targeting varies across the industry. Some companies that claim to offer behavioral targeting, really only offer vague demographic information. Also it is unclear if retargeting (ads based on a users visit to an advertisers site) is considered behavioral targeting by legislators.

Opponents to regulation of behavioral targeting argue that it could “cripple” the online advertising business. I think this is a bit hyperbolic. It might be true if retargeting is outlawed, which is unlikely because it requires the collection of only one piece of information. True behavioral targeting requires following a user across several sites, and represents a relatively small but growing percentage of ads. Advertisers selling high price-point items like cars or travel packages use behavioral targeting the most. For the majority of advertisers, it is still unclear if behavioral targeting is worth the premium. Perhaps as the technology improves, it will become more of an advertising mainstay.

Having said that, the the cost of online advertising inventory was plummeting before the crash, and with cutbacks in ad budgets, even a small change in the industry could impact a lot of businesses. The businesses most scared of this legislation are ad networks. Google has its own ad network, as does Yahoo. They sell billions of dollars worth of “remnant” publisher ad space. Ad networks, rather than the advertisers or publisers, do the actual behavioral targeting in most campaigns. Limiting behavioral targeting would definitely cause them to rethink the way they do business.

However there is another, quiet trend in the industry that may one day replace ad networks as they are now. Advertisers and agencies know that ad networks function as a middleman between them and publishers and they would like to have more direct access to remnant inventory. Ad exchanges give advertisers direct access to impression by impression inventory for purchase through auction. Right now, ad exchanges are still an emerging platform, but if they gain popularity, they would decrease the relevancy of ad networks. That doesn’t mean behavioral targeting would go away, but it may become less attractive to advertisers if they can target remnant impressions more precisely.

In conclusion, congress and the FTC continue to debate regulation of behavioral targeting while the online advertising industry attempts to standardize a definition and develop practices to polices itself. Though true behavioral targeting currently represents a relatively small percentage of impressions, regulating would adversely effect some advertisers, agencies and especially ad networks. However, behavioral targeting is only one set of innovations emerging in online advertising and other technologies may make it less desirable.

You can contact the author at press@janusnetworks.com

Visit our blog: http://janusnetworks.wordpress.com/

follow us on twitter: JanusNetworks

Long Term Challenges Ahead for Broadband Technologies

by Mielle Sullivan, Janus Networks

As consumer demand for broadband Internet has grown exponentially, a few different technologies have risen up to meet the need. Each of these technologies has their own unique set of advantages and challenges. Consequently, there is no all-encompassing solution for the future of broadband.

Let’s examine each of the current technologies:

VDSL2–Very High Speed Digital Subscriber Line 2. The newest and most advanced standard of DSL broadband over-the-wire communications. This standard supports wide-scale “Triple Play” services such as voice, video, data, high definition television (HDTV) and interactive gaming. It uses existing copper phone wires to make the connection. The supporters of this technology are AT&T with its U-verse offering and Qwest.

Advantages: Because it uses existing copper telephone wires as the back bone of the infrastructure, there less to build out than the other technologies.

Challenges: In terms of reliability, VDSL2 is sometimes more haphazard than to DOCSYS and FiOS, in part because it relies on older infrastructure. Also, VDSL2 speeds degrade over long distances.

In order to make the system faster, AT&T has created a hybrid of fiber optics and copper wires for it’s U-verse offering. The company uses a fiber optic cable connection to a city, then copper wires within a city. However, this hybrid system relies on huge cabinet-like hubs to be installed underground in each city. AT&T has had to battle officials over taxes in many cities for permition to install these hubs. Stalled negotiations have limited deployment.

FiOS–Fiber optic communications network and technology designed for bundled communication services including Internet telephone and television. Fiber optics are the newest technology and infrastructure, offering the highest potential speeds with the least amount of loss.

Challenges: When FiOS enters any new territory, the entire infrastructure needs to be built out from scratch.

Verizon is the only company currently building out its own all fiber optic network (FiOS). In more densely populated areas, the company must install cables under often-decaying city structures and negotiate with apartment building owners individually, making implementation very slow in old cities.

DOCSIS 3–the latest in Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification. DOCSIS is a standard that allows high speed data transfer over existing cable television system.

Advantages: DOCSIS uses existing cable infrastructure, so there is not nearly as much to build out as FiOS. This system also has less speed loss over distance than VDSL2.

Disadvantages: Ultimately, DOCSIS is inferior to FiOS for speed potential. Currently, FiOS does not need to operate near capacity to be competitive. As the market demands higher speeds, DOCSIS may not compete with FiOS. Also, despite having much of the existing infrastructure, there are still growing pains associated with this DOCSIS. Providers like Comcast and Cox have been unable to keep up with demand, slowing installations and causing services outages in some areas.

The challenges in implementing these technologies are likely to continue for years. Ironically, densely populated old cities and very remote sparsely populate areas simialr cost to benefit challenge for installation. The future is likely to be patchwork of all three technologies depending on different installation challenges in each area. Cities may need to depend on VDSL and DOCSIS for several years, while newer suburban developments in some states will have FiOS. Very remote areas may rely on broadband built out to a local tower which would then connect to users wirelessly Eventually, Verizon may be able build out FiOS in most areas and ultimately it may be the clear winner if very high speed becomes the deciding factor in consumer choice. But price is also a consideration and the market may never widely demand speeds that only FiOS can provide. Within several years, it is even possible mobile broadband advancements could make it a competitor to all of these over-the-wire technologies, causing further disruption to the marketplace.

Google Apps Goes for Businesses

by Mielle Sullivan, Janus Networks

One of the bigger stories in the computer tech world for the last several weeks has been Google’s promotion of Google Apps as a business solution. Google Apps (Gmail, Google Docs etc.) have been available to the public, both for free and as a premium level service, since 2007. But this is the first time Google has actively advertised its Apps for business. While most of the press has viewed this campaign as an assault on Microsoft’s home base, Google sees their Apps as something of a complimentary collaboration tool and not necessarily a direct competitor to Microsoft Office.

For the uninitiated, Google Apps are web based, cloud-computing programs that are accessible through any browser. A group can collaborate on a document, a spreadsheet, a power point presentation etc. all through a link. This cuts down on version multiplicity problem that often occur during collaboration. Also, by hosting everything in the cloud and making them as easily accessible as any web page, Google Apps provides a certain permanence, eliminates compatibility headaches and the need for endless software updates.

When I spoke to Andrew Kovacs, Manager of Communications for Google Apps, he saw the Google Apps products as part of a larger trend toward greater worker collaboration facilitated by the web. “A few years ago the emphasis was on individual productivity” said Kovacs. “One person would sit at their cubicle and create something, which they would then send to their boss or team. Now we are seeing much more of a focus on group productivity and collaboration and it is because programs like Google Apps make it easier to collaborate.” When I asked what he thought about Microsoft’s competitive product, Office Live, which is currently in Beta, he said: “When a software giant like Microsoft offers a cloud based solution, we see that as validation to what we have been saying…that the future of computing is in the cloud. We think it is good. We think it will only bring more people online.”

So, what are the downsides to Google Apps? Even though, for many businesses, there are cost and labor time benefits to hosting all their documents and email in the Google cloud, there is some loss of control. Not having your server in-house, but instead controlled by Google means not having direct control or access. For some, that requires a leap of faith. Also the kind of granular email message recovery that IT professionals are used to having on their own servers, comes at an additional cost from Google. Message Discovery, as the product is called, is $25/user/yr for one year of retention, or $45/user/yr for up to 10 years of retention. Meaning if you want to store one year’s worth of data for 8 years, it’s $45. Google believes that for many businesses there is still a significant savings compared to in-house server maintenance costs.

Google also admits, that for some work, Google Apps is not competitive with Microsoft Office programs. Word allows for more formatting than Google Docs. Excel offers more functionality than a Google Docs spreadsheet for complex tasks and number crunching. Google sees its Apps as an easy to use program that will satisfy the basic office document needs of most businesses, but admits more elaborate projects are better served by Microsoft. “We see Microsoft Office as being similar to Photoshop. It’s a great product that has a lot of functionality. Most offices have at least one copy of Photoshop, and we think all offices will always have at least one copy of Microsoft Office.”