Hi, I'm looking into adding SMS services to L3 and VZN numbers, and want to run my own message center and sip/smtp/whatever gateways, and hook into the cloud with a provider like syniverse. Tips, traps, tricks, and war stories welcome. Thanks, David
If you find someone other than syniverse let me know, their minimums were too high for me to really get involved with it since I don't have a specific way to make money off of it in mind... -Paul David Hiers wrote:
Hi, I'm looking into adding SMS services to L3 and VZN numbers, and want to run my own message center and sip/smtp/whatever gateways, and hook into the cloud with a provider like syniverse.
Tips, traps, tricks, and war stories welcome.
Thanks,
David _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Paul, Syniverse is malleable to changing the minimums or giving you a ramp period. We are a large company and can boast a potential boatload of business, but they are VERY keen to do deals....the minimum is negotiable if you can see your way clear to throw enough business toward them. -----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Paul Timmins Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 11:48 AM To: David Hiers Cc: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] SMS apps, providers, and peers If you find someone other than syniverse let me know, their minimums were too high for me to really get involved with it since I don't have a specific way to make money off of it in mind... -Paul David Hiers wrote:
Hi, I'm looking into adding SMS services to L3 and VZN numbers, and want to run my own message center and sip/smtp/whatever gateways, and hook into the cloud with a provider like syniverse.
Tips, traps, tricks, and war stories welcome.
Thanks,
David _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system.
On 12/7/09 9:30 AM, Sorensen, Marty wrote:
Paul,
Syniverse is malleable to changing the minimums or giving you a ramp period. We are a large company and can boast a potential boatload of business, but they are VERY keen to do deals....the minimum is negotiable if you can see your way clear to throw enough business toward them.
What *is* their minimum (at least the stated one)? We're in the same position...small ITSP, so many of these services either don't want to talk to us or the startup/commit is too high. -- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003 Advanced phone services simplified
We did the deal immediately before the completion of the Versign sale to Syniverse....most I can say is that the min is $5k per month at the start. Unfortunately Im under non-disclosure as to where we negotiated the min. Syniverse may be more flexible...they may also be able to refer you to other "sub-aggrigators" that might be a better fit. Marty -----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Alvarez Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 9:16 AM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] SMS apps, providers, and peers On 12/7/09 9:30 AM, Sorensen, Marty wrote:
Paul,
Syniverse is malleable to changing the minimums or giving you a ramp period. We are a large company and can boast a potential boatload of business, but they are VERY keen to do deals....the minimum is negotiable if you can see your way clear to throw enough business toward them.
What *is* their minimum (at least the stated one)? We're in the same position...small ITSP, so many of these services either don't want to talk to us or the startup/commit is too high. -- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003 Advanced phone services simplified _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system.
I am also interested in doing something like this also.. Can anyone namedrop any of these aggrigators? Marty, can you give us a ball park about how much it is per text and does Synniverse provide short codes? Thanks, -- Jarrod Lash, <jarrod at fed-com.com> Federated Communications, LLC. www.fed-com.com Office: +1-412-357-2127 Mobile: +1-412-999-0049 Fax: +1-412-545-8368 On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Sorensen, Marty <Marty_Sorensen at adp.com>wrote:
We did the deal immediately before the completion of the Versign sale to Syniverse....most I can say is that the min is $5k per month at the start. Unfortunately Im under non-disclosure as to where we negotiated the min.
Syniverse may be more flexible...they may also be able to refer you to other "sub-aggrigators" that might be a better fit.
Marty
-----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Alvarez Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 9:16 AM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] SMS apps, providers, and peers
On 12/7/09 9:30 AM, Sorensen, Marty wrote:
Paul,
Syniverse is malleable to changing the minimums or giving you a ramp period. We are a large company and can boast a potential boatload of business, but they are VERY keen to do deals....the minimum is negotiable if you can see your way clear to throw enough business toward them.
What *is* their minimum (at least the stated one)? We're in the same position...small ITSP, so many of these services either don't want to talk to us or the startup/commit is too high.
-- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003
Advanced phone services simplified _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Perhaps my suggestion will be dismissed as flippant, but why would anyone bother, at this point, to make serious investments in SMS-related services and technology, including contracts, high commitments, administrative overhead, API development, etc? It is a technologically primitive but pervasive (for the moment) profit center for the mobile carriers because it incurs virtually no marginal cost for them; SMS messages are carried as padding in control frames exchanged among network elements (as well as towers to handsets) that are sent anyway. It is, however, blatantly obvious that unlimited data plans provide an unmetered alternative that is not nearly as lucrative for the carriers. What's saving SMS right now is its ubiquity on non-"smartphone" handsets and deliberate stalling action arising from the collusion of handset vendors with operators to make SMS alternatives that run over 3G/EDGE/GPRS/etc., when available, less convenient and straightforward to use on the phones' interfaces from a user experience perspective. Of course, the aggregators/clearinghouses have a stake in it too. SMS is widely used and nearly universal, but like anything else founded on the sort of inherent tension I just described, its days are numbered. I would encourage forward-thinking voice companies to help assist in its demise rather than spin their wheels and perpetuate it. You'll be that much the poorer. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Alex Balashov wrote:
[W]hy would anyone bother, at this point, to make serious investments in SMS-related services[?]
SMS is widely used and nearly universal, but like anything else founded on the sort of inherent tension I just described, its days are numbered. I would encourage forward-thinking voice companies to help assist in its demise rather than spin their wheels and perpetuate it. You'll be that much the poorer.
Because while it probably will be swallowed by something else someday, it's here now, and there is a demand for it. So many services, at least in the US, allow for easy access to services via short codes. It's a ubiquitous service that if you know the DID is a mobile number (or SMS-enabled virtual phone number), you can send an SMS and you can be confident that your message was likely displayed on the end-users phone (or email, or something). You don't need to have AIM installed, or know their handle, or use some third party service. You know the phone number? You can send a text message. I'm surprised you see this as a bad time to put money into SMS-related services. 1.9 to 2 million tweets per day [1][2] -- lots of money and development going there. 4.1 billion SMS messages sent per day in the US alone [4] (3.5 billion per day in 2008 [5]). If you don't see a revenue opportunity there, then Alex, we need to have a beer. :-) There are 6.4 billion minutes of use on the wireless side of things alone made every day in the US [6], and we're all over that, even with slim margins (I couldn't find a source for total number of minutes of use per day in the US across landline and mobile). 4.1 billion SMS messages is more that the number of phone calls. It'd be nuts NOT to invest in that, especially if you are already investing in VoIP/Telephony. Sure, it may disappear eventually, but right now it's a pretty huge deal. Make your money while it's hot. Beckman [1] http://news.buzzgain.com/how-many-tweets-does-it-take-to-be-a-trending-topic... [2] http://www.mahalo.com/answers/social-media/how-many-tweets-and-facebook-stat... [3] http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/NJHomeland/abstracts.html [4],[6] http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=2... [5] http://www.intomobile.com/2009/04/06/americans-sent-1-trillion-sms-text-mess... --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter, Thanks for a thought-provoking and certainly, well-researched counterpoint. Here are some thoughts: Peter Beckman wrote:
Because while it probably will be swallowed by something else someday, it's here now, and there is a demand for it.
I suppose that, in light of perpetual change, the presence of something in the acute here-and-now is always a capitalistically appropriate observation.
It's a ubiquitous service that if you know the DID is a mobile number (or SMS-enabled virtual phone number), you can send an SMS and you can be confident that your message was likely displayed on the end-users phone (or email, or something). You don't need to have AIM installed, or know their handle, or use some third party service. You know the phone number? You can send a text message.
Yes, that is an apt description of how SMS works. :)
I'm surprised you see this as a bad time to put money into SMS-related services. 1.9 to 2 million tweets per day [1][2] -- lots of money and development going there. 4.1 billion SMS messages sent per day in the US alone [4] (3.5 billion per day in 2008 [5]). If you don't see a revenue opportunity there, then Alex, we need to have a beer. :-)
I'm always up for a beer. There are two ways to see this; one is that use of SMS is a growth market opportunity, and another is that the mushrooming diversity of applications for SMS is rapidly straining its capabilities and usefulness as a medium and only accelerating its expiration. As aspects of the mobile experience apart from straight voice calls stand now, there are two categories: (1) Plain text messages of <= 160 characters, almost always metered or requiring a comparatively expensive unlimited plan byte-for-byte. Strength: Ubiquitous on all types of mobile handsets. (2) Everything else data (web, e-mail, umpteen gazillion iPhone/Blackberry/Pre/etc. apps, etc.). Generally unmetered, and where metered inexpensively byte-for-byte compared to SMS. Weakness: Presently confined largely to higher-end phones and service plans. Strength: A thousand times more useful, extensible and adaptable than plain text, unleashes a completely new generational set of capabilities for mobile devices that makes them strikingly similar to little interactive computers. Much richer user experience. ... Now, the smartphone market has grown significantly in the last two years with the introduction of the iPhone and its cohorts, even among casual non-business consumers. I assume it is not controversial for you that smartphones are going to become more common and cheaper (Google is pushing that _really_ hard, among other things). I also assume it is not controversial that more and more features presently associated with higher-end smartphones will creep into the next generations of lower-end consumer-grade handsets and over time raise the capability floor on the bottom. Additionally, I assume that these structural changes are no more than a few years off at most, especially in the North American & W. European markets. Given those premises, as it becomes more and more possible to utilise data/Internet/IP/3G on an ever-expanding class of devices more affordably, where does SMS fit into this picture? Given its generational obsolescence and incompatibility with these emergent but soon to be more mainstream categories of user experience, I suggest that it's going to rapidly become irrelevant, although there is no doubt that the carrier and aggregator/clearinghouse racket that lines its pockets with it will do its best to slow the trend down. Your mention of Twitter is interesting. Twitter was originally designed around SMS because at the time of its inception that was still an almost exclusive means of realistically disseminating text to mobile devices. With the advent of the iPhone & the App Store, and copycat attempts at similar ecosystems and marketplaces by competing vendors, it is possible to equip nearly every mainstream smartphone now with at least one Twitter client of some description. Despite the fact that those applications must be explicitly invoked, their interface is certainly richer, more powerful and easier to use than the comparatively crude SMS gateway into Twitter. And it's a matter of time before all that evolves in a more "push" direction to erase the perceptual distinction between an asynchronous incoming SMS vs. a Tweet produced by a client application, as many instant messenger clients already do on those devices. Do you really see Twitter as an example of a major growth path for SMS at this point, rather than a vestigial aspect? Maybe we really should have that beer. :)
There are 6.4 billion minutes of use on the wireless side of things alone made every day in the US [6], and we're all over that, even with slim margins (I couldn't find a source for total number of minutes of use per day in the US across landline and mobile). 4.1 billion SMS messages is more that the number of phone calls. It'd be nuts NOT to invest in that, especially if you are already investing in VoIP/Telephony. Sure, it may disappear eventually, but right now it's a pretty huge deal. Make your money while it's hot.
You're leaving out one significant downside that isn't present with VoIP at large: the SMS economy is very closed and cornered by a very limited number of suppliers, as the preceding discussion in this thread has borne out to some extent. Also, there's a significant CAPEX formula to consider. Last time I checked, there weren't any ILEC and major mobile operators' representatives with strategic decisionmaking power subscribed to the list. We're all small to medium companies here, and should do the things that are most profitable for smaller companies. Small companies gain an advantage through maneuverability, innovation and thinking ahead, while large companies excel at wringing every last ounce of value out of mature product that exists now and optimising already sunk investments for maximum profitability. None of us have umpteen gazillion dollars to throw at ephemeral, short-term opportunities. All the carriers want to stall their inexorable march toward the role of commoditised "dumb pipes" for third-party applications and services, but we know that's what's going to happen -- it's just a matter of when. If I'm right and SMS is a sinking ship due to the _rapidly_ evolving capabilities and downward-trending cost (per unit of functionality) of the mass-market mobile handset, you should be thinking ahead, not belatedly hustling your way onto a crowded bandwagon. The mobile handset today is capable of far more sophisticated two-way data transmission than ~160 character text messages, and that capability is _already_ mainstream in certain segments. Are you really suggesting that in December 2009, money should aggressively be poured into an overpriced, borderline mafia-regulated ~10 year old method of delivering short, plain text messages consisting of about two lines of 80x24 terminal text? -- Alex -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Alex Balashov wrote:
I'm always up for a beer.
There are two ways to see this; one is that use of SMS is a growth market opportunity, and another is that the mushrooming diversity of applications for SMS is rapidly straining its capabilities and usefulness as a medium and only accelerating its expiration.
As aspects of the mobile experience apart from straight voice calls stand now, there are two categories:
(1) Plain text messages of <= 160 characters, almost always metered or requiring a comparatively expensive unlimited plan byte-for-byte.
Strength: Ubiquitous on all types of mobile handsets.
Strength: Near Instantaneous, doesn't require a third party that isn't you or your terminating carrier (such as facebook, twitter, or some not-yet-developed IM equivalent). It also fills a need - to dash off a quick note that arrives more or less immediately. If I need more than 160 characters, It's probably not urgent urgent, and can better be articulated in an email, which even dumb phones often have clients for these days. But I can still use SMS to say "check your email!"
(2) Everything else data (web, e-mail, umpteen gazillion iPhone/Blackberry/Pre/etc. apps, etc.). Generally unmetered, and where metered inexpensively byte-for-byte compared to SMS.
Weakness: Presently confined largely to higher-end phones and service plans.
Strength: A thousand times more useful, extensible and adaptable than plain text, unleashes a completely new generational set of capabilities for mobile devices that makes them strikingly similar to little interactive computers. Much richer user experience. But there's no good instant push notification that's even common across smartphone platforms, let alone across anything else. Even walled gardens like blackberry messenger suck. (at least when I tried using it with all my friends a few years ago, it required getting everyone's pin, loading them in both phones, and then getting their servers not to suck, and I could still only talk to blackberries)
I have a Palm Pre. My coworker next to me has a HTC Touch Pro. What can we use to send instantaneous messages between each other? (without signing up for an IM service, I know my phone has AIM and Yahoo IM, not sure about his, but let's assume making everyone sign up for 3 instant messenger services is off the table) Is there an easy service where I can give someone my phone number and have them send me a data based message? One that arrives right away?
If I'm right and SMS is a sinking ship due to the _rapidly_ evolving capabilities and downward-trending cost (per unit of functionality) of the mass-market mobile handset, you should be thinking ahead, not belatedly hustling your way onto a crowded bandwagon. The mobile handset today is capable of far more sophisticated two-way data transmission than ~160 character text messages, and that capability is _already_ mainstream in certain segments. Are you really suggesting that in December 2009, money should aggressively be poured into an overpriced, borderline mafia-regulated ~10 year old method of delivering short, plain text messages consisting of about two lines of 80x24 terminal text?
Until there's a better solution, sure!
Paul Timmins wrote:
Is there an easy service where I can give someone my phone number and have them send me a data based message? One that arrives right away?
If your argument is that SMS is the easiest thing to use for this purpose right *now*, this *very* minute, I would have to agree that SMS is it. There are plenty of perfectly functional "send text messages for free!" type apps available for the iPhone, for example. But it takes 3 or 4 steps to use instead of just 1 or 2, and push notifications don't really work well. The carriers work extensively to pressure handset vendors to make sure it stays this way as much as possible; that is why it takes more steps than using SMS. SMS makes the carriers 10x more money per character or byte. My whole argument is based on the premise that this will change. Any business model whose claim to superiority is rooted in collusion concerning certain user interface choices is not a strong or long-lasting one. As soon as some handset vendor dares to come out with a phone that makes alternatives to SMS not suck, SMS is all but dead. I am arguing that this is inevitable, will happen soon, and for that reason investing in SMS-based services is a pointless waste of time. In many cases, it's important to ignore actual-day "reality" and prepare for what's coming, not what's here. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
On Tue, 8 Dec 2009, Alex Balashov wrote:
In many cases, it's important to ignore actual-day "reality" and prepare for what's coming, not what's here.
So what are you preparing for? Do you already know what's coming, and you're preparing for it? Hell, I'm not even sure what _I_ am doing next year, much less the rest of the world when it comes to text messaging communications. I do know that SMS is growing now, is in active use now, and for me to put some effort into building a messaging infrastructure surrounding my VoIP service makes sense. If I do it intelligently, then the messaging infrastructure I build now can support SMS now and whatever comes next later. Most of the smartphones can't run a messaging app in the background, and if it can, which one should it? The only thing all handsets and all carriers support for public messaging is SMS. Until the phone can natively and in a built-in way support other messaging platforms that are supported by all handsets and carriers, SMS is here for a while. Just because it sucks and there are better things out there doesn't mean it's going away. Look at Beta vs VHS -- better did not win. I believe it is impossible for anyone to know what will replace SMS, or even if SMS will be replaced entirely in the next 2-20 years. If you do, don't tell us! Build it yourself, and wait for the money to roll in, because you'll be the only provider offering it. In the meantime, building SMS capabilities into VoIP DIDs is a service that can be sold now, and my gut says for a good long while (5+ years). Beckman --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Beckman wrote:
Hell, I'm not even sure what _I_ am doing next year, much less the rest of the world when it comes to text messaging communications. I do know that SMS is growing now, is in active use now, and for me to put some effort into building a messaging infrastructure surrounding my VoIP service makes sense. If I do it intelligently, then the messaging infrastructure I build now can support SMS now and whatever comes next later.
Agreed. At the end of the day, prognostication of such organic market trends is informed voodoo at very best. This will, as it has, remain a matter of opinion at the end of the day.
Most of the smartphones can't run a messaging app in the background, and if it can, which one should it?
That is not entirely true. Many smartphones can run a messaging app in the background; for those that can't, there are ways around it. For example, Apple is notorious for prohibiting the concept on the iPhone. However, it does provide a "push notification" API which can be used by an application that has servers on the back end holding connections to messaging services open surrogately. In my case, I use the Beejive IM client to stay connected to our company's internal Jabber/XMPP server; when one of our associates sends me a message to the appropriate account, I receive an incoming message on my phone that is identical to an incoming SMS in appearance and disposition. However, when I press "View" it will open Beejive instead of the SMS application and initiate a conversation. Thus, my experience of receiving an IM this way is not different than my experience of receiving an SMS, although I agree that other limitations are presently in force (who can send me an IM that way, how easily, what type of phone it takes to make that happen, etc.) It's a nasty hack, to be sure, and I predict this aversion to TSRs will gradually go away, or be replaced by a more elegant compromise to support asynchronously generated incoming events without client-side polling (aka "push").
The only thing all handsets and all carriers support for public messaging is SMS. Until the phone can natively and in a built-in way support other messaging platforms that are supported by all handsets and carriers, SMS is here for a while. Just because it sucks and there are better things out there doesn't mean it's going away. Look at Beta vs VHS -- better did not win.
And BlueRay did not displace DVD. I agree that better is not always a winner, especially if it's more expensive. My position is a bet on whether mobile handsets will continue to be used principally as phones and textual data terminals in the next 1-3 years. I predict that they will not, and if they will, certainly the user expectations will grow to a superset of what SMS currently provides. The price and maximum length of messages is the most crippling, not the format.
I believe it is impossible for anyone to know what will replace SMS, or even if SMS will be replaced entirely in the next 2-20 years. If you do, don't tell us! Build it yourself, and wait for the money to roll in, because you'll be the only provider offering it.
It is not necessary to know what will replace it with great confidence in order to be quite certain that it will be replaced by something.
In the meantime, building SMS capabilities into VoIP DIDs is a service that can be sold now, and my gut says for a good long while (5+ years).
I suppose it really depends on the market and the context. My argument is not that SMS is not useful or sellable now, but rather that the onerous terms, tight control and hefty minima aren't worth bothering with. Our premises differ in that I do not share your perception that it is practically free money simply being left on the table; it is not effortless or wholly cheap to develop, productise and bill SMS services. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Woohoo! I might have started the longest thread in the history of voiceops :) I don't know from nothing about business. All I'm really sure of is that I've got several furlongs of managers that simply won't go away until I get some kind of SMS solution wired up. Thanks for the input, everyone, David PS: Next I think I'll ask something like "If IPv4 is so broken, why throw good money after bad and invest in IPv6?" http://www.forumspile.com/Flame-Flame_on.jpg :) On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> wrote:
Peter Beckman wrote:
?Hell, I'm not even sure what _I_ am doing next year, much less the rest of ?the world when it comes to text messaging communications. ?I do know that ?SMS is growing now, is in active use now, and for me to put some effort ?into building a messaging infrastructure surrounding my VoIP service makes ?sense. ?If I do it intelligently, then the messaging infrastructure I ?build now can support SMS now and whatever comes next later.
Agreed. ?At the end of the day, prognostication of such organic market trends is informed voodoo at very best. ?This will, as it has, remain a matter of opinion at the end of the day.
?Most of the smartphones can't run a messaging app in the background, and ?if it can, which one should it?
That is not entirely true. ?Many smartphones can run a messaging app in the background; ?for those that can't, there are ways around it.
For example, Apple is notorious for prohibiting the concept on the iPhone. ?However, it does provide a "push notification" API which can be used by an application that has servers on the back end holding connections to messaging services open surrogately. ?In my case, I use the Beejive IM client to stay connected to our company's internal Jabber/XMPP server; ?when one of our associates sends me a message to the appropriate account, I receive an incoming message on my phone that is identical to an incoming SMS in appearance and disposition. However, when I press "View" it will open Beejive instead of the SMS application and initiate a conversation. ?Thus, my experience of receiving an IM this way is not different than my experience of receiving an SMS, although I agree that other limitations are presently in force (who can send me an IM that way, how easily, what type of phone it takes to make that happen, etc.)
It's a nasty hack, to be sure, and I predict this aversion to TSRs will gradually go away, or be replaced by a more elegant compromise to support asynchronously generated incoming events without client-side polling (aka "push").
The only thing all handsets and all ?carriers support for public messaging is SMS. ?Until the phone can ?natively and in a built-in way support other messaging platforms that are ?supported by all handsets and carriers, SMS is here for a while. ?Just ?because it sucks and there are better things out there doesn't mean it's ?going away. ?Look at Beta vs VHS -- better did not win.
And BlueRay did not displace DVD. ?I agree that better is not always a winner, especially if it's more expensive. ?My position is a bet on whether mobile handsets will continue to be used principally as phones and textual data terminals in the next 1-3 years. ?I predict that they will not, and if they will, certainly the user expectations will grow to a superset of what SMS currently provides. ?The price and maximum length of messages is the most crippling, not the format.
?I believe it is impossible for anyone to know what will replace SMS, or ?even if SMS will be replaced entirely in the next 2-20 years. ?If you do, ?don't tell us! ?Build it yourself, and wait for the money to roll in, ?because you'll be the only provider offering it.
It is not necessary to know what will replace it with great confidence in order to be quite certain that it will be replaced by something.
?In the meantime, building SMS capabilities into VoIP DIDs is a service ?that can be sold now, and my gut says for a good long while (5+ years).
I suppose it really depends on the market and the context. ?My argument is not that SMS is not useful or sellable now, but rather that the onerous terms, tight control and hefty minima aren't worth bothering with. ?Our premises differ in that I do not share your perception that it is practically free money simply being left on the table; ?it is not effortless or wholly cheap to develop, productise and bill SMS services.
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web ? ? : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel ? ? : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct ?: (+1) (678) 954-0671 _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
David Hiers wrote:
PS: Next I think I'll ask something like "If IPv4 is so broken, why throw good money after bad and invest in IPv6?"
To be fair, that's not really a reasonable analogy. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
It all boils down to what users want today and tomorrow. IMO - users want SMS today and are going to keep wanting it for a long long time because it's quick, works on most all phones (not just smartphones), and sovles a problem. I'm just not clear on how it comes into play for a VoIP/ITSP. SMS on an IP Phone - I'd ask - Why? IP Phones sit nex to computers (for the most part). Computers use IM (its quicker, easier, and free). Maybe Softphone on a PC? But again I ask why for same argument as w/ IP Phone? Am I missing something (likley since I'm not entirely a voice guy at this juncture in my career). The problem is quick, easy and instant communiactions. The solution today is SMS (smart and 'dumb' phones) and IM (PC's and SmartPhones). What's the solution tomorrow is the question I guess... Kenny
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Kenny Sallee wrote:
It all boils down to what users want today and tomorrow. IMO - users want SMS today and are going to keep wanting it for a long long time because it's quick, works on most all phones (not just smartphones), and sovles a problem. I'm just not clear on how it comes into play for a VoIP/ITSP. SMS on an IP Phone - I'd ask - Why? IP Phones sit nex to computers (for the most part). Computers use IM (its quicker, easier, and free). Maybe Softphone on a PC? But again I ask why for same argument as w/ IP Phone? Am I missing something (likley since I'm not entirely a voice guy at this juncture in my career).
Virtual numbers -- You can have 4 phone numbers all ring on your existing cell for cheap. Add SMS functionality from your Virtual Numbers to your phone, and if your provider is smart, a way for you to reply, then Double-Awesome. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Beckman wrote:
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Kenny Sallee wrote:
It all boils down to what users want today and tomorrow. IMO - users want SMS today and are going to keep wanting it for a long long time because it's quick, works on most all phones (not just smartphones), and sovles a problem. I'm just not clear on how it comes into play for a VoIP/ITSP. SMS on an IP Phone - I'd ask - Why? IP Phones sit nex to computers (for the most part). Computers use IM (its quicker, easier, and free). Maybe Softphone on a PC? But again I ask why for same argument as w/ IP Phone? Am I missing something (likley since I'm not entirely a voice guy at this juncture in my career).
Virtual numbers -- You can have 4 phone numbers all ring on your existing cell for cheap. Add SMS functionality from your Virtual Numbers to your phone, and if your provider is smart, a way for you to reply, then Double-Awesome. Many VoIP 802.11 phones have a SIP based SMS function that uses MESSAGE as well. Thus you can actually then have fully active SMS on those handsets.
On Dec 9, 2009, at 5:03 PM, Peter Beckman wrote:
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Kenny Sallee wrote:
It all boils down to what users want today and tomorrow. IMO - users want SMS today and are going to keep wanting it for a long long time because it's quick, works on most all phones (not just smartphones), and sovles a problem. I'm just not clear on how it comes into play for a VoIP/ ITSP. SMS on an IP Phone - I'd ask - Why? IP Phones sit nex to computers (for the most part). Computers use IM (its quicker, easier, and free). Maybe Softphone on a PC? But again I ask why for same argument as w/ IP Phone? Am I missing something (likley since I'm not entirely a voice guy at this juncture in my career).
Virtual numbers -- You can have 4 phone numbers all ring on your existing cell for cheap. Add SMS functionality from your Virtual Numbers to your phone, and if your provider is smart, a way for you to reply, then Double-Awesome.
For what it's worth, I found few people who were willing to pay for this service, though that could have been just due to Epic Fail on the part of our marketing department. (1) (1) I was the CTO and "inventor" at a company called TalkPlus, which did exactly what you're describing. Client software on the handset did data-channel call setup (bi-directional, Caller-ID correct,) text messaging on multiple DIDs, device independence, visual voicemail (before Apple), and a host of other cool features. Couldn't convince anyone to buy it. Company folded. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP1820310.pdf JT
On 12/10/2009 01:52 PM, John Todd wrote:
For what it's worth, I found few people who were willing to pay for this service, though that could have been just due to Epic Fail on the part of our marketing department. (1)
Which leads me to another observation: There's a lot of hype surrounding SMS and VoIP that gets dematerialised when it comes down to what people want and actually want to pay for. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Everything that has to do with SMS and non-cellular networks is basically cost prohibitive. Short codes cost a lot of money to get set up. So do switches that can support SMSC. There is a good reason that none of the big guys (or anyone really) is doing this en mass. Just remember SMS was built for the GSM systems and still runs over a MOBILE part of ISDN that most SS7 systems don't normally touch. Do any of you remember how long it took for all the carriers to route MMS to each other here in the US? And that's still using Verisign (or whatever that branch is called today) as the intermediate gateway as far as I know. -Scott -----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 1:58 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] SMS apps, providers, and peers On 12/10/2009 01:52 PM, John Todd wrote:
For what it's worth, I found few people who were willing to pay for this service, though that could have been just due to Epic Fail on the part of our marketing department. (1)
Which leads me to another observation: There's a lot of hype surrounding SMS and VoIP that gets dematerialised when it comes down to what people want and actually want to pay for. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Scott Berkman wrote:
Short codes cost a lot of money to get set up.
Between $500-$1000 per month, plus a setup fee. Plus you have to apply to each carrier to support your short code if you are selling anything, and maybe even if you aren't, before they'll carry your SMS traffic on your shortcode.
So do switches that can support SMSC.
You mean a standard PC? www.kannel.org I've run about 20,000,000 SMS messages through kannel without issue, via an aggregator. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, John Todd wrote:
For what it's worth, I found few people who were willing to pay for this service, though that could have been just due to Epic Fail on the part of our marketing department. (1)
I've got a bunch of people asking for it, though they probably want an unlimited plan for $5, and though the carriers can do that since there is almost zero overhead for them, we have to pay the carriers, and they are not cheap. $0.03-0.05 per SMS, both inbound AND outbound.
(1) I was the CTO and "inventor" at a company called TalkPlus, which did exactly what you're describing. Client software on the handset did data-channel call setup (bi-directional, Caller-ID correct,) text messaging on multiple DIDs, device independence, visual voicemail (before Apple), and a host of other cool features. Couldn't convince anyone to buy it. Company folded.
I watched an interview with you somewhere on the Internet, and tried to log into my account. Obviously it didn't work, sorry to hear it folded. You were CTO and Inventor, Jeff Black was Chairman and founder, right? http://vator.tv/news/show/2007-09-18-1-1-interview-with-talkplus-chairman-an... Beckman --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Dec 10, 2009, at 12:26 PM, Peter Beckman wrote:
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, John Todd wrote:
For what it's worth, I found few people who were willing to pay for this service, though that could have been just due to Epic Fail on the part of our marketing department. (1)
I've got a bunch of people asking for it, though they probably want an unlimited plan for $5, and though the carriers can do that since there is almost zero overhead for them, we have to pay the carriers, and they are not cheap. $0.03-0.05 per SMS, both inbound AND outbound.
I'm sure I'm still under NDA with Syniverse and a whole slew of other people, so all I'll say is that this service can be delivered for far, far, far less than those costs, no wireless carrier involvement required. Seriously. Someone really needs to start reselling that capability and making a tidy sum in the process. I would if I had $ and a developer to create a provisioning interface. On that note, the bandwidth.com stuff that they announced at ClueCon this summer looked very interesting (http://www.bandwidth.com/blog/the-sandbox/ ) but I've heard nary a peep on their fixed/mobile convergence announcements, even after directly mailing them.
(1) I was the CTO and "inventor" at a company called TalkPlus, which did exactly what you're describing. Client software on the handset did data-channel call setup (bi-directional, Caller-ID correct,) text messaging on multiple DIDs, device independence, visual voicemail (before Apple), and a host of other cool features. Couldn't convince anyone to buy it. Company folded.
I watched an interview with you somewhere on the Internet, and tried to log into my account. Obviously it didn't work, sorry to hear it folded. You were CTO and Inventor, Jeff Black was Chairman and founder, right?
http://vator.tv/news/show/2007-09-18-1-1-interview-with-talkplus-chairman-an...
Beckman
That's correct. JT
On Tue, 8 Dec 2009, Alex Balashov wrote:
Peter Beckman wrote:
Hell, I'm not even sure what _I_ am doing next year, much less the rest of the world when it comes to text messaging communications. I do know that SMS is growing now, is in active use now, and for me to put some effort into building a messaging infrastructure surrounding my VoIP service makes sense. If I do it intelligently, then the messaging infrastructure I build now can support SMS now and whatever comes next later.
Agreed. At the end of the day, prognostication of such organic market trends is informed voodoo at very best. This will, as it has, remain a matter of opinion at the end of the day.
Most of the smartphones can't run a messaging app in the background, and if it can, which one should it?
That is not entirely true. Many smartphones can run a messaging app in the background; for those that can't, there are ways around it. It's a nasty hack, to be sure, and I predict this aversion to TSRs will gradually go away, or be replaced by a more elegant compromise to support asynchronously generated incoming events without client-side polling (aka "push").
And is limited to iPhone apps. Sure, AIM could support it, and in theory any smartphone can support AIM if a client is written for it, and THAT smartphone supports either background apps or push notification. But that's a few million phones. Not 4.6 billion. No other active and installed messaging platform is in the hands, pockets or purses of more people than SMS. Nothing. Until some app, service or messaging method hits 20% deployment on the world's 4.6 billion active subscribed phones, it doesn't matter what phones CAN do or how much better they can do it.
Look at Beta vs VHS -- better did not win.
And BlueRay did not displace DVD.
You can't compare 480p to 1080p. Beta vs VHS was 480i to 480i.
My position is a bet on whether mobile handsets will continue to be used principally as phones and textual data terminals in the next 1-3 years. I predict that they will not, and if they will, certainly the user expectations will grow to a superset of what SMS currently provides. The price and maximum length of messages is the most crippling, not the format.
Email is great for longer than 160. It already works on most phones, even non-smartphones. I have one of my Gmail accounts running on my Sprint Katana DLX, and I get almost instant notification when I get a new email. But I had to pay for a data plan to do that, and people who know my phone number but not what email address is attached to my phone can't send me messages. You don't have to tell people anything other than your phone number (not your carrier, not your country, not your mothers maiden name) to enable them sending you a message. THAT is why SMS rules, and will continue to rule, for some time. I predict that SMS will continue to dominate well past 2015. And even if it doesn't, I'm going to make some money off of SMS now and for the next 1-3 years as you predict -- not gonna sit on my hands waiting for the market to show me the light.
It is not necessary to know what will replace it with great confidence in order to be quite certain that it will be replaced by something.
Will SMS be replaced by something? Was the horse replaced by the Model-T in 1905? Of course! But who cares now? It hasn't been replaced, there isn't anything that is even close to competing with SMS, and from a business standpoint, there is money to be made with SMS NOW. When that something else comes along, we'll change. Are you gonna stop investing in VoIP because it might be replaced by something else in 1-3 years?
I suppose it really depends on the market and the context. My argument is not that SMS is not useful or sellable now, but rather that the onerous terms, tight control and hefty minima aren't worth bothering with.
I think the problem is that you haven't done any research into what it costs to get a single DID with SMS enabled, nor the cost per message. There are no onerous terms, tight control, or hefty minima if you find a tier 2 or 3 reseller who has gone through that pain themselves and will resell to you at a price you can resell to your customers. I think your argument is based on a single email in this thread that mentioned a $5,000 minimum with Syneverse or something. There are other, less expensive and no-minimum ways to do SMS for VoIP, and that is why we disagree. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 12/7/09 7:07 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
SMS is widely used and nearly universal, but like anything else founded on the sort of inherent tension I just described, its days are numbered. I would encourage forward-thinking voice companies to help assist in its demise rather than spin their wheels and perpetuate it. You'll be that much the poorer.
Sounds great, and is very logical. I said the same thing about fax ten years ago. Today we (the entire telecom community) are wasting huge amounts of time/money/resources in order to support this dead technology. What makes you think SMS will be any different?
Carlos Alvarez wrote:
Sounds great, and is very logical. I said the same thing about fax ten years ago. Today we (the entire telecom community) are wasting huge amounts of time/money/resources in order to support this dead technology. What makes you think SMS will be any different?
Excellent question! I'm not sure. But I'm also not sure that's a very apples-to-oranges comparison. A lot of the remaining backstop for fax has to do with the preeminence of the written signature as the mark of legal validity. Until we come up with a good, universal way to electronically "sign" documents and law evolves to acknowledge it, I don't think the inertia behind fax will go away, even in industries where it continues to be used for reasons that are superficially very tangential to this. Also, the alternatives offered to users of fax by the vanguard of new technologies don't really add much new functionality, while striking people accustomed to it as cumbersome. Something about a scanner, saving files, attaching them to emails... yes, I know they're ultra-fast-acting document scanners and accompanying desktop software has made the process relatively turn-key, but it's still easier to just sign the page and put it in the fax machine. The same basic result is accomplished. The distinction between SMS and its prospective replacement is far wider and more pronounced, AND the reason SMS continues to dominate on phones capable of more (that is, aside from its ubiquity) is pretty much completely related to deliberate manipulation/coercion. It has very little intrinsic technological merit. That is why I think it will be different. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Here are the SMS sub aggregators we looked at here: VeriSign/Syniverse Gumiyo Gold Mobile Yesmail Mobile 3CInteractive Just Hit Send Smart Reply L7z Advanced Mobile Solutions Outsell -----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Paul Timmins Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 11:48 AM To: David Hiers Cc: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] SMS apps, providers, and peers If you find someone other than syniverse let me know, their minimums were too high for me to really get involved with it since I don't have a specific way to make money off of it in mind... -Paul David Hiers wrote:
Hi, I'm looking into adding SMS services to L3 and VZN numbers, and want to run my own message center and sip/smtp/whatever gateways, and hook into the cloud with a provider like syniverse.
Tips, traps, tricks, and war stories welcome.
Thanks,
David _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system.
Regardless of the long-term logic in providing SMS-enabled VoIP DID's (I happen to think it's a good idea) I will say that I still haven't seen anyone offering it at a "low-volume" level, other than Google. All the vendors listed below are short-code aggregators, and I haven't seen any of them offering E.164 numbers that are both VoIP (SIP) and SMS enabled. The Syniverse offering is really interesting, but still the market is totally silent on someone offering resale of the combined service. Anyone? Anyone? Even the ultra-simple ability to get out of the short-code costs for bi-directional messaging would be HUGE for certain applications. Many apps don't need to have premium pricing, and many small companies can't afford the per-month short-code costs. Someone could step up and do a moderate advertising campaign to the VoIP community and do quite well, I suspect, reselling this service. JT On Dec 8, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Sorensen, Marty wrote:
Here are the SMS sub aggregators we looked at here:
VeriSign/Syniverse
Gumiyo
Gold Mobile
Yesmail Mobile
3CInteractive
Just Hit Send
Smart Reply
L7z
Advanced Mobile Solutions
Outsell
-----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org ] On Behalf Of Paul Timmins Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 11:48 AM To: David Hiers Cc: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] SMS apps, providers, and peers
If you find someone other than syniverse let me know, their minimums were too high for me to really get involved with it since I don't have a specific way to make money off of it in mind...
-Paul
David Hiers wrote:
Hi, I'm looking into adding SMS services to L3 and VZN numbers, and want to run my own message center and sip/smtp/whatever gateways, and hook into the cloud with a provider like syniverse.
Tips, traps, tricks, and war stories welcome.
Thanks,
David _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
participants (10)
-
abalashov＠evaristesys.com -
beckman＠angryox.com -
carlos＠televolve.com -
hiersd＠gmail.com -
jarrod＠fed-com.com -
jtodd＠loligo.com -
kenny.sallee＠gmail.com -
Marty_Sorensen＠adp.com -
paul＠timmins.net -
scott＠sberkman.net