verizon wireless announces API for turbo bandwidth

 Posted by on November 5, 2011 at 16:56  applications, internet, mobile  No Responses »
Nov 052011
 

Let’s hope no mobile app developers actually implement the Verizon API for turbo bandwidth. There are a thousand reasons why this is a flawed idea, even without getting into core net neutrality issues. Below are three macro-level issues and one counter-offer to Verizon.

1. Verizon Wireless is basically a monopoly
If it was a truly competitive market, then Verizon can offer turbo, nitro and nuclear and I’d have no issue with it. I’d just go elsewhere. Unfortunately this is a monopoly/duopoly situation in most of the US.

2. Hitting turbo could be taking Pepto-Bismol for a headache
Consumers don’t know why their app is “slow”. Maybe it is last mile bandwidth. Maybe not. There are many causes for “slow” apps. You ready to hit “turbo”, pay Verizon and then not get the desired result because of a client issue on your mobile phone or iPad, a third party ISP’s congested Cisco router queuing packets on the route between your app provider and Verizon, or some database issues that your app provider is dealing with? The articles suggest the user will hit the turbo button but it is problematic even if it the app requesting more bandwidth on behalf of the user.

3. Verizon may be the source of the problem
Last mile bandwidth issues are not always caused by too much demand. What if Verizon Wireless has a problem causing the available local bandwidth supply to be cut in half? Should you pay for that by hitting the turbo button and (maybe) getting enough priority to get more packets through? What if Verizon does some poor design or engineering – should you pay for that? By the way, this type of data prioritization implementation isn’t easy – it may not work well even if everything else is in line – MPLS schemes, designed for similar purposes, often fail.

Counter-proposal: we get what we pay for…both ways
Verizon Wireless can add the turbo feature…if Verizon credits its customers each time one of our apps is slow due to the bandwidth being less than we are paying for and there is proper visibility for credibility. If I want priority, I’ll hit the turbo button. If I actually get the improved performance, improved to a transfer rate higher than I am paying for, then I will gladly pay for it using the credits I built up during all the times Verizon was giving me less bandwidth than I was paying for. And I’ll happily collect money from VZW each month when the balance is in my favor.

A variant of this counter-proposal to consider could be a two-way API between Verizon and the app providers – they maintain this bandwidth SLA of sorts and true up each month. I’ve heard folks like Aswath suggest similar (I believe) though I haven’t thought through it enough. They can explain it in more detail and have thought through the positives and negatives.

The best “solution” would really be no solution. Instead of investing in bandwidth prioritization technology, instrumentation, reporting, regulation, DPI, metering, billing, governance, etc…invest all that time and capital in minimizing the amount of time that bandwidth is an issue to begin with. Bandwidth really shouldn’t be the limiting factor – there is more value for everyone and more revenue in the ecosystem for all the players if assumed bandwidth constraints aren’t somewhat artificially throttling demand.

    phone app to detect cancer

     Posted by on March 11, 2011 at 13:53  applications, education, healthcare and medicine, internet, mobile, telepresence  1 Response »
    Mar 112011
     

    Scientists at the Massachusetts General Hospital have prototyped a smartphone integrated microNMR device that accurately detects cancer cells. The prototype enables a technician to extract a cell sample, immediately analyze it and have the digital results stored and ready to communicate.

    This paragraph from David Hill at Singularity Hub summarizes this perfectly:

    The next decade may very well go down as the decade of the smartphone, but it’s comforting to know that it may be due to more than just texting, gaming, and watching YouTube. With an increasing number of healthcare-related apps, smartphones have the potential to bridge the gap between doctors and patients through convenient and rapid access to medical data. We’ve already highlighted health-related apps that will measure blood-sugar levels and monitor vital signs, but some new apps are aimed at helping doctors by interfacing with medical devices where the smartphone becomes the tool for data handling, visualization, and communication. Devices like the microNMR, the digital stethoscope, and another app that changes a smartphone into a skin cancer screening tool promise to make smartphones revolutionary platforms that improve medicine for both clinicians and patients.

    Games have dominated mobile apps so far, but I think the combination of mobile apps, ubiquitous mobile broadband Internet, telepresence quality video and today’s distributed and often cloud-based computing power and storage will enable the dev of life-changing apps in medical research and education to hit an inflection point in the near future.

      is mobile fragmentation good?

       Posted by on March 4, 2011 at 15:26  applications, internet, mobile  No Responses »
      Mar 042011
       

      Forget about the often religious arguments about pure web development vs. native app development. The web app developer has more use cases and limitations (the browser itself, browser type, browser version, web API vs. OS API, etc) than the native app developer. This often results in trade-offs and lowest common denominator approaches. With today’s signal to noise ratio, you aren’t going to win with trade-offs and LCD, especially if you are a startup. Your web app might compete in more games (compared to if you develop for one platform), but you’re going into each game with a disadvantage that your app will have to be spectacular to overcome. No, HTML5, even if more browsers better supported more of the HTML5 capabilities, is not the panacea (it will help but it will need time to mature like anything else).

      So, not all apps will be web apps, and not all native apps will be developed for the same platform, which means we’ll have mobile app fragmentation for quite some time. Fragmentation is a strongly negative word and I’ve always seen it that way. Fragmentation = inefficiency = friction = an inhibitor to progress. But I wonder, from macro-economic perspective, is that true?

      Fragmentation means apps will need to be spun for multiple platforms, multiple handsets, multiple screen sizes and types (tablets etc). More design work, specs to write, development iterations, QA cycles, support, management, etc. More jobs. All on the app side. Same on the mobile OS side. If Apple, Google, HP, RIM, Microsoft, Nokia, etc. all stay in the game to some degree then that’s more overall jobs then if just one or two of those emerged, or if all the apps went web.

      Do those jobs offset the jobs “lost” due to apps that might have succeeded in a less fragmented environment? Do those jobs offset the overall deterrent on new progress introduced by the friction? Does the friction also open up opportunities for innovation that help from macro-economic perspective?

      I’d like to see what experts say, and in my gut I still come back to fragmentation = friction, but I’m not so sure anymore that friction doesn’t also mean more jobs. Jobs that the economy really needs.

      BTW, this is not an argument against web apps, but I don’t think web apps will become dominant anytime soon, meaning fragmentation will be the rule in mobile apps for near future.

        angry birds and happy droids

         Posted by on December 27, 2010 at 12:14  education, energy, government, healthcare and medicine, internet, mobile, science  1 Response »
        Dec 272010
         

        Angry Birds and other games outweigh all other applications combined for iPhones. Yes, games are more important than everything else in the world.

        iTunes apps has 20 total app categories, but the games category has 20 sub-categories. So 20 categories for games, 19 app categories for the rest of the world. Wow.

        If 2011 is the year of Android and smartphones in general, then I hope it also the year that life changing applications start to become as important as Angry Birds. Life changing mobile applications would appear in education, healthcare and fitness, medicine, science, energy (including smart grid etc) and government.

        Of course I’m using the iTunes categories to amplify the point, and most technology transitions are led by applications such as games and high revenue generating apps, but I feel or hope we are near an inflection point in the pervasiveness of broadband Internet connectivity, mobile computers (Android, iPhone etc) and application development (HTML5 etc.) that life changing applications in education, healthcare and energy are on deck.