Paul Kapustka's Blog
November 22, 2006
VONosphere Webisode #19 -- Sylantro Global Summit (in Las Vegas)
Webisode #19 of the VONosphere... from the Sylantro Global Summit in Las Vegas, we interview Dave Axam from BT...
(camera by Mike Arledge, WMS Inc.)
Topics: Voice as an application; to IMS, or not IMS; net neutrality, UK style.
Links: BT: 1 million VoIP users by Spring '07
Posted by paul at 02:41 PM | Comments (0)
November 17, 2006
VONosphere Webisode #18 -- Motorola's Michael Krutz
Webisode #18 of the VONosphere, we interview Motorola VP Michael Krutz and talk about WiMax deployments, IMS and Mobility. Interview conducted at the Sylantro Global Summit in Las Vegas, Oct. 17.
(Camera by Mike Arledge, WMS Inc.)
Topics: WiMax; Sylantro; IMS; mobility
Links:
Sylantro gets win in Motorola WiMax deployment
Posted by paul at 02:17 PM | Comments (0)
November 09, 2006
VONosphere Webisode #17 -- Covad CEO Charlie Hoffman
Webisode #17 of the VONosphere is a bonus track from the Sylantro Global Summit (which was held Oct. 16-18 in Las Vegas), where we interview Covad CEO Charlie Hoffman...
Posted by paul at 04:10 PM | Comments (0)
November 07, 2006
Why Tuesday DID matter for net neutrality -- and why the debate should change
With the benefit of hindsight, it's clear that Russell Shaw should stick to covering telecom issues and not handicapping elections. But even more to the point, it's worth correcting his opinion that Tuesday's results wouldn't change the net neutrality debate. The guess here is that things will change dramatically, and instead of pushing for some small net neutrality provisions, perhaps we can all -- finally -- move to a more meaningful debate about how to really build new, powerful, neutral, competitive broadband offerings, leaving no option (yes, including government-funded ones) unexplored.
At the time of this writing (11:43 pm California), two Senate races are still undecided (Montana and Virginia), but both are leaning toward the Democratic challengers. Both GOP incumbents, Allen (Va.) and Burns, are on the Senate Commerce Committee and have been telco allies in the fight to keep net neutrality language out of any overall telecom reform. So how can the debate not change in favor of net neutrality ideas with Allen and Burns potentially out the door?
(UPDATE, 11/8: AP reports that both Allen and Burns have lost, giving control of the Senate to the Democrats)
Since Senate Commerce chair Ted Stevens couldn't even muster the votes (or the political juice) to force an anti-NN vote when Republicans had all the power, even action in the lame-duck timeframe probably wouldn't stand for long. (And if he couldn't get a vote then, how hard will it be to muster one in the next month, with even more pressing issues at hand?)
Instead -- with Democratic control or near control of both houses -- what we could see is a total reworking of the telecom reform legislation, either in the form of some new omnibus bill (which includes net neutrality language) or smalller-subject efforts (like video franchising reform) during the next year.
Or? We may see not much at all from the new Congress as the Demos get used to holding the reins again, and reshaping the war in Iraq becomes a daily question for this country.
But -- what I truly disagree with is the opinion of Phil Wolff, who saw the tree but missed the forest when he said:
Since nobody will win on a "net neutrality" platform, no political capital will be earned for NN. So NN won't be a priority in the 2008 election. It's not like anyone tied NN to big issues like jobs, the war in Iraq, political corruption, or public morals.And nobody raised a million dollars to advocate for net neutrality.
Um, yes, nobody tied net neutrality to big issues, simply because it isn't part of one. Yet. But about the million bucks -- it wasn't just one million, but multiple millions spent by the telcos in attempts to keep net neutrality out of any telecom reform. Unfortunately for their pocketbooks, many of the kinds of folks they supported are now looking for employment.
And while network neutrality as a standalone issue may not be a big deal in ANY election, it will most assuredly be a part of debate and discussion about the economy, jobs creation, broadband penetration, and the ability for the U.S. to remain competitive in a digital world, going forward. And in a newly Democratic House, where Ed Markey will be on the side of power, surely the debate will change from the previous House committee leaders, who prided themselves on not knowing what net neutrality was.
(If they want a lesson, they can read Ed's take on the issue from Fall VON.)
What is heartening is that we may see the debate (or the steps forward) take place in the market before we have to wait for Washington to catch up. Perhaps already sniffing the winds of change, we have recently seen the telcos warm up to the idea of municipal-run networks, best done in private-public partnerships. And then on Tuesday, we heard of a potential deal between Verizon and YouTube, which probably means we won't hear Verizon execs spouting off about Google's free lunch anymore.
What's next? Ed Whitacre telling us how clear the Vonage connection is at his ranch? Well, maybe not.
But wouldn't we all rather see broadband's future worked out by some coalition of technologists, telecom experts and civic leaders instead of politicians who only have time to listen to lobbyists? What Tuesday's results mean is a time for change -- and that includes the current tired take on telecom reform.
To quote Mr. Markey, who at VON pledged to keep fighting for net neutrality and to assure every American access to affordable choices:
"We cannot afford not to have a plan."
Time to start writing one, no?
Posted by paul at 11:22 PM | Comments (0)
Verizon and YouTube: Beginning of the end of net neutrality debate?
Saw today's news from the Wall Street Journal about the possibility of a Verizon-YouTube (really Verizon-Google) deal and thought: Is this the beginning of the end of the net neutrality debate?
Wonder how much GooTube will charge Verizon for a snack of user-created videos, after digesting all those free lunches. Just wish you could be there at the negotiating table, dontcha?
UPDATE: Reuters also has a story about the Journal story.
Posted by paul at 07:20 AM | Comments (0)
November 06, 2006
Waiting for Microsoft and VoIP
Reading Andy's post today made me feel nostalgic about the topic of Microsoft and VoIP. Seems like my "not if but when" prediction is finally coming true.
UPDATE: According to the Wall Street Journal, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said VoIP is in the cards for 2007. (more after the jump)
Of course, it's not like Microsoft hasn't tried to "beta" all of us before with stealthy voice and video announcements. Still, never a better place than CES to talk about consumer VoIP issues.
MORE ON UPDATE: The money quote from a Journal story posted this afternoon from Japan:
"We are going to enter the voice over IP market [in] the beginning of next year," Chief Executive Steve Ballmer said at a Microsoft conference in Tokyo. Voice over Internet protocol involves technology enabling computer users to make telephone calls with their Internet connections.
Great. But why make the announcement in Japan? So as not to make U.S. telcos (who MSFT wants to sell video software to) angry? Just another puzzling VoIP move from M'soft.
Posted by paul at 08:51 AM | Comments (0)
November 03, 2006
VONosphere Webisode #16 -- Interview with Jeff Black, TalkPlus
Webisode #16 of the VONosphere features an interview with Jeff Black, CEO of TalkPlus, talking (natch) about the company's "Voice 2.0" applications for mobile phones.
Topics: Second numbers for mobile phones; more Voice 2.0 applications; TalkPlus
Links: TalkPlus launches (Alec Saunders)
Posted by paul at 05:18 PM | Comments (0)