Does The Average Person Want Voice 2.0?
David Beckemeyer asks the musical question: Where Are The Voice 2.0 Developers? He’s right about that. Clearly there is a ton of me too offerings out there. Few people, if any, really understand what Voice 2.0 really means (I hate that term), let alone understand the full power that David is offering with his PhoneGnome API.
The vast majority of the public doesn’t really understand Voice 2.0. It’s been an uphill battle getting people to adopt things like Skype, which is looking more and more like a telco every day. Or one of any number of other extensions to the voice calling experience. People still primarily use either their landline or mobile phone. And even if they’re willing to try something else, the vast majority only understand dial tone. If I can use it like a normal phone, that’s cool. That’s why Vonage and the cable companies have so many customers! All these other “extra” features? Most people simply don’t care.
Even myself, as a VoIP user and early adopter, I have reverted back to using my mobile phone to attend the various conference calls I attend for work. From time to time, I will try and use Skype or Gizmo Project to attend a call. With Skype’s seeming inability to deal with DMTF properly and general upstream issues I have with Gizmo (and possibly Skype as well), I can’t have a decent sounding conversation.
I could go on and on here about how beyond a small percentage of early adopters who look for all the latest and greatest features, the rest of humanity is content to use their phone service as it is now. The exception to that rule is that people are willing to try making their calls through an alternate path if it is significantly cheaper and not substantially different from the normal telco experience. My wife isn’t even willing to go that far.
Now I’m not saying we shouldn’t continue to progress in the Voice 2.0 direction. However, until a critical mass of people or businesses grok Voice 2.0 and begin to clamor for it, it’s going to be an uphill battle for folks like David Beckemeyer.
Bookmark with: del.icio.us Digg it Furl iFeedReaders ma.gnolia Maple.nu RawSugar reddit Simpy StumbleUpon
Comment by ted
You’re right Dameon. The problem is that while 2.0 present a wealth of new features, the basics are not quite there 100%. And this will kill a user’s interest. Ie. “screw it i can’t even make a decent conference call.”
Comment by David Beckemeyer
You make a good point, but it is orthogonal to my complaint.
I wasn’t speaking about the lack of demand for Voice 2.0 apps. from end-users. How can they demand things that they’ve never even seen before. We of course do have a lot of data about demand for more advanced features, and while niche, even with the dearth of advanced features available, sufficient interest and demand is there, for the apps and features that provide real value. Your point is well taken however, and I think you’re right, that not all people give a hoot. But if you asked those same people in 1990 (and believe me I did) if they wanted the Internet, most of them would have said no.
My point was more to the whining by the pundits, experts, analysts, bloggers, and other net know-it-alls about the telcos not opening their platforms, about net neutrality issues holding them back, and such, when the platform for offering these apps exists here and now and requires no more capital than putting up your average Wordpress or MT blog. So now what’s their excuse?
Comment by PhoneBoy
And you’re absolutely right. In 1990, I was one of the few people who knew what the Internet *was*, mostly because I happened to be working on the right project at the right place at the right time in *high school*. Unless you were a CompSci major at a University around that time (or managed to finagle access to such a system for some other reason), people never heard of the Internet, and it’s nothing like it is today. Obviously, you were among the people helping to make it what it is today.
Meanwhile, I agree with you. The tools exist today–on multiple platforms–to bring Voice 2.0 into reality. The Internet has always worked around dead nodes, which include regulatory roadblocks. The question is: who is going to do it first in a big way?
Trackback by Aswath Weblog
Still Looking for Voice 2.0 Features…
There was a time when Jeff Pulver will periodically lament about lack of new and exciting features and will talk about Purple minutes that became Purple Applications. A few days back, David Beckemeyer raised the same concern. He points out……
Comment by loopy
I think the issue is that the driver for developers to create apps is to have direct access to customers. If we compare Phonegnome to Asterisk you will see why developers work with Asterisk and maybe why Phonegnome does not have the same developer success.
- Developers can use Asterisk to make a product/service and enter into the market directly and get their own customers
- Developers making a product/service with Phonegnome only get access to Phonegnomes customers
Even big names such as Skype and Vodafone do not fare well [even with the number of customers they have]. BTW the latest Vodafone initiative is doomed [ http://www.vodafonebetavine.net/c/portal/layout?p_l_id=default
My personal view is that Phonegnome is a great product and should be a great product/service enabler, let the developers be ‘powered by Phonegnome’. Let them face the customers direct, drop the walled garden approach.
Trackback by Fractals of Change
Voice 2.0 – Fuggetaboutit!…
There isn’t gonna be a new killer voice application! Old friends from my VoIP days aren’t gonna believe it’s me saying that but (with lots of hindsight) it’s the truth. New phones? Yes! Different pricing? Yes! New features? Sure. Major new capa…