The most underused feature of 3G is video-calling, but why? It is interesting that there was an expectation that video calling would be popular on 3G phones. Of course, as we all know, it was a flop. There are all kinds of reasons. However, a key problem with mobile video, which also extends to other services, such as push-to-talk (PTT), is the lack of privacy.
In order to use video, or PTT, the user needs to hold the device away from their ear! This creates the immediate problem of how to hear the audio. This is solved by a speaker. At this point, the whole conversation now becomes audible to others, which poses a major problem for most users. One of the reasons that texting is so popular is that it is so discrete. We all know that kids will sit next to their parents and hold texting conversations with friends that they normally wouldn’t dare to do within parental earshot. Adults will hold texting sidebar conversations in meetings, allowing them to be quite two-faced in front of peers and managers.
There are other reasons for the failure of both videophony and PTT, especially within the consumer realm, but this aspect of its usability is important. However, when it comes to viewing 3rd party video content, the problem doesn’t exist, although using headphones improves the aural experience. There are lots of potential for H2C (human to content) mobile video services, and this is where the massively underused video calling feature of the 3G network can still be exploited.
The best thing about mobile videophony is that it is one of those rare times when the mobile experience, at least from a usability point of view, is far superior to the desktop experience. With videophony, there is no camera to install, there are no drivers to install, there are no settings to configure and - most important of all for a mobile service - no client to install! It is as easy as dialling a number and pointing the camera. Using 3G video gateway products, such as Dilithium Networks, enables a 3G video call to be converted to an RTSP video stream, which means going from the telco network into the IP realm is easy. And - big bonus - you don’t need an IMS network to do it!
What is starting to happen is that the same aggregator companies offering hosted SMS gateways are now getting into the video gateway business, such as MX Telecom. This means that users can dial a short code, which could be the same as a text short code, and make a video call, the content being nailed straight through to a web-based service. Dilithium Networks demonstrated this quite a while back.
The advantages of this approach to “uploading” video are that it requires no handset configuration or client and that it is instant. Moreover, it uses the circuit-switched resources of the network, so the video response and quality is guaranteed every time. The only downside is that the circuit bandwidth is relatively low (64kbps) and so the resulting video quality is poor. However, this is the YouTube age where kids don’t seem to mind watching grainy videos. For a large category of user-generated-content services, circuit switched will do fine. I’m still not sure why more service providers (e.g. Google) haven’t jumped at the chance to exploit this capability. Then again, if no aggregator exists to offer the gateway service, it means that the provider has to go negotiate with an operator to connect a gateway to their network - and one for each network too! Never mind the revenue agreement!
Nonetheless, we should expect to see more video short codes becoming available across the networks. The whole “dial-a-clip” video service (as I used to call it in seminars) has lots of potential. During my time running the Mashing Room for Motorola, we looked at using video gateways tied to location to create some interesting mash-ups around UGC video.
Technorati Tags: 3G, push-to-talk, videophony, video gateway, Dilithium Networks, user-generated-content, video short codes, mash-ups
[This blog has moved to here]
5 responses so far ↓
1 Marwan Jabri // Feb 10, 2008 at 5:48 am
Video value added services via video calling and short codes also offers the simplest access methods to users. With video codecs such as H.264 on the way to handsets, this will offer a “HD”-like video experience. I invite you to the Dilithium booth at the MWC-2008 (Hall 2 Stand 2G33) to see the latest video value added services that are being or about to be deployed around the world. You can also see why the Dilithium ViVAS video platform has been shortlisted by the MWC for best SDP award.
I also want to make the comment that peer-to-peer video services (regardless of the access technology, circuit or packet) are subject to two common barriers in emmerging mobile technologies - handset penetration/mobile coverage, and subscriber awareness. If you have a handset peneration of 10% and network coverage of 50%, the probability of a video call to complete (called party to answer call) is 5%. So privacy issues and hearing the voice are certainly important issues, but I think they are not the central issues for large uptake of the video calling service.
On the other hand, as you indicate, video value added services (e.g. short-code access to video services) are not subject to either privacy issues nor to call completion issues, and thats why I believe that such services are getting much more traction and will continue to do so.
2 Paul G // Feb 20, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Thanks Marwan for your comment. It is interesting to know about the H.264 codec, although I think that you are wrong to market this as an “HD like” experience. This might fall into the category of exaggerated marketing that killed the expectations for WAP. Will the handset be able to display 1080 lines? Perhaps you can elaborate on this for us, many thanks.
I would tend to market video gateway apps on the basis of dead-easy to use and require zero configuration on the handset - nothing to install, nothing to configure etc. This is a rare example of where the mobile experience is actually easier and better than the desktop one (except for Macs of course with their built-in cameras, although it still takes a few steps to figure out how to actually make video connections with content or somebody else).
3 Marwan Jabri // Feb 23, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Paul, the HD-like is not exagerated at all. In fact considering the screen size and resolution, the quality of video that can be communicated can be easily considered “HD-like”, given what can be achieved today using codecs such as H.263. Those who visited our booth at MWC’2008 in Barcelnona saw the experience of MPEG4 when deleivered using our ViVAS and Video Gateway products (http://www.dilithiumnetworks.com/products/ViVAS.asp). Many visitors (and handset experts) made the comment about HD-like. We have also demonstrated at MWC’2008 our latest VT-Phone solution (http://www.dilithiumnetworks.com/products/VT-Phone.asp) with H.264 and this shows further improvements over MPEG4. So HD-like is not an exaggeration considering the screen size, resolution and the bit-rate at which video is being delivered (around 45kbps).
Anyway, putting the HD-like argument aside, I agree with you on the marketing of Video Gateways as being plug-and-play. I will go further though. Video Gateways are excellent enablers, but successful video applications and services are the goals of service providers. This is why video application platforms such as the Dilithium ViVAS have been receiving such an attention recently, not only for 3G but also for IMS. ViVAS allows service providers to develop and launch video value added services quickly, and without requiring deep expertize in the underlying video protocols (e.g. 3G-324M, http://www.dilithiumnetworks.com/technology/3G-324M_H.324_IPR.asp). With ViVAS, the development and launch cycle of video apps such as video portals, video blogging, video surveillance (they all can use short-code for access) is reduced from a dozen months to weeks.
4 Romi Parmar // Mar 25, 2008 at 2:54 pm
another very interesting post. We also exhibited at the Mobile World Congress and many of the people visiting our stand agreed with you that 3G Video Calling is by far the best user experience on a mobile phone today. Being very simple it seems apparent that all you have to do is add relevance and purpose to make it fly.
We’ve found that the ability to place a 3G Video Call with a future husband/wife/partner is one type of highly personal and relevant service that we offer through our 3G Dating service and we find it completely transorms the user perception of value in the 3G video call experience.
5 Jim Arce // Jun 10, 2008 at 12:16 am
Paul, could not agree with you more!! Great stuff.. to reinforce your comments, I have seen several applications, particularly in Spain (it looks like our Spanish friends are very creative when it comes to applications!) related to two interesting markets: 3G video banking and 3G video security!! The security application I saw during my last trip to Madrid, was unbelievable!!! We were having diner in the center of Madrid and my friend wanted to show off his new video surveillance system. So he video called from his 3G phone to his security provider entered his pin code and there we were in the center of Madrid watching his house live via 3G video call!! Not only that: he was able to control the cameras using the keypad of his mobile… man, I wish we had 3G video call in the USA!!! So, this is a good example that caller to caller is just one application and perhaps not the most important. There are indeed many killer applications, like security, that are not affected by the constrains of the personal video calls. It is just a matter of time!
Leave a Comment