Facebook VoIP?

There are speculations that Facebook will be launching its own VoIP services. Users say that they have seen call icons1 on its screen but the icons didn’t connect. A news article2 pointed out that Skype integrated Facebook into its upgrade and various references to the popular VoIP popped in Facebook code. Further, Facebook has a job posting for “Network Egineer – Voice” which was recently removed. Despite these observations, Facebook remains silent on the issue.

If Facebook is really planning to join the VoIP arena it would be competing head-to-head with Skype and Gmail talk. In this field, Facebook would be in an advantage because of its already existing huge user base. As any usual business tactic, expanding its services to include VoIP has a very promising potential for Facebook. It will surely rock the worlds of Skype and Gmail.

The inclusion of VoIP in the existing services offered by Facebook in addition to messaging, status posting, photo and video sharing, and text chat is a great way to make any Facebook account one’s superaccount. Talk about synergy at its finest. Although this move will be detrimental to the business of local telecommunications company, measured in the decline of profits from traditional voice calls, its benefits will surely redound to the end consumers.

1 Image from http://news.yahoo.com/s/digitaltrends/20110127/tc_digitaltrends/willfacebookbattleskypegooglevoicewithvoipcalling

2 http://news.yahoo.com/s/digitaltrends/20110127/tc_digitaltrends/willfacebookbattleskypegooglevoicewithvoipcalling

Entry No. 10

TV Set with Internet

Image from http://www.randomdetox.com/tag/surf-tv/

The Internet has become an indispensable part of a student’s academic life, especially that of a Law and ICT student who has to post a blog entry every week.

I remember our first day of class.

“Sinong walang Internet access?”

No one raised a hand. Everybody has Internet access.

But imagine the question being asked in an elementary school in an obscure place where the students have to walk for hours just to reach the school. The Internet may even be unknown to some of them. They may not be required to post blog entries for their classes, but the Internet will surely help them with their projects and homework assignments.

What if the question was, “sinong may TV?”

Perhaps nine out of ten of the students will raise their hands. Unfortunately, the TV will not help them much in their studies, unless all the channels are Knowledge channels.

The problem of computer and Internet access drove Smart Communications to launch its product called Surf TV, which allows a TV set to function as a computer with Internet access capability. You can also type documents and make presentations very much like in a desktop computer. Through the convergence of Internet technology and broadcasting, families at home will have Internet access anytime anywhere through Smart’s wide network coverage.

Funny how this blog entry sounds like an advertisement for the product, so why not complete it by saying “for only Php 4,500 ($102), you can give a student a personal computer of her own.” This, I think, is truly a noble and humble product of convergence worth writing about.

For more information, go to http://smart.com.ph/corporate/newsroom/SurfTV.htm.

Kate Lomoljo

Entry No. 10

Viva Las Vegas!*

This is what I came home to last night: my little angel asleep on her bed and my wife, wide-awake, talking to her netbook. She was using Gmail’s voice chat to call her aunt, who lives in Vegas, on her mobile phone. Uninitiated, I was immediately concerned about the costs. She told me to relax, because calls to the US and Canada are free. Phew.

It wasn’t entirely free, of course. There’s still the P995 monthly for internet. But consider this: for a 3-hour call on Google, we’d have spent about 4 pesos; while the same call on PLDT landline would have been $72, or over P3000!

P4 v. P3000. Wow, P3000 JUST for VOICE. With 4 pesos, my wife could talk to her aunt, check her mail, play games on facebook and (ahem!) buffer Fringe and White Collar, while looking up Philippine and US jurisprudence for her research project. Talk about convergence.

And even if my wife had used Globe’s internet service on her mobile phone to dial her aunt’s mobile through Gmail, it would have cost only P60.


I long for the day when I wouldn’t have to pay separate bills for services that are converging because of technological advancement. It goes without saying that I don’t want prices to go up. Prices ought to go down as technology advances. I don’t know, then, why for just voice, you have to pay more. Wouldn’t it be something to turn the tables around, and instead of classifying internet as VAS, make voice the VAS, and internet the carrier?


Christopher John P. Lao
Entry # 10


* It seemed appropriate since my wife is an Elvis fan and she was calling Vegas.

1) Viva Las Vegas image from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viva_Las_Vegas


2)PLDT landline rates
http://www.pldt.com.ph/products/consumers/landline/Pages/PLDTLandline.aspx

3)Globe Mobile internet rates
http://site.globe.com.ph/prepaid/mobile_browsing?sid=TUDZcMuxpRYAAFITYE8AAABDe

The Black Box Fallacy

Image credit: tmenguy.free.fr

Convergence in technology has led some people to believe there will eventually become an omnipotent, one-stop-shop device. This is called the Black Box. It is expected to allow access to all media content, say a built-in computer, game console, and mobile phone, all inside your sunglasses as you stroll along the beachside.

I suddenly remembered the video on Sixth Sense technology invented by Pranav Mistry. This mini-projector with a camera and cellphone can do all sorts of things before thought of as unimaginable. Accessing the internet with its computer, it can obey hand gestures of the one wearing it and perform tasks like taking pictures, getting more info on products and books, and (strange enough) finding out words associated with the person you're talking to.

Such examples of unprecedented advance in technology calls for regulation, lest they be allowed as implements of abuse. Technological neutrality and regulatory forbearance may be invoked to limit the State's participation in making sure they are not used as tools for illicit purposes. But still, there are certain market competition-based factors that will by themselves affect the mass appeal of these devices.

First is that when black boxes are abandoned after their utility, like in planned obsolescence, the user will be left with many devices performing the same task. This creates clutter, rather than being able to dispose only any particularly non-useful device. Second, black boxes are oftentimes the product of technological experimentation. This then leads to impractical results where the user finds it harder to use devices too novel and radical to understand.

One example given is the creation of LG: a microwave with a TV screen. One will only watch during cooking time or while in the kitchen; however, that TV will certainly not be used for primetime viewing. In any instance, consumers would rather use specialized or dedicated devices for a particular purpose. Hence, the trend is not towards inventing more black boxes: a fallacy. This intuitive turn-off to the buying public and accompanying high R&D and production costs will make the manufacturer less competitive.

I believe that, in any event, regulation may be softened in this area where the end consumers themselves act to protect their economic interest. Here, competition must be allowed to bring out the best of what the market can offer. Barring any issues on antitrust or our penal laws on monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade, the public will do just fine. Their decision to purchase a new gadget or not is clearer--they won't be thinking inside a black box anymore.

Richmund C. Sta. Lucia, Post #10

Sources:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_convergence

2. http://www.ictregulationtoolkit.org/en/section.1679.html

3. http://www.lex-electronica.org/docs/articles_236.pdf

Is Overbilling Becoming a Trend?

Recently, I seem to have been very lucky to be the recipient of extraordinarily high billing statements from my cellular network service provider and land line service provider.

I’ll start with my business’ landline billing statement. Last December, I upgraded our landline account to include a DSL service. According to the customer service representative, my landline account will be billed an additional Php 1,400.00 for the DSL service. It’s a promo price offered to SME’s. The same price was indicated in the application form. Prior to that, we also availed of their additional wireless landline account for a mere Php 250.00 additional monthly expense on top of the same land line account. Our landline account is Php 1,200.00 per month.

1,200.00 + 250.00 + 1,400.00 = 2,650.00 per month

It is simple mathematics, Right? Wrong, at least according to my landline provider. Apparently, our provider mistakenly, as admitted by them, billed us twice for the same landline account. I raised this issue last December. The CSR advised that we pay the wrongfully assessed amount pending investigation, to be conducted by them. I was assured that the overpayment will be set off in our succeeding billing statements---that is if the result of their investigation is favorable to us. I disagreed for obvious reasons.

Instead, I insisted that they state in my complaint that I will pay the correct monthly dues but I will not pay the overbilled amount. After a couple of days, I was updated by the CSR that our complaint was filed and that I can pay the correct amount and that they will just correct our billing statement for the next month. That didn’t happen. Come January, our bill is now even higher. Not only did the provider included overcharge from December as an unpaid billing but it also charged us twice again for the same landline account. Worse, we were informed that the investigation is still pending. So now, unless we pay the overbilled amount, it’s just a matter of time before we receive a notice of disconnection. It’s that or I don’t pay and just open a new account with a competing provider. I prefer the latter. Our current provider can sue me in court if they want. Maghabulan na lang kami sa korte.

As for my cellular network provider, my friends have been complaining of outrageously high bills these past few months. Upon inquiring, the company claims it’s because they left their “data roaming” turned on. One friend was charged Php 30,000.00 for one month. When she filed her complaint, the same explanation was given to her---that she left her data roaming turned on. She disputed this knowing full well that she was aware of this feature and that she turned it off. Eventually, the company explained that her billing was a result of a computer error. The company reduced the bill to Php 3,600.00.

I, myself, have been victimized by these outrageously high monthly bills. Knowing that my cellular data roaming is turned off and that I don’t text or make calls to warrant such an amount, Php 8,000.00 is simply ridiculous. I figured it’s a convenient excuse to say that the customer left his data roaming on. Less vigilant customers will be surely be victimized by this.

These companies are getting away with theft.

post no. 10

Keeping Up

Dennis Quaid starred in a movie called “In Good Company,” where he played a 49-year old magazine advertising executive who got demoted after the company entered a merger and a tech savvy half his age, played by Topher Grace, was hired in his place. The movie portrayed how technology allows the younger generations, who are comfortable with IT, to skips through corporate ladders by producing innovative products and solutions. However, the movie later on showed how developments fall out of fashion as quickly as they come. And so, in this technology era, its all about keeping up.

This is especially true for SMBs who are encouraged to engage in e-business because of its low barriers to entry. With all the venues made available online, one can actually start an e-business in a couple of hours, without involving setting up costs. For many, it’s as simple as uploading pictures of products and their prices on facebook, multiply or a blogsite. It is precisely this easy access that encourages small time players, increasing competition by the minute. The challenge is to always keep abreast with the latest developments to maintain a competitive edge. Otherwise, the new wave of competition will take over and sweep you off the market scene.

Ma. Anna Katrina C. Eustaquio, Entry No. 10

Image from: http://brendans-island.com/blogsource/20100329ff/Dilbert108771strip550.jpg

Mouse v. Giants: Musings on Competition and Regulation

Of course there is a problem: a problem of trust. Especially when trusts – or those giant cartels formed specifically to reduce competition and control prices – imaginatively engage in anti-competitive behavior for the purpose of added profits. Such behavior creates deficits in international trade and offsets the benefits of trade liberalization. Manifestations of these deficits usually the rising costs of goods, defective or poor-quality products flooding the market, and/or the stagnation of technological research and development.

In this kind of set-up, there are no real winners. While there are still those who continue to make the case against antitrust policies, the general consensus is that there are no winners in the long run. Hence, antitrust policies are put in place precisely to combat monopolistic business practices, the end goal being optimal systemic efficiency. As Rosabeth Moss Kanter, in her book When Giants Learn to Dance, wrote: “Competition is a performance stimulant.”

The implementation of economically sound policies that help prevent or disperse illegal trusts is never easy. More so if a weak government and powerful cartels are involved – I imagine it to be like a mouse going against giants. (Well, unless that mouse is armed to the teeth with nuclear warheads… but I digress.) Since there are no explicit GATT or WTO agreements on the issue of competition and regulation, trade agreements and treaties continue to proliferate regionally and cross-regionally – quietly filling in the gaps of those issues that cannot, as yet, be fully addressed by the present GATT-WTO regime. However, these agreements, depending on the nature and demands of its general and specific obligations, often run the risk of being charged as undue state interference in established business practice. For example, where the rules are stringent, industries may complain that such stringency is harsh, unwarranted and unnecessary since there might not enough regulatory transparency to understand, and better navigate, what may be derisively seen as a confusing maze of bureaucratic red tape. For more arguments on how antitrust laws, and competition polices in general, are anti-free markets, click here.

I personally have no strong opinion as to how such tensions should be resolved. However, I do believe that antitrust policies should be based on the reasonable premise that the role of governments is not to force business entities to compete in a simulated market environment, but rather to ensure that no one is allowed to kill the competition

.