I last left the reader thinking the term Web 2.0 was useful in gaining attention to the development of the Internet and attracting investors.  I also left readers with the thought that maybe a more accurate term could be converged media.  Frankly, I am not quite sure what term to use.  Technology development is an odd activity.  The final results of the creative sciences and arts are a combination of brilliance, social interactions, and some convergence of events.  Web 2.0 has become this all encompassing term.

I have read so many different opinions and talked to so many web-professionals I am bit foggy as to what the term is trying to articulate.  For awhile there are times when I think that “no one knows anything”.  The Web 2.0 discussions are one of those times.  But maybe that would be wrong to say.  I think it is more accurate to say “no one knows anything definitive”.  The Internet is this rapidly evolving thing that has become a part of the social fabric.  The Internet and all of the things that it has come to mean, looks like a whirlwind of stuff.  Lets call this whirlwind, convergence.

I think the concept of convergence needs to be embodied in whatever term is used.

When I first heard about Web 2.0 the term was used to describe the following evolutionary web development stage:

The term Web 2.0 appears to mean different things to different developers or users or industry players.  It has been described to me as an association with companies like Google, Flickr, and last.fm.  Things like blogs, linklogs, podcasts, RSS feeds, social networking software, and online web services (including my online publisher) are considered to be Web 2.0 services and capabilities.  Think of Web 2.0 as an interactive experience that enables the user to communicate with other users or communicate with websites.  Web 2.0 is not static compared to the old Web 1.0.  What I find the most glaring examples of Web 2.0 are the video applications and the social networking attributes of the Internet.  Today you can communicate via video conferencing, group posting, or listening/viewing concerts or conferences.  The terms that were coined to describe this visual and audio experience was podcasting, blogging, and wikis.  The hot new marketing term to describe the interactive group communications is “social networking”.

Originally I simply looked at podcasting as what I had envisioned ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) services, AT&T’s 1956 picture phone, AT&T’s 1964 Mod 1, and video conferencing were supposed to have been supporting; audio visual services.  In the late 1970s when ISDN development began, the big services being envisioned were video services and closed user group communications.  It was high tech back then.  We were looking at breaking past the 300 baud barrier and soaring to the 56 kbps limit of twisted pair wire.  When we hit the 56 kbps barrier it was quite an achievement especially when you consider we did this with ferrite core analog electronic memory systems that had its programming literally hardwired.  Even though the DARPA folks and universities were working on the Internet concept, working engineers like myself in the telecom industry had not even been thinking of the Internet.  The idea of blogging or wikis would have been completely foreign to me.  The idea of transmitting text to a CRT (cathode ray tube) terminal via remote means was nearly unheard of.  In fact when we were first developing technologies like ISDN, the effort of getting the dialed telephone number displayed was a major undertaking.  Outside plant was designed to carry voice and not pictures, terminals did not exist, terminal display technology was limited, customer needs had not been defined, markets for digitally driven data services had not been nurtured, and there was not enough bandwidth in the network.

At some point in the 1980s it became easier and more commonplace to think of video, text-based data, and audio file transmission over the network.  I think it was probably because we began to use software more heavily, the desktop computer became a common office tool, and computing platforms were more powerful.  Internal corporate technical discussions and marketing discussions of voice, video, movies, entertainment, medical imaging over ISDN was common in the 1980s and early 1990s.  However, the one thing we, engineers, were facing was the bandwidth barrier.  We were constrained by bandwidth restrictions of twisted pair wire.

Hope sprang anew in the 1990s when the DSL work that had begun in the late 1970s and saw the light of day.  Modems that had not existed years earlier now existed and could now be provided at homes and businesses.  The cost of conditioning the outside plant was still expensive but the marketplace began to demand voice, video, and data services.  Furthermore there were now devices beginning to make their way into technical trials that showed video.  In the early 1990s the Internet took more of a commercial foothold.  DSL promised more speed availability for services.  We had not even coined a term to describe this combining of voice, video, and data services over common wires and common terminals.  We thought ISDN was sexy.  In 1991 and 1992, the Bell System even launched a National ISDN-1 campaign.  During this time the term convergence was entering the telecom lexicon to describe what we were trying to do.

The dream of many telecom engineers since the 1950’s was providing video and audio to customers on a network and over a single terminal.  We had all faced obstacles.  After telecom switches began to incorporate integrated chips our hardware problems went away – we had entered the digital age.  The next obstacle to fall was the lack of software – and eventually that obstacle fell as well.  The only problem we faced was bandwidth.  The subject of bandwidth will be discussed later.

When you take a step back and examine the things a user can do today on the Internet, see over the Internet, hear over the Internet, and interact with over the Internet you come to realize we are looking at activities that were once performed over separate networks and separate devices only.  We are seeing a converging of functions and activities over networks and common devices.

Talking about Web 2.0 is just one aspect of the Internet.  Is it important? Sure it is.  Is this what we should be talking about?  NO.

We need to focus on the end game.  We need to focus on what is on the Internet and how it has become the focal point for much of this convergence.  Convergence is as much a marketing term as it is a technical term.  We are seeing convergence occurring on networks, where the network of a provider (carrier) is now carrying video, audio, and data on the same switching/routing platform and over the same physical transport medium.  We are seeing convergence at a consumer level as well.  Entertainment and socialization are driving the device convergence for consumers.

The network convergence (on the provider/carrier side) is being driven by economics.  It is not a new idea to have two disparate networks providing services to the same user by the same carrier.  In the early days of ISDN, we built separate network facilities and switches to enable ISDN.  Today, Qualcomm is building its MediaFlo network to provide a separate network for its carrier customers to provide entertainment to their consumers.  Rather than having the wireless carriers use their existing 3G networks to handle both two-way voice communications and video simultaneously, Qualcomm’s solution to the limitations of 3G and the way it has been implemented is building an overlay network.  This may not appear to be technically elegant but it is a smart technical workaround.

The reality is that if a carrier had to maintain very distinct networks to provide services to its customers the long term cost of maintaining those networks would eventually force the carrier to migrate/converge the network technology towards a single common platform.

What Are We Converging Towards?

Much of the talk today about the Internet has been focused on entertainment.  Yes entertainment and no, not some praise worthy laudable charity or social activity.  People spend more money on being entertained then they do on charities.  Please don’t expect a statistic from me on this.  Just open your eyes and look around yourself.  People spend thousands of dollars to sit court side at a regular season basketball game.  People spend thousands of dollars to sit in the nose bleed section of a World Series baseball game.  The World Cup just ended and I am sure folks spent a small fortune on tickets and beer.   For those who are religious about their sports and are offended by my comments well you just proved my point.  Of course there is that unmentionable thing called porn that industry pundits won’t admit to having any revenue generating impact on the Internet.  However, lets face it that unmentionable supposedly generates hundreds of millions of dollars annually on the Internet today.

For those who don’t care about sports but care about things like the news, books, or music.  Some folks spend hundreds of dollars on books; fiction yet.  As for the news, there are plenty of folks who need to pay for their news from at least half a dozen different newspapers and magazines.  News and books are sold to the public like we were watching a Hollywood movie.  The popularity of music can be described in one word; “iPod”.  Some folks have said the iPod is a fad.  Who cares?  Most consumer products sold today are marketed like fads to consumers anyway.  Device manufacturers want you to buy the next version of the device as soon as possible.  The iPod of today plays not only music but also video.  Consumers do not like not being considered out of fashion. In today’s cellular and wired online environment, ESPN has become a staple.  Movie studios are providing movie trailers over mobile phones using advertising to pay for their trailers.  Cartoons are being sold over the wireless and wired Internet.  Cellular carriers and wired Internet companies are streaming and downloading videos of all of the aforementioned.  The same cellular carriers and Internet companies are even selling music.

The upcoming Advance Wireless Spectrum (AWS) auction will be seeing carriers such as Verizon Wireless (Cellco Partnership) bidding but also media companies like Direct TV, EchoStar, Cable One (a unit of the Washington Post) and Liberty Media will be entering the bidding process.  The entry of media companies into the spectrum auction is a loud clear signal they are converging their business models and eventually their technology towards telecom services.

The big surprise for some is Current Communications Group, LLC.  This is a broadband communications over powerline company.  As a side note, I have seen the Current Communications technology; it works.  Current Communications’ entry into mobile media just added a new layer of complexity towards the provisioning of video services.

The marketplace is seeing music and video being provided to consumers over a plethora of networks with the displaying trending toward fewer devices.  I did not say fewer carriers.  I said fewer devices.  This is all part of convergence.

However, it appears that convergence is focused on entertainment services.  Today we see wireless carriers, telephone companies, Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs), cable television companies, satellite companies, and media companies all looking to get into providing traditional telecom services as well as media programming.

What qualifies as good quality video and music?  Quality content is a subjective matter.  What is considered funny to one person is agony to another person.  What is considered great acting to one person is horrible acting to another person.  What is considered great music to one person is nothing but noise to another person.  However, quality can be described mathematically.  Picture resolution is measured in terms of pixels (picture elements).  The current trend towards a high quality visual experience is HDTV (high definition television).  Of course vivid colors and picture clarity does not make a great visual experience.  If you don’t like the program, you are not going to think highly of the HDTV.  Another aspect of quality is the audio experience of the user.  Sound quality can be defined as the degree of accuracy with which a device records or emits the original sound waves.  Audio quality refers to the user experience, which refers to music.  Music is organized sound.

The blending of sound and video in order to transmit to a device in a meaningful way is a challenge because quality of service for entertainment is so subjective.  You cannot remove the subjective aspect from the quality equation.  The technical community has been working towards finding that ideal audio visual format (Video Format) that will meet the needs of the user and the content creator over the available bandwidth technology.  In the next article we will focus on bandwidth technologies and video formats that are commercially available and formats that are underdevelopment.

Next article:  The Video Format and Bandwidth

P.J. Louis

A well-respected and seasoned executive, P.J. Louis has 28 years of experience leading companies in the nuclear power, financial, media, Internet, and telecommunications industries.

Mr. Louis is currently Managing Director for Avondale Ventures.  Avondale invests in telecommunications and media business opportunities.  Mr. Louis currently sits on the boards of LF Productions and Titan Motion Pictures Group.  He provides due diligence, management consulting, and business development consulting services in a number of domestic and international industries.  He is currently focused on infrastructure, media, and telecommunications (wireless and wireline) initiatives.

Mr. Louis was an advisor to Weiser LLP, a U.S. financial advisory services firm.  Mr. Louis supported the telecommunications practice in the areas of mergers & acquisitions and corporate restructuring.  Mr. Louis was Managing Director for PricewaterhouseCoopers’ Telecom & Technology Restructuring Practice.  He was also Managing Director for FTI Financial Consulting’s Telecom Restructuring Practice.  Between 2001 and 2005, he served as an advisor in dozens of different restructurings.  Mr. Louis specialized in business recovery services for financially troubled and underperforming telecommunications and technology companies.

Mr. Louis was Chief Financial Officer for Fun Little Movies (FLM), a Hollywood-based filmmaking studio, which creates funny short films for the mobile media space.  FLM’s clients included Sprint PCS, Microsoft, and Smart Video.

Between 1997 and 2001, Mr. Louis was Vice President of Marketing and Product Management for TruePosition Wireless Location, Inc.; a holding of Liberty Media.  He had been responsible for establishing, leading, and maintaining the Company’s carrier relations, sales, sales technical support, product management, and marketing communications programs.

Between 1996 and 1997, Mr. Louis was Director for Technology for NextWave Wireless, a nationwide cellular carrier.  Mr. Louis was responsible for technology evaluation and network planning.

In the early 1990s, Mr. Louis was Managing Senior Engineer for Bell Communications Research’s wireless and wireline technologies group.  Mr. Louis was the laboratory’s subject matter expert for network signaling.  Mr. Louis had been an active participant in the creation of wireless telecommunications standards having served for 6 years as a chairperson on over half a dozen committees within the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA).

In the 1980s, Mr. Louis was Chief of Staff for Network Engineering for NYNEX Corporation (today known as Verizon Communications).  He had corporate-wide responsibility for the planning and deployment of new telecommunications technology.

In the 1970s and early 1980s, Mr. Louis was an electrical engineer and licensing engineer in a New York City based engineering firm.  Mr. Louis was the licensing engineer for New York City’s first synthetic natural gas generating facility.  Mr. Louis was also Lead Engineer for Stone & Webster’s nuclear emergency response task force.  His specialty was command, control, and communications disaster scenarios.

Mr. Louis is the author of seven telecommunications technical-business books; “Telecommunications Internetworking: Delivering Services Across The Networks”; published in 2000 by McGraw-Hill, “M-Commerce Crash Course”, published in February 2001 by McGraw-Hill, “Broadband Crash Course”, published in September 2001 by McGraw-Hill, “Telecom Management Crash Course”, published in June 2002 by McGraw-Hill, “The Financial Handbook for Technologists”, published in September 2004 by Mind Commerce, “The Network Manager’s Reference Guide” published in February 2005 by Mind Commerce, and “The Definitive Guide To Wireless 9-1-1 – 2005” published in August 2005 by Mind Commerce.  Mr. Louis was a member of the editorial advisory board for “Cellular Integration” magazine.  He is a senior member and was an officer of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Communications Society New York Section.  Mr. Louis has a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from Columbia University (NY) and a Masters of Science degree in Technology Management from Polytechnic University (NY).

Mr. Louis has begun work on “The Telecommunications and Media Technology Handbook” for Mind Commerce.