View RSS Feed

Ben's Talk3G Blog

iMessage vs SMS. Did the mobile operators just get tagged?

Rate this Entry
10 Comments
by
Ben
, 7th June 2011 at 08:13 PM (14353 Views)
I know a thing or two about text messages.

There are two core 'types' of text. Person to person, and bulk.

In p2p I'm putting all those texts we send each other. Bulk is everything else for the purpose of this post - marketing, alerts, etc.

Apple just lobbed a whopping great stone at p2p text messaging, and that stone is called iMessage.

No biggie, you might think; mobile operators give generous SMS allowances with their iPhone tariffs, so what's it going to matter if Apple takes those messages and puts them over its own network instead? The usage is converted to data, and iPhone tariffs usually contain plenty of that, too.

Three things:
1) Picture messaging (about 20-25p a pop)
2) Video messaging (shockingly up to 50p a pop)
3) Overseas messaging (again 20-25p)

iUsers just got all these for free, plus free delivery reports, read reports, and even an indication of when the sender is typing a message. That's lost revenue for the mobile networks, whichever way you slice it. And to think Three UK foolishly thought it could charge 1p for just a delivery report?

Plus mobile networks will no longer be able to push those generous text message allowances in a way that makes them look valuable. "...for that you get 1000 texts!" What does that matter if you're only sending a hundred or so now most of your messages travel via iMessage?

I don't know what SMS revenues from the smartphone sector are like (they'll be lower than feature phones I'd have thought due to IM and email), but many a mobop CEO will have been scratching their heads today wondering just how they didn't see this latest revenue encroachment coming. Like it or not, Apple and others are, byte by byte, converting their organisations into dumb pipes.

FaceTime has already stolen video calling (that 50ppm con). Why not add iDevice voice calls to the mix and call it a day? Apple can detect which numbers are floating around in their 'cloud', so they can route calls accordingly.

Could a carrier backlash be on the cards?

Don't believe everything that has been tweeted and written about regarding SMS today, though. It's not actually going anywhere. Closed messaging systems are one thing, and they'll always be around, especially when standards bodies fail to keep up, but (like email) we need SMS to get messages telling us our shopping is on the way, our hair appointment is in an hour, and to make sure we know that we can claim for the accident we didn't have last week. SMS has exploded because it's simple and interoperable, and so as long as handsets continue to implement the SMS standard it'll continue to be a medium of choice for businesses/organisations the world over who need a reliable way to immediately contact mobile users.
Categories
Mobile Networks , Mobile

    Comments

    1. Hands0n's Avatar
        An interesting blog there Ben. This little shot across the operator's bows reminds me of the days when Telex was the mainstream means of typewritten communication. There were few contenders. At 50bps it used to take ages to get any lengthy messages anywhere, but as with SMS it was a global standard. Any Telex machine could call any other Telex machine in the world and it would just work. Later, much later, eMail came along and it all changed. Telex is now an oddity that barely persists - the Internet and all of the amazing messaging technologies it carries have usurped almost all other forms of electronic communications.

        So can Apple cause such a paradigm shift in the mobile messaging world? Certainly it can within its own ecosystem, in much the same way as RIM has had it to itself within its own network. But wider than that the game is still open to the likes of WhatsApp and similar cross-platform messaging apps. And there are so many that confusion reigns, people don't know which to go to, and there is a constant churn between the various apps. None of which are gaining dominance.

        But I certainly do like the iMessage concept and how it works - taking out of the user's hands whether it uses Internet or SMS. That is a nice touch.
      • gorilla's Avatar
          I don't think this is that special. FaceTime has still got a way to go and with iMessages users will still want to message those who are outside the iOS ecosystem. I do welcome this though as it will certainly bring IM mainstream.
          I use PingChat to talk to friends on Android, iOS and blackberry (there's probably a Nokia app but who uses them anymore ) so I'm used to sending text / images / audio via IM.
          I don't think the operators will care at this point - how many customers spend more than their monthly line rental? I have always said that mobile operators will one day be dumb pipes and this could start to happen in the USA where they already have 4G, but I think we are long way off that happening in the UK. (But I want it now!)
        • Ben's Avatar
            AFAIK iMessage automatically sends via Apple or SMS depending on whether the recipient is available to receive via Apple's ecosystem. So it's the whole element of the user not even having to consciously use it that'll worry operators most. BBM doesn't work like that, afaik, and IM doesn't because you have to consciously use it - including things like WhatsApp.

            FishText, fwiw, automatically detects other users of the service and can route messages for free or via SMS depending on that. Maybe Apple found some inspiration there

            The operators vehemently don't want to be dumb pipes. They want to own the customer relationship first and foremost. They know that being an ISP is no way to make a decent profit and they don't want to be on the bread lines. No, they want to be able to charge for things like messages consisting of just 140 bytes. P2p SMS is/was a veritable goldmine.
          • gorilla's Avatar
              I watched the keynote and I really don't get the fuss. This will only kill the networks when IM works like email and iMessage only works with other iOS devices and only internet connected ones at that.
              I will have to see how this works when someone with an iPhone wants to send me a message.
              Example:
              I'm out of the house with my Android phone.
              My iPad is at home connected to wifi and happily syncing away.
              When someone with an iPhone tries to send me a message they will see that I'm online and can therefore send me an iMessage. The fact that I'm not with my iPad is unknown to iMessage. Yes the user will see that their message is not read, but can they easily resend that message as a SMS? I can see this being very frustrating for some people and my GF will not use it. She knows that if she sends me a text or an email I will get that on my phone. iMessage creates doubt.

              As for the mob ops, I can see monthly line rental going up to offset any potential losses. Data is already pretty cheap and accessible by most customers. They could simply double the cost of data and reduce the included SMS bundles by 90% to ensure they maintain their margins. Let's hope they're not reading this ;-)
            • gorilla's Avatar
                Also why do Apple have so many communications tools now? iChat, Mail, SMS, iMessage, email, FaceTime (is there anymore?) never mind all of the IM apps in the App store.
              • hecatae's Avatar
                  does this explain the premium price for an iphone on contract? all that lost revenue that the operator can see occurring.
                • Ben's Avatar
                    @gorilla - I'm not sure how Apple are going to handle the multiple-devices thing, but if an iPhone user texts your number then I don't think Apple will route that to the iPad... not unless you've got an iPhone registered and using your number anyway.

                    I'd imagine SMS/iMessage/FaceTime will end up all the same sort of thing, probably in one app. iMessage could replace iChat also? Last nail in the iChat coffin I'd say. That just leaves email really, and third party messaging services.

                    @hecatae - I think iPhone contract prices may increase again...
                  • hecatae's Avatar
                      http://www.techeye.net/mobile/carrie...ecution-of-sms well written article, the carriers did not know of iMessage until Steve announced it on stage
                    • pctech's Avatar
                        Isn't this just a tad like Blackberry messenger which goes over RIM's own kit too.
                      • Ben's Avatar
                          pctech - sorry for the late reply. Sure, it's a tad like it. But iMessage intelligently routes the message via Apple's own infrastructure if it can, only resorting to standard SMS/MMS when routing by IP isn't possible. For that part, it works a lot like the FishText app. The user doesn't have to worry about whether the recipient has an iDevice or not.