Free Newsletter
Is open the new closed?
Free newsletter via e-mail
Tools
 
  
Is open the new closed?
I'm trying to be optimistic about the Verizon Wireless "Any Apps, Any Device" initiative, but try as I might, I can't shake the feeling that it sounds too good to be true. A year from now, Verizon Wireless' network will support any application and any device that meet certain as yet undefined technical specifications. This from the carrier that Columbia professor, and open access proponent, Tim Wu dubbed the "most closed" of the big carriers.
Most pundits have called the announcement an "about-face" for the carrier, but I think Verizon Wireless is just looking over its shoulder. It sees Sprint with its planned WiMAX network, which is an open access network. It hears Google repeating "open, open, open" when referring to any and every wireless initiative it rolls out. And it sees rival AT&T offering the most coveted mobile phone the industry has ever seen-the Apple iPhone. We can't keep up with the whims of the wireless user anymore, Verizon says, so it's time to open up.
So far, Verizon Wireless has only made a careful promise to open its network by the end of next year. The industry won't get a peak at the "approval process" devices and applications must go through before making it onto the open network until next spring, when the carrier releases its technical requirements. An "approval process" sounds a bit like a closed door to me.
Nitpicking aside, Verizon Wireless president and CEO Lowell McAdam characterized the FCC's "open access" rules for the upcoming 700 MHz spectrum auction as "an experiment" in an interview with the Wall Street Journal back in July.
"This is an experiment the FCC wants to do," McAdam said at the time. "We'll do it, but we won't be able to guarantee those customers much other than that the network will operate properly."
The tone is still telling. "We'll do it, but…." McAdam went on to reserve the right for Verizon to block certain applications and features for the phones it sells-regardless of open access rules for other devices. The FCC never made it clear whether all devices on the C-Block of spectrum from the 700 MHz auction will have to allow any applications, or just third party devices. Google argued that it meant all devices. Now, Verizon Wireless is reshaping the open access debate in its favor--reshaping it by closing it up. Just a bit. -Brian
More stories about Verizon Wireless Sprint Spectrum Google Handsets iPhone carrier open access WiMAX
Comments
Posted by Steve Haney | November 28, 2007 - 4:07pm
I agree that that there are still many unknowns as to Verizon's plans and how all this will actually fall out. Everyone in the blogosphere keeps saying "the devil is in the details" when it comes to this announcement. No one quite believes it will be what we all want it to be, and that it will spur innovation and create mobile services consumers actually want. Whatever the case, I think the next couple of years will be exciting ones for developers. The largest digital platform in history is opening up a little bit more, and in their direction. Going to be fun to watch.
Posted by Anonymous | November 29, 2007 - 11:19am
Open access sounds great, until one of the applications requires support, because inadequate testing of the embedded software stack. The key question is: Who will support all of these different applications, once they are deployed?
Posted by Jim Grams | November 29, 2007 - 12:20pm
Open Access will mean different things to different people in the mobile value chain. One thing I'm willing to bet on, though, is that Verizon Wireless' "open access" approach won't mean "inexpensive, unlimited, mobile broadband" access, which tends to be what users and application developmers dream of having. It's one thing to allow any technologically capable device (i.e. CDMA EV-DO) device to use the network, but it's another to let that device use it for a pittance.
I can imagine VZW only offering "unlimited", flat rate service bundles to selected devices. Or providing a multi-tiered rate plan that has much higher rates for devices that aren't managed and controlled by the carrier. They can't afford to give away the service, after all, just in the name of "openness"! In their announcement they seemed to be saying users will only have to pay for what they use (which sounds like metered kilobyte pricing to me).
Providing a more open development environment for application providers and device innovators, however, is a very good thing, even if it comes at a price. For that much, anyway, we can be optimistic this announcement will advance the mobile data industry rather than just provide another dark alley to explore.
Comments (3) | Post a comment