The following text is copyright 2000 by Network World, permission is hearby given for reproduction, as long as attribution is given and this notice is included.
Closed gardens
There has been a new
development since I mentioned Wireless Access Protocol (WAP) a few weeks ago
("Three means a trend" nww 4/17/2000) that may signal significant
changes in the WAP service offerings. WAP, as originally envisioned by service
providers, may even be on the ropes.
WAP was developed by the
WAP Forum (www.wapforum.org) which got its start in 1997. WAP was developed in
the context of trying to support IP-based services over low-speed wireless
connections to cell-phones with very small displays, slow processors and
limited battery lifetimes. The developers made some design tradeoffs to support
these constrained environments. The primary decision was to not support native
Internet applications such as HTTP and SSL, but to develop special versions
that were better suited to the conditions in the wireless world of 1997. This
decision meant that there have to be gateways between the WAP parts of the
world and the rest of the Internet to translate between the WAP version of the
protocols and the Internet-standard versions.
At the time this
approach may have looked like the best, if not the only, way to bring Internet
access to low-speed wireless devices. But one side effect of using gateways
just landed France Telecom in court. Even though WAP does not require it, most
of the wireless phone companies have assumed that they would pre-program the
address of one of their own gateways into the WAP phones they sell. There are
good reasons for phone companies to want to do this. If they run the gateway
they get to charge the user for use of that gateway. If they do not they risk
becoming a commodity IP connectivity provider. There is even IP-telephony
technology that would let the user bypass the phone company gateway for voice
service, eliminating the major source of revenue for these companies. But a
French court has just decided that locking the user into only using the
provider's gateway violates competition rules and that France Telecom must let
the user point to any gateway they want to. This may have a profound effect on
the business model needed to support this type of mobile service.
Another by-product of
the use of gateways is actually harder to deal with. No court can fix the
problem that gateways by their nature inhibit the deployment of new
applications. If a new application needs to transfer data in a way that the
gateway does not support then the application can not be deployed unless the
gateway is updated. Gateways create walled gardens that block the view of the
rest of the world.
These problems along
with newer integrated circuit and battery technology and the higher bandwidth
that will be available with the next generation of wireless devices may make
WAP a sub-optimal solution to the problem without the benefit of user lock-in.
We may just see real Internet service to new wireless devices.
disclaimer: Harvard does
not have to use lock-in to keep its customers and the above is my observation