

Forget iOS. Forget Android. This Is Microsoft’s Market, Baby - profitbaron
http://www.profitbaron.com/forget-ios-forget-andriod-this-is-microsofts-market-baby/

======
code_duck
This already exists! An iPod Touch with Skype on wifi is the best home phone
I've ever owned. But would I really call it a mobile phone, or consider a wifi
only phone? I spend a lot of time in my car, and of course don't have stable
wifi in there. I tried to pretend my iPod was a wifi-only phone for a few
months, but it didn't work out for me. Perhaps wifi availability is good
enough in densely populated urban areas, but is using random wifi across the
city secure?

It will be interesting to see what Microsoft does with Skype and the carriers,
though. MS is not in a very strong position in the mobile phone market, and I
can't imagine the carriers like Skype at all, as charging per minute and per
text rather than by the MB for data is much more profitable. The neutered, 3G
only version of Skype that came with ym Verizon phone, which counts US
domestic calls against your normal calling plan, shows what Verizon thinks of
Skype. That's "Skype Mobile", there's another Skype which works only on wifi.
When you call Skype-to-Skype on "Skype Mobile", it dials a 1800 number in
Atlanta, and the sound quality is terrible. On the same phone, the wifi Skype
has markedly better sound quality. It seems to me that since I'm paying $25 a
mo. for unlimited 3G data, I should be able to use the data to make Skype
calls if I please. If Microsoft can make that happen, more power to them.

~~~
aphexairlines
Do Skype-to-Skype calls on Verizon really count against your normal calling
plan? Skype has a similar deal in Japan with au/KDDI where Skype-to-Skype
calls use the cell voice network (which is much clearer than over 3g on other
carriers) and don't count against the monthly minute allowance.

~~~
code_duck
You're correct, I guess I'm thinking of Skype-Phone calls using SkypeOut. On
my computer or iPod, those are unlimited for like $3 a month, but they do
count as minutes on Skype Mobile.

The only Skype-Skype I do is international, so that's why I hadn't considered
that. Thankfully those are still data charges only.

------
John212
I'm not sure what you mean by a WIFI SIM card. A SIM card is designed to run
on a GSM network.

Outside of a wifi area you would need to use some sort of network to transmit
your data.. there really is no option other than a GSM/CDMA carrier.

Also, we have the problem of distribution now. Microsoft doesn't have the same
retail presence that Apple has. Google proved that selling handsets direct to
consumers doesn't work that well. Nokia closed down their stores in NYC,
Chicago and London. Think of the retail stores that T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon,
Sprint etc have across the country... there is no way to compete with that.

The GSM protocol is design to handle voice data and is well optimized and uses
surprisingly little bandwidth. Skype is much heavier on bandwidth in
comparison. The skype protocol wasn't designed to be used as you walk through
areas of low signal or for 1,000 users going through one cell phone tower at
once. For simple voice data... the GSM protocol wins hands down.

If you want to imagine any Microsoft/Skype/Nokia/Windows 7 mash up.. what if
they adapted the Skype p2p technology for use on handsets to allow you to
connect through other handsets to get to a base station? This will allow you
to route around network congestion, prevent dropped calls, reduce network
infrastructure and increase network coverage.

Nokia makes the cell tower infrastructure through Nokia Siemens... If anyone
could do this, it is Nokia. Imagine how hard carriers would push a p2p
handset. </dream>

------
pohl
_With the Nokia deal, Microsoft has positioned itself with one of the biggest
carriers in the world to produce its phones on its operating system_

This is an extremely low-quality article. The author seems to not know what a
"carrier" is in the mobile industry.

------
makecheck
The initial cost of a phone seems to be subsidized by the carrier's data plan
contract; a phone that calls and texts for "free" would look more expensive up
front than its competitors. And if AT&T is even _slightly_ telling the truth
about the "load" phones create on its precious network, a Skype-only phone
would have to impose a significant tax on any WiFi network it passed through;
so how long do you think there would be decent free WiFi in areas that become
bogged down by phone Skype traffic?

~~~
profitbaron
Microsoft could easily subsidize these to compete with the carriers, as they
would be running via BING (producing them revenue in ad clicks).

Also with regards to the Wifi issues obviously, the networks would have to be
improved with regards to WIFI offered by companies and Microsoft would have to
most likely invest into improving the network as well but, with billions lying
around. It is worthwhile to go BIG on a market where it has huge potential
than trying to milk its dying cash cows forever, until the company completely
burns out.

~~~
sfgfdhgfdshdhhd
I'm not sure the propaganda that MS cash cow's Windows and Office would stop
anytime soon. All this post-PC bs Stevie feed people through their extravagant
TV ad campaign surely have brainwashed the uneducated self-proclaimed pro-
sumers.

------
6ren
Free mobile, subsidized by ads is an attractive vision - but you need a
network to do it.

And, maybe advertising revenue is not sufficient... yet. However, because ad
revenue increases over time, and network cost decreases, it seems inevitable.

e.g. Google tried to do this with wifi in san fran (but IIRC had council
problems). Google already has huge market share, so it's probably not crucial
for them. But an up-and-coming search/advertiser with lots of money (like MS)
is motivated and able.

------
bradleyland
The inhibitor to free phone calls using data, rather than traditional voice
minutes, is not the technology; it's the carriers (ATT, Verizon, etc).

------
wglb
Whoops--lands me on a godaddy ad page, offering to sell me the domain.

------
drivebyacct2
Except that Android and Google Voice could snipe them out in nothing flat. In
fact, I have full confidence that they could push out their existing code call
it beta, and have all of this functionality on millions of phones right now.

The infrastructure is already there. I know it, because I use this fabled
phone right now. When I'm on a Wifi network, my 3g is turned off. My texts
stream in (and are synced with all my PCs) through Google Voice. My calls are
connected to the SIP built into Gingerbread. My outgoing calls are registered
with the GVoice web interface (via GVCallback) and are then connected to the
SIP on my phone.

(also note, that all of this is done transparently. If you call or text the
phone number that I give out to everyone, my phone operates the same
regardless of if I'm on Wifi/3g/etc)

Meaning, when I have wifi, I can make and receive texts and calls without
incurring data charges. I can do this over 3g if I wanted as well, but
honestly, voice performance on 1x is still better than VoIP.

~~~
aphexairlines
If Google were interested in providing outgoing access to the the telephone
system over data networks with Google Talk and Google Voice on Android like
they do on the GMail website, they would have done so already.

