I’ve been saying for a while that the next generations communicate differently than past generations, moving away from voice into other mediums. Not exactly a revelation there, but the calls that say ‘voice is dead’ are getting louder. Some of this is just posturing and hype as trade show season starts, but is voice really dead as some would say? No, and to say it’s dead is missing the point. It definitely has been put in its (increasingly minor) place but why is this a surprise? Will voice ever actually go away? Of course not. The point is there is not one golden bullet when it comes to communications and the telecom industry still can’t get a handle dealing with how people communicate. We keep recreating past experiences with a modern twist.

Now more than any point in history, individuals are communicating in a multitude of ways and with more than just one person at a time, and that is a challenge for telecom vendors and carriers. The telephony networks were constructed to deliver services to an address, to whomever was at that address. Mobile communications seem to be more personal, but it is still a matter of services delivered to a device, not to a person. Don’t think so? I bet you can’t pick up someone’s cell phone and register yourself on it and receive a call.

Every shopping site I go to I have to re-register myself including address and payment information. It’s just like walking into individual stores in a mall and having to pay at each store before I move on to the next one, but without having to leave home and without the convenience of a credit card reader.

I can go to nearly any browser and log in to my Facebook page, my Amazon account or my various message boards. Those services follow me wherever I go. But if I leave my cell phone at home, I’m done as far as receiving calls or texts from anybody. That’s one problem. The other is that all of my services continue to be individual services, maybe grouped together. My cell phone, IM and Facebook addresses and friends lists remain individual. Every Web site I visit requires a unique identification (usually an e-mail address and a password). Even my wireless carrier requires me to have a unique user name and password for each cell phone in my family for me to add features, even though we are on the family plan and it’s all on one bill.

The challenge for our industry is that vendors and operators still treat each form of communication independently. You have voice services, text services, instant messaging, video calling, VoIP (a technology, not really a service), as well as the multitude of social networking options.

Many people today are trying to reach multiple people at one time, or just send a quick message. A voice call is not the way to do it. There’s too much social protocol involved (“Hi, How are you? Good, you? Fine, thanks. Hey I was wondering....” It just takes too long.)

The Washington Post is stating that text messaging has exceeded voice traffic for the first time in history. This has been going on for a while, but we are definitely past the point where voice is the dominant form of communications. And the impact of this shift? Wait until January 20th. According to the very official-sounding JCCIC (the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies), “Be aware that it may be difficult to talk or send pictures from your cell phone, according to wireless companies. Please use text messaging to send critical messages.” Bring yourself, but especially your thumbs.

Additionally, it is hard to find a PowerPoint presentation on Cisco’s Web site anymore as video has taken over as the Cisco communication format of choice. CNN boasts a wealth of multimedia content across its news options, both professionally and reader-generated. Alcatel-Lucent has done well integrating PowerPoint with Flash Videos to drive their points home in a multimedia format. And pretty much every vendor’s Web site today features some sort of flash, video or YouTube-type experience. Nearly all of the major telecom vendor’s Web sites have gone Hollywood. Interestingly, none of the major U.S. wireless carriers have a video content feature on their home pages.

The time is now for implementing truly next-generation services and solutions, instead of incrementally better ones. We are missing the point trying to pick video over voice, IM over e-mail, and so on. Instead of picking A format, we should be loading our kit with multiple tools to use as appropriate. Video is a great medium for communication — it offers the sights, sounds, emotions and context of a story beautifully. But if I’m just trying to understand the story quickly or scan the facts, video is a less than efficient medium. We need to address the problem of multiple address books, friends lists and the authentication and payment duplications. IMS promises to merge applications together so that we have common access, but that has not happened yet. Will it?

Chris Nicoll is a principal at Nicoll Consulting Inc. His more than 20 years of experience working for telecom equipment vendors, carriers and as an industry analyst has helped him build expertise in evaluating competitor strengths and weaknesses, developing market messaging and positioning, and building multinational cross-organization relationships to develop, coordinate and implement corporate strategies. Nicoll previously worked at Alcatel-Lucent/Lucent Technologies, Current Analysis, Visual Networks, Netrix and Tymnet.

For the second time in our history, the Internet played a huge role in the presidential election. “Game Changing” in every sense of the word. Many Republican leaders are pointing to the breadth and depth of the Obama campaign and supporters’ online organizations as the difference-maker in the election. Rebuilding the Republican Internet advantage is one of the 10 items Karl Rove points to in his plan to get the Republican Party back on top.

The move of government (insert local, state, federal) to the Internet has been a steady progression over the past 10 years. The next four years is expected to accelerate that to levels not seen before. And that brings a key issue into focus — the gulf between the (broadband) Internet has and has nots. And those grassroots organizations that helped elect the president now are mobilizing to influence policy in the new administration.

So my question is this: If we have identified the Internet as the difference-maker in governing our country, is it time to get serious about a national broadband plan to broaden the base of those involved? Even more so today, if you are not online, you are not ‘In the Know.’

Barack Obama’s campaign success centered on the development and management of a broad grassroots campaign that largely was managed, coordinated and run via the Internet. According to several published sources, the Obama e-mail database contained more than 10 million names. Greater than 1 in 3 names on the list donated money to the campaign, and many donated multiple times. Multiple organizations relied on e-mail and Web sites to connect to their members (including Move-On.org, RePowerAmerica.org) and to initiate action of some sort, whether volunteering, contributing, voting, etc.

What all of this did was mobilize a population, in this case for political purposes. But we can do the same thing for educational, health care, agricultural and other purposes as well. We now know HOW, so let’s put that knowledge and organization to broader purposes.

As more information, and more activity, is initiated and sponsored via the Internet, a public policy that makes affordable broadband Internet access available to everyone should be a high priority. If Negroponte is bringing the benefits of the Internet to Sub-Sahara Africa, why not to Appalachia, inner cities and other under-penetrated areas of the United States? (Of course, inexpensive Internet access needs to be paired with inexpensive Internet access devices, but it appears that the ‘net book’ appliance may go a long way to meeting that need, perhaps even with subsidies if necessary or bundled with the access service.)

We CAN mobilize our far-flung populations to get involved, keep informed and influence the political process as never seen before. Those organizations that mobilized to get their candidate elected now are mobilizing in support of those issues important to them — health care, environment and others. Getting connected, being connected and staying connected is now tantamount to getting, being and staying involved — and having your voice heard.

There’s only one way of doing that — making sure it is as important that people are connected to the Internet on a high-speed connection as it is that they have health care. Information is power and is the enabler to a better life.

Who knows, with the reach and involvement of individuals, maybe the next major political change will be the elimination of the Electoral College — making U.S. elections truly the voice of the people.

Chris Nicoll is a principal at Nicoll Consulting Inc. His more than 20 years of experience working for telecom equipment vendors, carriers and as an industry analyst has helped him build expertise in evaluating competitor strengths and weaknesses, developing market messaging and positioning, and building multinational cross-organization relationships to develop, coordinate and implement corporate strategies. Nicoll previously worked at Alcatel-Lucent/Lucent Technologies, Current Analysis, Visual Networks, Netrix and Tymnet.

Is Green good business? Is it a fad? Is it sustainable? Every telecom and IT supplier is talking up their green credentials. “Sustainable” models for telecom and IT are the rage and even conferences specifically dedicated to Green IT/computing/telecom are popping up. Commercials on TV advertise the business sense of tree hugging, saving “40 percent of electrical costs.” What does this mean to the telecom community? A lot, from the social consciousness to the bottom line, and it should not be ignored. In fact, it represents the opportunity to take a look at how the providers are doing business, and maybe doing it smarter (faster, cheaper, AND green). IT is the model to follow.

The IT industry has already picked up on the need to be more energy efficient. One study shows that for every watt reduction in power usage, two additional watts are saved in cooling. Quite a bargain. Extrapolate the savings out when you realize that according to the U.S. General Services Administration, today large consolidated data centers alone use more than 5 percent of all electricity consumed in the United States. And these data centers are increasingly housing applications used by telcos and enterprises to meet their communication needs.

The impact of going green can be dramatic as reported by the EPA in its Fall 2008 Intergovernmental Solutions Newsletter “green IT”:

“In January 2005, EPA received the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) silver certification from the U.S. Green Building Council for the EPA’s large data center, the National Computing Center (NCC). Through strategic improvements and operational modifications made at the NCC since then, total annual power consumption has been reduced by 20 percent (4.5 billion BTUs), despite a rise in the number of servers in use.” So even accommodating additional growth in servers, the EPA was able to reduce its annual power usage by 20 percent. That is a sustainable model for growth, and savings.”

The report continues, looking ahead:

“By 2011, the trajectories (using the measured results of our case studies) showed significant savings over current trends.

For example, we demonstrated that with legacy retrofits, data centers can:

• Save between 59.9 and 64.6 billion kWh/year
• Save up to $4.5 billion annually
• Cut 40.9 million metric tons of carbon (more than 7 million cars)

With a combination of both new commissions and legacy retrofits, they can:

• Save between 64.2 and 68.9 billion kWh/year annually.
• Save up to $4.8 billion annually
• Cut 43.6 million metric tons of carbon (almost 8 million cars) annually.”

With savings of between $4.5 and $4.8 billion annually, the question is not if going green will save money, the question is, how can telecom benefit from going green, besides the PR benefit? “Networking” ─ once you get past the access and transport networks ─ is increasingly moving in the direction of software: applications, services and in particular, subscriber data management. Even from a platform perspective, some vendors are embracing the open concept which benefits from the IT lessons learned on efficiency.

“Cool rooms” and the ubiquitous raised floor to house telecom and IT equipment is fast becoming a thing of the past. Instead, the model is to direct the cooling specifically to the equipment that needs it, and only to the degree it is needed. Closed racks that are individually temperature controlled with cooling vents ducted directly into the rack require more intelligence in the overall HVAC (heating, ventilation and cooling) system, but those systems are available today and are already in use.

As the telcos complete their conversion to IP and Ethernet and move to create value-add on their network infrastructure, the next battleground will be in the server farms. As the size and build-out of central offices shrink, some of the remaining space could be used for application servers. The sooner telcos embrace the IT model on data center and server farm efficiency, the lower their cost of service rollout and management and faster time to market will be.

Chris Nicoll is a principal at Nicoll Consulting Inc. His more than 20 years experience working for telecom equipment vendors, carriers and as an industry analyst roles have helped him build expertise in evaluating competitor strengths and weaknesses, developing market messaging and positioning, and building multinational cross-organization relationships to develop, coordinate and implement corporate strategies. Nicoll previously worked at Alcatel-Lucent/Lucent Technologies, Current Analysis, Visual Networks, Netrix and Tymnet.