Comments on: P2P may be Google’s biggest weakness and an Operator’s biggest asset

By: bernard lunn

bernard lunn — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:10:49 +0000

interesting thread. I agree that P2P is the only alternative to giant server farms (which give a few firms with $$$$ billions to invest a big barrier). There does seem to be a link to social networking in the sense that we relate through content that we share through P2P networks.

By: Antonio Peña

Antonio Peña — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 13:20:50 +0000

Ajit,
I think that p2p and social networkings will be the future of mobile content services. Operators are the kings in this esenario but they have to start knowing there user. Today for example in latam 85% of the mobile phones are prepaid and operators really dont know how are there users. By the other hand 75% of the mobile content is download thrue the operators master portal. Today things are changing and we are starting to see that social networkings that knows there users ares starting to sale mobile content with great succes. Tomorrow these social networkings coul be MVO and offer to there users the best prices from different operators. But for all that you must now your user very well and that is very expensive in resources. That is why we develop a soluction call MOOGA ( http://www.infinitemoco.com) MOOGA is a self learning mobile entertainment ecosystem incorporating Artificial Intelligence techniques to understand, track, predict and recommend mobile content based on individual user tastes, downloads and popular contents. MOOGA is a platform that was conceived to be used in operators because it brings to the mobile world concepts which has proven to be successful in the internet such as the long tail and the wisdom of crows.
Here you can see a demo:
http://www.infinitemoco.com/english/mooga.htm

By: Ajit Jaokar

Ajit Jaokar — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 16:41:56 +0000

Thanks Martin. I like your thinking i.e. ..
>>>
If we look at it this way, what can be done using this principle, besides sharing files and connecting VoIP end nodes?
<<<
Thats the key here! rgds Ajit

By: Martin Lawrence

Martin Lawrence — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:26:43 +0000

I agree with Ajit and Tope
P2P is a concept that puts the power of end nodes to work, reducing (if not eliminating) dependence on centralized systems.
What is needed to unlock the power of internet-connected intelligent computing devices is, at the most basic, a table with pointers. E.g. Napster, e.g. Skype: here’s the IP that will provide access to (file/person)
And even this task can (and is) distributed to always-on PCs (supernodes).
If we look at it this way, what can be done using this principle, besides sharing files and connecting VoIP end nodes?
Example: It is quite likely that cellphones will be the music repository of choice. Could a smart agent on my phone register how often I listen to songs? Yes. Could that agent put songs I haven’t listened to in a year for sale? Why not. Would that be P2P?
A mobile device, as my most personal computer, could host a smart agent that provide presentation services regarding things I want to sell. And automatically negotiate with potential buyers.
Just my 5 cents…
Regards, Martin

By: Ajit Jaokar

Ajit Jaokar — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:27:00 +0000

Thanks Peter, Seb and Tope. I agree with Tope (and which was my point) i.e. we cant look at the future with the ecosystem of the present. P2P is highly disruptive and no one really knows(and I dont claim to make any predictions either) how users will use all this bandwith and connectivity in a P2P mode.
I am however a BIG believer in the power of grassroots and in the belief that empowered individuals can drive grassroots change(much the same view I take for Africa and mobile technology – of which I am a big advocate) i.e. the more links you can create between people, the more the emergence of an ecosystem which will be truly vibrant – and whose ultimate form we cannot see based on the views of today .. Thanks all -
appretiate the feedback

By: Tope Omitola

Tope Omitola — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:19:31 +0000

Hi Ajit
Great article. Good insights. And PeterC, nice rejoinder.
PeterC’s rejoinder reeks of short-termism and the inability to look forward 5 years from now. Especially this:
>P2P is not a service – it’s a feature which only techies use.
Techies may be the one using it now, but dont you think they use it because they’re a few years ahead of the curve? I read somewhere that 40% of Internet traffic is P2P. Is this true?
Isnt Skype (and service slike it) P2P?
5 years ago, video on the Internet was mainly done by techies, now everybody’s doing it. Sometimes it’s good to lift one’s head from the current milieu and gaze into what may be coming.
So, I think Ajit is on to something here.
Tope

By: Sebastian Thalanany

Sebastian Thalanany — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:18:38 +0000

Hi, Peter,
Yes, your point is well-taken.
Seamless mobility support together with an open access policy, in concert with a service environment that leverages third-party application development, would be a catalyst for service-oriented revenue streams, and market expansion. At the same time, P2P applications do have their niche, and will continue to be attractive
Thanks.
Regards,
Sebastian

By: Peter Cranstone

Peter Cranstone — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:16:55 +0000

Ajit,
I can agree with the notion of seamless mobility – the ability to simply transition across networks.
As for P2P – I would disagree. Why? Because P2P is really nothing more than a bandwidth saving for “large” files. And typically those files are either music or video which are not typically going to be downloaded OTA (Over the Air) on mobile.
You’ve been using the Web for awhile. Tell me how many P2P clients you have installed and use on a daily basis. My bet is none.
Google’s brilliance was not building a better search widget and getting lots of people to use it, but rather unlocking the economic value of search.
The key to mobile is unlocking it’s economic value. P2P doesn’t do that. Seamless connectivity could do it, (it’s like having a highway available anywhere you want to go) – what makes that valuable is the services available for the customer.
P2P is not a service – it’s a feature which only techies use.
So back to your original question – What can Operators do that is unique and different in a Web world and still add value?
Start offering tools that help web designers make it easier to build and support mobile content for their installed base.
Peter

By: Ajit Jaokar

Ajit Jaokar — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 08:58:47 +0000

Hello Enrique, Thanks for your comments. I agree that P2P should not be undertaken for itself and that there are benefits of centralization. My talk was more of a strategic approach – and I also feel that the benefits of P2P are yet not fully explored. It is also a place where the network itself can add value(and I mean a fixed and mobile network). Appretiate your comments as usual!

By: C. Enrique Ortiz

C. Enrique Ortiz — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 15:44:32 +0000

Embracing P2P for the sake of being different may not be important…. In your example above indexing using P2P or centralized networking. Note that indexing can be accomplished using P2P method of work distribution, but it also requires the distribution of the P2P node/executable as well. And that goes back to the logistical issue of managing such nodes. That is why centralized is simpler, more controllable, yet, it is centralized (processing power); even if quasi-centralized i.e. centralized by region.
Carriers need other differentiators — and we are starting to see them w/ Verizon’s announcement that it is going to open the network. Other ways is to provide better services on the their network such as integrated billing, etc to developers and allow open network, any device, any application.
ceo