http://weblog.demon.net/ en Copyright 2008 Thu, 22 May 2008 09:11:36 +0000 http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Lets face it, everyone likes getting a good deal and when it comes to internet services, there appears to be no shortage of ‘good deals’ on the market – at least on the surface. However, the way we are using broadband is changing as more and more people organise their work, home, life and leisure around online services. The fact is, if you provide a service, people will want to use it. In the case of broadband they want to use it for data-rich video and audio applications – and why shouldn’t they! Some consumer ISPs, however, are throwing their toys out the pram as this does not fit with their “stack ‘em high, sell ‘em cheap” business model. They want to put as many customers as they can onto a network so they can sell their products cheap and undercut the opposition. This is all well and good as long as their users only want to check a bit of email or do a spot of online shopping; heaven forbid that consumers may actually want to use the Internet for something more, something that may actually require low contention and a bit of bandwidth. So, this goes back to the age old saying - you get what you pay for. If you opt for a cheap Internet service then you need to be aware that you will be sharing your bandwidth with lots of other users. If you have a broadband connection of up to 8Mbps, then if you’re close to an exchange, theoretically that’s the download speed you’ll get. However, if all your neighbours are online at the same time playing World of Warcraft or downloading large video files then you’ll be lucky if you get 1Mbps, let alone eight! Let’s face facts – it is the consumer ISPs’ business models that are fundamentally flawed. With strong competition between consumer ISPs all wanting to provide the cheapest broadband, the service customer’s get is going to be severely compromised. While you’re getting that cheap deal, you’ll be suffering from high contention, usually with a very restrictive fair usage policy slapped on for good measure – all working to limit the amount of content that you can download. It is time for consumer ISPs to wake up to the reality of the modern Internet. Consumers need to be offered packages based on how they want to use it - if someone only requires basic surfing with a small amount of download capability, then offer them a basic package. If customers want to download or stream from iPlayer or similar high bandwidth services, then a different type of package is required. Consumer ISPs need to stop focussing on offering the lowest prices to secure the most customers and need to adopt more of business ISP model, providing a scalable range of products and services that meet the needs of the customer depending on the usage that’s required. By making it clear to customers exactly what they will be receiving for their hard earned cash, ISPs can sell products that actually meet the customers needs. That’s not just a business model approach – it makes good business sense. http://weblog.demon.net/2008/05/are_consumers_getting_a_raw_de.html http://weblog.demon.net/2008/05/are_consumers_getting_a_raw_de.html Broadband Thu, 22 May 2008 09:11:36 +0000 Recent reports suggest that as a nation, Brits are overworked, regularly spending well over 40 hours a week in the office. Dr Cary Cooper, a professor at Lancaster University believes that the explosion of technology, which has lead to a ‘long working hours epidemic’ is at the heart of the problem. He believes that technology stresses instead of supports, as businesses increasingly demand an immediacy of response. There is no doubt that a wider range of technology is much more readily available for companies, and that a higher proportion of the workforce is mobile. But is it fair that technology has to take the wrap for this ‘overworked’ phenomenon? Technology – since the launch of the mobile phone in the eighties, has allowed us to work on the move – to clinch that all important business deal while on the train, or to ‘buy buy buy!’ while queuing for a lunchtime sandwich. Fast forward twenty years and technology is much more advanced. People now use technology as an extension to the office; BlackBerrys and laptops give people the choice of working where and when they want - as more and more people can replicate the same working conditions found in the office, on the move. Mobile technology has a number of benefits – staff are retained if office locations change as they can work from home - and performance increases as employees work in their most productive environment. If your company employs a remote or flexible working policy and you work on your commute to the office, you have actually already completed a portion of your day before you hit the office – allowing you to leave earlier. If used properly it actually saves you time. The real problem to be tackled here is that people believe that their company expects them to carry on working once they have completed their hours – they don’t, or at least they shouldn’t! For technology to be recognised for the help that it is, policy and implementation needs to be effectively managed. Employers must accept that once the workforce has completed their hours, they should not be expected to work long into the night, just because their BlackBerry continues to flash. It has an off button for a reason. While it is true that there will always be a proportion of people glued to their mobile, or chained to their laptop, they are the people who would have worked long into the night anyway – and it doesn’t mean that normal people should follow their example, as this method of working doesn’t suit everyone. In the fast paced world that we live, people sometimes do require an immediacy of response – technology enables this. However, mobile technology is about more than immediacy. It is all about flexibility, efficiency and working smart. It allows you to make your own hours, work where you want and puts you in control. After all, who did win that race, the rabbit or the tortoise? Of course it was the tortoise (in a close finish) but you can’t fault the rabbit for its flexible approach to the task. http://weblog.demon.net/2008/04/can_an_overworked_nation_blame.html http://weblog.demon.net/2008/04/can_an_overworked_nation_blame.html Mobile Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:26:41 +0000 Mobile broadband suddenly seems to be the technology of the moment. Judging by the sudden rash of advertising plastered across busses and evening papers, it is as if a veil has been lifted and mobile operators can suddenly see the huge demand for a truly mobile access technology. Ericsson rates its ‘dongles’ so highly, that it has predicted the technology will spell the end of WiFi and relegate it to the broadband version of a telephone box. There is no doubting that mobile broadband is a great way of connecting while out and about, but will it really spell the end of the ubiquitous hot-spot? WiFi, when it popped on to the scene, was pretty impressive. Internet surfers were unshackled from their fixed-pipes and suddenly Starbucks became the de rigueur place for aspiring novelists and trendy businessmen to ply their trade. Mobile broadband, however, can do all that as well. WiFi is wireless, but it is not mobile. That means your connection is limited to within range of the router. Mobile broadband offers much more than this. As long as you are within range of a 3G base station you can access high-speed broadband. In theory this means you can sit on a train, or in a car, or anywhere at home and still be able to check your latest company emails or eBay auction bid. In terms of pure technology, when operating properly, mobile broadband can pose a serious challenge to WiFi. The problem with mobile broadband is that at present 3G coverage is not quite good enough to support a faultless service. There is still patchy coverage across parts of the county and this will lead to the service being slowed down or even dropped on occasions. Not great if you are hooked up to a corporate network and you have been working on a document for the past two hours – or that auction is about to close! Pricing is a bit of an issue too. Some consumer services out there are charging a lot for monthly subscriptions to mobile broadband. Although a lot of this would be recouped as users could do away with their fixed-line broadband and some providers charge a nasty fee if you go over your usage limits and while that might be fine for a personal service, businesses should look for providers that can deliver mobile broadband as part of a wider remote working strategy. Roaming fees can also be quite high; users wishing to connect abroad should use local WiFi services to avoid nasty phone bills (especially if you are visiting the US where many WiFi hot-spots are free). There is no doubt that mobile broadband is a very exciting technology and will be one to watch in the future. But it shouldn’t be seen as a replacement for WiFi – each technology has its place and users should spend time establishing what sort of service they actually need before they make the switch. http://weblog.demon.net/2008/03/will_wifi_beat_the_mobile_broa.html http://weblog.demon.net/2008/03/will_wifi_beat_the_mobile_broa.html Remote Working Fri, 21 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0000 It is now pretty well known that when it comes to broadband speeds, what you buy is not necessarily what you get. This debate will no doubt rumble on until some sort of regulation is passed to make sure consumers know exactly what they are paying for, or what they are paying for and not getting. Still it is not altogether clear how the industry will do this. In the midst of all the furore and indignation, it seems to me that a rather important element is being forgotten here. When a consumer or business buys a broadband package, at least they have some idea of what downstream speeds they are being promised. Sure they may not always hit these top speeds, but it is at least one way for users to compare broadband products on offer. So, here is my question, why can’t the same be said of upstream speeds? If you look hard enough at the small print, somewhere it will tell you the upstream speeds you can expect – but they are not nearly as well publicised as the downstream speeds. In fact, no contest. This makes absolute sense for home users, who will download much more data than they will need to upload, but surely businesses should be taking more than a passing interest in their upstream speeds? Most businesses only need sufficient download speeds to ensure that their email system works correctly, and that it doesn’t take up a lot of bandwidth. Upstream speeds are often far more important, especially if the business in question needs to send out large files on a regular basis – architects, media companies and surveyors for instance. They must ensure that their broadband can cope with sending larger files, not only so their colleagues and clients receive them promptly, but also so that it does not affect other, important applications. If anything, upstream speeds are only going to increase in importance for businesses as new applications enter the mainstream - VoIP is a case in point. VoIP is equally reliant on upstream and downstream data flows. If a small business is using a highly contended public broadband connection while also using a large number of VoIP clients, the upstream can run red-hot and will potentially crash the system if there is not enough capacity available. Upstream speeds are so important to many companies that installing SDSL broadband rather than ADSL, giving upstream speeds that match the downstream flow, seems like rather a good idea! This will give businesses the peace of mind that whatever their upstream needs, be it sending large files to clients, running VoIP or allowing remote access to their network for staff working from home, their needs will be met. So while the argument rages about download speeds, perhaps it is time for the industry, or customers, to start being a bit more vocal about this aspect of business connectivity. Dan Cole, Head of Product Management]]> http://weblog.demon.net/2008/03/what_about_the_upstream.html http://weblog.demon.net/2008/03/what_about_the_upstream.html Broadband Sat, 01 Mar 2008 09:00:00 +0000 It is nice to remember those heady, early days of the Internet, when corporations, politicians and users alike waxed lyrical about the freest flow of information humankind has ever seen. Fast forward 17 years and we are faced with yet another call for ISPs to do more to stop file-sharing – this time with a somewhat reactionary proposal that illegal file-sharers be booted off the Internet by their service providers. These calls are, not surprisingly, coming from those with the most to lose from a truly free Internet, with the music and film industries leading the assault. Logically it seems they may have right on their side – they own the IP rights for the tunes and movies so why should they be robbed of their profits? But then why should it be the ISP’s job to keep its users in check? Should manufacturers of tape-decks and CD players be required to monitor their devices and report back to the government every time a copy is made? Should car manufacturers be made to remotely shut down any vehicle they produce once its driver exceeds the speed limit? Of course not – it is absurd, and so is the idea that ISPs have any businesses policing their users. Quite frankly, as a musician and owner of copyright material myself I welcome the Internet and all it brings. Sure there's been a revolution and I'm struggling to sell as much vinyl as I once did (DJs having joined the laptop party recently). However the cost of entry into the market has dropped and I can now release more interesting and experimental material more easily. As an artist I do like to see people buying my music. However, whilst music piracy may be theft, I am aware that the majority of people with copies are not ripping me off. They are still copies - this isn't theft that necessarily deprives me of something I would otherwise have had! Many people who copy this material are not going to simply buy it instead, even if piracy was difficult. The music and film industries should worry less about enforcement and more about how they are going to take advantage of what is a much cheaper and more effective means of distribution. Things will change massively and profits may be insecure for a while, but ultimately the Internet provides a wealth of opportunities for artists and distribution companies – they just need to recapture some of the initial excitement of the Internet and worry less about maintaining the status quo. Jim Credland, security consultant, THUS]]> http://weblog.demon.net/2008/02/should_isps_really_be_the_internet_police.html http://weblog.demon.net/2008/02/should_isps_really_be_the_internet_police.html Broadband Wed, 20 Feb 2008 09:28:41 +0000 The technology press does seem to like a good scare story, and VoIP has seen more than its fair share. This month it was the turn of BT to get in the firing line as an ‘ethical hacking’ group claimed to have found a serious flaw in its Home Hub product which meant it could be used as a platform to launch nefarious VoIP frauds. It turns out that this was probably no more than a storm in a tea-cup as BT issued a strenuous denial and pointed out that they had spotted the flaw months ago and fixed it. Regardless, this incident did serve some value in once again raising the issue of Internet fraud. Phishing and pharming attacks are almost old hat by now. I received two phishing attacks this week alone – one telling me I had won the lottery and the other from a ‘businessman’ asking me to partner with him in an exciting (undisclosed) project. Both would have involved me sending my bank details to the fraudsters and shortly after, no doubt, my account would have been cleaned out. Pharming can be a bit trickier to spot and involves fraudsters mimicking legitimate Internet sites (usually retail outlets or banks) to once again part their victims from their bank details. Businesses, however, have not been slow to counter these threats, and with a combination of good firewalls, SPAM filters and employee education there is no reason for anyone to fall victim to these rather unsophisticated fraud threats. Vishing, however, is a different kettle of fish and it is here that VoIP is getting an entirely undeserved reputation. Vishing is where a user is called, or makes a call to an automated system that asks them for personal information (bank details for example) and then records the answer. The recordings are then used by fraudsters to liberate money from the victims account. The victim doesn't have to actually have a VoIP system either - it's just that the VoIP technology reduces the costs to the fraudster. Unfortunately the association between this particular use of VoIP for fraudulent purposes tends to tarnish the entire technology with the same dirty brush. It's a little like assuming all automobiles are evil simply because some of them are used as get-away cars after a robbery. Sure, the VoIP system here has enabled this new type of crime. But there are reasons for this, the VoIP system is flexible, relatively cheap, quick to implement, based on standard IP components and provides a great set of customisable features. Bear in mind the entire crime is possible with older technology - it was just too much of a pain in the neck to carry out. Whatever we do, we must make sure that we reclaim VoIP from the fraudsters and let legitimate businesses and home users claim the benefits for themselves. Matt Cantwell – Head of Product Portfolio]]> http://weblog.demon.net/2008/02/dont_let_the_fraudsters_ruin_voip.html http://weblog.demon.net/2008/02/dont_let_the_fraudsters_ruin_voip.html VoIP Wed, 06 Feb 2008 11:49:25 +0000 You’re probably familiar with WiFi, the wireless networking standard, from the numerous ‘hot spots’ springing up in towns and cities. Today though, the technology is expanding out of the coffee shops and airport lounges and into the office environment. The reasons for this are, as with most things in life, many and varied… Flexibility and cost are a major factor. A wireless network allows you to provide networking services in places where there is limited access to the fixed network. Instead of densely running cables throughout your building, you can rely on wireless access points covering areas where there is either lower usage or fewer employees. It is also quick to update; rather than having to re-cable a building, base stations are easily installed. The flexibility of wireless means employees do not have to be tied to their desks. Staff equipped with laptops can move around the office while retaining connectivity enabling increased flexibility in meetings, and the opportunity to ‘hot-desk’. The use of WiFi at work though is not without its problems – not least the issue of security. Any signal which can be received inside your office is also likely to be received outside too; and you never know who might be listening in. To combat this, your network should be using WPA encryption rather than the older WEP standard, and have MAC filtering (allowing you to specify which MAC addresses – unique codes embedded in every networking interface – are able to connect to the network). Finally, change the password for your wireless network frequently. WiFi is rarely a complete replacement for fixed networks. Gigabit Ethernet offers speeds of up to four times faster; and like any radio-based system, WiFi can be affected by interference (from atmospheric conditions or from poorly shielded electrical equipment). That said, the flexibility of wireless does make it an ideal complement to a fixed network infrastructure. This, combined with the advantages of offering the chance to implement new ways of working while reducing the need for excessive cabling, means that WiFi is something that every company should be investigating. Though, you will have to find another excuse to enjoy a visit to the coffee shop. Dan Cole – Head of Product Management]]> http://weblog.demon.net/2007/12/why_wifi_at_work.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/12/why_wifi_at_work.html SMB's Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:09:18 +0000 The Broadband Stakeholder Group’s warning in April 2007, that the government had just two years to encourage private-sector investment to prevent the UK from falling behind the likes of the US, Germany and Japan, was a direct challenge to Ofcom. So when Ofcom published its September consultation on the matter, it made for interesting reading. Not only did it go a long way to open up the conversation as to how we go about doing this, it also injected some economic thinking into the debate. With an estimated price tag of £15bn to roll out ultra-fast broadband network across the UK, it’s important to get the timing right. Rolling out too late could hold back economic development, but rolling out too early before there is real demand would also be economically wasteful – and premature public subsidy could distort competition. These are important considerations and it was good to see them getting the kind of national attention they deserve. Putting money and timing to one side however, there does need to be a degree of regulatory certainty to bring to life the broadband network that the UK will eventually need to stay competitive. Ofcom’s premise that our national infrastructure will need upgrading makes perfect sense. From Lerwick to Lewisham, businesses and homes the length and breadth of the country stand to benefit from such a development, so it is vital that we start talking about how to regulate this in the future. I fully support the regulatory discourse and while the consultation itself does not provide regulatory certainty, it is a step in the right direction. However, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that businesses can already get high-quality broadband services. THUS’s next-generation network has been operational since 1999 and businesses of all sizes, including the likes of GCap Media and GNER, are benefiting from faster and more efficient networking resources. On a personal level, it makes my working day a great deal more efficient and the ability to video-conference colleagues from home adds a nice human touch to my day! From a UK perspective, high-quality broadband is less of an issue for businesses since the main driver is likely to be entertainment services for the home. The UK already has one of the highest penetrations of multi-channel digital TV and we also have high availability of first generation broadband and high levels of customer satisfaction. Demand for bandwidth intensive applications is growing and now is the time to start talking about practical ways to achieve this. Richard Sweet - Director of Government Affairs]]> http://weblog.demon.net/2007/11/regulating_an_ultrafast_broadb.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/11/regulating_an_ultrafast_broadb.html Broadband Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:06:02 +0000 One of my colleagues overheard two guys in the pub last week, one asking the other when he thought his work would move over to VoIP in order to take advantage of the cheap phone calls. Anecdotal maybe, but still a clear indication that the average worker seems to have bought in whole-heartedly to the mantra that VoIP (running voice over the same network as data services) saves you money. Sorry to muddle the seemingly azure waters, but is that really the case? In our experience, VoIP as a standalone technology rarely delivers the cost savings heralded by some in the media or the telecoms industry. But don’t get disheartened just yet; VoIP can be a great cost-saving business tool if it is implemented as part of a wider network convergence. If an SMB is really keen to save money on communication and data charges it should investigate whether a migration to a next-generation network is a viable option. An NGN allows all types of traffic; voice, data and internet to be sent over a single, cohesive platform. So, not only can other media ‘buzz’ applications, such as video-conferencing be supported, it can improve productivity and operational costs across the board. Of course, you need to plan this sort of change carefully – its important to have a clear idea of what you want to achieve and make sure that your business is geared up for the transformation. If not managed carefully, the cost of change can outweigh the benefits, especially if you think about the risk that if your single network goes down the cost to your business is felt more widely. When convergence forms part of a wider strategy, however, it means that not just your network, but your applications and your employees can all work more efficiently and effectively. Does this mean that SMB owners will have more time and more money to discuss other new and hyped telecoms technology down the pub? Possibly not! Laura Joseph - Head of Product Portfolio]]> http://weblog.demon.net/2007/10/voip_just_a_load_of_hot_air.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/10/voip_just_a_load_of_hot_air.html VoIP Sat, 06 Oct 2007 09:53:53 +0000 … following a recent report from the Federation of Small Business that claims that just 18 per cent of SMEs are selling on-line, with less than one per cent of those generating all their sales through the internet. SME's main reason for such online reticence is their fear about online fraud and security … Research asks some pretty dumb questions. Reducing the problem to one of ‘fear’ doesn’t make sense. Fear is about risk and business is inherently risky – making money is about taking some risks. According to IMRG, UK e-retail sales hit four billion pounds a month in July this year, so some risks might be worth taking! If you ticked the box “Would like to sell online but worried about security and fraud” in the research questionnaire perhaps now is the time to consider how to reduce those fears into something manageable. The primary tool used by security professionals for thinking about these problems is the risk calculation. In case you’ve not used one of these before it works like this: Risk = Impact * Likelihood It’s a tool that lets you think about risk sensibly, address the issues and in some cases, achieve the holy grail of risk management - quantify the risk you’re exposed to. I’ll use an example, a fictional SME; let’s call them Scared Cat Ltd. Scared Cat have a website that has a phone number but no online e-commerce – remember research shows it’s too scary! Lets also assume that there is a ten percent chance of www.scaredcat.com being hacked in a year and that it costs £10,000 to have it rebuilt. The cost to Scared Cat averaged over lots of years from this risk, using the formula is £1000 pounds a year (1000 = 10,000 * 10 %). For this scenario the business impact of £10,000 is probably a relatively easy calculation: add up the developer rebuilding the website, lost business, lost time, and include some figure to cover damage to their reputation. The probability figure is going to be more of a guess, but they can talk to other people in their industry and harass or employ a security professional. Scared Cat need to decide if the risk is acceptable as it stands, and may want to look at ways of reducing it. Firstly is it acceptable? Well if the website brings in £1000 pounds of profit (not revenue!) a month then a £1000 a year cost is a pretty good deal. Can they reduce the figure? If so then the reduction is effectively profit – well really it’s less risk, but it’s very close to the same thing if the calculations are approximately right. Something that reduces risk in the terms of the security professional is known as a control. The trick is to implement the most cost effective control to reduce the risk – and you tend to get diminishing returns as you implement more and more controls. A good choice of control for a website with custom applications would be some application security testing or penetration testing. Often, because of the custom coding done for web applications, generic security scanning tools are ineffective and real value comes from the manual penetration test. The testing team will do all the things a typical hacker will do with the same tools at their disposal. Manual tests like these aren’t cheap but can be worthwhile. A test team time runs from about £750 a day upwards (you’re paying for all the time they spent prior to your job staying up all night, eating pizza and keeping up to date with the latest techniques).The good news is that you might see a reduction in that 10% ‘likelihood’ figure to around 2% - if it’s done well and often enough. So, using the risk formula should they run a penetration test? The risk has gone down from £1000 pounds a year to £200. The penetration test will cost around £3000 and will only save just £800 a year. So, unless the penetration test will provide protection for the next four years it’s not a great deal, unlikely as few web applications and servers remain untouched that long. It’s important to readdress the controls whenever the impact or likelihood changes. Frequently people focus on the ‘problems’, such as a new type of virus online and forget about the increasing impact figure as their business becomes more valuable. Should Scared Cat decide to tap into their share of this £4 billion pound a year market online by enabling e-commerce functionality on the site then the impact figure will increase dramatically, hopefully offset by huge additional profits. Suddenly the penetration test, or some other effective security controls may look like a bargain. Risk analysis techniques like these, however approximate, are essential for turning fear into a set of rational business decisions. Jim Credland THUS - Head of Product Security]]> http://weblog.demon.net/2007/09/fear_and_longing_for_ecommerce.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/09/fear_and_longing_for_ecommerce.html SMB's Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:50:46 +0000 So it’s official, following years of speculation about how addictive the BlackBerry really is, Gartner has released a research report predicting a meteoric rise in the use of mobile email. It forecasts that the popularity of text messaging is on the wane, as by 2010 over a fifth of email users will be sending messages wirelessly. Also that within three years wireless email users would have grown from 20million to 350million worldwide. That’s more than 320 million new users - more than the population of the USA! What will this huge upsurge in mobile emailing mean? The short answer is that by 2010 people will think emailing while waiting for a flight is as normal as texting on a bus. This change in how people want to communicate is where SMBs will really notice the impact on their business. As customers begin to email from wherever they are, whenever they want , they will expect a company they are doing business with to be doing the same. Not having a work force equipped to work on the move will mean that that employees will not be as responsive as your increasingly demanding customer base will expect. Your reputation as a company that rides with the times could be seriously tarnished. Some SMBs will be concerned about the cost and hassle of implementing mobile email. But it can be easily enabled through 3G cards for laptops or handheld devices. SMBs should seriously consider if mobile email will help to improve staff efficiency and customer relationships. If so, adoption driven by company foresight, rather than a beleaguered response to unsatisfied customers, is surely a sound business strategy. http://weblog.demon.net/2007/08/the_mobile_email_addiction_is.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/08/the_mobile_email_addiction_is.html Mobile Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:59:58 +0000 Some interesting new research about mobile working came out this week. Occupational psychologists (Pearn Kandola, commissioned by Cisco) have identified the qualities that make a successful mobile worker. It seems that the best personality profile is someone who is self-motivated, resilient and independent. Good mobile workers are extroverted, creative and disciplined. All terms that could just as easily be used to describe a successful entrepreneur. The UK is gripped by the possibilities of entrepreneurialism at the moment. Research shows that 60% of 16 to 21-year-olds aspire to be self-employed in the future. The huge appetite for TV shows like The Apprentice and Dragon’s Den suggests that we’re all busy hatching plans to make our fortunes by setting up our own businesses. Of course it isn’t easy, or we really would all be doing it. You need a great idea and bags of energy, and you also need to be a ‘jack of all trades’, taking on anything from sales and marketing to back office roles like finance and HR... I’m a great believer in how mobile technology can help manage these varied challenges, empower small start-ups and contribute to their success. Entrepreneurs who want to work smarter and who are open to new ideas (another key attribute identified by the research) are using mobile technologies to help them compete with the larger and more established ‘big boys’. A friend of mine recently set up on his own as a consultant. The hard part was deciding on a company name – once that was done he set up a simple website, bought a BlackBerry and he was in business. The BlackBerry means he is immediately as available to customers as his bigger rivals, punching above his weight and looking like he’s running a bigger operation than he is. Mobility is all about freedom, success and working smart… Working your own hours, where and when you want, and the promise of business success. It is hardly a surprise that successful entrepreneurs are putting it at the centre of their businesses. http://weblog.demon.net/2007/08/entrepreneurs_on_the_move.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/08/entrepreneurs_on_the_move.html Mobile Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:55:00 +0000 The potential of VoFi – Voice over WiFI - to redefine the mobile market is real, but I don’t think we’re going to see any major changes happening any time soon. In the long term, the cost benefits of using wireless VoIP instead of traditional voice over GSM could be a compelling proposition for businesses, but the technology needs to be proven and seamless before it can really deliver. However loud the industry shouts about VoFi, the fact is that this is a new technology, albeit one with lots of potential. The industry is working hard to iron out some of the teething troubles, but at the moment we’re still seeing issues with call quality and the performance of VoFi handsets. Call quality can be an issue because the VoFi connection usually has to share limited bandwidth with all other WiFi traffic, such as data – and voice isn’t given priority. It’s only the really established, business-focused providers that are delivering WiFi access with a low contention ratio and packet prioritisation to ensure that voice quality is assured. So this problem can be overcome, but it is up to the user to choose their provider very carefully. So far, the overall user experience with VoFi phones has been questionable. Users expect to be able to make phone calls using any WiFi hotspot, but a lot of pure VoFi phones lack the web interface that is essential to access most public WiFi services. Without a web interface, you can’t set up an account and provide the payment details that the service provider requires. So, no web interface means patchy and unpredictable access to WiFi hotspots. This issue is being addressed – we saw new handsets with web interfaces launch at 3GSM. Another concern is power and energy consumption. Battery life may not be the most exciting subject, but it is pretty critical when you’re away from the office for long periods and completely dependent on your mobile to stay in touch. VoFi handsets are power hungry, so their battery life is much shorter than we’re all used to with mobiles. This is a major practical drawback for the typical business user, who is getting more and more accustomed to accessing all sorts of useful applications on their mobile device. Applications eat power, so this often isn’t viable on a VoFi device. Fixing these issues is clearly a major priority for equipment manufacturers and we’re seeing improved VoFi handsets start to appear. There will be a new generation of much more efficient and user-friendly handsets in the future, which can only encourage the growth of this technology. Awareness of the need for uncontended, enterprise-quality WiFi services that can support voice calls is also key – however cheap the calls, business users have to have quality and reliability. Once these issues are resolved, the case for VoFi will start to stack up. How soon this happens, and how entrenched it ever becomes, remains to be seen. http://weblog.demon.net/2007/07/the_future_for_vofi.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/07/the_future_for_vofi.html VoIP Sat, 14 Jul 2007 10:55:21 +0000 The consumer broadband market is fiercely competitive, as providers compete to deliver the low cost broadband service that consumers demand. However important broadband is to a consumer, price is likely to win out over quality of service. The business market is very different, or it has been until now. For companies, broadband is a business critical service so – whatever the size of the organisation – the service needs to be fast, reliable and secure. SMBs should be clued up about this and not be attracted by a very cheap service without knowing exactly what it would deliver – after all, you get what you pay for. It is understandable that consumers will be tempted by a “free” broadband service from Carphone Warehouse, even with their patience being tested by delays and poor quality of service. The SMB market is less tolerant – it cannot afford not to be! So it’s very interesting to see that Carphone Warehouse, still a new player in the broadband market, is taking an aggressive approach to targeting SMBs. It has announced that it is planning for revenue growth of 11% -12% in its business-to-business operations and that it will continue to develop its “broadband and data proposition” for the SME market. It is no secret that the roll out of “free” broadband to Talk Talk customers has been problematic, to say the least. Of those that did not abandon the offer altogether, many are still waiting for their broadband to be up and running. Meanwhile, Carphone Warehouse continues to make a loss of £5 per Talk Talk customer as they continue to get their phone and broadband via BT Wholesale. Carphone Warehouse has proved with Talk Talk that it cannot always deliver on the ambitious goals it sets itself and that the service it delivers is often disappointing. SMBs will be thinking twice before entrusting their business-critical network services to a player with a questionable track record in service delivery, and no apparent understanding of the unique communications needs of these types of businesses. http://weblog.demon.net/2007/06/carphone_warehouse_targets_smb.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/06/carphone_warehouse_targets_smb.html SMB's Wed, 27 Jun 2007 10:54:48 +0000 Work Wise Week, designed to raise awareness of the benefits of working flexibly, has just drawn to a close. This initiative and the lively discussion it has provoked in the media show how high flexible working is high on the agenda of both businesses and employees. This is a topic that resonates with staff, who want the option to work flexibly, and with businesses, which recognise the benefits. However there is still uncertainty on both sides about how to make it work. What is increasingly clear is that flexible working is widely considered to be critical to business success. It is what people want and businesses need to enable it. The law now requires companies to give serious consideration to any request for flexible working. More than that though, companies increasingly recognise that allowing staff to work unconventional hours or to work from home can set them apart in a competitive employment market. One of the programmes launched this week, the “Work Wise UK Quality Mark“ for flexible working, was introduced by Sir Digby Jones to help companies “improve business productivity” and “recruit and retain the staff needed to do business”. Gartner has said this week that flexible working will only become more important as the next generation, used to communicating via the web, expect flexible working to be a core part of the way we work. Flexible working is a “must have”, not a “nice to have”. However, despite the enthusiasm for flexible working, there seems to be a lag in adoption. We surveyed SMBs late last year and found that while more than 80 per cent of companies had remote working policies in place, only 45 per cent of employees are taking advantage of the opportunity to work away from the office. There are clearly some major barriers to adoption and perhaps one of these is our finding that 57 percent of SMBs expect employees to pay for some, if not all, of the technology required to work remotely themselves. Home workers also lack IT support, with out-of-hours support unavailable for 73 per cent of employees working from home. It is clear that for flexible working to be effective, it needs to be properly supported and for employees to be given the same tools that they access in the office. Employers need to follow through – it’s not enough to file the policy, they also need to provide the necessary equipment and the right technical support. There are “softer” issues as well – employees worry about being out of the loop, losing a sense of team and becoming isolated. Employers worry about management issues – if you can’t see your team face-to-face, how do you make sure they are motivated and performing? This can be a real concern, but it is surprisingly easy to adapt to these working practices. Good management and simple processes like frequent team calls, clear objectives and regular face-to-face meetings maintain morale and motivation. Many of THUS’ employees work from home some or all of the time or hot desk from different THUS offices. We don’t want to miss out on talented people just because they can’t re-locate, and we don’t want people enduring unrealistic commutes into work. Transitioning to this model needs to be managed carefully, with a lot of support, but it really can work for the benefit of everyone involved. http://weblog.demon.net/2007/06/work_wise_week.html http://weblog.demon.net/2007/06/work_wise_week.html Remote Working Wed, 27 Jun 2007 10:53:32 +0000