Follow Me

Subscribe by Email

Your email:

Browse by Category

Sonus In Session

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Rich Communication: Sweet or Sour?

  
  
  

by Sattwik Gavli, Associate Product Manager at Sonus Networks

The telecommunications industry seems to have a love/hate relationship with Rich Communication Suite (RCS). Like another well known set of letters, IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem), there are supporters who believe it’s part of the future of communications, and detractors who think it’s a  distraction from the real solution. [You can read more on this in Mohan Palat’s blog, “IMS – The Struggle to Stay Relevant in an OTT World.”] For my part, I’ll try to keep this an objective discussion of the pros and cons of RCS.

First, a little history. RCS began in October 2008 when the GSMA, an association that represents the interests of the worldwide mobile communications industry, announced the RCS program as a means to facilitate “the rapid adoption of applications and services providing an interoperable, convergent, rich communication experience both in mobile and fixed environments.”  Today, the RCS-e (RCS enhanced) standards seek to do this through three significant enhancements:

  • Enhanced Address Book, which provides service capabilities seamlessly out of the box
  • Enhanced Messaging, which enables a large variety of messaging options including chat and messaging history
  • Enriched Call, which enables multimedia content-image and video sharing during a voice call

These enhancements are loosely defined by design because the GSMA did not want to limit the scope of RCS by defining everything at a micro level. The expectation is that the communications industry as a whole will explore the infinite possibilities of this rich service.

Yet, many of these enhanced features are already available in over-the-top (OTT) applications at no cost. An RCS advocate would ask whether these OTT apps depend on particular devices, platforms and software versions? The RCS vs. OTT discussion is an interesting one, however, so I created the following table to sum up the strengths/weaknesses of each:

 RCS

 OTT

Works on both smartphones and cheaper “dumb” phones

Works only on specific smartphones

Independent of platform and software

Dependent on specific platform and software

Not yet globally proven

Globally proven

Provided by service providers with carrier- grade quality

Developed mostly by small start-ups

Enabled out of  the box

Must be downloaded and installed

Services are backed by a carrier’s customer support

Not always supported by a tier 1 carrier

Robust scalability

Scalability is inconsistent among apps

Backed by GSMA, 3GPP and other large industry players

Backed by popularity and word of mouth

Charged to customers directly or indirectly

Current pricing model is typically free or with a minimal one-time fee

Slow to come out with new features

Features are quickly developed in response to market needs              

As you can see, there are arguments for both. Now let’s look at some of the research data on RCS.  A report issued early this year by Infonetics Research estimates that there will be 6.8 million RCS users by the end of 2012 (see chart).

What’s interesting to note is that only Asia Pacific and Europe show confidence in RCS. RCS subscribers in North America are not expected to reach 5 million even by 2014, whereas Europe and APAC are expected to have 50-60 million subscribers by then.

Although client applications for RCS have had a promising start with Megafon and China Mobile, it’s still not a big market, with  only $10.7M revenue expected in CY15.

RCS, of course, depends heavily on IMS because it re-uses the capabilities of the 3GPP-specified IMS core system as its underlying service platform.  IMS addresses issues such as authentication, authorization, registration, charging and routing. With its fortunes tied to IMS, however, RCS may be in for a bumpy ride. According to a recent Infonetics study (see chart below), IMS will still not reach 100 million subscribers in North America by 2015, with EMEA and especially APAC representing the bulk of IMS subscribers. Despite that, at least half of the service providers surveyed by Infonetics planned to launch RCS and video services over the next two years.By the end of 2011, other service providers plan to launch RCS commercially, including Orange, Deutsche Telekom, Telecom Italia, Telefonica and Vodafone. Some service providers plan to charge their customers an extra fee for RCS apps while others will charge subscribers indirectly.

An important consideration, interoperability, applies to any feature application whether RCS or OTT, with neither having an immediate advantage. And to date, RCS apps have been developed primarily for the mobile market. If service providers can develop some interesting RCS apps in the wireline market, it may gain more traction than OTT services in that market. While it’s still too early to pick a winner, we can expect the RCS vs. OTT discussion to stay heated over the next few years, if only to give IMS a break from the hotseat.

So do you think the Rich Communications Suite is the candy that will attract subscribers in the future, or is it just empty calories? Let our readers know by posting a comment below.

Comments

The app cloud and ott providers are continual pushing ahead with compelling services. Momentum for the successful providers are driven by the 3rd party programmers having access to the programming interfaces - plugins, add-ons, integrations etc. The key for telco is to provide software development kits for access to the session state of communications users. Think of development tsunamis like salesforce.com, facebook and Iphone. While telcos debate about IMS and RCS the new order is taking shape.  
 
SIP however could be the savior for telcos since it is a standard that enterprise vendors and carriers are using but the standard is also open to developers.  
 
The combination of SIP and implementing smarter transport layers could provide quality of service, management and packet shaping over the current and future physical transports. Telco shouldn’t get bogged down with over reaching standards because the momentum goes with the aforementioned crowd. Subscribers need smarter routers and smarter wireless packet management.  
 
When telco builds smart cores and open their interfaces they may take a potentially very meaningful place in the cloud. End users care about the apps and features. telcos need to think software and assimilate into the cloud if they want to be relevant.  
Posted @ Thursday, November 03, 2011 7:48 PM by Mark Anthony
It’s a great argument presented by the writer; however I gauge that this is more of a chicken and egg situation without a definitive answer at this point of time. Only future would reveal if RCS would prove to be a candy or a calorie buster. Kudos, to the writer for presenting such a crisp case. I would be looking forward to hearing his premonitions for the industry.
Posted @ Friday, November 04, 2011 3:44 AM by Rishi Vaidya
Thank you Rishi. I am glad you liked this blog. Do read the other interesting topics that have been covered by other writers.
Posted @ Friday, November 04, 2011 3:45 PM by Sattwik
I don't think it is enough to produce RCS apps for RCS to be a success. OTT apps are faster to deploy, appear cheaper (though carriers will make up the money lost elsewhere) and pretty popular. What RCS providers and operators need to do is produce solutions fully embedded into phones. 
 
Full embedding will allow RCS providers to build a far enhanced experience that is part of the ecosystem and fully interacts with all other applications, for example messaging and native map applications should be fully interactive. Continuing this sort of process across a phone where messaging is not a stand alone app, but a full phone-wide experience gives operators an advantage.  
 
However, to do this operators will need to give more license to providers to upgrade automatically without the current delays of new technology to market you see operating through carriers. In essence these RCS providers still need to build up their reputations and become a company as trusted as more traditional players in more traditional spheres such as Microsoft are.  
 
An interesting side note you have not yet considered is what RCS might do in developing countries like Africa. For sure RCS-like services could be deployed in such regions where OTTs have a smaller foothold. What you do raise of interest is the Wireline applications, but why stop there... what about your TV and telling it to IM or email a friend or family member about a great program you are watching or finding ways to integrate other hardware into the system?
Posted @ Saturday, November 05, 2011 7:46 AM by Rob Lalor
Rob- I agree, RCS providers need to build up their reputation and trust like the traditional players.  
About the wireline apps that i raised, i didn't want to reiterate what is crisply presented in: 
http://info.sonusnet.com/bid/53051/And-Don-t-Forget-the-Milk 
It addresses the different places where IMS can take you. I am sure you will like it.
Posted @ Tuesday, November 08, 2011 9:37 AM by Sattwik
"I am sure you will like it."  
 
I do... lots of possibilities, but just as you get your hopes up an awful lot of complications. How long before when you buy a house you need to consider what technological ecosystem is uses? It's going to get complicated isn't it?
Posted @ Tuesday, November 08, 2011 9:50 AM by Rob Lalor
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

     Legal Disclaimer