SoonR is in a slightly crowded space of companies offering remote access to a user’s PC via their mobile phone. It’s announcing a new feature Thursday that gives it some definite separation, though. The basic idea of SoonR is that you download their PC client (currently Windows only, though support for other applications is in the works), and leave it running. Then, though your phone’s mobile browser, you can access folders you choose to share, desktop search programs, Outlook information like email and contacts, and so on. SoonR’s server is pretty smart, as it senses the phone and browser you’re using, and formats content — Word document, PDFs, photos and so on — for the screen size.
The new feature is pretty awesome — called SoonR Talk, it’s Skype access through your phone’s browser. Not just text chat, but voice calls. It’s not some VoIP kludge over data networks, but a nifty little solution using SkypeOut. You log on to SoonR through your phone’s browser, and it connects to the Skype client on your computer, bringing up your buddy list with real-time presence information. You choose a contact, then initiate the call. A SkypeOut call is made from your PC to your mobile phone, then once you answer, it initiates the call through Skype, if your contact’s online, or through another SkypeOut call if they’re off. It’s not going to threaten mobile operators, but does offer a way to save on expensive calls, like those made overseas, and it also supports conference calls, which could get pretty interesting.
There are other companies working on solutions to do much the same thing; what’s cool about SoonR is that it does this all through a browser, opening it up to so many more devices than those relying on standalone applications (nicely illustrating one of Russell’s points about Java). SoonR’s also got some other interesting plans for its business model, adding premium services (like the ability to have your data persist on its services so you can access it when your PC’s offline), as well as licensing their service to operators, both mobile and wired broadband.
The innovative approach to integrating Skype with mobile service through a browser (it’s simple, though I hesitate to call it so as it downplays the ingenuity of what’s going on here) might be the real Skype mobile play, more effective than using the Skype service itself over a mobile data connection. It again also shows the power of of thinking in terms of platforms, not just applications. SoonR’s not an application, it’s a platform upon which the company can deploy multiple applications.
[tags]mobile, soonr, skype[/tags]
You have a valid point here: WAP is supported by more phones than Java ME, and with some effort you can detect and adapt to phone characteristics (via UAProf, WURFL or similar). Also, there’s a greater chance a WAP-based service works on an untested phone than a Java ME application would. In any case per-phone testing is less of an effort for WAP-based services.
Either WAP (and HTML) and Java ME will be used depending on the service interaction requirements.
Based on my testing of SoonR Talk: It doesn’t use the browser but the normal voice connection. That should mean normal voice rate between the phone and SoonR. If SoonR has services across the world you would save on long distance, but not on short distance. A solution based on a flat-rate data connection from the phone would actually be less expensive (and less of a kludge in my opinion) than this.
Based on my testing of SoonR Talk: It doesn’t use the browser but the normal voice connection.
It does use the browser, to access your Skype contact list, then, as I said, it makes a SkypeOut call to your phone. You pay the SkypeOut rate for the call to your mobile phone (about 2 cents a minute in the US), then for the call to your contact. Perhaps in an ideal world, where everybody had advanced handsets, high-speed connections and low-cost, flat-rate data plans, using a client over the data connection would be preferable (and indeed for some users, that’s already the case). But SoonR’s solution is a good one given the real-world parameters of the current mobile landscape.
Very cool… Do you think SoonR will be, sooner or later :-), hated by carriers?
SoonR value prop for the carrier is “we bring you more data traffic”, but not sure that will fly as it is going directly against the phone’s primary function and money generator - voice.
ceo
Heh, probably — though they should see it as a value-add to their customers. I don’t think that the types of calls the SoonR Talk service will save on (international calls at this point, really, and from early adopters at that) will cause enough disruption for it to be much of a concern. But, like Skype in general and other VoIP services, it will exert some pressure on carriers to drop call costs.
(about 2 cents a minute in the US)
Yes, but who’s paying the mobile carrier rate once the voice connection is up? Still same rate?
Where I’m at it’s approx 30 cents to call a cellphone via SkypeOut. For sure still less than normal mobile voice rate, but not by much.
VoIP over a data connection would be at a similar level based on a rough calculation with 1 EUR/MB. Maybe a bit less, but probably also with less quality.
Sorry, I got the currency conversion wrong.
SkypeOut is actually considerably more expensive than normal mobile rate (mobile to mobile) for calls within most countries in Europe, not counting the monthly fee for the plan (that is fixed rate).
I guess this service is for you on the west side of the Atlantic.
First, full disclosure as I am with SoonR.
Anders, you are correct that SkypeOut may not make sense for mobile to mobile calls in some countries. Skype makes the most sense when both parties have Skype and the call is free. What SoonR Talk adds to the equation is that you can now do this while you are mobile. There are lots of places in the world where this is $0.02 a minute US. In those cases, it makes sense. May I ask what country you are located in?
We are gated by the costs of the wireless infrastructure in some countries as we have to pay someone for their use.
Interestingly enough, we have lots of carrier interest. Although SoonR my affect long distance usage, it still uses mobile minutes so it does not try to totally cut out the carrier. Also carriers need to respond to the increasing availability of wifi. A SoonR based service not only keeps a customer with a carrier using mobile minutes, but it also makes it more compelling for a customer to use a carrier’s data plan, which is a profit center for the carrier.
Remember that billions have been spent building out a 3G infrastructure. Data plans are what pay for that cost.
Hi Carlo and all commenting on this posting
First of all, a fascinating variation on the Skype and VoIP play on mobile phones. Secondly, it will make business sense only in markets of “receiving party pays” like North America and parts of Asia. Europe is all “calling party pays” and many receiving party pays countries have shifted to calling party pays models as this is considerably more healthy for the telecoms economics and the end-users.
In this case, the so-called “free” portion of receiving the call - which is charged to Skype for calls to European mobile phone numbers - is actually charged to the mobile phone owner as part of RECEIVING the call from the Skype service to the cellphone in America. But as mobile operators have been building ever bigger minute-bundles, the calls are now “hidden among the clutter” of the total minutes buckets that the phone users receive. Nonetheless, the calls are billed to the phone owner, or counted against their total bundle of inclusive minutes. These calls are not free.
In Europe (calling party pays) when we are in our home country we do not pay for receiving calls on mobile phones. That is why European mobile phone owners all keep their phones permanently switched on, while still many American phone owners keep the phone often switched off. In Europe whoever calls a mobile phone number - the calling party - covers the full cost of the (mobile) call. That is why Skype calls to mobile phones in all of Europe are “so expensive”. Yet the costs are the same (or similar) if you call from any fixed landline phone to the mobile phone.
I should point out that no countries are shifting from a calling party pays model to a receiving party pays model but like I said, in many countries they have moved from receiving party pays to calling party pays. The industry financial analysts have proven about 5 years ago that calling party pays is an inherently better model for end-users, they understand the model, like it more, generate more traffic, keep their phones on longer, and do not resent incoming calls. Total traffic grows faster and total revenues grow faster than with receiving party pays models. So for this kind of opportunity, it is a small minority of all countries where this works, and that group of countries is likely to shrink, not grow.
in my humble opinion
Tomi T Ahonen
4-time bestselling author and consultant to the mobile telecoms industry
author of world’s first business book on advanced mobile telecoms, m-Profits, and lecturing at world’s oldest business course on 3G mobile, at Oxford University
website http://www.tomiahonen.com
blogsite http://www.communities-dominate.blogs.com
That is why European mobile phone owners all keep their phones permanently switched on, while still many American phone owners keep the phone often switched off.
Tomi, this really isn’t true. The cost of voice is so low here (particularly when compared to Europe) that most people buy a bucket of minutes each month that far exceeds their actual use, and getting free calls at night and on weekends is becoming a pretty standard feature of postpaid plans — so the days of people leaving their phone off because they were afraid of using their airtime are pretty much behind us.
In any case, so SoonR Talk isn’t a great application for European users because of the pricing structure of their markets… it’s still a good one here in the US — which is fine.
Also, I’m not sure I agree with that analysts’ conclusion that calling party pays is a better model for consumers — just look at the price disparity for both mobile and fixed service between the US and Europe
This isn’t really the place for a long discussion of the merits of who pays the extra costs of mobile calls, but I agree a lot with Tomi.
In USA, callback, calling card and other callthrough possibilities also cost about 2c per minute for many international destinations.
There really are not many countries in the world that have a Skype tariff of 2c per minute - only Canada, China, Hong Kong, Singapore and USA. Many Skype tariffs to mobiles are not competitive; if I wanted to forward from USA to my O2 UK mobile I could do this for US 15c rather than Skype’s 30c.
So the same applies to callback, which is what this seems to me to be most similar to in this application. I can see though that people that do want to use it like this may be able to save the cost of a Skype-In number with diversion to Skype-Out
I’m not sure I agree with Tomi, primarily because I can’t really work out what his point is!
My take is that using Skype to your mobile in the way SoonR do, is attractive for three reasons:
1. Being able to contact people on Skype from your mobile
2. When you have minutes to burn on your mobile plan
3. When you call abroad and SkypeOut’s rates beat the cost of international calling
For some of these cases there’s a clear cost benefit, for others there’s a convenience benefit, but an overall benefit? YMMV.
Jim
1-time worstselling author and consultant to anyone who’ll listen, and resident lecturer at many of the world’s oldest established watering holes
[...] There was some debate in the comments lately about the merits of the receiving-party-pays system used in the US and some other countries, versus the more popular calling-party-pays that’s the norm in Europe. Perhaps CPP is “better”, but as I pointed out, RPP seems to be working okay here in the US, given the rock-bottom prices we enjoy in comparison to Europe, the huge buckets of minutes we receive, as well as all the free nights and weekends and long-distance calls that are pretty standard. [...]
Jim, I think that reasoning only applies to US users, as European mobiles cost a lot more than 2c per minute for the Skype callback, like 30c. And there aren’t many other cases where Skype rates beat the best competition.
The 27th Carnival of the Mobilists comes from The 3G Portal…
The 3G Portal is honoured to host the 27th Carnival of the Mobilists. The Best Post of the Week for me is Judy Breck’s at Golden Swamp - Students say #1 obstacle includes no to mobiles . This week my daughter, Clare started her GCSE exams and the…
[...] What really caught my attention - with Soonr I believe you can take (or initiate) Skype calls from your Internet-based cell phone. Check it out… [...]
Hi,
I’d loved the information from this site explaining how ISkoot works, but I have a doubt: I read your in issue that my telephone, in the case, a NOKIA E62, (I’m using an EDGE/GPRS data connection) will call to a number, in U.S.A., that is a gateway to my cellphone connect to skype network, and than, use all resources from that net to call by voip. OK. How many time I’ll be connect by the conventional phone system? I’m from Brazil, and a conventional cell call from here to U.S.A. is very expensive… I don’t understand why the ISkoot have to make this connection using the convencional phone system…. am I not in the already and full time in the internet using the CLARO DATA (is the data service from the cell telephone company here) ? Why ISkoot don’t just use a gateway using the EDGE/GPRS service ? OK, just to understand…
So, after I explain the situation, even I use the ISKOOT service how it is, do somebody knows how many time is this first connection duration by this gateway? After that, will I be using that TCP/IP common system to use the Skype resources, or I will be paying twice all the time I established and use the system to conclude a call? One time for the internet connection using the CLARO DATA (I have a fixed cost to use in a indeterminated time), and also (I don’t know how many time) to call to this telephone gateway number?
Thanks for the opportunity to write to this newspaper.
Best Regards,
Airton