::.. Timing ..::

:: 2003/03/20 ::

RSS Feed

By the way, I enabled the RSS feed on this blog. See the "RSS URL" over there in the left margin.

:: Stowe Boyd 3/20/2003 10:59:12 AM [link] ::
:: ::

The Little Things In Life

Last week, calamity of calamities, my hard disk crashed. I was en route to a client site, and had no peripherals, system disks, anything.

A week and a half later, I am slowing rising up out of the ashes.

Had to -- gasp -- reformat the hard drive, reinstall Windows, etc., etc. Wasn't until today that I downloaded the software drivers for audio. Still haven't grappled with the loss of so much recent information, although I did have my contact database on my Kyocera Smartphone.

Anyway... that's the excuse for the hiccup in information flow here at Timing. That and launching A Working Model which is going fairly well. A number of clients lined up, doing some reports, and a lot of interest.

At any rate, I will be back in the groove in the next few days. Expect briefs from recent and upcoming meetings -- IBM, Groove, Blue Air Networks, Endeavors, Reuters, Financial Services Instant Messaging Association, Bantu, and others.

:: Stowe Boyd 3/20/2003 10:56:43 AM [link] ::
:: ::

Interchange with Nick Patience re: "The Coming Power Shift"

I emailed the newest issue of Message, expanding on the topic of The Coming Power Shift, to Nick Patience, and we had a lively email exchange about the subject. Nick works at the451, a technology analyst company.

By the way, to get the sample issue of Message on this topic, or even a trial subscription, please contact me at info@aworkingmodel.com.

From: Nick Patience [mailto:nick.patience@the451.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 6:02 PM
To: Stowe Boyd
Subject: RE: "The Coming Power Shift"


Hi Stowe,

Surely there is no need in the corporate world for such a registry as the handle most corporate IM systems use is your existing email address, which you already own, or at least 'rent' from the InterNic?

As the consumer IM players have penetrated the corporate market, this is what has happened, hasn't it?

Surely it's just a case of getting people to pay for something they don't need to pay for, or at least don't need to pay for twice?

regards,

Nick

From: Stowe Boyd [mailto:stoweboyd@aworkingmodel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 6:35 PM
To: 'Nick Patience'
Subject: RE: FYI

The issue is that currently the IM services -- AOL, MSN, and Yahoo for example -- have separate namespaces. They don't interoperate, and even if they did, its not a store and forward network like email. Someone has to be a single independent registrar, and mediate with all the services.

A corporate IM user can set up an IM server configured as 'aworkingmodel' and so could I. He could set up an account as 'stoweboyd@aworkingmedia.com' and so could I. There is no equivalent to the email DNS system for IM, and more importantly, right now the services manage name provising indepenently of any coordinated service.

- Stowe

From: Nick Patience [mailto:nick.patience@the451.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:12 AM
To: Stowe Boyd
Subject: RE: FYI


Sure, if the current consumer model of closed networks is extended to the corporate world. I guess my point is that what is relevant now in the consumer IM world won't be relevant in a just a couple of years time as companies will simply use email addresses as IDs, e.g. SameTime integrates with your existing directory thus negating the problem, as do most other corporate IM systems. Sorry, I just don't see the problem here, unless you're really, really attached to your consumer IM handles, but ultimately the user won't have the choice, just as they don't have the choice of which email address to use at work.

Interoperability among consumer IM networks may never happen in their current format, but from where I'm sitting that's not relevant to the corporate world anymore as it's moved to integration with LDAP and AD drectories.

just my two cents!

Nick

From: Stowe Boyd [mailto:stoweboyd@aworkingmodel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:43 AM
To: 'Nick Patience'
Subject: RE: FYI

The reality is that companies will want to interact with customers, partners, and suppliers without cross-connecting LDAP -- the costs are too high to do it that way. It an NxN-1 complexity issue. Companies will want to link to a single external gateway/registrar, once, and use it as a trusted arbiter of identity.

While you may have the URL "stoweboyd@aworkingmodel.com" as an email address, today, it doesn't necessarily connect to any instant messaging and presence system. Even if I set a corporate IM system up within A Working Model, I can't publish that identity through the "public" networks today, and that is exactly what most people want to be able to do. So the power shift will come when I can register that identity, once, and people using whatever IM system -- corporate, or public services (by which I include Reuters, Bloomberg, and offerings from companies like Communicator Inc) -- will be able (with my permission) to check on my presence and availability and to IM me.

- S

From: Nick Patience [mailto:nick.patience@the451.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 10:02 AM
To: Stowe Boyd
Subject: RE: FYI

The registry is an interesting model, but from my extensive experience in the domain name world over the last six or seven years, I doubt it the politics can be worked out to make it both sufficiently neutral and a viable business.

And I still don't think any companies will want to run their corporate IM system through the servers of a public IM provider to check on the presence of users. They will host their own IM servers at an ISP or retain them in house and standards will be worked out to offer interoperability at a presence level at the very least.

cheers,

Nick

From: Stowe Boyd [mailto:stoweboyd@aworkingmodel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 10:05 AM
To: 'Nick Patience'
Subject: RE: FYI

I agree that companies will want to a/ host their own servers, but will have to b/ interoperate with other services and server-based solutions to check identity authenticity, and then exchange messaging and presence. But the cost thresholds of the cross linkaging will make an independent third party gateway/registrar economically viable. It will still require interoperability, and standards would certainly help, but even in the absence of agreed-upon universal standards the cost/benefits of a single trusted third party identity brokerage are compelling.

- Stowe

:: Stowe Boyd 3/19/2003 10:21:21 AM [link] ::
:: ::