An updated WebRTC FAQ for those who wish to understand this tech somewhat better.
It is 2018, and it seems like there’s no good FAQ for WebRTC. Nowhere. They’re just not up to date. That, coupled with my own need to be the best source of information on the web about WebRTC (and the fact that my last few articles were more about CPaaS and messaging than WebRTC), got me to write this one.What is WebRTC?
WebRTC allows sending and receiving of real time voice, video and arbitrary data across browsers and other devices. This means we now have an easy way as users to conduct voice and video conferences from a browser or from our mobile devices. WebRTC can do a lot more than that, but voice and video in real time is the basis of what you get out of it.
There’s a short video explaining What is WebRTC on my site.Who is behind WebRTC?
WebRTC originated from Google. It started by an acquisition of a few companies, whose technology was then repackaged and released as open source under the name of WebRTC.
Google is still the main vendor behind WebRTC. That’s because its own WebRTC engine is the main WebRTC open source project out there and it is also the one that gets integrated into the Chrome browser.
Mozilla, Microsoft and Apple all contribute to WebRTC and have their own implementations of WebRTC in their browsers (some of these implementations are derived from the Google code).
Other vendors and individuals contribute to the specification through the IETF and W3C, where the standardization process of WebRTC takes place.
WebRTC is used today by commercial services (here are 10 such examples).
Some complain and gripe that WebRTC isn’t ready for commercial use. This stems due to the many changes that the codebase and specification is undergoing. It also means that if you plan on using WebRTC, either do that through a third party managed service (a CPaaS vendor – list here) or make sure to have a team of savvy developers that can keep up with the pace.
The changes introduced to the WebRTC codebase itself oftentimes breaks backward compatibility and features, probably by sticking to a “move fast and break things” motto to some extent.Why should I use WebRTC?
If you don’t need real time voice and video then you might not need to use WebRTC at all.
If you do, then it is a matter of capability, resources and time to market:
For video, the mandatory codecs are VP8 and H.264. Apple’s Safari browser doesn’t support VP8. And on Android, Chrome won’t support H.264 on *some* devices (I’ll let you go figure out on which ones). More about that in this video mini-series.
All of them. Almost. But not exactly. And there are differences.
There’s a devices cheat sheet on my website.
And then there’s adapter.js which you should definitely use.Can I use WebRTC on mobile devices?
On Android, on official Chrome and Firefox browsers, WebRTC is available.
On iOS, Safari offers something usable if you are willing to invest the energy to get it working well.
If you want to use a Webview inside your app, then this is easy with Android, restrictive with iOS for now (you won’t be able to access the camera or the microphone there).Do I need special servers to run WebRTC?
You definitely need a signaling server. And STUN/TURN server. You might need a media server.
WebRTC is said to be peer-to-peer. It is when it comes to the media as much as possible. But developers can make use of it in server centric environments. And there are some scenarios where it makes no technical sense to use peer-to-peer (for example if you want to broadcast something to a million people or conduct a video conference with 20 participants).
There’s a free video mini series explaining WebRTC servers on this site.Can WebRTC be used to create large conferences?
Think of WebRTC as a basic building block that gives you superpowers. With it you have the ability to send and receive voice and video in real time virtually on every device and browser.
Now what you do with this superpower, how you interact with it, architect your solution around it – that’s up to you.
There are vendors offering video conferencing that uses WebRTC and gets to 10’s of participants. Webinars with 100’s of live viewers in the audience.
You can read more about scale and size of WebRTC.Is WebRTC posing a security threat for me?
Depending who you are and what are your needs.
I wrote a lot about WebRTC security in the past. It gets tiring.
WebRTC comes with security in mind. It encrypts everything. Can’t remove that encryption. And browsers get security updates faster than any other software you have.
The one sticking issue is probably the fact that it exposes the local IP address of your machine when it is used. VPNs that are implemented properly solve that as well. More about that over at webrtcHacks and VPN leaks.What does WebRTC 1.0 mean?
WebRTC 1.0 is the first time that WebRTC will have an official specification.
Up until now, we had drafts and browser implementations that were an approximation of the drafts. Now we have an approximation of the WebRTC 1.0 specification and approximations of implementations to it in browsers.
Don’t be. Assume WebRTC is good to go commercially (check that part of my FAQ) and just go read Jan-Ivar’s explanation @ Mozilla’s Advancing WebRTC blog.
Oh – and be sure to use adapter.js.How much does WebRTC cost?
It doesn’t. And it does.
WebRTC is freely available in browsers.
The source code is also freely available.
The servers you will need to use it – someone will need to pay for them. That payment can be to a managed service, or to a cloud vendors and developers who will develop, install and maintain them. Up to you to decide.
Oftentimes, developers assume everything should be free with WebRTC, whereas reality is different. And for some reason, most perceive development costs as free or sunk costs (they will call it investment) as opposed to paying a third party for doing the hard stuff for you.
A bit more on this here.How can I learn more about WebRTC?
There are a few courses on coursera, pluralsight and elsewhere. Never tried them, but read their agendas. Take a look for yourself and decide what’s for you.
There are books, but none of them is up to date with the specification.
Best place? Hands down? My paid course. Advanced WebRTC Architecture CourseCan I help you?
There’s my course. There’s testRTC where I am a co-founder (we do testing and monitoring of WebRTC apps).
I also consult. Around architecture, vendor selection, defining requirements, setting roadmaps, working on differentiation and doing pure marketing related work. What can I say?
I like the variety.
You can reach out to me here.
Got a question about WebRTC that needs to go into this FAQ? Add it below in the comments.
Social messaging is killing RCS in all the places that matter.
When looking at messaging in the context of communications and people, we can probably split the story into 3 distinct models:
I’ll quickly sift through the first two and focus on the third.Consumer Centric
Consumer centric is easy. That’s where Apple iMessage, WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Telegram, WeChat and a bunch of others are competing. The approach there today is to deliver a rich messaging experience that includes text, images, video, voice and video calling, location, groups, … – the list goes on. And on. And on.
They have won the war against SMS. We still have SMS. Some mistakenly call it ubiquitous (on my phone it is used for spam and 2FA messages only). They won the war against RCS that never really started.
To give you a clue – Israel is a WhatsApp country. If you don’t have WhatsApp you don’t exist. It is true from the age of 8. I just purchased the first smartphone for my 8 year old boy. Not so he can play or call with the phone – just so he can send messages to his classmates and stay part of the social fabric of his class. It happened to my daughter when she reached that age. I am now a part of multiple WhatsApp groups: family, close friends, parents of my kids’ classes and after classes, work related, etc.
How easy would it be to move people in Israel from entrenched groups that hold history, images and videos? And to what end? How would RCS be any better in its experience?Business Centric
Business centric is Slack. It used to be all about calling and the PBX. Slack changed the game. Everyone is talking about “team messaging” today. I used the term enterprise messaging years ago.
What Slack did was find a good balance between functionality and user experience that no other player has been able to copy properly so far, but everyone is after.
WhatsApp is unlikely to penetrate businesses in a meaningful way. Facebook built Workplace instead of trying to introduce Facebook or Messenger directly.
Where’s SMS in this orgy of messaging? Meaningful conversations happen in IP messaging services and not over SMS anymore. Some solutions, like VonageFlow offer a seamless experience that encompasses both messaging as we know it today and SMS, though I’d argue that capability is a business to consumer one.
For all intent and purpose, SMS is non-existent when it comes to business centric messaging.Business to Consumer
Back to RCS. RCS was supposed to be the future of SMS when we all move to IP based packet networks. Guess what? We’re all on IP based packet networks, and RCS isn’t really here yet in any meaningful way.
In the past couple of years, RCS got a new tune by its proponents. The strategy changed from getting consumers back from social networks towards being the one ubiquitous network – the ring to rule them all. Here’s the idea: you get RCS on all smartphones worldwide. Now carriers have the ubiquity they had with SMS. And businesses would pay for such access to customer’s phones.
Not going to happen.
Why? Because Apple and Facebook have other plans for us.
Apple now has Apple Business Chat. It is built into the iPhone, making businesses discoverable and reachable over iMessage from the Safari browser, Spotlight search, Siri assistant and Apple Maps. I’ve written extensively about it when it was introduced on SearchUC: Apple Business Chat looks to polish customer messaging
WhatsApp came out with their own offering called WhatsApp Business API. Similarly to Apple Business Chat, it offers the ability for businesses to communicate with consumers. Apple does that by focusing on contact center vendors while Whatsapp partners with CPaaS vendors. The goal? Get higher exposure and not working directly with longtail developers in the initial release.
What drove me to even start writing this article? This title of a TechCrunch post: Wish, Netflix, Uber and ~100 others testing WhatsApp’s new Business API
Businesses aren’t waiting for RCS. They are trying to figure out how to communicate with their customers via WhatsApp.
They had Line, WeChat, Facebook Messenger. And they’re still aiming for WhatsApp – a messaging service that isn’t even a US-thing.
Which brings me to the main thing – business to consumer is now a social messaging realm. Carriers have lost that domain as well.1 Billion Defines the Moat
Remember ubiquity? Here’s what it takes to be interesting:
1 Billion Monthly Active Users
Who has that number today?
Facebook (WhatsApp + Messenger), Apple Business Chat and WeChat. WhatsApp being the biggest one are redefining this market. You hear a lot about how customers still phone businesses and chat isn’t catching up with contact centers. That might be true, but only partially.
Today’s chat solutions usually require being on the company’s website. SMS hasn’t proven itself in a large scale for anything other than notifications to customers on orders and transactions. Whatsapp can change that – and to that extent, any of the other 1B+ MAU social messaging apps.
RCS? With what billion users exactly?
With the large social networks, a 100 million monthly active users seem like a rounding error.Focus is on Customer Care – Not Marketing
Another interesting aspect (and difference) is that social networks are keeping user identity and access close to their chest. While WhatsApp is using phone numbers for identity, piggybacking on carriers in a way, they are not allowing anyone access to a user without the user’s permission. This means:
What these networks are trying to do is to get businesses and consumers off their SMS communications and shift it to their network. To do so, they plan on offering a superior experience. They are doing that not only by adding richness over the limited 160 character experience of SMS, but they are also making sure this will be a useful service to their user base and won’t be considered spammy.
Will there be other avenues opened to businesses on social networks to interact with users through marketing campaigns and outbound messaging? Sure. But it isn’t the first priority. The market needs to be created first.Where Can We Go Next?
We are headed towards an omnichannel interaction model.
To me that means that a business will meet a customer wherever it is comfortable for the customer in the context of that specific interaction.
A customer may prefer a phone call at one interaction, but a chat over WhatsApp on another.
The challenge here is that different customers may prefer different social networks. Or aren’t even approachable on some of the social networks. This isn’t going to change any time soon either. The number of social networks is still growing, and while we have a few huge players, others are important to specific populations.
Businesses will need to rely on multiple such channels if they want to reach out to a larger target audience of potential customers.Back to RCS
It is coming. In some carriers. On some devices. In some form.
Is it going to take back ownership of the interactions from social networks? No.
What it can be, is just another channel. Right next to the rest. It will only become important if it can make that 1 billion monthly active users mark.
Oh, and it will need to succumb to the rules of engagement laid out by social networks today, around business-to-user permissions.
The post Social Messaging != Carrier Messaging (the stories of Whatsapp Business API & Apple Business Chat) appeared first on BlogGeek.me.
I has been more than a year since Apple first added WebRTC support to Safari. My original post reviewing the implementation continues to be popular here, but it does not reflect some of the updates since the first limited release. More importantly, given its differences and limitations, many questions still remained on how to best develop WebRTC applications for Safari.
I ran into Chad Phillips at Cluecon (again) this year and we ended up talking about his arduous experience making WebRTC work on Safari.
Visual design tools in CPaaS are now a part of the offering.
In October 2017, almost a year ago, Twilio announced Studio. I wrote at the time a lengthy article about my thoughts on Twilio Studio and CPaaS. My closing paragraph then was this one:
It will be interesting to see how competitors would react to this in the long run, and even more interesting to see what will Twilio Studio grow into.
Then in January 2018, I wrote about the 7 CPaaS Trends to Follow in 2018. The ones I zeroed in on:
Not sure which CPaaS vendor to use? Check out my free CPaaS Vendor Selection Matrix. It will give you the KPIs to look for.
Download the CPaaS Vendor Selection Matrix
Guess what happened since with Visual/IDE?
Messagebird introduced Flow Builder: “The power of our Voice and SMS solutions at your fingertips, without writing a single line of code.”
Plivo announced PHLO on August: “A whole new visual way of integrating communications that would empower developers to design collaboratively, build visually and deploy instantly.”
Voximplant came out with Smartcalls: “a smart and flexible tool that helps you create outbound call campaigns in no time”
All of these CPaaS players invested into a Twilio Studio-like tool.
Let’s check out what each player did and why.Twilio Studio
Where it all started (even if there were tools before or in parallel to it).
Studio’s entry point is either an incoming message, an incoming call or a REST API call. From there, the actions include things you do with messages and phone calls, along with the ability to execute generic functions.
A nice touch to Studio is its revision control system – it saves past changes made to the flows you built, allowing switching back and forth between revisions. It would be nice to have named revisions, some automated verbose explanation of changes made, etc.Messagebird Flow Builder
Messagebird Flow Builder is focused around SMS. The inputs you can use for it are either an incoming SMS or an incoming webhook API call. Once in the “flow”, you can branch the flow based on the time and date or other conditions related to the contents of the message. The end result? An outgoing SMS, email or webhook. There’s a bit more to it than that, like the ability to manage subscriptions in Messagebird or wait for certain replies inside the flow.
What I like about the Messagebird Flow Builder is that it is rigid in how it outlines the boxes and their connections – it doesn’t let you move boxes around (a cool feature that got tiresome rather quickly on me in other tools here – Studio and PHLO).Plivo PHLO
Plivo PHLO is a me-too Twilio Studio tool.
It has the same entry points, node types and capabilities, assuming you’re interested in SMS and voice calls that is. Where Twilio Studio offers more generic “Messages”, Plivo has only SMS. This is probably fine for most users.
The only thing I couldn’t find in PHLO is the ability to execute an arbitrary JS function. There’s also no revision control as of yet. Other than that, PHLO is a rather straightforward too to use.Voximplant Smartcalls
The Voximplant Smartcalls service is different in nature. Where the rest of the pack here is focused on incoming events that trigger action, Smatcalls is all about campaigns. And all about voice.
You can create a scenario. Scenarios in Smartcalls is a visual decision tree of what to do with an outgoing call. You dial, someone answers, you play a specific recording, maybe ask them to click on digits, etc.
You can do things like send email or call a REST webhook, but the purpose of it all is to drive an automated outbound voice campaign: once you have a scenario, you create a campaign. A campaign is a time window, a scenario and a list of phone numbers to dial out to. Smartcalls does the rest to automate the scenario created across all phone numbers at the specified time window.On Pricing
Here things get somewhat murkier.
Do you pay for using the designer tool itself when it gets invoked? (you do with Twilio Studio)
Do you need to pay for the communications used within the flows created? (you don’t with Voximplant Smartcals).
Plivo, being the shadow of Twilio for voice and SMS, decided not to price the use of PHLO at all, and make that an important part of their announcement as well:
“That’s why, in addition to bringing in 100% Plivo-API support out-of-the-box, we are also making it FREE to build using PHLO. This is not just a commercial decision. This is our stake in the ground — as we truly believe this is how the communication capabilities of the future will be built.”
Here’s the visual from the product page:
Will this create pressure on Twilio? I doubt it, but who am I to say?A Comparison Table
I put these tools in a table, to see where each one is focused:
Twilio Studio Messagebird Flow Builder Plivo PHLO Voximplant Smartcalls Focus Inbound Inbound Inbound Outbound Medium Voice, SMS, Omnichannel messages SMS Voice, SMS Voice Cool factor Revision control Really easy to use Campaign management Flow pricing Per flow invoked Free Free Per minute charges Communications pricing Not included Not included Not included Included A Word about iPaaS
Maybe a few paragraphs…
iPaaS stands for Integration Platform as a Service. The poster child service here is probably Zapier, allowing the connectivity of one service to another. I use it daily in my own business to power many of the integrations on this website.
Many of the CPaaS players have been working on enabling their use via Zapier, so a user doesn’t need to be a developer to send a message for example. Being able to build more complex communication flows using a visual builder sits well with this approach.
What will be interesting to see is how the two play out with each other, if at all. Will these visual builders get integrated into Zapier? Will these visual builders include easier integration points to other services besides what they themselves offer and a rudimentary capability of invoking a REST call?Welcome to Visual CPaaS
CPaaS is more than making communication API calls or offering github repositories. In the past two years we’ve seen some interesting movements in this space and innovations coming out.
I can’t wait to see what will come next.
Not sure which CPaaS vendor to use? Check out my free CPaaS Vendor Selection Matrix. It will give you the KPIs to look for.
Download the CPaaS Vendor Selection Matrix
The post The CPaaS Version of iPaaS: MessageBird & Plivo Join the Twilio Studio Bandwagon appeared first on BlogGeek.me.
WebRTC isn’t the only cool media API on the Web Platform. The Web Virtual Reality (WebVR) spec was introduced a few years ago to bring support for virtual reality devices in a web browser. It has since been migrated to the newer WebXR Device API Specification.
I was at ClueCon earlier this summer where Dan Jenkins gave a talk showing that it is relatively easy to add a WebRTC video conference streams into a virtual reality environment using WebVR using FreeSWITCH.
A web survey says… that you need to join in to learn more about real time video technology.
I’ve partnered up with Vidyo on a survey they are working on with Hanover Research. This one is focused on how real time video technology gets used in different industries, as well as how decisions are made when choosing the technology stack to use.
I worked as a programmer during my time at school. It was fun, but it is hard to call it professional work (although the last place was a startup focused on medical patient records in the Israel healthcare system). My first “grownup” job as a developer was at a video conferencing company. You can say I’ve been spending my time in front of a webcam for more than half of my lifetime, communicating with peers and colleagues.
In the last several years, as a consultant, much of my work is conducted online. At times with customers that I have never met face to face – only through a video conference.
At testRTC, almost all of our sales are done through video conferencing. Recently, we had a conference call conducted on one of the web conferencing platforms that was selected for use by our customer (we tend to use Google Meet by default, but flexible to use whatever the customer is comfortable with). People from that company always join with their video turned off. I forgot mine on for a couple of seconds, which allowed me to use it as an excuse to ask the person who I had working relations with for several months now to see her as well. She obliged, and for a brief few seconds it felt more human. Now it is a lot easier for me to have a mental image of that person when she speaks. This adds volumes to the connection between us humans.
For me video isn’t a gimmick. It is a critical tool.
Are all my calls video calls? No. Just like I use messaging but still use voice calling. Different tools for different jobs.
When Vidyo asked me to join them for the survey, I automatically said yes. As someone who uses video on a daily basis, I am always interested in understanding how others are making use of video if at all.
The survey Vidyo is doing comes to answer one main question: How (and why) video gets embedded into different businesses?
For me, one of the more interesting questions relates to the applications businesses develop, and if they don’t plan on adding communication functions into them, then why. Understanding what barriers and challenges people see in these technologies can help us as an industry decide where to put our focus.
If you are reading this blog and want to help me out in understanding the industry better, would you be so kind as to fill out this online survey? If you do, you’ll have my thanks as well as a copy of the research findings.
The post Understanding video tech in the enterprise: a web survey appeared first on BlogGeek.me.
Our AI in RTC report got published, and I am proud of the results. Purchase it now while it is under its launch price.
It has been quite a ride to get this report completed. We spent many hours interviewing vendors, researching individually, sifting through web survey results, discussing topics between us and writing. Lots of writing.
When Chad said he estimates the report to be in the range of 60 pages – 80 tops – I laughed. It seemed ridiculous that the report will be “that short”. My own estimate was 100. Give or take a couple of pages.
We ended up with 147 pages. And not because we’ve increased the fonts or used double lines
There was just so much to cover and so much we wanted to discuss. We ended up with almost 30,000 words.
The report has 37 figures and 23 tables. We added them to make some of the concepts easier to understand and to put some order and methodology into the data provided.
Each chapter has its own set of recommendations, to help you move forward. We wanted to have an actionable report and not a lukewarm one.Initial Feedback
Last week, we delivered the final report to our prepublication customers – those who were willing to trust us with our work before even knowing it was complete.
I talked to one such customer two days later. He said he already read the whole report once, but will surely dive into it at least twice more. He had to digest all the information in it and see how it fits with his product roadmap.Artificial Intelligence and … Your Company
Here is something that I am sure today more than ever.
Machine learning and artificial intelligence are here to stay. They are going to be integrated into products and services across all industries, and communications is not going to be any different here.
There are 3 ways this can play out for a vendor in our industry:
What we’ve seen in our interviews for this report, along with the discussions we had with customers who purchased the report, I know that this is the right time to look into this domain and plan for the future.
I’d like to invite you on this journey – we’ve created a report preview, which contains the executive summary, scope and methodologies and the table of contents. You can download the preview from the research page on Kranky Geek:
There’s a special launch price at the moment, which will not be available once we hit September. So if you are interested, there’s no better time than the present.
Video, in the hands of the correct company can be a powerful thing.
In 2012 Telefonica acquires TokBox. I wrote about it at the time – almost 6 years ago. It seems sad reading that piece about TokBox acquisition again. I suggested three areas where Telefonica can make a difference with TokBox. Let’s see what happened.What Could Telefonica do with TokBox?
What I said in 2012:
Will Telefonica wait the same amount of time it did with Jajah until it does something with this acquisition? I hope they will move faster this time…
Telefonica did nothing with TokBox. They haven’t integrated them into anything. They decided to leave TokBox independent.
This has helped grow TokBox in the 6 years into one of the dominant players in video APIs for real time communications. Almost any developer and initiative that I talk to which has decided to go for a 3rd party platform decided to use TokBox. I see others as well, but not as frequent.
Since the acquisition, TokBox:
Telefonica failed to make use of TokBox. It didn’t go into video with it. It didn’t try to figure our VoIP. It didn’t try to understand why developers chose TokBox. Telefonica did nothing other than let TokBox continue in its trajectory. It is probably why Telefonica lost interest and decided to sell TokBox to Vonage.
Telefonica plans on folding TokBox into BlueVia, but how will they combine TokBox, if at all, with their Tu Me VoIP OTT service?
Telefonica made no use of its strengths to find synergies with TokBox. Would doing so kill TokBox altogether, or could it made them stronger?
What will Telefonica do about voice? Their main API set doesn’t seem to include voice calling, but now it has video… will they be going for Twilio or Voxeo for that one? Or will they roll out their own? Will they skip voice altogether?
TokBox doubled down on video, beefing up their capabilities in that domain. It has a SIP connector, but nothing more than that. It is a missed opportunity.Where is TokBox today?
TokBox is video communication APIs. There are other vendors out there doing that today: Twilio, Vidyo.io, Agora, Sinch, Voximplant, Temasys and probably a few others I forgot to mention (sorry for missing out on you).
TokBox are the market leader here, when it comes to breadths of features in the video space.
It just wasn’t enough to get them to more customers and garner more than $35 million in the acquisition. I’d attribute this to:
Does this say anything about the market of video APIs? The viability of it to other vendors? The importance of video in the bigger picture?
I don’t really know.Where are we with Video CPaaS?
Video CPaaS, and in a way we can extend it to WebRTC CPaaS vendors – those who don’t dabble too much with PSTN voice and/or SMS is a finickey market. The vendors that get acquired in this space are gobbled up never to be seen again (think AddLive or Requestec) or they just don’t grow fast enough or become as big as their PSTN voice/SMS counterparts.
IDC maintains that the U.S. programmable video market will be a $7.4 billion opportunity by 2022, representing more than a 140% four-year CAGR. Assuming only 10% of that becomes a reality, the question becomes who will be the winners in programmable video?
What types of services do they need to offer? What products? Are these lower level APIs, or higher level abstractions? Maybe we’re looking at almost complete solutions with a nice API lipstick on top that get calculated in that $7.4 billion.
Video is here to stay.
It won’t be replacing every voice call. But it definitely has its place.
Otherwise, why did apple go for group video calls in FaceTime with 32 participants in their latest iOS?
And why did Whatsapp just add group video calls? And Instagram added group video calls?
Are they doing it just for fun? Is the market bound to be focused only on larger social networks?
I can’t believe that will be the case.
I came from a video conferencing company. Every year I was promised by management that this year will be the year of video. It never happened.
The last 5 years, I am using video so much that the year of video has passed already.
I guess the next question is what year will be the year of video CPaaS?
The difference in these two questions is that the year of video is the year when video became a widespread service. The year of video CPaaS will be the year when video becomes a widespread feature. We’re not there yet, but we’re heading in that direction.
In many ways, TokBox is one of the vendors figuring out how to get there.Where are we with CPaaS?
CPaaS seems to be different, but only slightly.
Growth in this space, as far as I understand, comes from SMS and PSTN voice. That’s it.
VoIP? WebRTC? IP messaging? Social omnichannel aggregation? Video? All nice to have features for now that don’t affect the bottomline enough. And at the moment, they don’t seem to be big enough to fill in the gap when SMS and PSTN voice fall out of favor.
To be a successful CPaaS vendor today, you need to:
The thing about that third point, is that it won’t be as simple to achieve as doing what CPaaS did with SMS and PSTN. In SMS and PSTN, CPaaS needed to act as an aggregator of carriers with a simple API. No one wants to deal with carriers (which is why they fail with these API initiatives when it comes to WebRTC and video services), so friendly CPaaS vendors are a great alternative.
What is the mote/barrier that CPaaS vendors are building in the IP world? Answering this question holds the key to the future of CPaaS.What will Vonage do with TokBox?
Not have it as a standalone business.
Doing that, would mean perpetuating what happened in Telefonica. While not all of it was bad, it didn’t bring the expected growth with it.
Vonage is uniquely positioned here – more than any other vendor in the market, which is probably why it ended up acquiring TokBox.
I’ll go back to my venn diagrams for an explanation here:
TBD – IMAGE HERE
The opportunity space:
Telefonica was never a serious competitor in video CPaaS.
Nexmo and by extension Vonage is.
Nexmo is probably second to only Twilio.
TokBox is probably first in video CPaaS.
They combine nicely and offer Nexmo a capability that its competitors don’t have if you look at the breadth of their video offering.
If Vonage executes this well, the end result will be a better CPaaS offering, a better Nexmo and a better Vonage.
If you’re new to WebRTC, Jitsi was the first open source Selective Forwarding Unit (SFU) and continues to be one of the most popular WebRTC platforms. They were in the news last week because their parent group inside Atlassian was sold off to Slack but the team clarified this does not have any impact on the Jitsi […]
The post Suspending Simulcast Streams for Savvy Streamlining (Brian Baldino) appeared first on webrtcHacks.
Simulcast is one of the more interesting aspects of WebRTC for multiparty conferencing. In a nutshell, it means sending three different resolution (spatial scalability) and different frame rates (temporal scalability) at the same time. Oscar Divorra’s post contains the full details. Usually, one needs a SFU to take advantage of simulcast. But there is a […]