Amazon Tech Support

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Tuesday, 7 June 2011

Creating user engagement in RCS and other communications services

Posted on 05:07 by Unknown
I've been having many more discussions recently about my vehement views on RCS and why I think it is (still) destined for failure. In short, the current hoopla about various operators and vendors doing a big push to "make it happen" is not enough.

Yes, it helps that DT, FT, the US & Korean operators and (belatedly) Vodafone seem to be getting their marketing machines & spin-merchants lined up. Yes, it helps that RCS-e ditches the early RCS presence function which normally kills batteries and generates large amounts of extra signalling traffic. Yes it helps that Android is "malleable" so operators can get RCS-e clients onto some future handsets without too much pain. Yes, Orange and others are reportedly trying to strong-arm handset vendors into implementing it. Yes, executives from DT and other operators are name-checking it wherever possible on the conference circuit. Yes, I've even heard the word "freemium" mentioned in the same sentence as RCS.

All good stuff. But falling under the banner of "necessary but not sufficient".

These improvemens still don't mean that RCS-e somehow overcomes the other dozen or so problems I identified last year in my report on its near-inevitable demise. I predicted it would launch, splutter along for a bit, and then fail.

It's notable that when I have discussions with operators or vendors about what the problems really are, the one theme that seems to resonate is that of user engagement. How do you encourage people to actually use and exploit RCS rather than the myriad of other messaging and sharing and social-networking tools at their disposal? What makes them "invite friends" and others to accept those invitations? What makes them "invest" in the service?

Top of the list of things that versions of RCS I've seen *don't* do is permit the little snippets of user interaction that make alternatives like Facebook or Twitter or BlackBerry BBM so engaging.

The most obvious is "Like". On Facebook, you get instant validation that you've posted a cool picture, added a fun status update, attended a great event, listened to a great music track or whatever. It's a single click, but it communicates involvement, friendship, respect, attention, humour and all those other human qualities. It's a way to say "No, I haven't forgotten you, I am reading your stuff but don't have time to write a full message". It's like smiling at a friend, rubbing your partner's back, winking at someone in a crowd.

"Retweet" is similar. As are a whole host of "Vote up/down", "+1", "Recommend", "Share" and so forth.

These create user involvement and engagement, with a simple HTML link. They also tend to be extensible - as seen by the amount of Facebook Connect logos around the web.

Maybe a future version of RCS - or perhaps some operator-specific variants - will do something similar. Because if not, the services are likely to be very "dry".

There's another form of user interaction for messaging I've just become aware of in this context as well, triggered by this article about Apple's new iMessage service. It has something that most PC-based IM software has had for years, as well as BlackBerry Messenger - "typing indication". That's the little animation on a Skype or Yahoo IM window that shows that the other person is composing a reply. It will be interesting to see if any RCS clients can do the same thing - some of the specification documentation suggests it should.

The problem is that in future, communications users will have a very low tolerance of "clunkiness" - and they will also expect features to be upgraded like today's best apps, on a monthly or quarterly basis. There will also need to be a mechanism for operators to test different types of apps on certain groups of *live* customers. Google and Facebook can change their web page layouts, or app behaviours, for certain groups of their users, to see what works best. In my experience, it's pretty rare for telcos to do comparison-testing of different versions of services on their "production" customer base.

Overall, I still think that RCS is going to face insurmountable challenges - especially with newcomers like iMessage and whatever Google does with adding communications services into the browser. I think there will be a few niche usage cases - and perhaps specific countries where local conditions are unique enough to support it. But unless they get the user experience not just "good", but "fun" and "engaging" as well, it will struggle to gain traction.

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Quick musing on Cloud Computing
    I just heard the phrase "Everything as a Service" during a presentation on Cloud, SaaS and other forms of managed service offering...
  • Apple, embedded SIMs, NFC and mobile payments - some speculation
    I wonder if I've just managed to join up the dots on something rather important: - Recent reports suggest that Apple is intending to use...
  • New Cisco VNI traffic report out
    One of the broadband industry's "bibles" has been published in a 2010 edition . Cisco's "Visual Networking Index...
  • Is the MID a market?
    MIDs (Mobile Internet Devices) are being pushed by some notebook OEMs and silicon suppliers as the next big convergent handheld category. I...
  • "You can't use my eyeballs for free"
    Let's look forward 10 years. We've all got augmented reality browsers on our handsets, or perhaps our 4G-connected sunglasses. They ...
  • Mobile traffic management - the Inter-technology war begins
    I've been following the proliferation of mobile broadband traffic management technologies for some considerable time now, having publish...
  • Pre-MWC notes for analyst relations staff
    OK, it's the time of the year when I get bombarded by emails and phone calls from a million people inviting me to briefings and similar ...
  • Mobile operators' future voice strategies decoded
    Apologies in advance, but this blog post is deliberately a bit of a tease. I'm not going to spell out the answer here, as it's too v...
  • Hosted mobile services in the recession - Caveat Emptor
    I used to work as an equity analyst at an investment bank back in 2000-2001. I remember an unending stream of first generation Application S...
  • Challenges in measuring offload volumes
    I suspect we're going to get bombarded with statistics in the next year, along the lines of "Operator X deployed Vendor Y's off...

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (31)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (6)
    • ►  May (5)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ►  2012 (46)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (9)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ▼  2011 (73)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (10)
    • ►  October (8)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (5)
    • ▼  June (7)
      • Something to watch - voice comms and voice apps in...
      • Is mobile voice revenue being hugely overstated? A...
      • Key takeouts from the Mobile Data Offload conferen...
      • A classic example of app complexity that network D...
      • Creating user engagement in RCS and other communic...
      • Can telcos compete in an era of fashion-driven ser...
      • Inspecting the inspectors & throttlers - reverse e...
    • ►  May (9)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (7)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ►  2010 (130)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (10)
    • ►  October (10)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (9)
    • ►  July (7)
    • ►  June (19)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (11)
    • ►  March (18)
    • ►  February (7)
    • ►  January (10)
  • ►  2009 (126)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (14)
    • ►  October (9)
    • ►  September (8)
    • ►  August (9)
    • ►  July (10)
    • ►  June (21)
    • ►  May (14)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (11)
    • ►  February (15)
    • ►  January (9)
  • ►  2008 (94)
    • ►  December (24)
    • ►  November (26)
    • ►  October (25)
    • ►  September (19)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile