Amazon Tech Support

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

Monday, 14 January 2013

WebRTC - not just about browsers

Posted on 23:57 by Unknown
At the moment, most observers' commentary about WebRTC involves asking about "browser support", which is understandable given that it comes under the HTML5 and W3C banner.

**NEW Feb 2013 - Disruptive Analysis WebRTC report - details here**

So we see support for WebRTC in the current "public" desktop versions of Google Chrome and - just this week - Firefox. The implementations could still be referred to as "early", but they're out there in real users' hands, not just developers using beta versions. (You'll also sometimes see references to WebRTC being "behind a flag" which means that it's available as an advanced feature if you fiddle around with settings).

Unsurprisingly, conversation then tends to turn to when WebRTC might be supported in Microsoft IE, Safari and so on, for PCs and Macs. Mobile browsers then tend to get discussed next, with mutterings about users' reticence to download and install second browsers on phones and tablets - generally, most "normal" users stick to whatever the phone is equipped with "out of the box" today. So then the predictions start to ponder when the Android browser might support WebRTC, people bemoan Apple's apparent slow pace of adoption ("hmm, they don't want it to compete with FaceTime"), or Microsoft's perceived slowness.

Actually, the picture is more complex than that, especially on mobile, but also on the desktop.

Looking at smartphones, there are actually 4 main possible paths for getting WebRTC support onto mobile devices:

  • Support by the default browser that the phone ships with
  • Support by a downloadable secondary/replacement browser (complicated on iOS because Apple doesn't allow a separate web-rendering "engine" - they need to be built around Webkit). Ericsson's Bowser is already out, and expect Chrome/Opera/Firefox etc in future as well.
  • Support in the OS. This hasn't happened yet, but many expect to see native support for WebRTC APIs in the platform itself, allowing apps to exploit the capabilities, not just web-pages. I'm having lots of interesting debates about which OS vendors might do this first.
  • BYOWebRTC approaches, where individual apps actually integrate WebRTC elements - media engine & all - typically provided by using an SDK from one of a growing number of providers offering APIs, cloud "enablers" and other building-blocks
All this is further clouded by upcoming web-based OS's like Firefox OS, BB10 and Tizen, where it's not entirely clear where the boundary is between OS and browser anyway. There's also no guarantee that future phones will always ship with the platform's "normal browser" - so for example Samsung could ship Galaxies with a tweaked version of the basic Android browser, use Chrome-for-Android instead, or even develop its own from the ground up. (There's also a small matter of supporting all of the WebRTC APIs, or just some of them).

Then there are some other wildcards - we may see WebRTC acceleration performed in silicon at some point (eg video codecs and media processing). Also - and I think I'm the first person to mention this - there's no reason that WebRTC needs to be confined to the browser or aftermarket apps on the phone. Maybe we'll see it crop up elsewhere, such as in email clients, enabling direct interaction with HTML5 emails inside the message. Standby for two-way video spam....

A similar is story is also true on the desktop, but I expect that browsers will "get there first" for the most part. So we could see downloadable applications (Enterprise softphones? Games? Skype? Outlook?) that incorporate bits of WebRTC rather than, or in addition to, their normal media engines. This would allow much tighter control of the experience than relying on browser tabs and windows, and probably make it easier to integrate comms with enterprise apps, security and assorted other features.

Overall, anybody asserting that WebRTC will only take off "when all the browsers support it" is missing half the story, especially on mobile. The reality is considerably messier - and should mean things happen a bit faster than they otherwise might.

**NEW Feb 2013 - Disruptive Analysis WebRTC report - details here**
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)
      • Microsoft and WebRTC - well, this is awkward
      • WebRTC - not just about browsers
      • Musing: exploiting under-used network capacity or ...
      • Retrospective: My most-read posts of 2012
      • There really needs to be a "User tariff API" for d...
  • ►  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)
    • ►  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