RACO, a T-Mobile partner, specializes in wireless data solutions for machine-to-machine (M2M) industries, which allows wireless systems to connect with other devices.  John explains how M2M is now being used all across the world.

“Each industry has become integrated with M2M technology.  From the insurance industry which uses it for monitoring discounts to even the ice industry monitoring their inventory.  It’s important to show that M2M has become mainstream,” he said.

As Brad Pitt said in Inglorious Basterds, ‘Business is a boomin’.  Raco has seen a 300% growth in 2011 and has provided new solutions for providers in less than a day.

How has RACO been able to perform and grow at such a high level?  John explained the keys to his success came down changing the way he looked at wireless altogether.

“The team has been together for over 9 years and has 200+ years of M2M experience.  This translates into a wealth of knowledge to help our customers build successful business models.  We have seen what works and what doesn’t and know what trouble spots to look out for,” Horn said.

The keys, Horn said, are flexibility and the ability to quickly turn around a solution that’s right for the business.

“The old business model was to have companies go through long certification processes in order to put a new device or product on the carrier network,” he said. “This takes thousands of dollars and many weeks. Then you have to buy a rate plan that exists from a carrier or wait for weeks for them to build a new one.  Then it takes weeks to connect into whatever management platform they are using and tie up IT resources to get it accomplished.”

Now, it takes John and Raco only a few short hours to complete the process.

“We created a whole new business model which allows us complete flexibility and shortens the business model to one day. We have eliminated or simplified these steps”

With all the company’s growth, it still faces challenges.  While M2M is growing, its still a niche many people don’t know about, and RACO is struggling to become a household name.

“The biggest problem we have right now is marketing, getting our name out there,” he said. “We print ads and appear at trade shows but we’re also looking into other avenues to explore.”

However, Horn sees a bright future for the M2M industry.  “We have seen massive growth.  It comes down to if you support it or not. If you support it, you will come out a winner.”

Michael Tidmarsh is the assistant community editor at ITKnowledgeExchange.com. He can be reached at MTidmarsh@TechTarget.com

The reaction was as swift as it was predictable. Wired’s excellent Tim Carmody blasted the Damning Backstory Behind ‘Homeless Hotspots’ at SXSW, while others took the initiative as another sign of the tech conferences jumping the shark – or worse, how out of touch the digerati are with real world problems.

To quote Carmody:

It sounds like something out of a darkly satirical science-fiction dystopia. But it’s absolutely real — and a completely problematic treatment of a problem that otherwise probably wouldn’t be mentioned in any of the panels at South by Southwest Interactive.

This program and the immediate media backlash reminded me of why so many promising, innovative projects inevitably sputter out, whether its in the world of startups, social work or plain vanilla corporate IT.

The basic idea behind the experiment, conceived of by marketing firm Bartle Bogle Hegarty, is simple and time tested: Give disadvantaged individuals an opportunity at respectful, accessible self-employment. Thousands of programs around the world are based on the same premise in. One popular version is the street newspaper, in which homeless individuals are given free or cheap newspapers to sell, and then keep the profit (I volunteer for one of these in the Boston area), and that’s the model Bartle Bogle Hegarty said they were building on, working with a local Austin shelter.

But what, exactly, made the experiment cause such a visceral reaction? A New York Times blog post dubs it “dystopian” before posing the question: “When the infrastructure fails us… we turn human beings into infrastructure?” Carmody goes even further, focusing on the project’s precursor, which provided mobile and social tools to the homeless to help them directly tell their story – before the project fell apart:

This is my worry: the homeless turned not just into walking, talking hotspots, but walking, talking billboards for a program that doesn’t care anything at all about them or their future, so long as it can score a point or two about digital disruption of old media paradigms. So long as it can prove that the real problem with homelessness is that it doesn’t provide a service.

Unfortunately, the reality is that many, many well meaning projects fizzle out early on for one reason or another, whether old media or new. Awarding supporters of those projects a scarlet letter and expecting everyone to bat 1000 means that tried and true mediocrity becomes the only metric of success.

I think a lot of the gut-level reaction to the initiative stem mostly because BHH is trying something new and untested while raising uncomfortable truths (as a few commenters noted, nobody would otherwise be discussing homelessness amid the excess of SXSW).

The problem isn’t limited to public service or Silicon Valley’s endless chattering classes, the latter of which often feels like an echo chamber of “me too” companies that endlessly cookie cutter each other’s success. The attitude infects IT and technology decisions for understandable reasons – but ultimately ones that put IT in a reactive, defensive position.

One of the first expressions I learned at TechTarget was “Nobody ever got fired for buying Cisco,” a twist on the original (?) “Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM”, both classic examples of the conservative habits of IT buyers. Because for years, not many people would get fired for following the path of least resistance and going with one of two “safe” vendors. But lately that thinking has left IT blind to the challenges advances like cloud computing, Bring Your Own Device and software-as-a-service everywhere have brought, leaving users to route around their conservatism with riskier, but more practical, tools and methods, or letting their business get swallowed up by a nimbler competitor.

In IT departments, the gut reaction is often, “If the user doesn’t follow our policy, fire them”. But the uncomfortable truth is that, in many areas, IT hasn’t kept up with the consumer world, and it’s easier to attack challenges to the status quo, whatever the topic, than to do the hard work of embracing change.

Michael Morisy is the editorial director for ITKnowledgeExchange. He can be followed on Twitter or you can reach him at Michael@ITKnowledgeExchange.com.

‘First, do no harm.”

This lesson for first-year medical students should also be taught to government policy makers as they consider proposals to reallocate the nation’s airwaves. … Until it is certain that provisions are in place to protect the broadcast industry and television viewers from harm, spectrum auctions should not be held.

The idea that the broadcast industry, long the domain of oligarchic titans local and international, needs government protection from feisty cellular providers, was touching but not nearly so intriguing as the concept that rule number one should be protectionism: When looking at a potential revolution, in other words, step back and begin building a very solid, very thick, very wide wall.

If any industry is in upheaval, it is surely telecommunications. IP has changed the nature of commerce, of courtship and of connectedness. And as much as I hate (hate) dealing with current wireless providers, I am amazed and grateful for how individually and collectively empowering this revolution has been. From minor things – like being able to use a cell phone to change last minute reservations – to big things – like the Arab Spring – IP has overthrown so many of society assumptions about how things can and must work, and it’s not something to be lightly traded.

But for a long time, this wasn’t the vision of what the net was supposed to be. For one, it was chained down to a desk. For another, it was tied to serious academic and military purposes. But even when it (quickly) moved past that, the corporate controllers of Internet access CompuServe and Prodigy treated network connectivity like access to a walled garden: Discussions were pruned, prepared and moderated with at least some degree of central control.

Were these companies to have been protected with their models – so advanced at the time of their debut – the United States would have missed out on a revolution and trailed the world in innovation, access and connectedness. The “Do No Harm” principal would have devastated the country even as it sought to protect something of value.

And, in fact, to an extent it has: The United States still trails many other developed and even developing nations in terms of cost and access to true high speed Internet access, due to a number of factors. I would not and probably could not argue that wireless providers, the ones now seeking more spectrum, area saints here, but in general I think it’s the counter-revolutionary forces that have kept our connectivity lagging. Clever startups like Republic Wireless and scrappy also-rans like Boost Mobile put downwards pressure on price while providing much-needed competitive pressure to the big three wireless providers.

Holding back an entire industry because of the interests of even more outdated concerns is a prescription for disaster, but just as we see it again and again at the national level (see Congress’ bull-headed support of SOPA) it also holds back companies large and small: IT is a traditionally extremely conservative department, explaining why not more often than paving the way for the future. Just like local broadcasters can’t go back to the golden years of Cronkite, neither can businesses return to the simpler (ok, maybe not) times of tape storage and top-down control of which applications are deployed where, when and how without feedback from the hoi polloi.

Michael Morisy is the editorial director for ITKnowledgeExchange. He can be followed on Twitter or you can reach him at Michael@ITKnowledgeExchange.com. ]]> http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/IT-watch-blog/when-do-no-harm-becomes-a-prescription-for-tech-suicide/feed/ 0 http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/IT-watch-blog/windows-mobile-7-what-is-it-good-for/ http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/IT-watch-blog/windows-mobile-7-what-is-it-good-for/#comments Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:51:00 +0000 Michael Morisy http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/IT-watch-blog/?p=693 More and more Windows Mobile 7 details are drip-dropping out daily, with the latest being that Microsoft’s taken a trick from Apple’s playbook and pushing application downloads through its own store, with a “forthcoming” enterprise option to centrally deploy corporate apps.

But will it even matter to the enterprise? Windows Mobile devices have long been a consumer also-ran, but have found die-hard users for specialized applications in areas from the warehouse to the road to extreme heat and cold situations. They often put the “computing” in mobile computing, but it doesn’t look like Microsoft is trying to keep that market with the latest update, which Ed Hardy dubbed the “Zune Phone.” It probably makes a lot of sense from Microsoft’s perspective, but what will power enterprise warehouse floors now? Will device manufacturers rejoice at getting to drop the “Microsoft tax” and go with custom Android builds? Will Microsoft have a legacy program to keep this market just sated enough not to leave? Will we see Windows Mobile 6, like it’s distant (distant!) cousin XP, be end-of-lifed for years and years to come as demand continues and companies resist upgrades?.

I’d love to hear your thoughts, either in the comments or at Michael@ITKnowledgeExchange.com: Does Windows 7 Mobile matter to your business, and if so, how — even if it just means you need to start planning a transition to something else?.

We are using WAN for phones and PCs. Is that your definition of 100%? In fact we have NOT removed all LAN cables. Some fixed IP phones,  mainly used for receiving calls from customers or business partners are wired because the calls should be answered as the company not as an employee. Desktop PCs are also wired because they do not need mobility. Another use of wired LAN is the emergency use when WLAN gets unstable.

4) Have you upgraded to .11n, and have you run into any challenges with that?

Not yet, but as stated above, we are trying various products and will try .11n in the near future because we are planning to replace the current wireless system in 2011 that is our Meru products’ economical end-of-life.

5) If you’ve moved to 100% wireless, why did you and what benefits did you see in terms of cost savings or efficiency?

6) If you’re not, what was behind the decision not to go 100% wireless?

It’s not necessarily appropriate to suggest that wireless itself contributes to cost saving or improving efficiency. In many cases of  introducing wireless LAN as a replacement of wired LAN, you cannot expect cost savings.

Our project started from the replacement of conventional PBXs. PBXs were so expensive that we could achieved 50% reduction of facility cost in terms of depreciation cost.

In terms of efficiency improvement, we not only introduced wireless LAN but also promoted to change our workstyle from paper-based one to full-digital one. Wireless environment and full-digital workstyle allow us to access, transmit and share real-time information anywhere, which leads to efficiency improvement.

7) Any other advice for companies considering going all wireless?

We believe that the use of wired and wireless systems and 3G and VoIP phones in optimal combinations is important for us to improve our work efficiency and thereby reducing operation costs.

“Wireless” is a means, but not a destination.

Frequently Asked Questions about Mobile Computing:

• Blackberry Desktop Organizer
• Exchange server sync with iphones
• Wireless to wireless connectivity (Cisco WAP4110N)

Still have unanswered questions? See what others are asking about cloud computing or ask your own IT question in our forums!

For a deeper dive, take a look at some of these excellent mobile computing book recommendations we’ve pulled together, or suggest your own:

Books on Mobile Computing:

• Mobile Computing: Technology, Applications, and Service Creation
• Wireless LANs (2nd Edition)

Have another suggestion for this list? E-mail me at Michael@ITKnowledgeExchange.com or leave it in the comments.

Want to connect directly with experts? Read their blogs to hear straight from the horse’s mouth: The pioneers, cheerleaders and critics of the mobile computing landscape are often just a click away, and we’ve helped to organize the best of the best.

Top Mobility Expert Blogs:

• Craig Mathias’ Small Mobile Business
• Boy Genius Report
• Ed Hardy’s Brighthand Bytes

What else would make this guide useful to you? Let me know in the comments or e-mail me directly at Michael@ITKnowledgeExchange.com with any additions, corrections or suggestions.

The benefits of this supposed wireless wonderland, fueled by .11n and powered by pixie dust, is ease, accessibility and even cost savings. Imagine, users can just pony up to any office corral they want, pop onto the Wi-Fi, and even re-group with different colleagues with ease. No need to send an IT tech to reconfigure or troubleshoot their Ethernet jack, they just hop onto the same wireless connection no matter where they are. Those IT calls add up, and there’s a is a real cost. Several IT professionals estimated that each desk move runs a couple hundred dollars just in the time it takes to set the user up for access to the Internet and corporate network.

And the dream is nothing new: A few weeks after I started working at SearchNetworking.com in 2007, I was getting pitches about it. A quick search through my e-mail turned up tens of thousands of e-mails for “all wireless office,” from PR flacks, newsletters and mailing lists.

And flacks still tell me regularly: This is the time for the all-wireless office.

But the reality is, just like the paperless office and the e-mail-less office, we’ve got a long hard road ahead.

Take one of the top Google results for the topic, Matt Hamblen’s “All-wireless office launches for 6,000 users at Japanese company“.

Of course, once Matt dove into the details, he found that the office wasn’t really all wireless: A lot of workers still had traditional deskphones, and even the 6,000 wireless phone users had backups in case of a power outage.

But Michael, I hear you argue, that was three years ago. .11n has finally been ratified! Sure, and it’s brought a host of improvements, but in interview after interview with networking professionals, I’ve found that wireless companies routinely over-promise, under-deliver and leave customer after customer holding the bag.

Here’s three areas that give me pause:

Consistency: .11′s MIMO is a whole new ballgame for wireless, and the improvements are great. But they’re also overstated, because just as the greatest maximum reach has been extended, so has its unpredictability. That better-than-broadband throughput only comes through if you’re lucky, unless …

Cost: There’s a reason wireless vendors are so happy to pitch the all-wireless network: You’ll end up saturating your offices with access points. Access points that are “cheap” if they come in under $600. Access points that will have to be super-saturated once you discover that you have users clustering around in a meeting room. So much for saving on those desk moves.

Commodity: When you buy Ethernet cables, you pretty much buy Ethernet cables. And they’re a dirt chip commodity at this point. Forget that when it comes to wireless: You’ll have to pick a vendor and stick with them for a long, long time, bending over every upgrade cycle for whatever specific product they have to fit your need. And you’ll have to get the whole matching kit and caboodle, too: The controllers, the APs, the security consoles, the software that does your coverage mapping which, by the shows, shows you need even more of those proprietary controllers and APs.

I won’t argue that there’s not a lot of benefit that the ratified 802.11n standard brings, but be careful that your enterprise doesn’t get caught up in the spin.

If you’d like to read more, I highly recommend Lisa Phifer’s three-part series on .11n (registration maybe required), which advocates and explains a mixed network methodology, a compromise that, just like reduced paper offices, makes a lot of sense.

Verizon Wireless’ latest telephone campaign, Droid Does, is a direct attack on AT&T’s iPhone dominance, and they’ve also been running those cheeky “We’ve got a map for that” parodies (not that any of it’s hurt AT&T so far).[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/37NKnDRPFKU" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

So what could bring the two warring wireless behemoths into such close quarters and at allied aims? No less a specter than Net Neutrality itself. Tom Tauke kicked off the discussion by reminding the small gathering that, as the FCC unveils its network neutrality proposal tomorrow, “There is no broadband without broadband investment.”

At this point, I was kindly escorted out of the room and informed the lunch was closed to the press (there had been no notice of this on the invitation I’d been handed nor the lunch room entrance). The meeting wasn’t the first Tom & Jim show, and unless the proposal tomorrow is radically different than what anyone is expected, be prepared for more frenemies-with-benefits as the giant telecoms try to knock any teeth out of the final Net Neutrality guidelines, both from behind closed doors and out in the public spotlight.

Have any hot tips from SuperComm, or thoughts on net neutrality, AT&T, or Verizon? Leave a message in the comments or shoot me an e-mail at Michael@ITKnowledgeExchange.com.