Competition at Work

Last spring analyst Jack Gold wrote an intriguing commentary about how mobile networks in the United States would need to move to open device access -- meaning that they would need to give third-party devices (as opposed to carrier-sponsored devices) access to their networks.

Gold, of J. Gold Associates, wrote: "Carriers in North America still exert enormous influence over device vendors, getting them to modify each device to specific carrier specs (which generally raises the cost and limits the cross- network capability – a feature carriers are keen to protect). But we believe several things will change this over the next 1-2 years."

As a user, I was really excited by this possibility. This is what we have with landline service afterall. So, I mentioned it to our wireless beat reporter, Tara Seals, to find out if there was some truth to this. She was dubious at the prospect, citing the mobile operators' lack of motivation to relinquish their stranglehold on devices.

This week one U.S. mobile operator apparently has been sufficiently motivated. Verizon Wireless announced that it will begin opening its mobile network to third-party devices and applications -- at least the ones that meet certain technical standards. It's a start.

So what's changed since last spring? Two things, in particular.

1. The iPhone. Apple's intention to let third-party developers have access to iPhone to build applications is part of the trend. Additionally, Apple sells the iPhone direct to consumers. Jack Gold mentioned this in his analysis last spring: "We believe this is the start of a wave, as many vendors of devices are now beginning to feel empowered to go direct to consumers."

2. Google's Android and the Open Handset Alliance. The launch of Google's Android open-source mobile application platform is supposed to enable mobile applications development similar to what's been experience with the Web. Thirty-four developers, wireless operators and handset manufacturers have come together to get Android-based products to market, calling themselves the Open Handset Alliance.

I have to give Verizon Wireless credit for being a first mover, especially since it's been one of the most vocal against Google's campaign to disentangle devices and networks.

It either will give them an advantage over their competitors or cause those same companies to follow suit. Either way, it's a good thing for consumers like you and me.

There are other drivers that might cause mobile operators to eventually come to the same conclusions that Verizon Wireless has. Analyst Gold predicted a few:
"*First users will demand more choice, especially high end users who are more willing to forgo subsidies and buy what they want.

*Second, new competition to the current networks will emerge, particularly in urban areas where Mesh Wi-Fi and WiMax are becoming available.

*Third the higher-end purchaser will demand cross-network support (e.g., 3G+, Wi-Fi, WiMax, etc.) and will go with a provider (or providers) that can assure all the connections needed."

While WiMAX is foundering here in the states, especially after Sprint's announced troubles, I think Gold is spot-on about the cannibalization that will come from competitive networks.

This is what I expected to happen. I am fairly disappointed that the real pressure on the mobile operators to create the inevitable open ecosystem came from outside the industry -- Apple, a computer maker, and Google, a content company. I suppose these innovators are not used to playing by the "rules" and that, my friend, has made all the difference.