Asian operators are making plans to roll out standardized and interoperable instant messaging (IM) services next year under an initiative launched by the GSM Association, but for some messaging solution vendors, standardized IM may not be enough to realize its full potential in the mobile space.
According to the GSMA, all three of Malaysia's GSM operators - Celcom, DiGi Telecommunications and Maxis - have agreed to launch interoperable IM services next year. Singaporean cellcos M1, SingTel Mobile and StarHub are developing a similar agreement, while Indian GSM operators are planning to launch commercial services in early 2007.
All of the operators will base their IM services on the "personal IM" technical and commercial framework designed and launched in February 2006 by the GSMA, which says the framework maximizes ease-of-use, interoperability and reliability, while minimizing spam and viruses.
The framework also follows the Instant Messaging and Presence Service (IMPS) standard developed by the Open Mobile Alliance for mobile devices.
Most wireless industry players agree that mobile IM interoperability across different networks will be crucial to its success, as users will be reluctant to accept IM that only allows you to create buddy lists only with friends who subscribe to the same phone network. However, says Kevin Nix, EVP and chief marketing officer of Roamware, one thing the IM standard doesn't guarantee the best possible user experience.
"For IM today, the experience on a mobile phone is not optimal," he said.
John Hoffman, CEO of fastmobile, concurs. "Standards are good, but what will really drive mobile IM is the user experience," he told telecomasai.net on the sidelines of the 3GSM World Congress Asia in Singapore on Wednesday. "Standards tend to go to the lowest common denominator to get by, so they're usually not super-feature-rich."
That's going to matter to users who find straight IMPS-based services falling short of their expectations, Hoffman said. "If you want to recreate the desktop portal experience and bring that level of functionality to mobile IM, that's too overhead-intensive for IMPS. Our own IM solution can deliver that experience because it's up to three to ten times more efficient."
Hoffman stressed that this wasn't an argument against IMPS so much as an argument in favor of cellcos differentiating themselves by offering IM solutions that offer the best possible user experience. "You could still create cross-network buddy lists and send IMs across different networks, but the graphical reproduction would be different depending on what service you use."