An Exploration of Cell Phone Videoconferencing
Sandra Blair University of Denver University College Capstone Project for Master of Applied Science April 29, 2009
_____________________ William Blattman Capstone Advisor
_____________________ Thomas Tierney, Ph.D. Academic Director
Upon the Recommendation of the Department
_____________________ James R. Davis, Ph.D. Dean
Blair–ii Abstract Videoconferencing enables improved communications over distances, making meetings more efficient by including visual cues and body language. This project’s goal is to explore cell phone videoconferencing technology and determine if it would benefit my organization. This analysis includes an introduction of the project and a literature review. The literature review focuses on the following areas: 1) Evolution of videoconferencing and cell phone videoconferencing, 2) The importance of visual cues to effective communication, 3) Advantages and disadvantages of the technology, 4) How other countries have had success with this technology, and 5) Reasons why this technology has not been widely used within the United States. Then, a determination will be made if cell phone videoconferencing would benefit my organization. Finally, areas for further research are identified.
Blair–iii Table of Contents
Abstract .............................................................................................. ii Introduction.........................................................................................1 Statement of Problem ...................................................................1 Statement of Goals and Objectives .................................................2 Benefits ......................................................................................2 Literature Review .................................................................................3 History of Videoconferencing .........................................................3 Figure A. An artist’s conception of video telephony, as imagined in 1910...............................................................................4 Figure B. 1964 Picturephone Set............................................5 Figure C. First Lady Ladybird Johnson using the PicturePhone at the 1964 World’s Fair in New York .........................................6 Communication............................................................................9 Advantages of Videoconferencing ................................................. 11 Figure D. Example of Telepresence Videoconference............... 13 Disadvantages of Videoconferencing ............................................. 16 History of Cell Phones ................................................................. 18 Table 1. Wireless Technology Comparison ............................. 21 Convergence of Videoconferencing and Cell Phones ........................ 27 Figure E. Example of Cell Phone Videoconferencing ................ 28
Blair–iv Advantages of Cell Phone Videoconferencing ................................. 29 Disadvantages of Cell Phone Videoconferencing ............................. 30 How Other Countries use this Technology...................................... 32 Why Videoconferencing Cell Phones are not yet Popular in US.......... 34 What is Currently Available in the US............................................ 37 What does the Future Look Like ................................................... 42 Would My Organization Benefit from this Technology? .................... 44 Discussion ................................................................................. 45 References ........................................................................................ 48
Blair-1
INTRODUCTION This Capstone Project will include a current analysis of the cell phone videoconferencing technology, the availability of the technology and its usefulness for my organization. Statement of Problem For many years, videoconferencing technology has helped bridge the distance gaps for meetings. Our organization relies heavily on videoconferencing to assist with communications with people in other locations. With offices located in Virginia, Colorado, California, Texas, Alaska, Hawaii, and internationally, it is not possible to be in person for all meetings. Our organization uses videoconferencing nearly everyday to bring key people together, regardless of their location. Many companies experience similar challenges with maintaining effective communication with remote offices. Communication still needs to occur in a timely fashion and important decisions still need to be made, despite the fact that resources are scattered in different states or countries. Today, videoconferencing helps to bridge that gap; however, when people are traveling or working from home, there is no current solution in our organization to enable them to join in via video. They often will dial in to the audio bridge to be linked to the meeting and participate or they may not join at all. The value of their contributions and what they take away from the meeting is diminished or lost entirely. Face-to-face meetings remain the
Blair–2 most effective means of communications. However, when these meetings are not possible, and when people are not in the office to participate in videoconferencing meetings in the conference rooms, cell phone videoconferencing may be the solution. Statement of Goals and Objectives The goal of this Capstone Project is to determine if cell phone videoconferencing would benefit my organization. The analysis will include an exploration of the evolution of videoconferencing and cell phone videoconferencing technology. It will research the advantages and disadvantages of using videoconferencing. This project will also investigate other countries’ adoption and use of cell phone videoconferencing and seek reasons why it has not yet been used widely in the United States. It will explore current options available in the United States and the potential future of this technology. The final product will be a determination of whether or not my organization should use cell phone videoconferencing technology today. Benefits The overall benefit of this Capstone Project will be to provide my organization with meaningful information regarding cell phone videoconferencing to assist in making a determination if it would be beneficial for our organization. Specific benefits of this Capstone Project include gaining an understanding of the developments in the area of
Blair–3 videoconferencing and cell phones, the advancement of technology in these areas, the importance of visual cues to communication in meetings and pros and cons of cell phone videoconferencing. LITERATURE REVIEW History of Videoconferencing Videoconferencing is a communications technology that enables people in one geographic area to view and communicate with others in another geographic location. It utilizes coder/decoder (codec) videoconferencing equipment at each location and network connections to transmit voice and video. The technology also allows for data collaboration with remote locations. Videoconferencing can take place between two locations, or multiple locations, with the use of a Multipoint Control Unit (MCU) to bridge the locations together. Videoconferencing technology experienced many starts and stops along the way to developing into the great communications tool that it is today. It can be traced all the way back to April 1891, when Alexander Graham Bell recorded conceptual notes of an electrical radiophone and postulated on "....the possibility of seeing by electricity" using devices that employed tellurium or selenium imaging components. (Videophone). See Figure A below (Picturephone).
Blair–4
Figure A. An artist’s conception of video telephony, as imagined in 1910 In the 1920’s, Bell Laboratories began exploring technology to support transmitting voice and video over regular telephone lines. In 1927, the world’s first videoconferencing call took place between Walter Gifford, AT&T President (in New York) and Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce (in Washington D.C.). It was the first public demonstration of long-distance video transmission. The videoconferencing system that they used was enormous; it was larger than two giant-sized refrigerators (Event). Work continued on the videoconferencing technology and in 1956, AT&T built the very first Picturephone test system. It was first introduced at the 1964 World’s Fair held in New York by the Bell System (now AT&T) (Video). “The Picturephone gave users a two-way black-and-white video
Blair–5 feed between those at the fair and other users in Disneyland” (McGrath). See Figures B and C below (Picturephone).
Figure B. 1964 Picturephone Set
Blair–6 Figure C. First Lady Ladybird Johnson using the PicturePhone at the 1964 World’s Fair in New York After making adjustments to the Picturephone to address the complaints about the small screen and usability, AT&T introduced the Picturephone for lease to the public in 1970, for $160 per month. Then, Ericsson demonstrated the first trans-atlantic video telephone call in 1971. There were high hopes that the Picturephone would become a household item in the decade to follow. Unfortunately, that was not the case. The large size and large price made it unappealing to the general public. Later in 1982, the International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee (CCITT) developed the standard of H.120 video coding. Also Compression Labs Inc. (CLI) began selling videoconferencing systems in 1982, at a cost of $250,000 per unit and $1,000 per hour for the network lines. Slowly, the prices started to come down, as PictureTel began selling their system for $80,000 per unit and $100 per hour for the network lines in 1986 (A History). During this time, videoconferencing systems were largely using different proprietary protocols. This made it extremely difficult for companies to communicate with each other using videoconferencing equipment that was purchased from different vendors. The only way dissimilar videoconferencing codec systems could communicate would be through services from a third party to link the two together. Early on, proprietary
Blair–7 protocols were far better for video and audio quality than the video standards. After paying high prices for the hardware and network, customers preferred the quality of the proprietary protocols. In the meantime, videoconferencing standards continued evolving and improving and over time, slowly became more widely accepted and more commonly used by the vendors and customers. In 1990, CCITT developed the H.261 video coding standard, along with the H.320 ISDN standard. In 1993, the CCITT became the International Telecommunication Union, Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T). In 1996, the ITU-T introduced the H.263 standard (video coding for low bit-rate communication), the H.324 standard (plain old telephone service conferencing), the T.120 standard (data conferencing) and H.323 v1 standard (audio, video and data over packet based networks). In 2003, the ITU-T released their recommendation for H.264 (advanced video coding) (A History). Over the years, the ITU-T has continued to release updated and improved standards. The vendors and customers were finally embracing standards-based videoconferencing, making it the norm and pushing out the proprietary protocols that were commonly used in the past. This enabled a user owning a CLI videoconferencing system to connect with another vendor’s system without needing extra equipment or the services of a third party.
Blair–8 Not only have videoconferencing standards improved over the years, the videoconferencing hardware has become more sophisticated. The systems have become smaller; the cost of ownership and use has significantly decreased and the use is much more widespread. Videoconferencing systems have become popular within many businesses both inside conferencing rooms and at the desktop. In businesses and at home, there is also use of the very compact webcams. Still, the video phone has not yet become a household item. Back in 1992, AT&T spent more than $500 million to bring a video phone to market for consumers, in hopes of igniting the interest in the product. Unfortunately, the product was not successful in gaining traction or popularity. Through all the ups and downs of videoconferencing, and after all the technology improvements, the video phone still has not become a household item. Despite the fact that the video phone has not become a household item, the videoconferencing systems have become popular in many businesses. Today businesses will have one or several videoconferencing codecs in their offices, generally in the conference rooms. With the improvements to the technology over the years and the decreasing costs, videoconferencing systems can provide businesses with many advantages. One primary reason that businesses are using videoconferencing is to improve communication.
Blair–9 Communication Communication is essential to any business, whether this communication takes place in person, over the phone, via the computer or other means. We communicate every day. When employees are working from home or traveling, face-to-face communication is not possible. Often what replaces face-to-face communication is a voice-only telephone call or an email. Unfortunately, telephone calls and emails do not promote the most effective communication within a company. As stated by Sharer: When we communicate, 10% of the meaning is contained in the words we choose; 20% is contained in the style of delivery; 70% is contained in non-verbal cues or body language. That's why videoconferencing can be so much more effective than a voice-only conference call. Let's look at some other facts. When we engage in a face-to-face conversation, all parties walk away with an 80% level of common understanding and agreement of what was discussed; in a voice-only meeting, this level drops to 40%; when the meeting is held over videoconference, the level rises back up to 60%. (Sharer 2004) Given that information, it is clear that visual cues play a large role in communication. When people only have the option of joining a meeting via the telephone, they lose the ability to see the body language and verbal cues. This results in a diminished understanding of the meeting discussion,
Blair–10 leaving the phone participant with possibly only 40% of a common understanding with the others. This is a very low percentage with a lot or room for misinterpretations and misunderstandings. The telephone participant in a meeting is at a significant disadvantage over a participant that was in the meeting room with the others. Extensive research by the Communications Studies Group in England, involving hundreds of managers from business and government, indicates that we cannot generalize about the effectiveness of teleconferencing without relating the purpose of a meeting to the particular form of teleconferencing being used. Based on a comparison of face-to-face groups with audio conferencing and video conferencing groups, their research indicates that the chief role of visual cues from people is to communicate interpersonal attitudes. They are particularly important for getting to know others. For this purpose, face-to-face meetings are best, video conferencing is next best, audio conferencing follows, and (presumably) computer conferencing is the poorest. (Fox, 146) Now when we change that interaction to a videoconference, when a face-to-face meeting is not possible, the ability to pick up on the visual cues and the level of common understanding significantly increases. Videoconferencing is a great communication tool that enables people to have face-to-face meetings, even if they are geographically separated. “This
Blair–11 technological advance makes distance obsolete. Anybody anywhere can see and talk live to the person face to face who could be thousands of miles away. A truly effective meeting involves much more than the exchange of words - it involves visual communication - in the form of body language, facial expressions. Videoconferencing is a tool that allows this natural, full communication of ideas & information to take place over distance - without the overwhelming expense of travel” (Video Conferencing Meelap). Research in this area also indicates that when a face-to-face meeting is not possible, videoconferencing is the next best option. The Collaboratory for Research on Electronic Work (CREW) group from the University of Michigan conducted a study in four different communications situations. These four environments included 1) face-to-face, 2) video, 3) audio, and 4) text chat. “Videoconferencing may be as good as face-to-face for building trust. In this experiment video was indistinguishable from face-to-face, and both were significantly better than text chat. Although we cannot yet statistically separate the phone condition, it appears that phone is somewhere in between text chat and video for trust building. It does appear that trust forms more slowly in mediated conditions” (Bos). Advantages of Videoconferencing Utilizing videoconferencing has many advantages to a company. One of the advantages is that it can help streamline communication and enhance or reinforce relationships. With both audio and video being broadcasted, not
Blair–12 only are emotions detected through the audio, but facial expressions and body language are viewable by the remote location. Videoconferencing allows people the opportunity to make eye contact and make a visual connection. “By fully exposing the visual and audio cues during a meeting, videoconferencing allows the full impact of a relationship to be explored since person-to-person contact can be both heard and seen. . . . During a videoconference you can see the facial expressions and body language of conference participants. These are both important aspects of communication that are lost with a basic telephone call” (Benefits 2004). And with the advancements in telepresence videoconferencing, participants can enjoy lifesize, panoramic images of the remote meeting participants. Telepresence advances the use of videoconferencing by making it appear that the remote participants are simply sitting across the table. It utilizes multiple monitors, along with high-definition audio and video feeds to simulate an “in person” meeting, improving the face-to-face interaction. Below in Figure D is an example of a telepresence videoconference (Wolgemuth 2008).
Blair–13
Figure D. Example of Telepresence Videoconference Another advantage of videoconferencing is to minimize the need for travel, thus reducing costs for travel expenses. This saves the company money on items like airfare, gas, car rental, hotel, meals, etc. Although nothing will replace the face-to-face meeting, travel time and expense can be limited to the first meeting and significant follow up meetings. All other meetings can be conducted via videoconferencing, saving the company thousands and thousands of dollars. On a timelier note, “faced with an economic downturn and increased airfares, three-quarters of 230 U.S. travel buyers responding to a recent National Business Travel Association poll reported increased use of teleconferencing and Web-based meetings. Nearly 57 percent cited increased use of videoconferencing. More than 80 percent said the
Blair–14 technology replaced actual trips. Once considered a threat to traditional face-to-face meetings, virtual meetings increasingly are viewed as an invaluable component to strategic meetings management programs” (The Next 2008). A third advantage to companies using videoconferencing is an increase in productivity. Since people will need to travel less, they will be in the office more, and able to produce more while still effectively communicating with the remote locations or customers. Plus, traveling can be exhausting and too much travel does not provide a good work-life balance. Reducing the travel requirements will help ease the stresses of being out of the office and enable people to be more productive. Another advantage of videoconferencing is the ability to meet with many locations simultaneously across time zones and in any geographic location. More and more business is conducted globally. Videoconferencing is the ideal technology to bridge multiple locations together for quick information sharing, discussion, and decision making, anywhere in the world. It provides a great means of communicating project status, milestones and deliverables, ensuring that everyone is on the same page, regardless of their geographic location. One more advantage of videoconferencing is the ability to incorporate data collaboration into a meeting. Often people work together in groups that are geographically separated. Using videoconferencing and data
Blair–15 collaboration helps to bridge those distance gaps. Workgroups can work together on a single document, design, drawing or project, at the same time, sharing their knowledge and experience and providing meaningful contributions to the group’s tasks. It is valuable to note that “Another important consideration in today's world is the environment. With global warming and sustainability becoming increasingly important issues for both individuals and corporations, finding ways to reduce negative impacts upon the environment is a major aspect of improving business practices. Since video conferencing solutions allow business people to connect and converse very effectively without the need for travel, this form of communication allows companies to significantly reduce their carbon footprint. As a result, it provides the benefits of face-toface conversations without harming the environment with the excessive carbon emissions that come with traveling by land or air” (Long). The overall advantage of videoconferencing is improved effectiveness. All other advantages can be rolled up onto this one. Videoconferencing helps improve communication by using both audio and visual cues. It helps enhance and reinforce relationships. It reduces the need for travel, along with the travel expenses. Videoconferencing improves productivity and can offer data collaboration capabilities. Videoconferencing is a tool that allows people from all over the world to meet simultaneously and improve the effectiveness of any company, along with being environmentally friendly. As
Blair–16 stated above, there are several advantages to companies who choose to use the videoconferencing technology. Disadvantages of Videoconferencing Although several advantages of videoconferencing have been noted, one cannot ignore the disadvantages to videoconferencing. The major disadvantage of videoconferencing is that it is not an in person, face-to-face meeting. Strong relationships can be built with face-to-face interaction. It is easier to build trust and come to a common understanding with using visual cues and body language. When doing a videoconferencing meeting, some people find the technology to be distracting to the actual purpose of the meeting. Even though there is audio and video, and even with today’s telepresence technology simulating a real meeting environment, nothing will replace the true face-to-face, in person meetings, as discussed in the Communication section above. Another disadvantage to videoconferencing is the technology itself. It has not yet reached a point where the common user can effectively troubleshoot and fix a problem. As a result, videoconferencing still often requires having support staff to manage the equipment and network. Most videoconferencing meetings occur without incident or interruption. However, on occasion, there will be a system or network related issue that arises and it is beneficial to have staff available to quickly remedy the situation, if possible. If the problem is more serious and requires more troubleshooting,
Blair–17 the trained staff can work through the issues so that the next videoconference call is a success. The complexity of troubleshooting is a disadvantage of the technology. Another disadvantage of videoconferencing can be the cost. Even though costs of equipment and network have dropped substantially, there are still upfront and ongoing costs to a company to purchase and use the videoconferencing equipment. Codecs today can range in price from $600 for a very small and simple system to $50,000 or more for a large and more feature rich system. In addition to the equipment and network costs, there may be costs associated with having the conference room designed and furnished to provide the best videoconferencing environment. One small disadvantage to videoconferencing is that the company will need to set up a way to reserve the videoconferencing room. Often the videoconferencing equipment will be installed in a conference room. Many companies do not have an organized or automated means of handling their conference room scheduling. One option available could be for companies to use their Microsoft Outlook tool to enable users to check availability and reserve the rooms. There are also over the counter software tools to enable companies to find an efficient means of handling their conference room scheduling. Now with an understanding of how videoconferencing has evolved over the years, the importance of visual cues and body language in
Blair–18 communication, and some of the advantages and disadvantages of videoconferencing, let us look to the final element of the solution. Videoconferencing is one half of the solution for the cell phone videoconferencing capability. The other half of this technology is the cell phone. History of Cell Phones Cell phones have also had an interesting history and huge advancements in the technology over the years. Where videoconferencing had not yet become a household item, cell phones certainly have. “The very first patent for a mobile phone was given to a certain Nathan Stubblefield who was from Murray, Kentucky in the year 1908. In spite of this the earliest record of a phone that used cellular technology came out in the year 1973” (Infinite 2008). The first cell phones were bulky and expensive. They, too, have come down in size and cost over the years. Cell phone technology has improved significantly. With prices dropping and technology constantly improving, cell phones have quickly grown in popularity. “In 30 countries around the world, from Aruba to Italy to Hong Kong, mobile phone penetration has passed 100 percent. Translation: the number of cell phone subscriptions has exceeded the size of the population” (Giussani 2006). A poll of 1000 people found that the average mobile phone owner now has an average of 1.8 handsets, and this is expected to rise to two cell phones for every person soon (Gray
Blair–19 2008). In the United States, we have not yet reached that subscriber level; however, cell phone use is also very high. It is estimated that the current number of wireless subscribers in the United States exceeds 271,000,000 according to CTIA, the International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry (CTIA 2009). “According to ‘World Mobile Subscriber Markets 2005’ announced by Research and Markets by 2010 there will be over 2.3 billion individual wireless subscribers worldwide” (4G). In many areas of the world cell phones have become so important to people that they cannot imagine leaving home without their communications device. Cell phones are heavily relied upon. One example is China. China’s 455 million cellphone users chat, cajole, joke and flirt via short messages about 33 billion times a month, according to government statistics and iResearch Consulting Group, a market research company that focuses on Chinese Internet and wireless industries. During the mid-autumn festival, people here exchanged 2 billion short message greetings and well-wishes in a single day. More people in China get news or weather via the Web on their cellphones than from personal computers, said David Turchetti, chief executive of 21 Communications, a mobile marketing agency based in China. ‘Most Chinese people can’t afford a PC for their home. It’s a pretty big investment,’ he said. ‘Your mobile phone — you almost can’t live without it.’ (Chmielewski 2007)
Blair–20 Cell phones have clearly grown in popularity and have become household items, here in the United States and in many other countries. 3G and Technology Advancements Just as there are constant improvements being made in videoconferencing technology, cell phone technology is also constantly improving. The first generation (1G) networks were introduced in the 1980’s. In 1991, 1G was replaced by 2G. Now there is a third generation of telecommunications standards for mobile networking, 3G, which is available. 3G supersedes 2.5G and is based on the ITU family of standards. 3G networks open up the services that can be offered for mobile networking to include wide-area wireless voice, video calls and broadband wireless data. The first 3G networks were installed in Japan in 2001 and are still being deployed. Here is a side-by-side comparison of the 2G, 2.5G and 3G technologies (What 2003):
Blair–21 Table 1. Wireless Technology Comparison
2G Wireless The technology of most current digital mobile phones Features includes: 2.5G Wireless The best technology now widely available Features includes: 3G Wireless Combines a mobile phone, laptop PC and TV Features includes:
* Phone calls * Voice mail * Receive simple email messages
Speed: 10kb/sec Time to download a 3min MP3 song:
* Phone calls/fax * Voice mail * Send/receive large email messages * Web browsing * Navigation/maps * New updates
* Phone calls/fax * Global roaming * Send/receive large email messages * High-speed Web
* Navigation/maps
* Videoconferencing * TV streaming * Electronic agenda meeting reminder
31-41 min
Speed: 64-144kb/sec Time to download a 3min MP3 song:
Speed: 144kb/sec-2mb/sec Time to download a 3min MP3 song:
6-9 min
11 sec-1.5 min
3G technology has turned ordinary cell phone capability into extraordinary capability. “3G networks have potential transfer speeds of up to 3 Mbps (about 15 seconds to download a 3-minute MP3 song). For comparison, the fastest 2G phones can achieve up to 144Kbps (about 8 minutes to download a 3-minute song). 3G's high data rates are ideal for downloading information from the Internet and sending and receiving large, multimedia files. 3G phones are like mini-laptops and can accommodate broadband applications like video conferencing, receiving streaming video from the Web, sending and receiving faxes, and instantly downloading email messages with attachments” (Marshall).
Blair–22 In addition to the high data rates, another benefit of the 3G network is the increased security. Not only is there an increase to the infrastructure security, there is also end to end security offered when application frameworks such as IMS are accessed, although this is not strictly a 3G property (3G). The very first commercial 3G network was deployed by Monet Mobile Networks, but later they shut down operations. The next 3G network service provider in the United States was Verizon Wireless in October 2003 (GSA). Today, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon Wireless all have 3G networks to some degree, even though the rate of deployment is somewhat slow. Specifically for the United States, the rate of adoption of the 3G has been impacted by many issues. These issues include: [E]xpensive input fees for the 3G service licenses & agreements, numerous differences in the licensing terms, large amount of debt currently sustained by many telecommunication companies, which makes it a challenge to build the necessary infrastructure for 3G, lack of member state support for financially troubled operators, expense of 3G phones, lack of buy-in by 2G mobile users for the new 3G wireless services, lack of coverage, because it is still a new service, high prices of 3G mobile services in some countries, including Internet access, current lack of user need for 3G voice and data services in a hand-held device. (3G)
Blair–23 Despite the numerous issues surrounding the adoption of 3G, the new network standard has been deployed around the world. “In December 2007, 190 3G networks were operating in 40 countries, with 200 million subscribers -- but that's still only around 7% of the 3 billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide” (3G/4G). Other countries have had much greater success in 3G network deployments in their concentrated areas. Japan and South Korea can boast that they are the most advanced mobile markets in the world. Japan has 3G market penetration of over 80%. They use cell phones as wallets, have ubiquity for mobile Internet usage, have “mobile books,” and can even open their car with a “digital mobile key.” New businesses have sprung up in support of the huge cell phone use. For example, there are now cell phone charging stations dispersed for convenience where people can charge their cell phones for a small fee. Japan and South Korea have extremely dense urban populations. This has helped with their deployment of 3G networks. In comparison, “Around 45% of the population of South Korea is in the immediate area around Seoul while respectively 6% of the population of the US is around NYC and another 7% around LA” (Husson 2008). As a result, they have a far better return on investment, making it quicker and easier to deploy new technology. There is also a cultural difference. In Japan, the cell phones are their means of web access, email, games, and more. It has become an essential
Blair–24 part of their lives and remaining connected. “In Japan, 75 percent of the most popular mobile content is pure entertainment – games and music – while 25 percent is known as ‘save time’ content” (Japan’s 2006). For the 3G technology, many other countries have made great strides to stay ahead and provide this high-speed access to their users. Just as technology is constantly evolving and improving, the next generation cell phone technology is already on the horizon. 4G has the potential for bringing even faster speeds, with 100 Mbps for downloading and 50 Mbps for uploading. At this time, however, the service providers have not agreed on a 4G standard. There are different technologies in use. For example, Sprint Nextel will use the Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access, a faster Wi-Fi standard (WiMax). AT&T and Verizon Wireless will use the Long-Term Evolution (LTE) standard. Another technology for 4G is Ultra Mobile Broadband (UMB). Here are high-level definitions of the WiMax, LTE and UMB that the major carriers in the United States are using. • Mobile WiMAX is an IEEE specification also known as 802.16e and designed to support as high as 12Mbps data-transmission speeds. It uses OFDMA and is the next-generation technology of choice for Sprint Nextel and Clearwire Communications. • Ultra Mobile Broadband (UMB), also known as CDMA2000 EV-DO, is an expected path to 4G for legacy CDMA network providers. It’s an IP-based technology that is said to support 100Mbps through 1Gbps
Blair–25 data-transmission speeds. Also key for business users, it is supposed to be able to support QoS. • Long Term Evolution (LTE) is a modulation technique designed for GSM/UMTS-based technology that uses OFDM and MIMO. It’s being developed by the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) and is said to support 45M to 144Mbps in test networks today (What 2007). Standards in this area “tend to run in 10-year cycles,” Redman says. “2G came out in 1995, 3G in 2004. There will not be a 4G standard before 2015” (What 2007). Once a standard has been accepted, it generally takes about four to five years before it really gets integrated enough for use on a commercial basis. Sprint Nextel is aggressively pursuing the 4G technology. In September 2008, “Sprint has debuted a next-generation 4G wireless network based on mobile WiMAX technology in Baltimore, heralding the start of a new era for wireless consumers as Sprint officially launched XOHM mobile broadband commercial service in the first major U.S. city” (Sprint 2008). Verizon is also working toward their 4G network. They plan to build United States’ first next-generation LTE network. Partnering with Vodafone, Verizon’s target is “to be to become the first wireless company to offer commercial LTE-based service in the United States, starting in 2010” (Nelson
Blair–26 2009). Initially, they want to launch it commercially to about 25-30 markets in 2010. AT&T is not far behind the competition. They will do testing of their new LTE 4G networks in 2010, and have their network ready in 2011. AT&T states that LTE is theoretically over five times faster in downloads, at about 100Mbps, and has lower latency that should make multiplayer games, VoIP and two-way video calling more practical than on 3G (AT&T 2009). As for other countries and 4G technology, they also have plans for deployment in the near future. China is investing significant capital into their 4G deployment, spending roughly $50 billion a year. They are doing commercial trials of their 4G network in Shanghai and Guangdong. “With 3G just getting a foothold in most of the world's wireless markets, China is preparing to leapfrog those efforts and get 4G pushed out to as many customers as it can” (White 2007). They plan on providing this new service in 38 cities by May 2009. China is pushing to have their Time DivisionSynchronous Code Division Multiple Access (TD-SCDMA) 4G standard adopted globally. The China Ministry of Information Industry wants the ITU to adopt the 4G mobile standard that they developed; it is their own unique technology, different from the ones described above. Sweden is also pursuing the 4G technology. “The Swedish telecommunications operator TeliaSonera has signed contracts towards the launch of an 4G high-speed wireless network in 2010, saying it aims to be
Blair–27 one of the first with an LTE network up and running” (Broersma 2009). They are working with Ericsson to build their first LTE network in Stockholm. Cell phone technology continues to improve. As more and more countries adopt and increase their coverage with the higher speeds of the 3G and the emerging 4G technologies, the more features that the cell phone users can enjoy. Convergence of Videoconferencing and Cell Phones Now with the advancements in videoconferencing and cell phone technology, and thanks to 3G networks (and soon to arrive 4G networks), the two capabilities have merged. People have the amazing capability to do videoconferencing via their cell phone. This offers consumers a powerful new communications solution and there are various ways in which consumers use this capability, as described below. Soon, with the introduction of 4G networks, two-way cell phone videoconferencing will become even more practical. See Figure D (Cingular) below for an example of what a cell phone videoconference call can look like.
Blair–28
Figure E. Example of Cell Phone Videoconferencing One cell phone videoconferencing challenge remains with the placement of the camera on the cell phones. Even though more and more cell phones are being introduced with the videoconferencing capability, the camera placement is not always conducive to supporting cell phone videoconferencing. Most cell phones still have the camera on the opposite side of the screen. As a result, you have to flip the phone so that the remote site can see you, and then flip it back to the screen side to view them. To correct this problem, some of cell phones are now placing two cameras on the phone; one in the back for taking pictures and one in the front, where the screen is, to allow for easier videoconferencing. Still other cell phones are emerging with a camera that can rotate or pivot from front to back to allow for both capabilities. There are many cell phones available today that can support videoconferencing. Some of these cell phones include the Sony Ericsson V800, the Sony Ericsson Z1010, the Nokia N95, the Samsung A706, HTC
Blair–29 Diamond, LG TU500 and others. The videoconferencing technology has even moved beyond the cell phone. On January 7, 2009 LG Electronics Inc. unveiled their wrist phone (the LG-GD910) that is capable of doing video calls (two-way). They have not yet partnered with a carrier for their wrist phone, but it will be compatible with AT&T’s network. Advantages of Cell Phone Videoconferencing Just as there are many advantages to videoconferencing, there are also advantages to cell phone videoconferencing. Cell phones with videoconferencing have all the benefits of regular videoconferencing, but now with the added benefit of being flexible and mobile. This technology can “make the personal and professional lives easier in the sense that conferences can be made even sitting at home or anywhere across the globe. They are the most modern technological forms incorporated in today's mobile sets, making commercial activities all the more personalized and convenient on the part of big tycoons” (Video Conferencing Cell). An advantage of cell phone videoconferencing is that people can link up easily to others. One person in any geographic location can use their cell phone to do a videoconferencing call with another person, quickly and easily. Each person, however, would need to have sufficient network access, videoconferencing services and videoconferencing capable cell phones. A big benefit of cell phone videoconferencing is the freedom to conduct business anywhere. People are not tied to their office, home office or other
Blair–30 location with their PC or laptop. If they could do a videoconference using their cell phone, they become completely mobile, provided that they have adequate network cell phone coverage in the area. There is great flexibility with cell phone videoconferencing. There are many services that a person could use, including sharing documents, making presentations, doing collaboration with people both on local and international level, conducting meetings, (even after office hours) without requiring special arrangements, trained staff or reservations. In some countries, service providers offer flat call rates and unlimited usage options. Disadvantages of Cell Phone Videoconferencing Cell phone videoconferencing also has disadvantages. First and foremost is availability. Not all areas have implemented 3G and not all service providers support cell phone videoconferencing. This is especially true in the United States. The United States has been slow to roll out 3G networks. “The prime reason is the split in 2G digital mobile phone technologies among U.S. carriers, which has meant the networks needed to deploy their own new 3G equipment to cover the same service areas. Today, the major 2G camps are GSM (AT&T Wireless, Cingular, VoiceStream) and CDMA (Sprint, Verizon Wireless, others). Although primarily for voice, 2G also supports data transfer at speeds around 20Kbps, slow enough for most early customers to decide Internet access via mobile device wasn’t practical” (Erlanger 2006). Later, carriers moved to 2.5G as a bridge to 3G. There was
Blair–31 not significant push from the consumers to move to 3G and the expense to the carriers was quite high. As a result, the United States has been slow to roll out their 3G networks. Another disadvantage is some limitations placed on the capabilities within the United States. In order for one person to do a cell phone videoconference with another, both must have cell phones that have the capability and both must subscribe to the same service provider and pay extra for that particular service. There are proprietary cell phone videoconferencing solutions available today, but they severely limit the user to only using this technology with others having the same service. Another obvious disadvantage to cell phone videoconferencing is the small screen size. Whereas eye contact can be made in a traditional room videoconference, when one switches to a small hand-held cell phone, the screen size is much smaller. As a result, the images that are viewed by the person using cell phone videoconferencing are much smaller. Locations would need to zoom in their cameras in order for the person on the cell phone to be able to view the visual cues and body language that are so important in effective communication. Another disadvantage to cell phone videoconferencing is the camera placement on most cell phones, as mentioned earlier. Most cell phones with a camera have the camera placed on the phone facing out to take pictures, on the side opposite of the screen. For videoconferencing, you need the
Blair–32 camera on the same side of the phone that the viewing screen is on so that the person can view the remote location and transmit their video without needing to flip the phone back and forth. Another disadvantage is cell phone videoconferencing standards. At this time, it does not appear that there have been standards set in place for cell phone videoconferencing to take place regardless of the user’s phone and service provider. It is similar to early days of videoconferencing where each location had to have the same codecs to communicate; now, people must have the same service provider and be signed up for this specific service, or both have the same proprietary software, plus have a phone that supports the capability. How Other Countries use this Technology As discussed earlier, cell phone videoconferencing has many advantages and disadvantages. Other countries, outside the United States, have recognized the advantages and have much more widespread use of this technology. In Japan, they use video calling to assist with in-home nursing care. Deaf consumers can use the cell phone videoconferencing to communicate visually, via video. In Sweden and Japan, they already use cell phone videoconferencing to transmit sign language, enabling deaf people to communicate using a cell phone (Hickey). Grandparents can see their grandchildren across the miles or parents can check in on them to see how they are doing during the day. First-on-scene cell phone videoconferencing
Blair–33 can help show how bad an accident or disaster is and help give some indication to the emergency support staff. There are countless ways in which consumers can use the new cell phone videoconferencing technology. Another way to use the technology is through the schools. Schools use cell phone videoconferencing to extend the classroom and learning experience. “ 3G (or third generation) mobile phone technologies are already permitting cell phone users in parts of Europe and east Asia to videoconference with others using their cell phones. Tandberg is one company that is already selling videoconferencing MCUs (bridges) in the European market which permit cell phone users to videoconference collaboratively with other users in traditional H.323 videoconferencing rooms. In this case, the latest generation MCU functions as a 3G gateway, so the cell phone user can conference into a traditional H.323 videoconference with others and is treated just like another "endpoint" in a multi-point videoconference connection. (Fryer 2007) In other countries like Japan, South Korea, Europe and Asia, they see the value of this new capability. Service providers in these areas and the people have embraced cell phone videoconferencing for years. The widespread use is made easier because many of these regions use a common standard for cell phone provider services (Carmack 2006).
Blair–34 On May 28, 2008, South Korea and China placed a videoconferencing cell phone call. While visiting China, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak called a Korean handball player training in Seoul for the Beijing Olympics, to offer some words of encouragement. Foreign business people also often use their cell phones to conduct videoconferencing calls with their colleagues. Cell phone videoconferencing has been used for many different purposes in these other countries. There uses range from in-home nursing, to communication for the deaf, grandparents to view grandchildren, first-onscene emergency response, as well as uses in the schools and the business environment. There are endless ways to use the technology. Why Videoconferencing Cell Phones are not yet Popular in US In the United States, the use of cell phone videoconferencing has not been widespread. For cell phone videoconferencing to become more popular within the United States, there are some challenges that need to be overcome. A major challenge is deploying 3G networks. The United States has enormous geographic space, requiring much more in equipment and labor costs to deploy a 3G network than it would in a smaller country, like Japan, South Korea or some European countries. There is significant investment required to have 3G networks deployed throughout the United States. “The reason is that Japan and these European countries are geographically smaller than the U.S. It takes fewer 3G cell phone towers to cover everyone in Japan than it does to cover everyone in the U.S. In
Blair–35 addition, some theorize that Americans are slower to invest in advanced cell phone features because the U.S. has such reliable landline service compared to the rest of the world” (McGrath). Also, there is a cultural difference in the United States. In foreign countries, the cell phone has become an integral part of their lifestyle. In the United States, the cell phone is viewed as a tool. “People in the US can be just as enthusiastic about mobilizing technology, but they often think in terms of shrinking and mobilizing the PC and Internet, rather than growing the cellphone. In the US, the cellphone is often viewed as a necessary tool rather than something to love. For example, an MIT survey in 2004 found that Americans rated the cellphone number one in the list of inventions they hate but can't live without, edging out the dreaded alarm clock” (Mace). Following is list of reasons why some people believe cell phone videoconferencing has not taken off in the United States: 1. There is limited availability of cell phones with videoconferencing capability. 2. Call quality still needs improvement. 3. The general public has a perception that the cost for this service is too high. 4. With cell phone videoconferencing, people generally use the speakerphone and there is a loss of privacy.
Blair–36 5. People do not want the person on the other side to see how they look. 6. Some cell phone users find the videoconferencing inconvenient. 7. People cannot multi-task or do other things while on a cell phone videoconference. They do not want the remote location to think they are not paying attention. 8. Some people that responded believe that video does not add much to the conversation. (Yadav 2008) Another challenge for getting widespread use of cell phone videoconferencing in the United States is for the wireless service providers to embrace the technology and offer it as a service to their customers. There is one-way video streaming capability over a 3G cell phone in the United States, but not two-way, interactive videoconferencing, except through proprietary means or software. Another challenge is that cell phone videoconferencing is “only useful for the purchaser if his or her friends and family members also owned videophones.” Today, there are not that many cell phones available that support this feature (McGrath). Also, the United States cellular network uses a variety of technologies and standards, making implementation and interoperability more challenging (Carmack 2006). Tandberg states that cell phone videoconferencing has not become as popular in the United States for two reasons. First, they believe that the
Blair–37 United States is slow to adopt newer technology. Second, they state that companies may not be moving to this new technology because they have so much capital invested in the older technology. Another challenge is the mindset of the cell phone users regarding the visual aspect, as included in the list above. “One of the things people like about a purely audio phone conversation is that you don't have to worry how you look. You can talk to someone before you've had your morning shower or even in your underwear” (McGrath). People enjoy the freedom today of working from home and not needing to be concerned with their appearance or to need to get dressed in a business suit for a meeting. What is Currently Available in the US With the understanding that the United States is a little behind when it comes to the adoption of cell phone videoconferencing, there are some services that are available today. Many of these services are proprietary in nature and require special software and service to function. The service is not ubiquitous or readily available. Below are some examples of options that are currently available. This is not an exhaustive list of every option. AT&T offers a service that they call Video Share. This is a video-calling service that enables people to stream live video to others. They utilize their 3G network and boast that there is “barely a second of delay in video transmission. You can adjust the brightness, mute the sound, turn the
Blair–38 speakerphone on or off, and record the video for safekeeping. You can also start and end the video during a call without interrupting it” (Lee 2007). Unfortunately, AT&T’s Video Share service does not offer the two-way interactive videoconferencing. It “only supports one-way video streaming at the moment, and the video quality is limited to the capabilities of your phone. It only works with certain 3G phones, and will only work when both phones are connected to a 3G network. Both phones will also need to be signed up to the Video Share service” (Lee 2007). “Currently, Video Share is only available on selected phone models: the LG CU500V, the Samsung Sync, the Samsung A717, and the Samsung A727. The Video Share service will cost you as well; it's $4.99 per month for 25 minutes of usage, or $9.99 per month for 60 minutes of usage. If you opt out of the subscription, it's 35 cents a minute. Only the sender will be charged” (Lee 2007). Other carriers have plans for cell phone videoconferencing, but do not currently offer the service. Verizon and T-Mobile do not offer the service yet. T-Mobile does not yet offer the service; however there are rumors that with their new G2 product, the camera in the phone is for videoconferencing. They may be in the market soon. Sprint is working on their 4G WiMax network and will likely offer cell phone videoconferencing in the next year or two.
Blair–39 Currently, there are no wireless service providers in the United States that are supporting direct videoconferencing without first subscribing to a proprietary service or software. Unfortunately, these proprietary services and software options are still very limited and generally will only work with certain cell phones. Since cell phone videoconferencing is not available from the wireless service providers, we can explore other vendors that are entering this market. One new player in this cell phone videoconferencing market is Apple. “Apple was recently granted a gigantic patent covering everything that is the iPhone and a closer look reveals that serious video capabilities might be coming in the next iPhone. Apparently video recording is mentioned frequently throughout the entire document but a few images and sections explain a video conferencing capable phone” (Burns 2009). Polycom has also come up with a new product. Their VC2 communications solutions enables: [P]eople to connect regardless of their device or network type; and that can be deployed and managed easily and effectively within an organization's converged IP network and communications environment. ‘The global business environment will dramatically evolve over the next five to 10 years. Polycom believes visual communication will be one of the most important and impactful tools for business success during this time,’ said Joe Sigrist, senior vice
Blair–40 president and general manager of visual communications solutions at Polycom. ‘Visual communication capabilities like telepresence, realtime multimedia content sharing, on-demand video content , mobile video and video-enabled unified communications have the potential to change what is possible in business and radically alter how, where and when we work, and the way we communicate and collaborate with coworkers, partners and customers.’ (Polycom 2008) KT-Tech also offers a solution. They are a small start-up company and they revealed their cell phone videoconferencing application, KTvid. KTvid allows person-to-person videoconferencing in real-time over today’s mainstream cellular networks. The application doesn’t require the highbandwidth of a 3G cellular network for quality two-way video and audio connectivity. They utilize a patented proprietary audio and video compression technology to accomplish cell phone videoconferencing over 2.5G networks. “The technology can compress data by up to 80% with virtually no data loss and compress images by 98% with no visual loss” (KTTech 2008). Another option comes from iVisit and their Teleport product. It allows multiparty videoconferencing across mobile phones and desktops. “The simplest way to think about iVisit Teleport is as a P2P social network that lets you call, chat, video conference, and transfer multimedia for up to 8 contacts at a time. You sign up for an account
Blair–41 and can start adding any contact who has also registered with the service. Conferencing starts when you enter a room, after which you have an array of controls to launch multimedia sharing functions with a one-button click; that is, tap or click the interface to chat, start a video conference using the phone's camera as the lens, send a file, and see a buddy's GPS location on a map. (Dolcourt 2008) Another vendor in the cell phone videoconferencing space is Global IP Solutions. On October 13, 2008, they launched their peer-to-peer videoconferencing and multi-point videoconferencing capabilities. These capabilities are available on Windows Mobile-based phones called GIPS VideoEngine Mobile. They are limited to Windows Mobile phones at this time, but plan to include Symbian and iPhones in the future. “Using GIPS VideoEngine Mobile, wireless carriers, application developers and mobile handset manufacturers can provide high-quality video calls, even under adverse network conditions. The software leverages GIPS expertise in packet loss as well as lip synchronization to ensure a good quality video experience” (Global 2008). Lip synchronization is the technology that enables the remote location to see the speakers lips move as they are saying the words. In early videoconferencing protocols, there would be a lag in time from when the words were spoken to when the lips would move. That was very distracting to participants in a videoconference. Skype may also play in this space down the road.
Blair–42 ’We are seeing video becoming ubiquitous in different segments,’ said Durchslag. ‘Everybody is building cameras into their PCs and folks that aren’t comfortable with a PC have simple dedicated appliances.’ Durchslag noted that making it simple to make video calls is paramount for the market to take off. ‘One click and you’re viewing the person at the other end. They can let it run all day and it’s not costing them anything. Although the ability to make video calls on your computer or videoconferencing device is convenient, the Holy Grail for Skype and other technology companies is being able to make video calls on a cell phone.’ Unfortunately the carriers in the U.S. aren’t too keen to offer a free service like Skype, which could eat away at their revenue. Durchslag said it will take time for Skype users to make video calls although it’s heading in that direction. (Fuscaido 2008) In March 2009, Nokia and Skype established a working partnership. This teaming could bring Skype into the cell phone videoconferencing market, but it is still too soon to tell where this relationship will lead. What does the Future Look Like There appear to be many challenges and obstacles to overcome before cell phone videoconferencing will grow in popularity in the United States. The one-way video streaming capability over cell phones is here today, however, how long will it be before this is expanded to full, two-way communication
Blair–43 via video? What about security? How are those meeting protected? The technology currently exists, as other countries have been using two-way cell phone videoconferencing for years. AT&T states it plans to integrate two-way video calling in the future, plus it hopes to have the video stream over to a Web site or television set as well. “If AT&T manages to upgrade the Video Share service as it suggests, and if 3G becomes more widespread, we definitely see it as a wonderful feature that's worth the extra money. Until then, however, the AT&T Video Share service is only for first-adopters and those who don't mind giving new technology a try.” (Lee 2007). Where do we go from here? The bottom line is that more than 60% percent of communication is non-verbal. In 1956, AT&T built its first Picturephone test system, which broadcast a single image every two seconds. Generation Y (18 to 26-year olds) spent 28 percent more time online every week versus 27- to 40-year-old Gen X-ers, and almost twice as long as 51- to 61-year-old Boomers. The receptivity of a new generation to technology, combined with highly advanced audio, video and networking technology could be a perfect storm in favor of videoconference adoption. Businesses need to pay attention to the more important, albeit less tangible implications that come with a technology-enabled shift. (New 2008)
Blair–44 Would My Organization Benefit from this Technology? Videoconferencing and cell phone technology have experienced significant improvements over that last several years. Regardless, at this point in time, it is a bit premature to recommend a cell phone videoconferencing solution for my organization. Even though other countries have adopted the use of cell phone videoconferencing, here in the United States it is not yet readily available. Once the service providers in the United States bulk up the deployment of 3G and 4G networks and they begin to provide two-way, interactive and secure videoconferencing services via the cell phone, and move towards adopting standards, then my organization would benefit from this service. Also, the cell phones would need to have the cameras on the same side as the screen, or have cameras that rotate or pivot. As shown, there are many advantages and disadvantages to using cell phone videoconferencing as a means of communication with others. Research has proven that visual cues are very important in effective communication, however, how well can you pick up on those cues through a small screen size? If the remote participants are in a traditional videoconference room with a large screen, they will view the cell phone participant clearly. It is the cell phone videoconferencing participant that will not be able to view the others as clearly. The value of that interaction would be dependent upon the purpose of the meeting.
Blair–45 Another critical consideration of the practicality of cell phone videoconferencing would be security. Meetings could not be recorded or accessible to the service provider or any other person or company. Technology would need to exist that could encrypt and protect the conversations and data that is shared during a cell phone videoconferencing meeting. Cell phone videoconferencing certainly would offer my organization a communications option for the employees that travel or work from home. Without requiring additional bulky equipment or requiring running certain network connections to their home, the employees can be provided a cell phone. Then, regardless of their location they can communicate via audio and video back to the office, provided they are in area that has adequate coverage. With too many unanswered questions and a technology that is not fully developed or available within the United States, I cannot recommend the use of cell phone videoconferencing to my organization at this time. Discussion It is not certain if cell phone videoconferencing will become as popular in the United States as it has in other countries. The 3G networks are growing and the cell phones are being built with cameras in the front or swivel cameras. There are still unanswered questions about the culture in the United States and our view towards videoconferencing. It is possible that
Blair–46 the younger generation will adopt this communications tool and introduce it more and more into corporate America. There are many areas that require additional research on cell phone videoconferencing. What is the plan for 3G networks to be deployed in the United States? How soon will all areas be 3G enabled, to include the rural and low population regions? Another area for additional research is with the cell phone cameras. How soon will most cell phones come with two cameras or a camera that can rotate or pivot? A hot topic that requires additional research deals with security. How safe are these cell phone videoconference calls going to be? Will they be encrypted? Does the service provider store any data on their server? What about effective communication? New research is required in this area to determine if the benefits of videoconferencing for meetings would carry over to cell phones. The screen size is much smaller and it may be very difficult to pick up nonverbal cues. Another area that requires more research is the development and incorporation of cell phone videoconferencing standards across service providers and across countries. Can a person in one country do a cell phone videoconferencing call with a person in anther country when they both have different manufacturer’s cell phones and different service providers? Will
Blair–47 there be a ubiquitous standards based cell phone videoconferencing protocol, to move us away from proprietary solutions? And finally, is the culture in the United States embracing this technology? Does the consumer see a legitimate need or value from this capability? Would they pay for the service and would they use the service? There are many unanswered questions about cell phone videoconferencing. Even though videoconferencing technology and cell phone technology have improved immensely over the years, there are still many areas for improvements and many areas for further research.
Blair–48 References 3G. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3G. 3G/4G (Third/Fourth Generation) wireless system stuff. Wireless topics. http://sss-mag.com/3g.html. 4G. Booknet. http://bohknet.tm.tue.nl/BOHKNET2005/onlinefiles/9/3.2.html. A history of video conferencing (VC) technology. How Stuff Works. http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=videoconferencing-cellphone.htm&url=http://myhome.hanafos.com/%7Esoonjp/vchx.html. AT&T promises formal 4G service in 2011. February 17, 2009. Electronista. http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/02/17/att.on.4g.rollout/. Benefits of videoconferencing. 2004. Accunet Technology Group, Inc. http://www.isdnlongdistance.com/benefits.html. Bos, Nathan, Darren Gergle, Judith S. Olson, Gary M. Olson. University of Michigan. Being there versus seeing there: Trust via video. http://www.crew.umich.edu/publications/01-01.pdf. Broersma, Matthew. January 16, 2009. Sweden pushes ahead with 4G network. ZDNet. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/0,1000000085,39593279,00 .htm.
Blair–49 Burns, Matt. February 2, 2009. A video-conferencing iPhone in the works? http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/02/02/a-video-conferencingiphone-in-the-works/. Carmack, Carmen. September 2006. Communications. Volume 4, Issue 9. pages 28-30. Mobile video phones, for real. http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:9_uxt9Z90_0J:www.pctoday.co m/editorial/article.asp%3Farticle%3Darticles%252F2006%252Ft0409 %252F04t09%252F04t09.asp+cell+phone+video+calling+europe+jap an&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8&gl=us. Chmielewski, Dawn C. December 3, 2007. The China Post. Cellphone trend on the rise in China. http://www.chinapost.com.tw/china/nationalnews/2007/12/03/133342/p1/Cellphone-trend.htm. Cingular to demo “live” cell phone video share call. January 5, 2007. Cell Phone Digest. http://www.cellphonedigest.net/news/2007/01/cingular_to_demo_live _cell_pho.php. CTIA. International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry. http://www.ctia.org/. Dolcourt, Jessica. April 3, 2008. Host a video conferencing party on your phone. http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-12261_7-9911412-51.html. Erlanger, Leon. April 24, 2006. InfoWorld. The long, winding road to today’s 3G broadband.
Blair–50 http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/04/24/77295_17FE3gevo_1.html ?s=feature. Event history. History of videoconferencing. Cylive Beta. http://www.cylive.com/viewRow.do?rowid=5728&tableid=864&p=1&t =&vt=&q. Fox, William M. Effective group problem solving. How to broaden participation, improve decision making and increase commitment to action. http://books.google.com/books?id=k1IGtTPypf0C&pg=PA146&lpg=PA 146&dq=effective+meeting+in+person+vs+video+vs+audio&source= web&ots=SZrlPXBtRe&sig=IqbBGuF2tvxzvivCUMkEE6Yp0g&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result. Fryer, Wesley. February 10, 2007. The future of collaborative videoconferencing. http://www.techlearning.com/blog/2007/02/the_future_of_collaborativ e_vi.php. (accessed on November 18, 2008). Fuscaido, Donna. December 30, 2008. FOXBusiness. Skype makes big push into free video calling. http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:8WWLuFSAWGwJ:www.foxbusi ness.com/story/markets/innovation/skype-makes-big-push-free-videocalling/+skype+cell+phone+video&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us.
Blair–51 Giussani, Bruno. June 16, 2008. More cell phones than people. http://www.lunchoverip.com/2006/06/more_cell_phone.html. Global IP solutions launches video calling for Windows Mobile phones. October 13, 2008. http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tomkeating/voip/global-ip-solutions-launches-video-calling-for-windowsmobile-phones.asp. Gray, Louise. December 26, 2008. Average person will soon have two mobile phones. Telegraph.co.uk. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/technol ogynews/3949050/Average-person-will-soon-have-two-mobilephones.html. Hickey, Hannah. August 21, 2008. Can you see me now? Sign language over cell phones comes to United States. University of Washington News. http://uwnews.washington.edu/ni/article.asp?articleID=43397. Husson, Thomas. November 17, 2008. Japan and Co. Mobile Trends. http://thomashusson.com/tag/4g/. Infinite Advice.com. 2008. Who invented the cell phone. http://www.infiniteadvice.com/who-invented-the-cell-phone. Japan’s mobile success explained. June 27, 2006. http://www.textually.org/textually/archives/2006/06/012767.htm. KT-Tech Inc. licenses software to Health Partnership Inc.” February 1, 2008. Business Week.
Blair–52 http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.a sp?privcapId=606516. Lee, Nicole. July 27, 2007. CNET Editors’ Review. AT&T Video Share. http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/at-t-video-share/4505-6454_732553715.html. Long, Steven. FA Lifesyle. Video conferencing – the next best thing to a face to face conversation. http://www.floweradvisor.com.br/lifestyle/technology/video_conferenc ing/587/video_conferencing___the_next_best_thing_to_a_face_to_fac e_conversation/. Mace, Michael. European vs. American mobile phone use. Mobile Opportunity. http://mobileopportunity.blogspot.com/2006/09/european-vsamerican-mobile-phone-use.html. Marshall, Brian, Jeff Tyson and Julia Layton. How cell phones work. HowStuffWorks. http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cellphone9.htm. McGrath, Jane. How video conferencing cell phones work. http://communication.howstuffworks.com/video-conferencing-cellphone1.htm. Nelson, Jeffrey. February 18, 2009. Verizon Wireless fosters global LTE ecosystem as Verizon CTO Dick Lynch announces deployment plans.
Blair–53 Verizon Wireless. http://news.vzw.com/news/2009/02/pr2009-0218.html. Sharer, Sandra. 2004. Effective meetings via videoconferencing. http://www.effectivemeetings.com/technology/conferencing/sharer.as p. New attitudes, technology paint a brighter future for videoconferencing. January 2, 2008. Knowledge@W.P. Carey. http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:nnzmcR2oS9EJ:knowledge.wp carey.asu.edu/article.cfm%3Farticleid%3D1524+COMMunication+in+p erson+vs+over+the+phone+vs+videoconferencing&cd=17&hl=en&ct =clnk&gl=us. The next best thing to being there: Virtual meetings earn their rightful place in strategic meetings management. December 2008. NBTA Groups and Meetings Committee. http://www.procurement.travel/news.php?cid=telepresenceNBTA.Dec-08.30. Picturephone (Video Phone). Ahead of it’s time – Another Bell Labs innovation! Bell System Memorial. http://www.porticus.org/bell/telephones-picturephone.html. Polycom VC2 empowers the video-enabled enterprise with new solutions for visual communication. June, 2008. Market Wire. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200806/ai_n25498631.
Blair–54 Sprint debuts next-gen 4G wireless WiMAX network in Baltimore. September 30, 2008. Cell Phone Digest. http://www.cellphonedigest.net/news/2008/09/sprint_debuts_nextgen _4g_wirel.php. Video conferencing. Meelap Infotech Services. http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:bpx_dNff44MJ:www.meelapin dia.com/video_conferencing.html+video+conferencing+communicatio n+effective+meetings&cd=33&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us. Video conferencing cell phones. Maps of World. http://www.mapsofworld.com/referrals/conference/video-cellphone.html. Video conferencing history. http://www.wiredred.com/video-conferencinghistory.html. Videophone. Wikipedia. http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:9jH72iNdxfAJ:en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Videophone+1927+The+world%E2%80%99s+first+Videoconfere ncing+Call&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us. What is 3G? March 21, 2003. How Stuff Works. http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=cellphone.htm&url=http://www.3gnewsroom.com/html/about_3g/what_is _3g.shtml.
Blair–55 What you need to know about 4G. May 21, 2007. Network World. http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/052107-special-focus4g.html. White, Brian. April 8, 2007. China wants its 4G standard adopted globally. Engadget Mobile. http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2007/04/08/chinawants-its-4g-standard-adopted-globally/. Wolgemuth, Liz. February 28, 2008. Telepresence enhances video conferencing. U.S. News and World Report. http://www.usnews.com/articles/business/technology/2008/02/28/tele presence-enhances-video-conferencing.html. Yadav, Sachendra. June 11, 2008. Why haven’t video calls (Mobile Video Telephony) taken off? http://sachendra.wordpress.com/2008/06/11/why-havent-video-callsmobile-video-telephony-taken-off/.