I think the term total disappointment when I read the latest white paper from the CTIA action group to be an over statement. I do think that this type of paper is necessary. In fact I do love some of the images and it’s great to see barcode eco-systems.
But I was disappointed.
Why?
It seems that here I am banging the drum for interoperability and open standards for barcodes and then is see this.
Any client application used by CCSAT carriers at introduction will support both EZ Code and Data Matrix code symbologies with Indirect access.
What is the problem?
Well. This is just simply stupid. (No, I am not going to beat around the bush). Why would mobile operators state they are going to work together to support the EZ Code and Data Matrix codes.
Why do there have to be two codes.
Does that mean there will always be two code readers?
Why just the EZ Code – if this had read (all proprietary barcodes) and all data matrix codes with the plan to create seamless readers moving forward – I would not have an issue.
By focusing on just the EZ Code will:
Fragment the market
Put other proprietary small business players out of the US market
Mean that the millions of existing 2D barcode readers already on Nokia phone redundant for scanning mobile barcodes.
Hinder the immediate market.
Yesterday I was talking about growing the market and now this seems to be taking a step back not forward. So I went to the CTIA office and asked for a meeting.\
I got one with Mark Desautels who is one of the leaders of the paper and I expressed my concerns.
I said, I like Scanbuy and I like EZ Codes but simply saying that US carriers are going to support one proprietary standard will hinder the market and increase the cost of entry.
I said that this should say either all proprietary players or say it’s a very early market decision and will come to a head with all codes – even proprietary ones will conform to one standard with one reader (a long call –but where there is a will there is a way).
So Mark responded with caution but precision. He said that this would be the fastest way for uptake of mobile barcodes services in the US. We engaged on this for a while – but I think I need to think more about one of his responses. I managed to record a part of the answer so more next week.
Read it here:
http://files.ctia.org/pdf/WhitePaper_CTIA_WIC_CodeScan_9_08.pdf
Bena, Bena, Bena
I am totally confused now. You say that by focusing on EZ-CODE and Data Matrix this will fragment the market, suggesting this is a problem.
Then right below that you say this is bad because it will limit the number of US companies able to participate and put some out of business. You also stated that if they stated they support all proprietary codes you would not have an issue at all.
These are very conflicting statements.
Seems to me, by limiting the number of companies able to participate with their own codes, the market becomes less fragmented. Also seems to me your issue is with Scanbuy since their code was one of the formats selected and not something like Neomedias Aztec codes.
As for the readers and multiples of them, I sure hope there are multiple readers available to the end user. This is business 101. Just as there are multiple software programs for the computer user to chose from, there should also be multiple software programs for the mobile user to chose from. Let the best man or men win.
Thats not to say, all these readers eventually will not be able to decode the exact same codes. That task can be accomplished regardless of how many readers are available. If someone like Neomedia wants their reader to be code agnostic, they would have to buy a license from scanbuy to be able to adopt their reader to the EZ-CODE etc. Not a big deal and it is how business is conducted through out the software rhelm.
As the CTIA rep stated, limiting the number of proprietary codes they recognize is the fastest way to adoption, not limiting the number of readers.
It is not the standards bodies out there responsibility to limit software to one version, and I doubt seriously that they will ever say they support one reader concept. Its their mission to develope standards that all software will want to comply with, so that the multiple readers all can accomplish the same tasks one way or another. Even then, there will still be those outside CTIA who will develope their own readers figuring they do not need a part of the CTIA business, and can capture business to be profitable outside their standards.
What should of been more shocking to you, is that CTIA a global organization, ignored the QR codes that are already so widely accepted and in use in the Asian markets, and they will not be changing those codes for CTIA. That was the real shocker of the CTIA white paper, and now they need to explain how they are going to adopt and function in those markets. Remember the QR code is the only one at this time that recognizes the alpha characters of the Asian countries.
I finally had a chance to read the entire white paper, and this was a huge win for Scanbuy. With an EZ_CODE manager in place they will get about a 9 month lead on the Data matrix going forward.
The requirement that the code reader must be able to read the EZ_code and data matrix is another big plus for Scanbuy. And CTIA says that reader will be available this year, so is it Scanbuys reader? As best I know theirs is the only one capable of decoding EZ-CODE.
And Neomedias Aztec code solution has been rejected. No wonder they switched their business model, to focus on the back end solution now.
Interesting how a while back I think the pr or comment was posted here where Scanbuy said they were working with two carriers and soon three more would follow. Who would of thought that CTIA was behind the scenes making that happen? They say in the white paper they conducted the cross carrier trial of the EZ-Code.
Bena – I sort of agree. This first step tends to look like it favors an entity which must have spent a lot of time lobying to be in the first release.
brewskih – you need to step away from the very biased sore NeoMedia stock holder griping and look at the bigger picture. It is not great news for ScanBuy. They are one of many that will be part of an INDIRECT link.
Bena: The real story will be the third step (step two is the continued announcement of the codes covered – which could have stuck with the three already approved by IATA, QR, DM, and Aztec. — which, brewskih, are regular NeoMedia read codes, not just the Aztec you keep using as a means to try to lower NeoMedia in the eyes of the public – Step two is the selection of the central clearing house which all codes read will pass. This is the true big step toward a standard world. In a way similar to the RFID standards, many similar/different codes can be read by many different handsets, and all passed through one clearing house – thus opening the world to all readers and all codes.
Rick
Bena:
In a brief follow up comment – We are installing DM Code projects here in China – and all will work well in NeoMedia readers and the central clearing house system.
Rick
from beijing)
Rick,
Yes Neomedias reader can read all three standard codes.
But, and this is a big but, their proprietary solution that was going to generate revenue uses the AZTEC CODE that I keep mentioning. They are not set up at this time to offer campaigns using the other two standard codes to the best of my knowledge.
As for your step two of adding more codes just when do you think that will happen. They make it clear in the white paper that for rapid adoption they are starting out with two codes first, and the second on of those two, the Data Matrix, will not even be functioning until July 2009 according to their own published white paper.
Step two is not selecting the clearing house that all codes will pass. They have no intent on passing Aztec and QR through the clearing house at this time. That is just spin on your part. The clearing house is to be selected at about the same time the campaign manager for the data Matrix is sselected which is July of next year.
After those two codes are functioning and mass adoption is occurring, THEN they will look at expanding the number of codes. That is the whole reason why they have decided to limit the codes to two initially, to force mass adoption.
And you also failed to address the aspect that the preferred reader they will endorse must be able to decode Scanbuys codes, and will be available this year. Huge win for Scanbuy in any objective readers eyes. But then again you are not objective are you?
Big deal that you are installing DM codes in China that will work with the Neoreader. Will the NEOREADER be supported by CTIA? Not if it does not also read EZ-CODE which it does not, and will not unless Neomedia buys a license from Scanbuy, since the EZ-CODE is patented by Scanbuy.
Further, the Data Matrix codes spoken about in the white paper, will be issued through the clearing house, when that function is put in place. Has no real impact on what you and others are doing in China at this time.
Remember this white paper is written for US consumption only, not Europe ar Asia. This is the model that CTIA is setting up to operate and produce mass adoption in the UNITED STATES.
So for the meantime, there will be more campaigns set up with CTIA backing in the US between now and the time they get the rest of the system set up. Since the EZ-CODE is the only one operating at this time with a campaign manager, those campaigns will mostly consist of EZ-codes in my opinion. And who is issuing those codes at this time, and maintaining a database of them? Scanbuy of course. I expect when the Central Clearing House is set up, whoever is chosen to run it will upload all the EZ-CODES already issued by Scanbuy into the Central data base as a starting point.
Well I’ve posted my response with all the deference this white paper deserves.
http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/ctiacodescanactionteamwhite-paper.html
After 2 years of lobbying and hidden agendas with lots of committees and discussions this is what they come out with, they should have titled it…”We’re carriers looking out for ourselves and all you advertisers and consumers better bend over and touch your toes”.
Someone at CTIA either took a bribe or failed an IQ test if they think this is going to work.
This is paper is fubar and will die a stillborn death.
Basically all you QR code people go about your business, keep implementing really cool campaigns with no hidden charges, license fees or ‘carrier taxes’ on your creativity.
Ignore all the scummy scanbuy/neomedia/ctia cohorts with their closed mobile carrier mentality and taxes and charges. The world has already passed proprietary closed systems by, they had their shot 4 years ago and they blew it.
Regards,
Dean Collins
http://www.Cognation.net
Someone at CTIA did not have their head in the sand, as the carriers are not at all interested in any open solution.
The carriers see the future (a “pay per scan” model) where advertisers pay. This dictates a closed “gatekeeper” solution, where these tolls can be collected.
As the CTO for a major Retailer, I can tell you for a fact that the proposed “solution” from CTIA leaves me completely cold. Frankly, what we want is for our customers to have easy access to information about our products. Published, widely available (and reputable) industry statistics clearly show that the mobile device is a central component of many of our customers’ daily lives. In fact, a number of public studies note that our customers will give up MANY THINGS before losing their mobile service. That being the case, we want to make content about our products available to our customers via whatever medium they chose, in the simplest interaction model possible.
What we would like to see is an environment where one code symbology is chosen as the standard, and hopefully that “standard” will not deviate into proprietary code formats, nor will it deviate from widely-deployed standards already in place. On top of that, we would like to see carriers pre-load reader software on a wide range of high- and low-end handsets. From there, let the market prevail.
We see NO VALUE WHATSOEVER in an indirect model. The wireless carriers will see their revenue streams increase with increased data plan usage. Those selling the Indirect “service” really add no value whatsoever to the transaction. There’s no need for the carriers (or any other entity for that matter) to charge a brand owner or content provider a fee to simply translate a barcode (pick your symbology) into a URL. Good grief! The companies peddling this kind of “service” are asking outrageous fees – fees that pay for no real added value. Uniqueness? Please….. Security? Not every provider of content is a dope! It’s absurd to see some of the claims thrown around.
NTT DoCoMo was successful employing a Direct model with QR Codes as a part of their iMode service. They seem to understand that the real revenue for them comes from data plans. The US carriers, on the other hand, simply continue to make bad decisions fueled by short-term thinking. The position staked out by the CTIA in this paper simply reaffirms this kind of thinking on the part of the wireless providers.
Can you say Betamax versus VHS? How about CDMA versus GSM? The 2D debate has all the makings of these old, dead fragmentation wars.
Verizon Wireless, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint: Please, please, PUHLEEZE! Get off your dead horse and let’s get going! Pick a STANDARD, not a proprietary code (you know, one that is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN?) Deliver handsets with readers pre-installed and LET’S GET GOING. You guys are going to kill this opportunity before it ever gains traction.
What a terrible waste of a great opportunity to put ease of use into your (and our) customers’ hands.