NEW EDIG

[cksla]

http://www.instantmessagingplanet.com/public/article.php/1552841

Inquiring minds want to know how AOL is going to power the video components that have been identified in the above link as being built into IM? The one common element involved, without even adreesing the much bigger issue of true Video Instant Messaging, is the need for video compression. Which codec is AOL going to use? Think it will be WM9? RV9? MPEG-4, H264? VP5/6? ??? Make a case for whichever one you want. Just consider some basic realities, disregarding technical/qualititative issues, why certain of these aren't probable candiadates. Realize also that On2 has established, if not clear business dealings with AOL, and recently did a deal with another apparently struggling outfit called Viewpoint. What does Viewpoint do? They provide leading edge, rich media advertising services. Who does Viewpoint work with that would be of any particular interest to us? AOL for one.

What does AOL say it has plans to do? Hmmm....one plan looks to be to deliver up rich media advertising, sic streaming media ads, via IM. How, using Viewpoint is how. Why? Because the IM client runs on the desktop without having a browser loaded. Why? Because AOL recognizes the current static internet advertising model is going bye bye -heck they've already started to dismantle the current model by announcing intentions to drop pop up ads from other parties. Static internet ad revenues have also been dropping as clients have reducing their expenitures. What's the replacement? Targeted, rich media advertising. Guess who's rich media advertising products already run via IM. Viewpoint that's who. Yes the very same Viewpoint that has licensed VP5 and has deals in place with AOL.

Also bear in mind that AOL has made it abundantly clear that it has no intention of abandoning its dialup subscribers as it moves more agressively into the broadband space. They believe, and without getting into specifics, I think correctly, that the dial up market will continue to represent a very big chunk of their business. So what? Well the so what is that as AOL publicly extols the continued importance of their dialup customers they can't afford to deliver new products into the market space that don't provide a reasonable level of functionality over 56kbps dialup connections. If they do they run a huge risk of alienating their dialup customers. Rich media, streaming advertising delivered over both dialup and broadband connections to IM clients. Conjures up some thoughts regarding the technology necessary to accomplish the objective. Which codec(s) can provide the scalable performance that AOL will need to cover their bases? Here's a clue. The choices are a lot fewer than the list of possibilities I identified. Like four fewer. Probably the same four that the BBC considered before selecting VP5.


Now throw in considerations of the Microsoft challenge that AOL is confronting and what I believe to be the single most significant product AOL needs to get out ahead of them to maintain a captive subscriber base. VIM (Video Instant Messaging), meaning true, realtime, audio/video communication over both dialup and broadband. Why is that so important for AOL. Try over 100 million worldwide IM users as possible paying clients and targeted rich media recipients at the same. Again what's needed? You guessed it. A codec. And one more tme, not just any codec but a codec that scales efficiently across all connection speeds. The question is not to my way of thinking whether or not AOL will deliver VIM. It is a question of when, not if. I personally believe that 2003 will be the year for AOL VIM. Wheher early or late I can't say. I do think the clock is counting down. Which codec will they use to power it? Think they would choose not to use the most efficient, best video compression available, particularly if they are using it for other applications through the same IM client?

Watching the grass grow may prove to be not so boring after all.