Replies to post #14977 on Calypso Wireless (fka CLYW)

[bill2124]

Michael,

I wondered the same thing. Can anyone provide some insight to this?

[sugarpea29]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sugarpea29]

It looks somewhat generic to me too. Compared to phones that are on the market now it doesn't compare...but, of course, looks aren't the only thing that sells a phone either.

[stitch_surfs]

Aloha, everyone. This is my second post, however I have been reading the board for some time. I read the request for insight into this issue so I will give you some answers. First however, perhaps I should supply some credentials to help establish that I am a real person, not hiding behind some screen name, that I am not a "pumper or dumper" trying in influence the stock and that I am knowledgeable about this space.

To that end my name is Oliver Starr. In addition to a background in biochemstry, I have a long history in technology including founding an internet health database company, selling fiber, doing sales engineering for a broadband company, and building a b2c and b2b distribution company that had over 30,000 business accounts. I'm currently the CTO for a telecommunications ISO called Hello, Inc. that manages payphones and other phone systems for F1000 Companies, and most recently authoring three tech oriented weblogs; my personal blog, QuantumConvergence (http://qconverge.blogspot.com) and two nationally syndicated blogs; The Mobile Technology Weblog (http://www.mobile-weblog.com) and The Wireless Weblog (http://www.wireless-weblog.com). I've also just been made the newest Executive in Residence at Angel Strategies, a Strategic Venture Fund that includes technology companies in our portfolio.

I learned about Calypso about 4 or 5 months ago and have been researching the space carefully since. I have written a number of posts that address the impending need to backhaul cellular traffic to an IP core for a lot of reasons. I won't go into the details here, but moving the traffic via IP will happen, where it happens is what is critical.

First off, let me address the question about the phone. There are already any number of phones capable of providing "video telephony" on the appropriate network. I have a Motorola A1000 that has two cameras including one that faces the user when he or she is facing the screen; the phone itself is preset with video gateway settings. The "3" network in the UK brands this phone and if you are in a true 3-G network space, you can conduct video calls on their system. Thus, you don't need Wi-Fi to conduct a video call. Also, you don't need a Calypso branded phone. Sony Ericsson, Motorola, Nokia, all have phones that can do this today.

Second, I don't know where anyone got the idea that you would get "movie quality" resolution using WiFi. This IS NOT SO. Even full motion which is generally considered to be 30 frames per second is far from movie quality. Even using a stationary desktop PC with a very high quality camera explicitly designed for video telephony, and with memory far beyond ANY phone in the PC and more memory in the camera itself, the quality is still far from "movie"; serviceable, yes. Kodakchrome? I think not.

Still, in my mind that is NOT the reason to hold CLYW stock. ASNAP is. Or more precisely, ASNAP may be the reason. I say may for two principal reasons; first, because I am uncertain if other technologies infringe upon this patent or not. If they do, this is likely to be a home run for reasons I will only touch on, if ASNAP is not a barrier to these other technologies, than there might be a problem because it seems to me the other technologies are cheaper to deploy and don't require any one company be involved. For big carriers, this is an attractive factor.

One thing that concerns me; the hyperbole and inaccurate information that seems to be prevalent in Calypso's PR. Even the one below quoting the website makes reference to facts that are at best, exaggerations. Wi-Fi isn't new, perhaps public awareness was at that time, but I was already working with Starbucks to deploy the first hotspots in '01 and we already considered 802.11b a mature technology then.

So where does this leave Calypso? I wish I knew the answer, however, stating that I did would be truly irresponsible. I like the concept of their technology. The fact that they’ve been granted a patent for it supports the merit of the design, but bear in mind that patents are not the holy-grail and as the saying goes, there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

I think a qualified patent attorney’s review of the ASNAP patent would be well worthwhile in terms of easing any concerns I have about whether other companies will be able to move into this space and by virtue of size, prior relationships, technological advantages or some combination of the above, gain the first mover advantage and achieve dominance while Calypso is still busy with European testing and licensing MOU’s.

It would also help my confidence a great deal if the management, and particularly George Shilling would take the time to address some of these concerns so that the people that have put their time, energy, money and faith behind George and Calypso can stop guessing and have a clear idea of what is really going on with the testing, the licensing agreements, the development of any handset and a realistic analysis of Calypso’s prospects for the future.

Lastly, and I added this later in response to questions that people were asking about the ability to do this without “ASNAP”, check out this: http://www.symbiancentral.com/Developers/Resources/Make_VoIP_Calls_on_Your_Symbian_Nokia_Phone_20050...

There was also an article a few months back that talked about the other part of the equation which is the Wi-Fi to Wi-Fi handoff. In some areas where there are large full mesh networks already deployed, the ability to traverse multiple WiFi hotspots would be critical. This can be accomplished with no special hardware in the phones or the access points, simply by changing the software in the APS to triangulate handset positions and prepare to grab and release in much tighter sequence. This gets very technical but it can readily be done. IMO the key issue is not if ASNAP works, but if their patent protects them regardless.


PS: I have more coverage of these issues, and will continue to stay on top of this whole topic at the following blogs:

http://www.wireless-weblog.com
http://www.mobile-weblog.com
http://qconverge.blogspot.com