Mobile IM is getting some hype, but has a long way before it can take over SMS.
The way I see it - SMS is king, and it is here to stay. This is mainly due to the ease of use one enjoys with SMS.
Today, at least, IM usually involves a buddy list and presence information. Once you connect to someone (a “buddy”), you will be able to see his presence status and send him an instant message. If you don’t know that person in advance, chances are you won’t be able to send him a message - at least not from today’s usability perspective.
When it comes to text messaging, one can send anyone a text message, regardless if this person is a “friend” or not. You can text a number, you can text a contact, and the message will simply be delivered.
But another reason that SMS will stay around for a long time is the difference in characteristics in each of these two technologies:
| SMS | Mobile IM | |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | Ridiculously high price | Requires a data plan from an operator (currently quite expensive) |
| Robustness | Exist on every handset and works between all handsets and networks | Usually needs a downloadable client today. Works within the same IM network |
| Coverage | Works everywhere | Need to be connected to an IP network – either the operator’s data network or through WiFi |
| Interworking | Available on mobile handsets with minimal availability on landlines | Works well with desktop IM solutions |
| Micro payments | Widely used for micro payment services | N/A |
| Other uses | Widely used for voting (for instance, on reality TV shows) | N/A |
| 3rd party services | Retrieve banking information, bus routes, flight information, etc. | Some contact centers offer customer service via desktop IM |
| Filtering / Spamming | You receive text messages from anyone who sends them. They pay a price for sending it, which limits the amount of spam | The cost of sending IM messages is zero (same as email), but the use of presence allows you to filter messages and receive them only from people you want |
Even though IM is regarded as the superior service, this is exactly its barrier at this point in time:
- Embracing mobile IM requires operators to get used to making less revenues out of text messaging on their networks
- Mobile IM usually means adding Presence as well
- Mobile IM requires coming to terms with the actual technology to use. It requires operators to agree on what technology to use
- IF Mobile IM will take over SMS in the types of use cases it allows and is used for, then spamming will become a real issue due to the negligible cost of sending an instant message
SMS will stay forever (which is at least 10 more years). When mobile IM really happens, it won’t kill SMS, but live along side with it on the same handset and on the same network, and people will use both for different use cases. The real question is will mobile IM become part of the operator’s network and infrastructure, or will it be another protocol/application?
ABI Research believes SMS will garner 83% of all mobile messaging revenues through 2013, but that’s easy - people are not used to paying for IM, so 83% still means that a lot of the traffic will be shifted from SMS to IM.
Subscribe to this blog
Leave a comment
Add your own
1. SMS 5 years outlook: SMS | August 14th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
[...] SMS vs. Mobile IM [...]
2. Carnival of the Mobilists | August 18th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
[...] Radvision, Tsahi Levent-Levi, delivers a communication transport death match featuring “SMS v. Mobile IM. ” Levent-Levi has a prespective on the winner, but I can’t but ask….what about [...]
3. Lisa | August 19th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Excellent summary!
4. Vitor Domingos | September 13th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Ok, SMS is more obvious choice for current use, but people, when shown to twitter and the whole @world experience, tend to see what they’ve been missing: the group messages, the send to all personality and poking around just for fun on other people messages.
SMS is P2P and Mobile IM, or any other kind of group messages, will be (as I believe) the true experience on messaging. IM is expensive because SMS is the cash cow on carriers, period. They only see the money, not a better user experience.
5. Tsahi Levent-Levi | September 14th, 2008 at 5:38 am
Vitor,
Though I agree that SMS is the cash cow, it still has a lot of advantages over IM and twitter.
I do believe that the best application on a mobile is the one that doesn’t need to be downloaded and can be used in front of everyone.
Until this is the case for mobile IM or Twitter, they are bound to stay niche.
Tsahi
Leave a Comment
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed