VoIPWatch

What's Ahead in 2019-AI, More Video, Better Customer Experiences

There is no question that AI and video are going to be more widely deployed in 2019, and beyond. You don't need to be a Gartner Analyst to be seeing and hearing what's ahead. As a matter of fact, as direct to customer approaches are more and more en vogue in every industry, not just in consumer products, all you need to be is on the mailing list of brands with a history of anticipating the future to know what they're focusing on next. 

Take Twilio. I'm on their mailing list as I have an account. I don't make much use of it, more to "play" and experiment with simple "consumer" level integrations with Zapier and IFTTT. However, what that gets me is their developer and marketing newsletters, and allows me to know "what's possible." That's why today when I received their post-Christmas drip campaign email from Twilio,  I took a look to see what they were up to.

Today's newsletter took the form of a series of short, well-penned announcements about a few new functions which over the past month the CPaaS (communications platform as a service) company has been rolling out. The marketer in me liked the breezy, as it was designed to have the reader click through for me. I liked the way it was presented and the topics, so I bit and clicked.

First is the network video quality API.

This is a function that anyone building group video calling or video conferencing would be interested in, as too often the network connectivity isn't up to carrying a solid video call. While the API today is built for the video calling supplier, the plan is to roll out an SDK to build the reporting into iOS and Android apps. That way the end user can see how good or how bad their connection is, and how well the conversation session will be.

 

The second item in the drip campaign was Twilio's approach to building Facebook Messenger's Chat bot via Autopilot, Twilio's beta AI platform offers what they say is a "declarative API" that also offers "NLU and ML to parse data, intent, and tasks from customer interactions out of the box." In a nutshell Twilio is connecting Messenger Chatbots to other services, starting with SMS, but there's no reason they can't interconnect to Slack or other messaging based services too.

Here's my take:

1. Twilio is using Facebook's universe of connected people to gain as much knowledge as fast as they can about people. The level of interactions, the size of the addressable audience using Messenger and the already text first nature of the participants, is a massive number. This experimental stage deployment helps Twilio build up an extensive lexicon, understand behavior and go from testbed to commercialization with data.
   
   
2. The Video Network Quality API is a trojan horse. What service provider doesn't want to be able to know how good or bad their delivery is to the person on the other end of the line, and be able to not take ownership of the problem by being able to say "oh it's not us, it's your _________" to the customer. Twilio will then be able to forge alliances and offer better solutions to those providers.

Given that I'm predicting that in 2019 we'll see many more brands embrace the idea of in-app AI, voice and video all as standard functions enabled by using WebRTC (ala what Uber is already doing) Twilo's message was well timed as it hit on all of those AI, Voice and Video.

With LTE becoming more ubiquitous and less congested, especially as 5G comes along, in the session path, voice and video in-app will no longer be a nice to have. Those features will be a must, as AI, location services and data science all take center stage with the idea of better customer service, product design (UI/UX) and customer experience (CX).

This likely adoption direction by companies large and small means Twilio's service, and that from the competition, will drive app enterprise decision makers and app developers to build a better service both for the deskbound, as well as the mobile-first worker. To do that means smarter tools, and these two are all about intelligence, not simply connecting the call.

Clearly Twilio won't be alone in offering tools like these even if they are just today in beta stage. Companies like Nexmo, Telesign (owned by Belgian giant BICS), client SignalWire and others will all be in the mix, carving out their own areas of specialty in the AI and video markets next year.

Look for apps like food delivery, medical, counseling, consulting, all to begin to go in-app vs. out of app as the tools to build and to manage, as well as to be more automated come on stream as we have only scratched the surface so far. Most of all, look for the contact centers and call centers to brace AI and Video, as calls move from chat, to voice to a face to face session, all within the app and the call.

Telecom In 2019 Was Revealed at IT Expo

VoIPWatch's  first ever telecom poll has concluded.  For those attending IT Expo this week in Fort Lauderdale, FL the results were revealed at the IDEA Showcase yesterday

CPaaS led the voting with over 30% of the votes cast. This was followed by WebRTC and then Call/Contact Center technology. UCaaS came in fourth, evidence that the service category has reached maturity. Intentionally left out of the poll was AI based services as some level of AI will find its way into telecom.

The outcome bodes well for companies in the CPaaS and WebRTC sectors. For those who have a mastery of both, this will lead to increased attention from developers and app producers who need to have reliable, scalable and stable communications in-app vs. OTT or as Dean Bubley says "under the floor."  With CPaaS and WebRTC app developer can now go "through the middle" to make communications easier and more feature rich.

Drones Over Gatwick

No that wasn't Santa trying to reach the UK with gifts before Christmas. It was drones.

London's Gatwick Airport, the UK's second largest airport was shut down for more than a day due to drones flying overhead. The end result was roughly 120,000 passengers were severely inconvenienced at a time of the year where travel is at its' peak.

This was not "terrorism" according to local authorities, but who really knows. Shutting down the airport, stranding travelers, and calling it an extraordinary event meant that the passengers have no recourse for refunds and for many the process of getting where they planned to be for the holidays has been stymied. For some it means delays in getting home. For others it's a delay in reaching their holiday destination. 

To call it a bloody disaster is a understatement. As someone who has traveled through Gatwick more than most Americans (at least twice a year for the last 15 years) I know how many people rely on the airport that's south of London by 30 minutes. For starters it's a major gateway to the European continent. It's also the airport of choice for holiday travelers on charters, as well as those who buy tickets on the economy airlines like EasyJet, RyanAir and Monarch.  It's also the airport that Norweigian Air flies to the USA from out of the UK. 

Media here in the U.S. has given it light coverage compared to how other global disasters are covered, largely because it's not the airport most people think of when they travel to London, or Europe, from the USA. If this had been Heathrow as the affected airport, more media coverage would have been out there. That may be a good thing, as the lack of on the scene, local coverage, where local contacts are supplying the information in theory is the better way to go.

That said, the "could it happen here" scenario is one we all need to consider, as copycats are everywhere. Let's hope for the sake of travelers everywhere it just doesn't happen again.

CEO and CMO's: Do You Want Stories or Just a News Release

If you're a CMO or CEO of a startup or even a mid stage tech company, this post is for you...

Over the past few months as I've gotten back into blogging, I've decided that my approach of writing, which is more surrounding the concept of IPO-insight, perspective, and opinion, is something that most PR folks working with tech and  telecom companies are either scared of, or their clients don't want anyone asking questions that would allow for an actual story to be written.

What I'm finding is that gone are the days where bloggers, or industry influencers, were being courted and convinced to write real stories. Instead, the PR firms and clients they have, or the internal PR managers of companies, would rather NOT have to answer questions or share details that, for whatever reason, they don't want to address, explain or disclose. 

One reason is the so-called "news announcement" isn't the basis for a story beyond what the company has said. That's announcement journalism. It's not that the don't want a story written. It's the fact that there's no story to be written.

For this types of announcements, it's better to write a nice "why we did this piece" on LinkedIn, Medium or as a blog post on the company's own site, as it's not "news."  It's also why real reporters and editors don't cover the announcement because it is not news that's worth covering.

Oh, and the sites that do run the so-called news, don't be fooled. They're often being paid in some way to have someone rewrite the release, but God forbid, they don't ask hard questions, they just write the release, so the right keywords trigger ads that bring in money. That also applies to some of the larger outlets who simply write mostly about "new an shiny" or produce the occasional review. They just need content to put between the ads. Again, it's not a feature story. It's a bunch of words strung together to call up ads that generate $$$$$.

Oh, and some of those sites also love to play the name game.

• Got a VC involved. Check the box, run the release as a story.
• Got a pedigree exec as a founder from an exit to Apple, Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Oracle, SalesForce...run the release..
• Got some ties to Uber...run the story....

But find an angle..that's what the Wall Street Journal and New York Times are for...and the reporters there are really working hard for those real stories, as the PR folks are not really giving them the details, just the hype. 

As a test, I started to fire back questions when I was asked to cover some weak story pitches like one from a telecom company winning some unified communications business from an NHL team. Given my background with the Philadelphia Flyers, (among other roles there I ran their office, bought the first System 75 sold to an arena-a precursor of sorts to what Unified Communications offers today) I was able to come up with a bunch of use case examples that I thought would make for interesting angles. Here they are:

• What role does it play with scouts and communications?
• How does UC benefit the GM in making trades?
• Are there any new benefits that UC brings to the waiver wire?
• When games/events are in process how is UC connecting the game night crew and to who?
• How have the XXXXX used UC to connect everyone from office, to homes, to when on the road...? Call it RoadGames?
• What was the Goal in switching to IP based Communications?
• How is YYYYY being used so scouts, coaches, GM, player personnel director are all in sync?
• What collaboration goes on inside the XXXX organization via YYYYYY?

Oh and I ended with "Happy to discuss this....to help you score a story :-)"

What I got back was "we'll check with the client." That was almost a week ago. Either the client doesn't know about the pitch, doesn't want to comment, or the "win" isn't really live yet so instead of waiting to tell the story in a few months, the brand marketing team blows out a release when it's what we call a "nothing burger."  What's worse though is the PR person, didn't even pick up on the cue to talk with me. PR = Public Relations. The emphasis is on "relations" ...or so I thought. Here was an opportunity to cultivate a relationship, and the shot taken goes wide of the net.

Another request came from a CaaS company surrounding a release that was more executive positioning than worth the embargo that was asked for. I figured out an angle and would have written, but the release was light on facts, but full of self-serving plaudits - like citing the Gartner Magic Quadrant status the company was able to secure.....YAWN...so the questions I posed included:

• What are the facts that I can use that demonstrates and communicates:
• Number of direct customers (new in 2018/total overall)
• Number of communications providers using XXXX  (new in 2018/total overall)
• What percentage of business is attributable to CaaS at XXXX vs. DID number sales revenue
• How much (percentage) growth has XXXXXX seen with CaaS services in 2018 vs. 2017 vs. other revenue centers (growth/decline would also be good to know)
• What XXXX is doing differs from YYYYYYY which is a public company chasing the same markets

A third request came from a top-rated VPN company where they were pitching the angle around the need for VPN usage when using Wi-Fi at airports. Having worked with Boingo in the past, before their IPO, that knowledge gave me deep insight into airport Wi-Fi, so I asked for some specifics surrounding how the company had deemed one airport as the "most insecure" in the country.

Basically, I was looking to learn what they were comparing between the airports. I also asked if their study had the data to show airports whose Wi-Fi is run by the airport themselves vs. Boingo as I felt that Boingo likely does a more consistent job with security between their owned and operated vs. roaming properties vs. the airports that are doing their own thing. Nothing.

At the end of the day, PR firms and in house practitioners pitching stories are harming the companies. In each of the above cases I had an angle to write about, and in each case, the lack of any real substance held back insightful coverage. Instead, these companies get what they think they want. A release appears somewhere, and some marketing person see's an uptick in SEO.

That's not PR and that's not generating coverage. 

If you're a CMO or CEO and want to get real coverage about your business talk to me. If you're just looking for outlets that will simply run your news release I'll help you trim your budget to what that release is really worth....You can reach me at [email protected] or better yet, send me a message via LinkedIn.

CEO and CMO's: Do You Want Stories or Just a News Release

If you're a CMO or CEO of a startup or even a mid stage tech company, this post is for you...

Over the past few months as I've gotten back into blogging, I've decided that my approach of writing, which is more surrounding the concept of IPO-insight, perspective, and opinion, is something that most PR folks working with tech and  telecom companies are either scared of, or their clients don't want anyone asking questions that would allow for an actual story to be written.

What I'm finding is that gone are the days where bloggers, or industry influencers, were being courted and convinced to write real stories. Instead, the PR firms and clients they have, or the internal PR managers of companies, would rather NOT have to answer questions or share details that, for whatever reason, they don't want to address, explain or disclose. 

One reason is the so-called "news announcement" isn't the basis for a story beyond what the company has said. That's announcement journalism. It's not that the don't want a story written. It's the fact that there's no story to be written.

For this types of announcements, it's better to write a nice "why we did this piece" on LinkedIn, Medium or as a blog post on the company's own site, as it's not "news."  It's also why real reporters and editors don't cover the announcement because it is not news that's worth covering.

Oh, and the sites that do run the so-called news, don't be fooled. They're often being paid in some way to have someone rewrite the release, but God forbid, they don't ask hard questions, they just write the release, so the right keywords trigger ads that bring in money. That also applies to some of the larger outlets who simply write mostly about "new an shiny" or produce the occasional review. They just need content to put between the ads. Again, it's not a feature story. It's a bunch of words strung together to call up ads that generate $$$$$.

Oh, and some of those sites also love to play the name game.

• Got a VC involved. Check the box, run the release as a story.
• Got a pedigree exec as a founder from an exit to Apple, Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Oracle, SalesForce...run the release..
• Got some ties to Uber...run the story....

But find an angle..that's what the Wall Street Journal and New York Times are for...and the reporters there are really working hard for those real stories, as the PR folks are not really giving them the details, just the hype. 

As a test, I started to fire back questions when I was asked to cover some weak story pitches like one from a telecom company winning some unified communications business from an NHL team. Given my background with the Philadelphia Flyers, (among other roles there I ran their office, bought the first System 75 sold to an arena-a Unified Communications precursor of sorts) I was able to come up with a bunch of use case examples that I thought would make for interesting angles. Here they are:

• What role does it play with scouts and communications?
• How does UC benefit the GM in making trades?
• Are there any new benefits that UC brings to the waiver wire?
• When games/events are in process how is UC connecting the game night crew and to who?
• How have the XXXXX used UC to connect everyone from office, to homes, to when on the road...? Call it RoadGames?
• What was the Goal in switching to IP based Communications?
• How is YYYYY being used so scouts, coaches, GM, player personnel director are all in sync?
• What collaboration goes on inside the XXXX organization via YYYYYY?

Oh and I ended with "Happy to discuss this....to help you score a story :-)"

What I got back was "we'll check with the client." That was almost a week ago. Either the client doesn't know about the pitch, doesn't want to comment, or the "win" isn't really live yet so instead of waiting to tell the story in a few month, the brand marketing team blows out a release when it's what we call a "nothing burger."  What's worse though is the PR person, didn't even pick up on the cue to talk with me. PR = Public Relations. The emphasis is on "relations" ...or so I thought. Here was an opportunity to cultivate a relationship, and the shot taken goes wide of the net.

Another request came from a CaaS company surrounding a release that was more executive positioning than worth the embargo that was asked for. I figured out an angle and would have written, but the release was light on facts, but full of self-serving plaudits - like citing the Gartner Magic Quadrant status the company was able to secure.....YAWN...so the questions I posed included:

• What are the facts that I can use that demonstrates and communicates:
• Number of direct customers (new in 2018/total overall)
• Number of communications providers using XXXX  (new in 2018/total overall)
• What percentage of business is attributable to CaaS at XXXX vs. DID number sales revenue
• How much (percentage) growth has XXXXXX seen with CaaS services in 2018 vs. 2017 vs. other revenue centers (growth/decline would also be good to know)
• What XXXX is doing differs from YYYYYYY which is a public company chasing the same markets

A third request came from a top-rated VPN company where they were pitching the angle around the need for VPN usage when using Wi-Fi at airports. Having worked with Boingo in the past, before their IPO, that knowledge gave me deep insight into airport Wi-Fi, so I asked for some specifics surrounding how the company had deemed one airport as the "most insecure" in the country.

Basically, I was looking to learn what they were comparing between the airports. I also asked if their study had the data to show airports whose Wi-Fi is run by the airport themselves vs. Boingo as I felt that Boingo likely does a more consistent job with security between their owned and operated vs. roaming properties vs. the airports that are doing their own thing. Nothing.

At the end of the day, PR firms and in house practitioners pitching stories are harming the companies. In each of the above cases I had an angle to write about, and in each case, the lack of any real substance held back insightful coverage. Instead, these companies get what they think they want. A release appears somewhere, and some marketing person see's an uptick in SEO.

That's not PR and that's not generating coverage. 

If you're a CMO or CEO and want to get real coverage about your business talk to me. If you're just looking for outlets that will simply run your news release I'll help you trim your budget to what that release is really worth....You can reach me at [email protected] or better yet, send me a message via LinkedIn.

OTT Voice Calling Challenges

One of the benefits of the traditional landline from the by-gone era was reliability. Not only did your landline just work, its quality was pretty much the same regardless of where you were. It wasn't until the arrival of the PBX and in-building wiring from third parties before we started to see issues with call quality. 

Well OTT Voice calling pretty much is like the latter. A crapshoot based on so many different factors that what should be a great sounding call can be filled with packet loss, jitter and even buffering. Let's look at what contributes to that:

1. Internal network-you may be sitting on the fastest, fattest and most reliable broadband connection around, but if your in-house LAN (local area network) isn't set up to prioritize voice (or video) traffic and all of a sudden everyone comes back from lunch and logs on to get their email, upload a few files, or also make calls, you're call just went to crap.
   
   
2. Your upstream is only so big.....Let's face it, you can only move so many packets at one time. If your upload speed is limited and there's lots going on over your connection, your call will be impacted.
   
   
3. Your building or neighborhood router to the network is old. For example a 10meg switch vs. a gigabit switch in the network or a small capacity router anywhere creates a traffic jam.
   
   
4. Your telecom provider loves to play "hot potato" with your call traffic. That means they want to pass the call over the public internet as fast as possible vs. owning the call traffic for as long as possible. In the former case, the carrier saves money. In the latter, they pay more, but control quality.
   
   
5. The carrier doesn't have regional data centers they pass traffic to..Smart providers put data centers as close to where their customers are or will be. They then utilize a series of IP networks and have POPs (point of presences) to manage keeping the calls on-net before moving them off-net to the PSTN or mobile network. Those data centers and POP should co-locate with as many service providers as possible (these are known as meet-points) to minimize the risk of delays in connecting a call.

Bottom line is make sure your local network can handle voice, while picking a carrier which can handle the traffic the right way, to insure that call quality really is there for you.

Robocalls to Get Shaken Up Makes It Time To Change Calling

If you're like me, the number of Robocalls that attempt to reach you in a day tends to outweigh the number of spontaneous calls from friends and colleagues that reach any of my VoIP or Mobile phone numbers. Long time industry marketer and product maven Alan Percy or TelcoBridges has a really nice recap for the SIP community surrounding STIR/SHAKEN, new protocols designed to cut down on the annoying calls being placed. Give it a read.

Here's my take:

The industry isn't wrong in wanting to deal with the growing problem. Recent stats from former client, YouMail,  shows that the number of robocalls are increasing, not decreasing.  A second proof point is how progressive mobile operators are dealing with the problem. Based on the problem growing and becoming so annoying, T-Mobile rolled out NAME ID, a service that in many ways mimics what YouMail has been doing for years, using crowdsourced data and predictive analytics to stop calls from reaching you before they ring your number. GoogleVoice has had the opportunity to block calls or play a message to stop unwanted callers from reaching you, and cloud providers like Telzio and Dialpad (I'm an option holder in both) have done the same.

But there's an unwanted side-effect to STIR/SHAKEN which Percy points out. Its the legitimate business which is using automated calling to reach their customers getting affected. Banks, doctor's offices, restaurants and airlines all need to be given the "trusted" caller designation. Securing the approved status process will add complexity and cost to the businesses, while not providing a clean solution to their need to be able to contact their customers with important messages when current IP calling technology can improve communications, not stop it.

Put the call in the app.

Companies like UBER are putting the communications channel to their customers "inside" their applications. Here are a few examples of where in-app calling, using SIP or WebRTC would change the game:

1. OpenTable-even in our app driven era, restaurants still call you to "confirm" your reservation. If OpenTable incorporated WebRTC the app can be used just like WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, FaceTime and a message to confirm your reservation or cancel can be sent. The customer would then have a choice in calling back through the app, or using the app's messaging capability to update their reservation. If a conversation was needed, from the app, the restaurant (or their call center) could be reached. Restaurants could also provide better drop off and parking instructions. 
   
   
2. Doctors-my personal physician sends out voice mail health tips and notifications about webinars to watch on the MDVIP platform. MDVIP could develop an app that uses WebRTC to provide secure doctor, patient communications, including both time sensitive and not so sensitive calls. This would allow "messages" to appear in my inbox that are "about me" vs. "for me" to listen to, as well as allow calls that really matter to not be lumped in with the robocalls.
   
   
3. Flight Delays-I use TripIt and their flight notifications about delays and cancellations usually beat the airlines emails, calls or texts messages even in our era of in-app notifications.  What's worse is the airlines "call" me to tell me what I already know sometimes as long as 20 minutes after TripIt does. I've even had American Airlines and Delta both call me while I'm in flight to tell me what I already knew about my connection. 
   
   Like the doctor's office solution, using the app to receive a call or message would move the automated calls off the PSTN, Mobile and VoIP networks, and put them where the recipient could do more with the call. In the airline situation, the passenger could be presented with options like-book me on the next flight; that they need a hotel room; return me to my point of origin, or alert customer service that they'll address it when they land. This would completly transform how flight delays and travel disruptions are handled, allowing the airport staff from the airlines to deal with the most critical problems, and to be staffed accordingly.
   
   
4. Banking-Some banks are getting better at using text messages to alert you to transactions that are questionable. That said, often you need to "talk" to a banker. WebRTC in app, and in the browser, would allow for the data about the matter that's on screen to be communicated to an agent who can handle your situation directly, not force you to go through an IVR/decision tree, and then be passed from support person to support person, while also having to explain over and over again and go through verification each time.
   
   
5. Food delivery services/Restaurants/Drivers-Just like UBER, there's often a need for customer, supplier, delivery driver to communicate. Using in-app calling would connect the driver with either the restaurant or the customer via a dedicated channel. Too many times calls from delivery drivers end up in voice mail, leading to frustrations.
   
   
6. UPS/FedEx-Deliveries coming from FedEX often trigger a notification call. While much of this information can be moved to a text message in app, sometimes a call to FedEx or UPS is needed to make sure the delivery isn't going to be missed or stranded over a weekend, or can be delivered to another location (unless you're buying from Apple that is.) Here, migrating the call off of the PSTN will allow for the tracking number and related information to be visibile to the caller and the agent, allowing for more rapid handling of what's needed.

There are likely many other scenarios where "automated" calling can be moved away from the traditional approaches to more elegant, and purposeful solutions over the data network. Since we already have VoLTE, VoIP and such a heavy use of other apps to call with, isn't it time that the same solutions we use for social communications become more useful to our everyday life?

Got a suggested problem/solution? Share it with me via a comment.

 

Is It A Text or Not?

The FCC has given mobile operators more power surrounding SMS, and in doing so have actually classified the service as different from texting applications and services like GoogleVoice, WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal and all the rest of the alternatives, including Apple's own iMessage. I say this because they went to great lengths to not include the Google backed RCS.

In the past, during the VoIP heydays, we used to use the "duck test." That was, if it worked like a phone, and provided service like a phone, it was a phone service. Clearly the FCC is not applying that test to messaging, at this time. That move has some interesting implications.

For starters, if only the mobile operators are classified as information services, then they are not given FCC oversight. But there's no saying that the MNO's can't begin to treat the other services differently, including how they use the SMS system, and pay (or don't pay) for it. For example, if Verizon wanted to stop all SIGNAL or TELEGRAM traffic on their network, they could in theory, the same way they could block porn (if they wanted to) from traversing the wirelesss network.

In the case of this decision, it's more a case of what wasn't included than what was included. Only time will tell if the MNO's start to block traffic or degrade their timely delivery. 

Verizon's AOL-Yahoo Buy A Multi Billion Dollar Failure

No matter how you look at the performcance of AOL-Yahoo under Verizon's ownership, you have to see it as a total failure.

A writedown of $4.6 billion dollars will go down is in recent memory not quite as big as the Microsoft writedown of their Nokia purchase which was over $7 billion dollars. In many ways the whole move by Verizon to try to get into the content and Silicon Valley style information services business was a mistake. It reminded me of AT&T's buy many years ago of TCI cable where a rich buyer saw all the potential of the combination, and none of the hurdles to successful integration and success.

Looking back, Yahoo would have been better selling to Microsoft, if the DOJ would have permitted it, but instead the Yahoo we all grew up and loved, is basically a thing of the past. Granted there's a ton of IP inside the Yahoo purchase, but Verizon isn't the kind of company that plays the patent game as a core way they operate. 

Instead Verizon needs to look at what they have that's popular and see what they can make money off of, or what and to who they can sell off to. Flickr and YahooMail are two services that have legacy loyal customers so there's both recurring revenue and the potential for growth, albeit, with some smart marketing. Other assets inside AOL-Yahoo include patents that are likely being stepped on, Then there is the core advertising delivery platform that came from Yahoo, and the ad sales platform that came from AOL. To some advertising driven sales group, like iHeart, there would be dynamic synergies.

The bottom line is the writedown is a tax game, but the future games of partnerships and sales are only just getting started.

Alexa Reading Email is Webley, JFax Deja Vu

News flash. Alexa can now read your email to you, and reply too.

For me, reading the story was like Deja Vu. No, not the Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young LP by the same name, but a flashback to the 90s when I was first using services like JFax (now J2) and Webley (now CommuniKate) and owned by Parus Holdings.

Back in 1998, when I first started using Webley one of the best features was the ability to have "him/her" read you your emails and that you could reply to them. This function was one of the earliest uses of text to speech I ever used, and while driving, it was a great way to stay in touch on crucial time sensitive messages, and not have to pull out my Blackberry Messenger. 

Today, with people more moble, and with smaller keyboards, and the need for hands-free while driving, having text to speech, and voice to text capabilities is something that is needed. Of course having Alexa read your messages when others are in earshot may not be the best idea, but if you're in your own space, or if you've connected your Echo to a Bluetooth headset, the new feature could be for you.

But the issue of Amazon rolling out a feature like this is about patents. So watch the patent war's begin.