Mobile IM poised to overtake SMS, analysts say
Citing growth rates of the respective services, telecom consulting firm Ovum is predicting that mobile instant messaging will replace SMS as the de facto text messaging solution some time in the next five years. This has operators scrambling, and analysts pontificating, on how the outrageous profits made from SMS will be replaced. One of the compelling features of SMS for operators is a lack of status -- there's no way to know whether a user is able to immediately receive your text, but your carrier will be happy to take your coin regardless. From the user's perspective, SMS is an inherent, universal feature of every mobile phone sold today, which gives us a level of integration that mobile IM won't likely see any time soon. With IM, on the other hand, user status is a common feature, and you might be less likely to send a message to someone who can't receive it. Carriers are slowly making moves to embrace IM, but it's unclear how, or even if, they'll be able to fully recoup lost SMS income in the long run when it's being overrun by a universal, virtually free, data-based system.[Via textually.org]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
msafi @ May 28th 2006 5:15PM
did the analyst say reliable push email poised to take over IM?
JT @ May 28th 2006 5:46PM
Cingular has it covered, mobile im's are treated the same as sms, so if you have an sms package each IM sent and received is taken from the pool, or charged to your account.
Dusty @ May 28th 2006 7:24PM
Try out YehBA* IM to see the difference.
http://www.yehba.com
Jimmie @ May 28th 2006 9:30PM
Seeing how all the major carriers (Verizon, T-Mobile, Cingular, Sprint,) and many of the regional carriers only allow IM traffic when it counts as SMS, I'm sure they'll continue to be able to buy gold-plated Ferraris to blow up at their mansions every week. If anything, as mobile IM gets more and more widespread to even the tiniest carriers and comes preinstalled on every single phone, they'll just stand to make more money. After all, it's their technology and we just use it, so they can keep IM tied to SMS charges for as long as they like in the forseeable future.
That is until some whiny jerk mutters "class action suit" and the whole scheme collapses.
Geoff Brown @ May 28th 2006 9:42PM
I don't know. I have my doubts that mobile IM is going to totally replace SMS, if only for the sheer fact that mobile IM requires set up, while SMS is effectively set-up free. Sure, most of the younger gen is all ready to go via AIM, Yahoo etc... but I can still SMS my Mom a picture even if she has no idea what AIM even stands for. What I could see, however, would be changes to the SMS platform that incorporated a lot of what mobile IM has to offer (status, away messaging, graphics and such), sans user set-up.
Dusty @ May 28th 2006 10:58PM
#4
I've tried out YehBA* IM on Cingular & Verizon and it counted as GPRS traffic not SMS.
PEZ @ May 29th 2006 9:12AM
Lets get one thing straight here: no one is scrambleing, and no one is pontificating. Not everyone wants IM, or even needs it. SMS is on every cellphone, and will always be used and dosnt need a highspeed connection above GSM to operate, either. No one cares, and everything is square.
Brian @ May 29th 2006 10:42AM
This (IM substitute for SMS) is useful for the kids who bought cheap cell plans that make them pay for their text messaging. (I've got Sprint --> Sprint = free SMS texting)
For anyone with more than the cheapest plans, these IM apps are nothing but time killers for youngsters in pre-algebra.
Ian Argent @ May 29th 2006 10:31PM
Oddly enough - when I had a non-PDA device on Sprint - the IM apps on it used data, and did NOT consume SMS (which, admittedly, I have an unlimited allowance of). So be careful how large a brush you use to tar the carriers with. AFAIK, Sprint's IM apps are still data consumers, not SMS consumers.
chris @ May 30th 2006 10:05AM
SMS supports delivery notification, so it's definitely possible to see if someone has received the text message (read is another matter).