It’s not quite the stuff of bragging rights, but Arkansas and Mississippi find themselves at the top of a new state ranking: They have the highest concentrations of people in the nation who have abandoned landlines in favor of cellular phones.

At the other extreme? People in Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Jersey are still holding on to their landlines, and they have the lowest concentrations of people whose homes use only cellphones.

The study, released Wednesday, was part of an annual survey conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics.

Full story.

From India to Finland to America, postmen have fewer letters to deliver, meaning sharply lower profits or even losses for postal services. In the year to March 2008 India Post handled 6 billion pieces of ordinary post, down from over 15 billion at the start of the decade. First-class letters dropped by 9% in the first half of this year at Finland’s Itella; junk mail fell by 16%. America’s postal service is in crisis as volumes fall. It is expecting a third consecutive annual loss this year, after losing $2.8 billion in the year to September 2008.

Full story.

At the University of Washington, the communications department faculty did away with their landlines. (“Phones were our biggest line item,” said David Domke, the department chairman. “We’ve still got landlines in common areas and for staff, but we’re saving about $1,100 a month by getting rid of faculty phones.”)

Story. And the punchline:

“We found a way of saving money that doesn’t hurt the student experience, and I think everybody’s happy,” said Mr. Domke of the University of Washington. “With cellphones and e-mail, everyone can get hold of us. People think it’s funny that we’re the communications department and we cut phones. But it’s just a symbol, an old technology.”

Bioscience: Martin Evans, director of the school of biosciences and professor of mammalian genetics at Cardiff University, for his work in stem-cell research and the development of “knockout” mice. Sir Martin performed pioneering research into stem cells, and used them to create mice with a specific genetic disorder. This led to the creation of “knockout” mice, which are used to model human diseases by deactivating a specific gene.

Business Process: Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia for the promotion of online public collaboration as a means of content development. Mr Wales co-founded Wikipedia, a free, online encyclopedia, in 2001. Every entry is a wiki—a special kind of web page that anyone can edit. Today versions of Wikipedia exist in more than 250 languages, containing over 10m articles (2.6m in English), making Wikipedia the largest encyclopedia ever created.

Computing and Telecommunications: Matti Makkonen for the development of Short Message Service (SMS), or text messaging. Mr Makkonen is a Finnish engineer who is credited with inventing SMS, which allows short messages to be sent between mobile phones. He proposed the idea in the 1980s while working at Finland’s telecoms authority. Billions of text messages are now sent every day.

Consumer Products and Services: Steve Chen and Chad Hurley of YouTube, for creating an easy way to share video. YouTube, founded in 2005, lets users upload video files via broadband connections. They can then be viewed on YouTube’s own site, or embedded in pages on other sites. Viewers can add comments and ratings. YouTube quickly became a cultural phenomenon and is now the most popular video site on the internet.

Energy and the Environment: Arthur Rosenfeld for his promotion of energy efficiency. Dr Rosenfeld is considered a founding father of the energy-efficiency movement. He established the Center for Building Science at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and helped to develop more efficient lighting, low-emissivity windows and software to analyse the energy use of buildings.

No Boundaries: Sumio Iijima for the discovery of carbon nanotubes. Dr Iijima discovered carbon nanotubes in 1991 while working as a researcher at NEC. They are the strongest and stiffest materials known, with many unique properties. They are being applied in catalysts, batteries, fuel cells, solar cells and drug delivery.

Social and Economic Innovation: Bill Gates and Melinda Gates for developing of a philanthropic support platform. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was created in 2000 with a mission to improve lives around the world. As well as applying a rigorous, businesslike approach to philanthropy, it provides an enabling platform for other non-profit organisations. It focuses on improving health, reducing poverty and increasing access to technology in public libraries.

Corporate Innovation: Nokia for its ability to respond to social and technological trends while maintaining its position as the world’s largest handset-maker. The firm makes use of anthropologists and futurologists to steer product design, and recently launched its “Comes With Music” service, hailed as a promising new model for the music industry.

Read the full story here.

The reasons cited in favor of MNP were classified into advantages to subscribers and regulators. The former were benefited by an increase in choice (of packages) and the eliminated costs of having to inform third parties of a number change, while the latter saw MNP as an approach to attract new investment and generate healthy competition. Operators on the other hand, were split in their views; new entrants and operators with smaller market share were of the view that it would create fair play in the industry, but larger operators with significant market power were, unsurprisingly, against the implementation of MNP.

High implementation costs were the main reasons against number portability. Mr. John Horrocks, an MNP consultant who spoke at the Workshop, demonstrated that a basic costs-benefit analysis of the portability process showed that implementing this service in smaller countries with populations of less than 10 million was not a feasible option, as the costs outweighed the benefits significantly. Instead, he suggested a few alternatives for these countries that would make number changes easier for subscribers (e.g.: operators send free SMS to all contacts on SIM, low cost for maintaining old number in parallel, etc), and ensure quality of service and competition among operators.

Figure 1: MNP implementations by country

Source: Presentation slides, MNP Workshop, August 2007

Mr. Horrocks also talked about the results of MNP implementations and lessons learnt in the countries listed in Figure 1. The success of MNP implementation is measured by the percentage of ported numbers, and it is evident that in countries with higher mobile phone penetration, competition and awareness, porting rates are high (e.g. Hong Kong and Australia). It was interesting to note though, that in some cases where MNP was implemented successfully, it proved to be an economic failure (e.g. Ireland, Finland, Malta, etc), while the implementations in UK and Netherlands were failures in all respects.

These varied results can be attributed to a number of reasons. Hong Kong’s MNP implementation, built on an already implemented solution set in place for fixed-line services, was driven heavily by the regulator; in addition, a highly competitive market structure in a technologically-aware community, and the fact that the introduction coincided with the entry of four new operators into the market, ensured portability a success there. The Australian regulator persistently promoted number portability to the public, while maintaining porting times of less than 3 hours on average, which eventually led to the successful implementation of MNP.

On the other hand, in the Irish case where MNP implementation was a success, the lack of competition (two incumbents and one weak new entrant) proved porting to be an economic failure. The same happened in Finland, where implementation was a success, but due to the absence of minimum contract periods and the provision of high incentives to port (from one operator to another), operators started losing heavily. This resulted in the introduction of minimum contract periods which, in turn, reduced the porting rate from 40% to 10% leading to economic failure. In the UK, Oftel (regulator at the time) pushed for MNP hoping it would increase competition, but did not play a hands-on role in the implementation phase. Additionally, only one operator in the UK was in favor of portability, and these factors collectively played a large role in the resulting failure.

A number of lessons can be learnt from these situations. Mr. Horrocks explained that it was essential for both regulators and operators to be in favor of and have heavy involvement throughout the porting process. The success of MNP depended greatly on competition and awareness and therefore it was the duty of both regulator and operator to keep subscribers informed of all things related to porting. He also said that it was important for regulators to understand that MNP did not create competition, but only improved it. Furthermore, for number porting to be successful it was necessary for a clear goal to be established, with a good set of rules (technical and legal) laid down from the start of the MNP process. He also stressed that porting time (i.e. time taken to port a number from operator A to operator B) had to be minimal, ideally one day at most, to ensure a successful MNP implementation.

The Workshop also covered the technicalities involved in number porting. Various features such as the number portability database configurations (centralized, distributed and hybrid), the call/SMS routing schemes (direct and indirect), and payment mechanisms were presented over the course of three days. The use of ENUM and NGN systems to make the porting process simpler were also discussed.

In light of these technical developments, call forwarding as a low-cost solution to number portability was not seen as the most efficient way to deploy MNP, although it was implemented in Singapore. Over 10 years ago, when the Telecommunication Authority of Singapore (TAS) discussed MNP as a means to lower number switching costs for subscribers and increase competition among operators, they explored three alternatives: 1. call forwarding, 2. originating re-route, and 3. Intelligent Network (IN) solutions. While Option 2 deviated from the GSM standard and affected services such as international roaming, Option 3 was not technologically mature yet, and therefore they settled for Option 1. They did not, however, rule out the possibility of implementing Option 3 at a later date. (Read more about MNP in Singapore)

The technical specifications employed in the number portability process in Pakistan were also described in detail. Similarly, the regulatory framework (including operator rights and obligations, charging schemes, best practices, and policy implications) required for the successful implementation of MNP was communicated by members of the PTA who were engaged in the Pakistani MNP process.

The key lesson learnt from the Workshop was that there was no standard MNP solution for a country. Every solution was unique with success riding on a number of factors.

Cellphone-Only Homes Hit a Milestone – New York Times

From September 2006 to April 2007, the percentage of Americans in cellphone-only households for the first time overtook the percentage in landline-only households, according to Mediamark Research, a firm that has been tracking such data since the mid-1980s. The milestone is a natural consequence of two trends: a glacially slow decline since 2000 in the percentage of households with landlines, and a steep rise in the number of households with cellphones. Mediamark said 84.5 percent of households now have landlines, and 86.2 percent have at least one cellphone. The data was collected through in-home surveys at roughly 13,000 homes across the country.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Nokia Net Up 19%, Topping Estimates – New York Times

Nokia, which is based in Espoo, Finland, shipped a record 106 million units in the quarter, up 26 percent from a year earlier and 19 percent from the third quarter. Nokia said its fourth-quarter market share was unchanged from 36 percent in the third quarter and up from 34 percent a year earlier, led by gains in all regions except North America.

Unit sales jumped 54 percent in China and 60 percent in the Asia-Pacific region, which includes India. Handset sales in Europe rose 11 percent and fell 39 percent in North America.