Mercurial > docs > diploma

comparison thesis/tex/2-MarketAnalysis.tex @ 248:724cc6057105

Find changesets by keywords (author, files, the commit message), revision number or hash, or revset expression.
complete names are now in small caps
author meillo@marmaro.de
date Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:49:50 +0100
parents 47af8eb539cf
children 822a4b135dd2
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
247:50240b753a46 248:724cc6057105
91 91
92 92
93 \subsubsection*{Unified Communication} 93 \subsubsection*{Unified Communication}
94 \name{Unified communication} is the technology aiming to consolidate and integrate all electronic communication and providing access for all kinds of hardware clients. Unified communication tries to bring the three trends here mentioned together. The \name{{\smaller PC} Magazine} has the following definition in its Encyclopedia: ``[Unified communications is t]he real-time redirection of a voice, text or e-mail message to the device closest to the intended recipient at any given time.'' \citeweb{pcmag:uc}. The main goal is to integrate all kinds of communication (asynchronous and synchronous) into one system, hence this requires real-time delivery of data. 94 \name{Unified communication} is the technology aiming to consolidate and integrate all electronic communication and providing access for all kinds of hardware clients. Unified communication tries to bring the three trends here mentioned together. The \name{{\smaller PC} Magazine} has the following definition in its Encyclopedia: ``[Unified communications is t]he real-time redirection of a voice, text or e-mail message to the device closest to the intended recipient at any given time.'' \citeweb{pcmag:uc}. The main goal is to integrate all kinds of communication (asynchronous and synchronous) into one system, hence this requires real-time delivery of data.
95 95
96 According to Michael \person{Osterman}, unified communications is already possible as far as various incoming sources are routed to one storage where messages can be accessed by one or a few clients \cite{osterman08}. But a system with an ``intelligent parser of a single data stream into separate streams that are designed to meet the real-time needs of the user'' is a goal for the future, he says. 96 According to \person{Michael Osterman}, unified communications is already possible as far as various incoming sources are routed to one storage where messages can be accessed by one or a few clients \cite{osterman08}. But a system with an ``intelligent parser of a single data stream into separate streams that are designed to meet the real-time needs of the user'' is a goal for the future, he says.
97 97
98 The question is, whether the integration of synchronous and asynchronous communication does make sense. A communication between one person talking on the phone and the other replying using his instant messenger, certainly does (assumed the text-to-speech and speech-to-text converting is fast and the quality good enough). But transferring large video messages and real-time communication data with the same technology, possibly does not. 98 The question is, whether the integration of synchronous and asynchronous communication does make sense. A communication between one person talking on the phone and the other replying using his instant messenger, certainly does (assumed the text-to-speech and speech-to-text converting is fast and the quality good enough). But transferring large video messages and real-time communication data with the same technology, possibly does not.
99 99
100 100
101 101
103 \label{sec:unified-messaging} 103 \label{sec:unified-messaging}
104 \name{Unified messaging}, although often used exchangeable with unified communications, is only a subset of it. It does not require real-time data transmission and is therefore only usable for asynchronous communication \citeweb{wikipedia:uc}. Unified messaging's function is basically: Receiving incoming messages from various channels, converting them into a common format, and storing them into a single memory. The stored messages can then be accessed from different devices \citeweb{wikipedia:um}. 104 \name{Unified messaging}, although often used exchangeable with unified communications, is only a subset of it. It does not require real-time data transmission and is therefore only usable for asynchronous communication \citeweb{wikipedia:uc}. Unified messaging's function is basically: Receiving incoming messages from various channels, converting them into a common format, and storing them into a single memory. The stored messages can then be accessed from different devices \citeweb{wikipedia:um}.
105 105
106 The easiest way of Unified Messaging is to base it on either email and convert all input sources to email messages (as attachments for instance) and store them in the user's mail box, or use the telephone system as basis and convert text messages to speech. Both is technically possible for asynchronous communication. 106 The easiest way of Unified Messaging is to base it on either email and convert all input sources to email messages (as attachments for instance) and store them in the user's mail box, or use the telephone system as basis and convert text messages to speech. Both is technically possible for asynchronous communication.
107 107
108 Finally, a critical voice from Jesse \person{Freund}, who voted Unified Messaging on top of a hype list, published by \name{Wired.com} ten years ago. His description of the technology ended with the humorous sentences: 108 Finally, a critical voice from \person{Jesse Freund}, who voted Unified Messaging on top of a hype list, published by \name{Wired.com} ten years ago. His description of the technology ended with the humorous sentences:
109 \begin{quote} 109 \begin{quote}
110 Unified messaging is a nice idea, but a tough sell: The reason you bought a cell phone, a pager, and a fax/modem is because each does its job well. No one wants to download voice mail as a series of RealAudio messages or sit through a voice mail bot spelling out email, complete with `semicolon dash end-parenthesis' for ;-). 110 Unified messaging is a nice idea, but a tough sell: The reason you bought a cell phone, a pager, and a fax/modem is because each does its job well. No one wants to download voice mail as a series of RealAudio messages or sit through a voice mail bot spelling out email, complete with `semicolon dash end-parenthesis' for ;-).
111 \hfill\cite{wired:hype} 111 \hfill\cite{wired:hype}
112 \end{quote} 112 \end{quote}
113 113
128 A \NAME{SWOT} analysis regards the strengths and weaknesses of a subject against the opportunities and threats of its market. The slightly altered form called \name{Dialectical {\smaller SWOT} analysis}, which is used here, is described in \cite{powerof2x2}. \NAME{SWOT} analysis should always focus on a specific goal to reach with the product. In this case, the main goal is to make email future-safe. 128 A \NAME{SWOT} analysis regards the strengths and weaknesses of a subject against the opportunities and threats of its market. The slightly altered form called \name{Dialectical {\smaller SWOT} analysis}, which is used here, is described in \cite{powerof2x2}. \NAME{SWOT} analysis should always focus on a specific goal to reach with the product. In this case, the main goal is to make email future-safe.
129 129
130 The two dimension---a subject and the market---are regarded in relation to each other by the analysis. Here the analysis shall be driven by the market's dimension. Thus first opportunities of the market are identified and split into being strengths or weaknesses of email. Then the same is done for threats of the market. 130 The two dimension---a subject and the market---are regarded in relation to each other by the analysis. Here the analysis shall be driven by the market's dimension. Thus first opportunities of the market are identified and split into being strengths or weaknesses of email. Then the same is done for threats of the market.
131 131
132 \subsubsection*{Threats} 132 \subsubsection*{Threats}
133 The market's main threat is \emph{spam}, also named \name{junk mail} or \name{unsolicited commercial email} (\NAME{UCE}). David~A.\ \person{Wheeler} is clear about it: 133 The market's main threat is \emph{spam}, also named \name{junk mail} or \name{unsolicited commercial email} (\NAME{UCE}). \person{David~A.\ Wheeler} is clear about it:
134 \begin{quote} 134 \begin{quote}
135 Since \emph{receivers} pay the bulk of the costs for spam (including most obviously their time to delete all that incoming spam), spam use will continue to rise until effective technical and legal countermeasures are deployed, \emph{or} until people can no longer use email. 135 Since \emph{receivers} pay the bulk of the costs for spam (including most obviously their time to delete all that incoming spam), spam use will continue to rise until effective technical and legal countermeasures are deployed, \emph{or} until people can no longer use email.
136 \hfill\cite{wheeler03} 136 \hfill\cite{wheeler03}
137 \end{quote} 137 \end{quote}
138 The amount of spam is huge. Panda Security and Commtouch state in their \name{Email Threats Trend Report} for the second Quarter of 2008: ``Spam levels throughout the second quarter averaged 77\,\%, ranging from a low of 64\,\% to a peak of 94\,\% of all email [...]''\cite[page 4]{panda:email-threats}. The report sees the main reason in the bot nets consisting of zombie computers: ``Spam and malware levels remain high for yet another quarter, powered by the brawny yet agile networks of zombie \NAME{IP}s.''\cite[page 1]{panda:email-threats} This is supported by IronPort Systems: ``More than 80 percent of spam now comes from a `zombie'---an infected \NAME{PC}, typically in a consumer broadband network, that has been hijacked by spammers.''\cite{ironport:zombie-computers}. Positive for \MTA{}s is, that they are not the main source for spam, but it is only a small delight. Spam is a general weakness of the email system, because it can not prevent it. 138 The amount of spam is huge. Panda Security and Commtouch state in their \name{Email Threats Trend Report} for the second Quarter of 2008: ``Spam levels throughout the second quarter averaged 77\,\%, ranging from a low of 64\,\% to a peak of 94\,\% of all email [...]''\cite[page 4]{panda:email-threats}. The report sees the main reason in the bot nets consisting of zombie computers: ``Spam and malware levels remain high for yet another quarter, powered by the brawny yet agile networks of zombie \NAME{IP}s.''\cite[page 1]{panda:email-threats} This is supported by IronPort Systems: ``More than 80 percent of spam now comes from a `zombie'---an infected \NAME{PC}, typically in a consumer broadband network, that has been hijacked by spammers.''\cite{ironport:zombie-computers}. Positive for \MTA{}s is, that they are not the main source for spam, but it is only a small delight. Spam is a general weakness of the email system, because it can not prevent it.
208 Another problem is multiple clients sharing one mail box. This is only solvable by working directly in the server's mail box, which causes lots of traffic, or by storing at least information about read messages and the like there. 208 Another problem is multiple clients sharing one mail box. This is only solvable by working directly in the server's mail box, which causes lots of traffic, or by storing at least information about read messages and the like there.
209 209
210 210
211 \subsubsection*{New email concepts} 211 \subsubsection*{New email concepts}
212 212
213 Changing requirements for email communication lead to the need for new concepts and new protocols that cover these requirements. One of these concepts to redesign the electronic mail system is named ``Internet Mail 2000''. It was proposed by Daniel~J.\ \person{Bernstein}, the creator of \qmail. Similar approaches were independently introduced by others too. 213 Changing requirements for email communication lead to the need for new concepts and new protocols that cover these requirements. One of these concepts to redesign the electronic mail system is named ``Internet Mail 2000''. It was proposed by \person{Daniel~J.\ Bernstein}, the creator of \qmail. Similar approaches were independently introduced by others too.
214 %FIXME: add references for IM2000 214 %FIXME: add references for IM2000
215 215
216 As main change, the sender has the responsibility for mail storage; only a notification about a mail message gets send to the recipient. He can fetch the message then from the sender's server. This is in contrast to the \NAME{SMTP} mail architecture, where mail and the responsibility for it is transferred from the sender to the receiver (called \name{store-and-forward}). 216 As main change, the sender has the responsibility for mail storage; only a notification about a mail message gets send to the recipient. He can fetch the message then from the sender's server. This is in contrast to the \NAME{SMTP} mail architecture, where mail and the responsibility for it is transferred from the sender to the receiver (called \name{store-and-forward}).
217 217
218 \name{Mail transfer agent}s are still important in this new email architecture, but in a slightly different way. They do not transferring mail itself anymore, but they transport the notifications about new mail to the destinations. This is a quite similar job as they do in the \NAME{SMTP} model. The real transfer of the mail can be done in an arbitrary way, for example via \NAME{FTP} or \NAME{SCP}. 218 \name{Mail transfer agent}s are still important in this new email architecture, but in a slightly different way. They do not transferring mail itself anymore, but they transport the notifications about new mail to the destinations. This is a quite similar job as they do in the \NAME{SMTP} model. The real transfer of the mail can be done in an arbitrary way, for example via \NAME{FTP} or \NAME{SCP}.
219 219
220 A second concept, this one primary to arm against spam, is David~A.\ \person{Wheeler}'s \name{Guarded Email}, described in \cite{wheeler03}. It requires messages to be recognized as Ham (non-spam) to be accepted, otherwise a challenge-response authentication will be initiated. 220 A second concept, this one primary to arm against spam, is \person{David~A.\ Wheeler}'s \name{Guarded Email}, described in \cite{wheeler03}. It requires messages to be recognized as Ham (non-spam) to be accepted, otherwise a challenge-response authentication will be initiated.
221 221
222 \name{Hashcash} by Adam \person{Back}---a third concept---tries to limit spam and denial of service attacks \cite{back02}. It requests payment for mail to get accepted. The costs are computing time for generating hash values. Thus sending spam becomes expensive. More information can be found on \citeweb{hashcash:homepage}. 222 \name{Hashcash} by \person{Adam Back}---a third concept---tries to limit spam and denial of service attacks \cite{back02}. It requests payment for mail to get accepted. The costs are computing time for generating hash values. Thus sending spam becomes expensive. More information can be found on \citeweb{hashcash:homepage}.
223 223
224 New concepts, like the ones presented here, are invented to remove problems of the email technology. Internet Mail 2000, for instance, removes the spam and large message transfer problems. 224 New concepts, like the ones presented here, are invented to remove problems of the email technology. Internet Mail 2000, for instance, removes the spam and large message transfer problems.
225 225
226 226
227 227