Commentary

Stephen Wellman
 

Why Doesn't Google Android Support SIP?

While Google's Android OS promises to break open the mobile market, some insiders are wondering why it has no support for SIP or IMS. How revolutionary can Android be if it does not include SIP?

While Google's Android OS promises to break open the mobile market, some insiders are wondering why it has no support for SIP or IMS. How revolutionary can Android be if it does not include SIP?Here is a look at one blogger's take on the issue:


More Mobility Insights

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

Webcasts

More >>

One of the questions I asked was: Android has no SIP stack. It also has no IMS stack/interface to speak of either. What are the implications of that?

This is interesting .. It may be a gap for a start-up. Or .. It may be irrelevant - here is why ..

Basically IMS is a secure mobile connection and / or a guaranteed (QOS) mobile connection. By working at the service layer, Google overcomes some of the issues that hamper IMS type applications. In doing so, it foregoes certain applications(potentially things requiring some form of higher QOS.).

However, if the bearer is WiFi (as it is starting to be increasingly) then this does not matter because many network /telephony applications can be run over WiFi. Downside is low QOS.

I don't share this blogger's tepid reaction. I think the fact that Android doesn't include either SIP or IMS is telling. While Android is pushing itself as the Linux-based open standard for mobility, the search giant is intentionally avoiding two other standards. SIP has long promised to create easy-to-use telephony applications. But SIP's potential has yet to be realized. As for IMS, the standard promises one platform for all carrier-grade access -- both wireless and wireline. But frankly, IMS is beginning to feel like the other side of SIP, another unrealized horn of hype.

I can think of three reasons why Google avoided putting a SIP and/or IMS stack in Android. Reason one is simple: Google thinks these technologies aren't yet ready for primetime and will support them once they gain traction.

Yuck, that felt like typing a canned PR line. Now let's dive into the other two reasons.

The next reason could be that Google thinks SIP and IMS are irrelevant to mobility. And right now, that's an accurate position. Neither carriers nor handset makers are really pushing these standards on these devices and consumers still don't seem that interested in SIP-based applications.

But, if both SIP and IMS are irrelevant today, that could mean they remain irrelevant forever. Which leads me to reason three.

Maybe Google wants to replace SIP and IMS -- or subsume them within Android. By leaving these standards out, Google can position Android as the default platform for mobile devices and once it gets its fingers around the carriers from the device side, it can then take over the ecosystems for SIP and IMS and move the service providers onto these systems -- or whatever technology Google positions in their place.

What do you think? Why didn't Google include SIP and IMS stacks in Android?


Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
T-Shirt Giveaway T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting!
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links