Can Surface Rescue Microsoft’s Mobile Plans?
Posted: May 24, 2016 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: android, apple, foxconn, IDC, iOS, lumia, microsoft, microsoft mobile, smartphone, windows mobile, windows phone Leave a comment
What is Microsoft’s future in the mobile space? It’s a question that’s generated more than a few column inches over recent years. Now with Redmond agreeing to sell the feature phone division to Foxconn and licence the Nokia name, things have perhaps started to get a little clearer.
First, the bad news. IDC is predicting Windows Phone’s market share for 2016 will stand at just 1.2% this year – that’s down from 2% last year, 2.7% the previous year, and 3.3% in 2013. The firm is clearly not getting any OEMs on board for future devices anytime soon, and there was no mention of new Lumias in the Foxconn announcement – just that it would support current devices. From this – and speaking to a few experts for an upcoming feature – I think the smart money’s on a Surface handset.
Surface has done pretty well in the tablet/laptop space – albeit after a few iterations. And a high-end Surface handset would show off the best features of Windows 10 Mobile, as Microsoft finally harmonises its OS across all platforms. It could have crack at competing with the Samsung Galaxy range and potentially the iPhone. Whether this is enough to prop up Microsoft’s mobile hardware business is unsure, however, and more job cuts could be on the way.
A Surface smartphone could appeal in particular to business executives and the like, according to IDC analyst Susana Santos. “It’s a strategy that makes sense, but it takes time. It’s too early to say if it’ll work or not. It certainly won’t help with its volumes. These devices are more expensive and not as easy to sell,” she told me.
With the business market set to rise only to 20% of the global smartphone market, according to IDC, this is also a concern if Microsoft can’t persuade those BYOD consumer/employees to migrate away from their iOS or Android handsets. It’s been said many times before, but Microsoft is in many ways still a victim of its lack of vision a decade ago, which let Apple and Google steal the hearts, minds and wallets of consumers.
And what of its chances of getting those sought-after OEMs on board?
“Of all companies, Microsoft knows the value of a developer and application ecosystems, but has been poor to drive this agenda in the mobile realm. I’d expect it to continue with Windows phone, but play mostly in the higher-end,” Quocirca’s Rob Bamforth told me by email. “The words it has used seem to indicate an interest in mobile computing devices, with telephony capabilities, rather than emphasis on ‘handsets’, so I think that means higher-end pricing and positioning – and perhaps a closer connection to Lync/Skype for Business and Skype Meeting. Perhaps we might be looking for a Skype Surface.”
The question is whether Redmond can maximise its IP and engineering talent in this space, “gluing the bits together in a way that Apple seems to mange elsewhere”, according to Bamforth. If it can, it’ll be the greatest comeback in the history of computing.
With Virtual Reality, the Future’s Closer than you Think
Posted: April 22, 2016 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: AR, augmented reality, British Museum, cio, Hololens, HTC Vive, microsoft, Oculus rift, Samsung Gear VR, virtual reality, VR Leave a comment
What does the future of virtual reality hold? I’ve got to say it’s not a question that has particularly bothered me from a corporate IT perspective – a feeling I’m sure shared by many CIOs out there. But the truth is that VR – and its slightly more sensible cousin, augmented reality – is already beginning to transform the way organisations work and engage with their customers.
Putting together a recent feature for IT Pro in Hong Kong, I spoke to several experts about the kind of use cases that VR and AR might best fit, and some of the key challenges facing manufacturers.
It’s pretty clear from most of the analysts I spoke to that those smartphone-based VR headsets like Samsung Gear VR and Google Cardboard are going to get end user traction much quicker than the high-end Oculus Rift, HTC Vive and others.
“Everyone has a smartphone so it makes the entry barrier for VR very low and affordable,” IDC European associate director, Chrystelle Labesque, told me. “Does it offer the best experience? Maybe not. But it does give people the chance to have their first VR experience.”
From a manufacturer’s point of view, each major player in the space – and virtually all of the world’s biggest tech companies have a stake in VR/AR – faces a difference set of challenges according to their commercial priorities, argued IHS Technology head of games research, Piers Harding-Rolls.
Samsung, for example is using VR to drive sales of its premium smartphones, he told me.
“We have already seen Samsung diversifying further with the Gear 360 camera to build of its VR ecosystem offer and to continue to differentiate as more and more smartphone vendors bring their own VR headsets to market,” Harding-Rolls added.
“Samsung is now using the Gear VR as a promotional and bundling tool to sell more phones, but the value of this offer may become diluted over time. So for Samsung the challenges centre on staying differentiated and building out the ecosystem successfully in the face of additional competition.”
As for those high-end players, it’s all about trying to drive down their prices to appeal to a broader market.
“Oculus has courted developers for over two years, but still does not have the scale of distribution and user base of Valve’s Steam or Sony’s PlayStation Network, so must build its own content and compete from a less established position,” he claimed. “As you can see the challenges differ from platform to platform.”
But this is talking about VR/AR from a consumer-focused perspective. The truth is that it’s already being used both inside companies and to create differentiated experiences for customers.
Labesque referenced a British Museum project last year that allowed visitors to experience the Bronze Age through Samsung Gear VR headsets, for example.
The Marriott hotel chain has also been an early adopter – using the power of Oculus Rift VR to transport users to far flung destinations, and in so doing build its brand and even drive potential sales.
When it comes to internal use cases, AR has the edge, according to the experts. Digital overlays can help with training, working to meet strict compliance requirements, and collaboration, among other things, Labesque explained.
On this front, Microsoft’s Hololens already has some impressive big name case studies to brag about.
So there you have it. If you’re a CIO and have the money and motivation – VR/AR is probably something you should be considering right now as part of a multi-year innovation project. If not, it won’t be long till your CEO is knocking at your door to find out why.
How Long Before We Get to Live in Genuinely Smart Homes?
Posted: March 31, 2016 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: alexa, amazon echo, apple, google, HomeKit, Nest, samsung smartthings, smart home, strategy analytics Leave a comment
What will the smart home of the future look like? Despite drawing the crowds at CES this year, it’s clear that the industry is still in its very early stages. Yes, the big boys are all involved – Amazon, Apple, Google et al. – but at the moment it’s a messy hotchpotch of competing standards, point products and exaggerated claims.
I may be biased of course, as my house is about as dumb as you can get – save for a couple of Sonos speakers dotted around the place.
But where I see things really coming together over the next few years is when we start to get more industry alliances, partnerships and/or M&A to consolidate competing platforms. At CES more than 10 smart home vendors announced integration with Amazon’s Echo/Alexa, for example, which begins to tie together a bunch of disparate tools for the smart home. Apple’s HomeKit, Google’s Nest ecosystem and Samsung SmartThings all have similar potential.
Strategy Analytics’ senior analyst, Joe Branca, claimed the biggest challenge facing the industry as a whole is finding a business model that works for vendors and their customers.
“The price point for solutions offered by traditional security companies helps to prevent a lot of consumers from buying into the smart home concept,” he told me when I interviewed him for a recent feature article.
“Our data shows, however, that there’s a strong interest in the benefits offered by security and smart home solutions – not to mention digital health and elderly care solutions – but at a lower price point than what’s available in the market at present.”
However, there may be other ways to subsidise the cost for consumers – for example, by getting insurance companies and marketers on board. The latter would be prepared to access user-generated data while the former benefit from more safe and secure houses, he claimed.
“Other big challenges have to do with customer service and installation,” Branca added.
“With multiple product and service offerings part of a single smart home ecosystem, consumers want to know who they will speak to when they need assistance. With regard to installation, DIY products have gotten a lot of praise, but we believe that to succeed with a mass market offering, installation by trained professionals is key.”
That’s a problem the Silicon Valley giants may need to partner up on to solve.
So what of the future?
Branca reckons more personalised, seamless, user-friendly experiences. I’d agree, but I think the usability and interoperability problems will still mean homes full of point products rather than smart ecosystems. As for the vendors, he argued that firms will end up transitioning to service-based business models.
“The real opportunity for smart home is in services that generate recurring revenue, and not simply the sale of hardware,” he concluded. “In the US, the security model is well-established. However, there is both an opportunity for security services that don’t fit the traditional mould – i.e., services that are lower cost and/or are a better match for renters or apartment owners – and services outside of security, including home maintenance and repair, for example.”
Long story short: I can’t wait for the smart home of the future, but I think I’ll be forced to for several years yet.
Data Protection Day: Shot in the Arm or a Waste of Time?
Posted: January 22, 2016 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: data privacy day, data protection, data protection day, gemalto, ICO, infosecurity magazine, privacy, rackspace, varonis Leave a comment
It’s Data Protection Day next Thursday if you hadn’t noticed, and you’re forgiven for not doing so. I only remembered about it after researching an analysis piece today for Infosecurity Magazine.
The idea is to raise awareness among consumers to think twice about leaving a bigger digital footprint online than they already have, and to try and get businesses to take data privacy more seriously.
On both counts it’s a challenging prospect, according to many of the experts I spoke to.
David Gibson, vice president of strategy at Varonis, told me that improving privacy protection all comes down to better monitoring of fraud abuses.
“The proof that traditional methods don’t work is in the increasing frequency and magnitude of data breaches related to unstructured data,” he argued.
“Not only is there more data to worry about, but it’s containing more sensitive and valuable information and it’s getting easier for attackers to exfiltrate that data since it’s typically not monitored. If what you’re trying to steal isn’t being watched, you have a much better chance of getting away.”
Rackspace senior director of legal, Lillian Pang, admitted that firms still don’t prioritise data privacy at a board level, and this needs to change if things are to get better for consumers.
“Only then will firms start taking it seriously and filter down the privacy compliance needs to the ground level of its business. In some respects, you could say that privacy needs to be led from the top level of any business and administered from the ground level,” she told me.
“Many firms pay lip service to the importance of data privacy but few really understand or recognise that a robust data privacy program in a firm solidifies its information security and helps to further safeguard the firm’s business.”
The EU General Data Protection Regulation could be the push that many firms need to start taking the issue seriously, according to Gemalto data protection CTO, Jason Hart.
“The EU Data Protection Regulation is set to be finalised later this year, but companies need to start taking the steps to change how they protect their data now, otherwise they could find themselves subject to compliance penalties, and also put their reputation and consumer confidence at risk,” he warned.
“As the reporting requirements of the new EU regulation make data breaches more visible, we can expect the economic and business consequences of a breach to continue to escalate, so businesses need to start taking steps to ensure they are prepared for when new regulation comes into force.”
So are awareness raising exercises like Data Protection Day even worth the effort? Well the general consensus is that anything like this is probably a bonus, although the jury’s out on how effective it can be.
“Although Data Privacy Day is a great opportunity to raise awareness of the issue, understanding the importance of protecting data needs to be an all year round initiative,” said Hart. “Businesses need to realise the importance of the data they hold in their systems and how the loss of this can impact their customers.”
Data Protection Day (Data Privacy Day in the US) is on 28 January.
Why Abuse of Digital Certs and Crypto Keys is the Biggest Security Threat for 2016
Posted: December 11, 2015 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: 2016 predictions, CISO, cryptographic keys, cyber security, digital certificates, information security, infosecurity magazine, kaspersky lab, signing, snowden, sony pictures hack, stuxnet, venafi Leave a comment
If there’s one major security trend of 2015 I’d predict causing even more trouble next year it’s abuse of crypto keys and digital certificates. Cybercriminals have simply found that abusing this layer of the internet is far easier, cheaper and often more effective than more traditional forms of attack.
Digital certificates stolen from Sony Pictures were later used to sign malware in order to make attacks more effective; and the same technique was linked to the Anthem and Premera healthcare breaches in the States.
And of course it was a similar strategy which contributed to the success of the Stuxnet attack.
Kaspersky Lab even said this week that the number of new malware files it detected this year have actually dropped, as hackers instead use stolen or bought digital certs to achieve the same ends.
Kevin Bocek is chief security strategist at Venafi – a firm which helps secure cryptographic keys and digital certs. He told me these foundational layers of trust on which the internet rests are being undermined by the latest developments in the black hat community.
“We’ve all seen that movie scene where the bad guy dresses up as a painter to gain access to a building; this is now what is happening in the cyberworld,” he told me.
“Bad guys are trading keys and certificates on the dark web and using them to crack into company systems – just look at Sony, the Snowden revelations and Stuxnet. They all involved stolen or misused keys and certificates.”
It doesn’t bode well for the future, with even current systems being architected in the same way – based on digital certificates.
“My concern is that moving forward industrial control centre malware could become bioweapons,” Bocek claimed. “This is because the moment you sign the malware with a valid certificate, it is essentially like a bio weapon. In the current climate, that’s frightening.”
That’s not all. The burgeoning Internet of Things space is ripe for exploitation in the same way, with cybercriminals likely to hold firms ransom by effectively taking over their smart devices.
“By taking a code-signing certificate and changing the entity it obeys, a hacker can change the firmware on a smart device to take control of it. Now when that sensor or smart device calls back to the ‘mothership’ who does it trust? The bad guy,” he explained.
“From a single point of compromise – the digital certificate – hackers and cybercriminals can take over a whole network of hundreds, thousands or even millions of smart ‘things’. This can then be used to blackmail companies – either cease operations, take on huge disruption, or pay up.”
Now, Venafi certainly has a vested interest to talk up the potential damage that abuse of certs and keys could effect.
But this is already happening in the wild with real consequences for organizations and their customers around the world.
Unfortunately 2016 is likely to see things get a lot worse before CISOs start to give this their full attention.
Is Groupon Doomed to Fail?
Posted: November 26, 2015 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: amazon, cautionary tale, daily deals, e-commerce, ebay, flash deals, gartner, groupon, IDC, IT Pro, retail, wall street Leave a comment
Daily deals giant and one-time darling of Silicon Valley, Groupon, is having a hard time of it. An IPO in 2011 raised a whopping $700 million, apparently more money at the time than any US firm since Google. But more than four years after the flash deals specialist was valued at nearly $13 billion, there’s very little to celebrate.
In September, the firm announced over 1,000 job cuts as part of its ‘One Playbook’ plan to cut debt and kick-start growth. Its CEO has moved across to chairman and the firm is quitting several markets including Morocco, Panama, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Taiwan, Thailand and Uruguay. In November the firm’s shares plummeted 27% after it forecast 2016 revenue of $2.75 billion-$3.05 billion, below analyst estimates.
So what went wrong? I’ve been chatting to analysts for a piece in IT Pro (Hong Kong) about this and the general consensus is that it shouldn’t have IPO’d when it did. IDC Retail head of Europe, Spencer Izard, told me that the firm simply can’t keep up with the demand for high quality deals on a daily basis, so it’s failing in turn to meet the insatiable growth demands of shareholders.
For Gartner’s Sandy Shen, it’s a vicious circle. Groupon is not coming up with consistently good deals, so customers are leaving. Merchants see these falling customer numbers and the fact that most are only after that one deal and aren’t returning, so they also lose interest.
For Miya Knights, global technology research director at Planet Retail, there’s simply too much competition for the firm these days, and not just from bricks and mortar stores, which have lowered their prices to match the web.
“Groupon was first to the flash deals party, but has certainly not been the last. The space it occupies has been filled with direct, global and local competitors that offer deals across a wide range of categories, like Wowcher in the UK. More niche, specialist deal sites, for hotels, holidays, and home furnishings etc. have also emerged to fill the space,” she told me by email.
“Groupon’s figures, however, show it still has a loyal customer base and that revenues are strong. It’s just that its business model is broken: it does not generate enough revenue from its daily deals, which is where the margin lies, and relies too heavily on selling goods at discount prices, where the margins are tiny.”
So is there any hope for the site? It’s now trying to rebrand as an online marketplace, but with the likes of Amazon and eBay also playing in that space, the future doesn’t look too rosy.
What’s the Real Value of Smart City Projects?
Posted: November 26, 2015 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: apac, asia, china, IDA, IDC, idg connect, infocomm development authority, singapore, smart city Leave a comment
IDC recently released the results of a competition it ran to find the best smart city projects in Asia. As alluded to in my IDG Connect piece, I was keen to find out if these competitions, and the projects they seek to promote, are really very helpful at all.
My suspicion is that we can’t really use these competitions to judge whether one country is more “innovative” than another when it comes to IT. And I also have a feeling that in many cases, the smart city banner itself is little more than a handy, headline-grabbing way for self-aggrandising local and national politicians to attract foreign investment and talent, score geopolitical points and bolster their reputation as ‘visionary innovators’. It’s also pretty clear that Asia is far from leading the world when it comes to smart cities, despite pockets of excellence like Singapore.
IDC program manager for government insights, Gerald Wang, admitted that the picture was mixed across the region, and that the lack of legacy technology alone has not been enough to propel developing Asian countries forward.
“While it is true many cities in developing nations and emerging economies have been able to leapfrog the digital divide to what IDC coins the ‘3rd Platform’ landscape, they also lack the long-term experiences required in managing enterprise-wide ICT solutions,” he explained by email.
“This means these cities have to tread very carefully with their investments into new (sometimes untested) territories without the proper governance processes and manpower talents in fund-seeking, information management, standardisation and consolidation expertise, and building resilient environments that that withstand cyber attacks, etc.”
Leading by example
Singapore is an exception of course, in Asia and the world. Its size, relative wealth and tech savvy administration have helped produce the Smart Nation initiative, launched last year. Infocomm Development Authority executive deputy chairman, Steve Leonard, told me the goal was to improve the quality of life and opportunities of Singaporeans, especially given the rapidly ageing populous.
But he was also quite open about the initiative’s role as a tool for attracting foreign investment.
“Singapore has the unique assets that makes it easier for tech start-ups and talent to build and grow their business from here to serve other markets. Working on big enough shared global challenges that make an impact to people’s lives will inspire more entrepreneurs and talent to come to Singapore to test their ideas, and more big corporates to set up their innovation labs or ventures here,” he argued.
“It starts a virtuous cycle – talent attracts more talent, more ideas and start-ups are established, the excitement builds on itself and we get more breakthroughs. Investment capital naturally gravitates to where there’s a high concentration of great talent and business opportunities.”
So smart cities in Asia could actually be good news for western tech investors, from start-ups through to large corporates. But what about the other way round? Are local leaders also signing off projects with a view to exporting technology and/or services one day? Not quite, according to Leonard.
“Our goal is for Singapore to be a node on the global network. Different countries are doing different things and we can all learn from each other’s experience,” he said. “The challenges we are working on in Singapore are not unique to us, other countries face similar challenges. We believe if you can make it work in Singapore, you can have the opportunity to adapt and apply to other contexts.”
Nice idea. But I’ve got a feeling that more countries will be learning from Singapore than the other way round over the next decade.
Why F-Secure and Others Are Opposing the Snoopers’ Charter
Posted: October 30, 2015 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: decryption, end-to-end encryption, f-secure, government, investigatory powers bill, privacy, snooper's charter, surveillance, whatsapp Leave a comment
It’s widely expected that next week the government will unveil details of its hugely controversial Snoopers’ Charter, aka the Investigatory Powers Bill. To preempt this and in a bid to influence the debate cyber security firm F-Secure and 40 other tech signatories presented an open letter opposing the act.
The bill most controversially is expected to force service providers to allow the authorities to decrypt secret messages if requested to do so in extremis. This is most likely going to come in the form some kind of order effectively banning end-to-end encryption.
I heard from F-Secure security adviser Sean Sullivan on this to find out why the bill is such as bad idea.
To precis what I wrote in this Infosecurity article, his main arguments are that forcing providers to hold the encryption keys will:
- Make them a likely target for hackers, weakening security
- Send the wrong signal out to the world and damage UK businesses selling into a global marketplace
- End up in China or other potentially hostile states a service provider also operates in also requesting these encryption keys – undermining security further
- Be useless, as the bad guys will end up using another platform which can’t be intercepted
I completely agree. Especially with Sullivan’s argument that the providers would become a major target for hackers.
“End-to-end encryption makes good sense and is the future of security,” he told me by email. “Asking us to compromise our product, service, and back end would be foolish – especially considering all of the back end data breach failures that have occurred of late. If we don’t hold the data, we cannot lose control of it. That’s just good security.”
One other point he made was the confusion among politicians about tech terminology as basic as “backdoor” and “encryption”.
“A lot of UK politicians end up putting their foot in their mouth because they don’t properly understand the technology. They try to repeat what their experts have told them, but they get it wrong. UK law enforcement would probably love to backdoor your local device (phone) but that’s a lost cause,” he argued.
“The politicians (who actually know what they’re talking about) really just want back end access. As in, they want a back door in the ‘cloud’. They want to mandate warranted access to data in transit and/or in the back end (rather than data at rest on the device) and fear that apps which offer end-to-end encryption, in which the service provider doesn’t hold any decryption keys, are a threat.”
Let’s see what happens, but given the extremely low technology literacy levels among most politicians I’ve got a bad feeling about this one.
Huawei Top Dog in Chinese Smartphone Market – So What Now?
Posted: October 28, 2015 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: canalys, china, Chinese new year, huawei, smartphone sales, smartphones, xiaomi Leave a comment
Huawei has leaped over local rival Xiaomi to take number one spot in China’s much prized smartphone market, according to Canalys. I covered the news for IDG Connect and asked Canalys VP analysis, Rachel Lashford, whether she thought the Middle Kingdom now belonged to domestic players.
She argued that the market has actually decelerated slightly of late (1% from 1H14 to 1H15) which has increased the pressure on all vendors – but Apple and Samsung are still flying the flag for the Rest of the World.
“Apple still has a very powerful brand in China and we expect to see the latest product launches to continue its popularity,” Lashford told me.
Samsung, meanwhile, has dropped from the top spot of a 15% share in 1H14 to fourth place (9%) a year later.
“But it is recovering in the high end and has really focused on investing in localised marketing messages,” Lashford added, by email. “Combined with recent restructuring of its channels, focusing on large retail and operators, it should be well equipped to keep the pressure up on its local competition.”
So what of Huawei and Xiaomi? The former’s rise has come on the back off a steady building out of online channels over the past two years and a focus on its offline channel presence. Aiming squarely at the mid-range ($200-500), it has increased investment in the brand to good effect, concentrated on quality and kept momentum with regular product updates.
Xiaomi, on the other hand, may have taken its eye off the ball by concentrating on wearables, TVs and other smart home kit. It will need a “refreshed flagship” in time for Chinese New Year to wrest back momentum, she claimed.
And what of the two vendors’ plans for international expansion? Well, half of Huawei’s sales already come from outside the massive China market. But Xiaomi will need more help to get it competing beyond the Great Firewall.
“Many vendors are hindered by the lack of patents and having the difficulties and expense of licensing those in order to enter markets like the US and Western Europe where these are adhered to, so this needs to be overcome,” claimed Lashford.
“As does the adoption of a successful channel strategy. Xioami’s focus has been directly online, but it will still likely need the expertise of distributors mobility businesses – like Tech Data and Ingram Micro – in order to navigate the complexities of bringing those products to market.”
Can India Exploit Chinese Frostiness to Secure More US Tech Investment?
Posted: October 23, 2015 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: bilateral trade, chinese regulations, forrester, india, India start-up, modi, start up, tech investment, US-China, US-India, xi jinping Leave a comment
Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi were both in the US recently to press the flesh and do the diplomatic rounds, but I think the latter will have returned feeling more positive.
As explained in my latest for IDG Connect here, Beijing has, via tightening regulations, antitrust investigations and even more restrictive censorship rules, been making the Middle Kingdom an increasingly hostile place for foreign – especially US – tech companies. It was never easy – foreign firms have always had to team up with a local partner to have a crack at the huge domestic market, with all the risks that entails. But now it’s even more difficult.
So enter India – a nation of over one billion and with the world’s fastest-growing economy. US firms have had a much better time there historically. Foreign direct investment is very much OK, and even in those few industries which are less welcoming – retail, media, telecoms and banking, for example – successful partnerships with local players are possible.
The start-up cash pouring in from Silicon Valley and elsewhere is staggering – dwarfing that in China already, according to Forrester research director, Ashutosh Sharma. In the last quarter this reached $6bn from private equity alone, he told me. What’s more India can boast:
- A suspicion of China matched only by the US
- A nominally democratic political system based on rule of law, making its regulatory environment more predictable, if still overly bureaucratic
- A young, tech savvy, increasingly well educated, and affluent population
On the minus side, however, it has dreadful mobile connectivity and poor broadband penetration.
“The size of the country in terms of populations makes it difficult for any government to strike a right balance between pursuing growth through investments versus leaning towards more socialistic policies,” Sharma told me.
“This dithering on policy initiatives since India liberalised its markets in early ’90s have cost them time which has manifested in poor physical and virtual infrastructures.”
A large, “digitally dark” population which doesn’t speak English makes it hard to justify investments in digital media, he said.
“However all indications are that this is temporary because at the pace innovation is happening both in terms of affordability of mobile devices, data connection, and local language solutions it won’t be long before a major part of India is digital,” Sharma added.
As mentioned, the regulatory framework is still over complex and bureaucratic, although this too is apparently changing.
“The pace of simplification and speed of execution has improved since the new government has come in place,” he said.
It will take years before India even comes close to the $600bn in bilateral trade the US and China enjoy. But that trade is massively unbalanced, comprising mainly of Chinese imports to the US. This is not the case with US-India relations.
The winds of change are blowing, and they’re blowing to the sub-continent.
phil muncaster 