|
Newsletters
|
|
|
|
|
The LBS Marketing Twist
By:
Jonathan Spinney, Product Specialist, SignalSoft Corporation
The phrase Location-based Services (LBS) is abuzz in the GIS industry. It seems everywhere one
looks these days there is some mention of a new product line or initiative focused on mobile
lifestyles and delivering location-based information to mobile devices. Wireless industry analyst-
identified regression models, the US FCC 911 mandate schedule, and market penetration
propensity predictions have all fueled the market and positioned the LBS space as the next big
niche for GIS, and the proverbial ‘killer app’ for the wireless telecommunications industry. The
convergence of conventional wireless networks with Internet technologies has spawned this new
market segment for GIS companies who have historically been uninvolved in the real time call
processing aspect of wireless networks.
Prior to the Signaling System 7 (SS7) and IP convergence, and the resulting introduction of a
new GIS market cavity, GIS companies were limited to entering network operator environments
with support oriented GIS service tools. These tools have historically assisted network operators
with managing their geographic assets, planning network build-out, and analyzing geographic
market trends. These tools were, and still are, well-received and implemented operational
components of any typical network operator environment. If you ever have the chance to visit a
Carrier site, your likely to find some type of GIS handling offline activities unrelated to call
processing - whether it be managing base station locations, analyzing propagation data, or
identifying market trade areas. While all of these operational activities have required some
derivative of a geographically based management system, location-based services on the other
hand introduce a new and untapped domain for GIS players - the online transaction and call-
processing realm of the network operator environment.
LBS have recently received much hyped attention, evident through redundant GIS industry
collateral and advertisements. Most of these advertisements appear identical, and most GIS
companies appear to be claiming identical LBS application capabilities. The LBS topic is trendy,
and commentary and/or advertisements appear monthly in most GIS industry publications. In
talking with GIS industry players and my academic colleagues, there is a perceived notion that
LBS is a new and exciting endeavor. This notion is however a misconception. LBS in reality, has
been around for at least five years. Newcomers to LBS, of which GIS companies are significant
sources of new contribution, have identified LBS as a space they can enter through their spatial
technology expertise. In fact, the potential is assumed to be so promising, that complete
subsidiary programs by GIS companies have been launched to focus specifically on LBS alone.
The interesting thing is that they appear to be marketed separately from their core business
competency - GIS. This is apparent by new initiatives under different company names, further
distinguishing their LBS capabilities from their GIS capabilities. Still, and perhaps even more
intriguing is that the prominent GIS standards governing consortium OpenGIS have launched a
unique LBS-centric standards consortium called OpenLS. Perhaps a natural question one would
ask, and one in which my colleagues and I have pondered, is why have GIS companies and
organizations distinguished their LBS divisions as independent entities within their organization?
There are arguably an extensive slue of managerial and organizational reasons for separating the
two, which may be specific to individual company and organization structures concentrating on
specific verticals and market segments, but from a technology standpoint the question may be
relatively simple to answer.
The advancement of wireless networks from 2G to 2.5G, and eventually 3G, has opened the
competitive gates for new and enhanced LBS applications built by GIS companies. The online
transaction and call processing participation of GIS/LBS subsidiaries has become realized largely
due to these enhanced next generation IP-capable networks. Wireless networks are now capable
of standardized protocol interfacing with IP elements outside of the wireless infrastructure built
on SS7. Conventional networks based on SS7 have been around a while and LBS applications
designed to function on SS7 have been a reality since 1995. However, it is the convergence of
SS7 and IP that have made it possible for GIS companies to enter the LBS application domain.
GIS companies are likely to be successful in the space largely due to their already well-developed
IP-based Internet mapping capabilities. Most GIS companies seem to be targeting this angle
because it does not require them to develop SS7 capabilities. A map server application can
reside outside of the network and perform all the necessary spatial query and processing needed
to deliver content back to the subscriber via XML, cHTML, or WML in the case of WAP services
now live in a lot of Carrier networks throughout the world. However, processed content must still
pass back through the SS7 infrastructure in order to deliver location information to the mobile
subscriber. In addition, these IP-based LBS applications must firstly receive subscriber location
from the SS7 infrastructure in order to process the request in the first place. This requires that
the SS7 network elements have some sort of location management component. These location
management components residing on a network Service Control Point (SCP) are known in the
CDMA/TDMA world as the Mobile Positioning Center (MPC), and the GSM counterpart Gateway
Mobile Location Center (GMLC).
MPC’s and GMLC’s must firstly, be capable of interfacing with positioning technologies such as
TA, TOA, AOA, TDOA, GPS, etc. in order to position a subscriber; and secondly, capable of
transferring that X,Y subscriber location to the wireless network SCP where it can then route the
data to an IP-based application for spatial processing. An alternative to routing the call and
position data to an IP-based application is to build the applications to run directly on the SCP.
This is not a trivial a task - one in which GIS companies have steered clear of. GIS companies
don’t specialize in building wireless network components like an MPC or GMLC, but these
elements are key for making location services a reality. The alternative is for the subscriber to
enter their location into their mobile device which is an unlikely viable solution.
So what does all this mean, and what is the original point? I asked the question “why have GIS
companies and organizations distinguished their LBS divisions as independent entities within their
organization?” GIS companies may have segregated their core competencies of GIS from LBS
because it may be a more appealing catch phrase for wireless professionals. It is a phrase that
wireless network operators are likely to interpret and embrace because it implies mobility, and if
GIS companies are implying understanding mobility management, then they must be keen to
what’s going on in wireless networks. The fact is, GIS companies are really not doing much more
then taking their existing Internet mapping capabilities and wireless enabling them through XML
formatting. Others, who specialize in SS7 and GIS, have been able to develop these technologies
for the last five years because of their IP-independence and SS7 compatibility. The wireless
network operators have made LBS possible for GIS companies, and GIS companies have put a
twist on their marketing approach to appear more savvy in the LBS space. No more, no less.
One thing is for sure, all involved in either building GMLC’s or MPC’s, building spatial processing
Applications, the interfaces between the two, or all of them, are likely to capitalize on their
investments in the “new” theatre of the LBS domain.
About the Author
Jonathan Spinney is a Product Specialist at SignalSoft Corporation and an MS GIS student at the
University of London. He can be reached at
jspinney@signalsoftcorp.com
Any reproduction, copying, or use of the material contained in this article without first
contacting the author and The WirelessDevNet is prohibited.
|
|
|
