Despite its short history, VoIP has already changed the way people live. While these changes may be minor for people living in developed countries, they can have a potentially significant impact for residents of developing countries. For the First World, this is minor, but this is a big thing for the Third World!countries.To To illustrate the impact that this technology can have, we have posted the following highlights which were reported in the Washington Post on November 22, 2006.

"Bangladesh, where the United Nations says average annual income is about $440, is one of the most densely populated countries in the world, with its 150 million people crammed into an area roughly the size of Iowa. By midmorning on a steamy September day, at least 20 people stood in line waiting to use one of Ambia computer center's two Chinese-made computers. A woman named Aleya, 55, sat down on a small plastic chair and handed the shopkeeper a scrap of paper with a London phone number. She said that her 18-year-old daughter was getting married and that she was calling her uncle in England to ask him to help pay for it. Aleya said her husband is a construction worker who earns about $70 a month, barely enough to feed their five children. Ambia dialed the number on the keyboard of his computer, connected by a cable to a Motorola cellphone. The call connected using voip (Voice Over Internet Protocol) technology, which allows calls to be placed from a computer to another computer or a telephone anywhere in the world -- for little or no cost.

Aleya picked up the small telephone handset connected to the computer and her face lit up. Her uncle, who owns a restaurant in London, promised that he'd make arrangements to send money for the wedding.

The five-minute call cost 8 Bangladeshi taka, about 11 cents.

"An 8-taka call has earned me thousands," Aleya said with a broad smile.

Before Ambia's center opened in February, Aleya said, she would have called her uncle on a borrowed cellphone at a cost of more than $2, her husband's daily wage. "(1)

As the article indicates, VoIP has the potential to help break rural isolation. As such, it could develop into a transcedent product which connects people all over the world. Rich or poor, East or West, people can connect with eachother using VoIP. As Robert Poe sees it, "Someday, the dream goes, the VoIP world will be one big happy family. Any user will be able to make feature-rich calls to any other. Attaching text messages, images, or video to voice calls will be a mere mouse click or key press away. And it will not matter what device or network the call is coming from. Cellular, Wi-Fi or wireline phones, as well as PC-based softphones, connected through any VoIP service anywhere, will talk to one another." (2) However, whether or not VoIP ever reaches its enormous potential is still debatable. While anyone anywhere has the potential to make feature-rich calls, obstacles to universal adoption, at this point, are still prevelant.


Barriers to Universal Connection

Universal connection has the potential to deliver features and services, such as text messages and video to voice calls, to users with different technological platforms. However, in order to establish VoIP as a service that provides universal features it is necessary to connect VoIP providers with current forms of communication technologies such as mainstream voice service providers. Poe refers to these divergent platforms as the "Islands of VoIP." (2) As detailed in the synopsis of VoIP technology, there are currently multiple ways to make VoIP calls (ATA's, IP Phones, computer-to-computer). However, the feature-rich calls that Poe details above are only available in end-to-end IP calls (calls which communicate directly and avoid traditional communication mediums such as telephone lines). (2). Converting VoIP technology to conventional communication technologies degrades the quality that VoIP brings, as well as increases the cost, thus eliminating many of the benefits that VoIP services provide. Until VoIP can achieve a seemless network, the dream of VoIP that Poe describes is nothing more than a dream. However,In summation, VoIP compatibility faces barriers that may prevent it from forming a communications fabric as seamless as the traditional technologies.

First, it is very hard for the VoIP providers to find partners to provide them with a cost-saving way to share the technology with conventional voice providers. A second barrier, which we saw in the Business Implications section, is the competition between existing voice service providers, such as telecommunication companies and cable operations. More importantly, from a security aspect, "established facilities-based operators that operate pretty much like conventional [telecommunication companies] will likely worry about accepting traffic from smaller providers with different business
models". (2) Universal connection will face significant problems if VoIP providers can not establish a relationship with conventional subscribers/service providers.


Conclusion

It is true that VoIP technology is growing rapidly. One of the biggest brands as previously mentioned (see Business Implications), Skype, was founded in August 2003 and now has 136 million registered users. (3) Companies such as Vonage and Yahoo also offer the VoIP services and are expanding exponentially. (3)However, due to the inherent technological handicap and the barriers to compatibility with traditional communication methods, VoIP may never be exactly like the Internet in terms of universal unrestricted connectivity. It will always retain some controls reminiscent of the traditional telecommunications model, particularly when it comes to knowing one's user. (2)

Sources:

(1) "Internet Extends Reach Of Bangladeshi Villagers; Cellphone-Linked Computers Help Break Rural Isolation" By Kevin Sullivan 22 November 2006The Washington Post

(2) Poe, Robert. "Universal VoIP Peering Faces Rough Road." Available at www.voip-news.com

(3)"Internet Extends Reach Of Bangladeshi Villagers; Cellphone-Linked Computers Help Break Rural Isolation" By Kevin Sullivan 22 November 2006The Washington Post