Yesterday Martin Geddes, one of the most repsected minds in the Telecommunications industry, posted a scathing critque of Gizmo Project’s log-in interface on Skype Journal. Although I agree with Martin’s overall thought of VoIP “products” passing the “Mother” test, Gizmo Project is not a piece of VoIP software designed for mass market, main-stream users and comparing it to other softphones that are designed for the mass market is inaccurate.
Gizmo Project is an open source/open standards based softphone that was originally developed for internal use by SIPphone and was eventually released for use with SIPphone’s VoIP service. As it has grown in popularity, it has done so because it was designed for the programmer, the developer, and the hobbiest who wants to use this inconjunction with an Asterisk PBX or their WiFi Sip phone. These are the individuals using Gizmo Project, not your run-of-the-mill consumer.
As we all know, there is software for residential and business user, then there is software for the developer and the hobbiest. Comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges. Holding Gizmo Phone to the same standards as that of Skype, MSN, and Yahoo is the equivalent to holding Asterisk to the same standards of a PBX by Cisco, Nortel, or 3Com PBX. In fact, I think holding Gizmo Project to the same “Mother test” that Martin holds Skype et al. is the equivalent of holding Asterisk loaded on a Linux server to SwitchVox or Fonality - it is not the same comparison.
Gizmo Project has experienced immense viral growth - in the programmer, developer, hobbyist verticals - just as it was designed to do so. It is a program that definitely would need some work in order to make a viral mass market consumer product, but I just do not think that is were Gizmo Project is going.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
I’d still disagree — and the same applies to XTen, which is also a softphone designed to be re-skinned. Both have all sorts of usability issues throughout the UI, and these rarely get fixed when OEM’d.
Telephony is a mass-market activity. I think any piece of software for non-specialist use should aspire to pass the “mother” test. You’re part of a *system*, not an isolated feature. There’s a wider problem here, too. The proponents of an open SIP network have failed to articulate a vision of “better telephony”. Examples might include a broader range of signals than “pickup” and “busy” — “call me later”, or “i’d like to talk, but not ring”; the ability to mutually agree on when and how to divert to voicemail; etc. By emulating Voice 1.0, and putting a complex UI on it, the system is perpetually doomed to irrelevance (see http://www.telepocalypse.net/archives/000868.html).
(The session fixation of SIP also leads you down all sorts of blind alleys that a hybrid SOA approach avoids, but I’ll have to save that for another day.)
Go look at the Gizmo home page — screams B2C to me, not B2B. I think the positioning of Gizmo is an ex post facto rationalisation of having failed to penetrate the consumer market, and was conceived in a bout of Skype envy. Harsh words, I know.
Gizmo aligns with the open source/open systems movement. The quality of user interfaces is consistently dire. This appears to be structural. Even Firefox, which I love and use, has a terrible interface for obtaining and managing extensions, which should be its core differentiator from IE and Safari. Gizmo likewise underestimates the incredible importance of user experience vs usefulness and usability. I think the iPod illustrates this perfectly.
Respectfully, Martin.
Martin, I am a huge proponent of making telephony more about the user experience and making products useful and easy to use. I see the same sort of issues when it comes to the small business ip pbx market and with the open source movements that are taking many industries by storm. I also talk of the “mother” test (not in that exact term) quite frequently when I speak with hardware manufacturers who want to release products into the VoIP marketplace.
You could also be right about the ex post facto, but I do know the device was originally cretaed for SIPphone internally use and was then released publicly due to “demand” from partenrs, etc. Quite possibly this has something to do with the poor UI and experience you originally commented on?
Do you feel that the “lack of attention” to the user experience and usability of telephony (or any market) products (hardware and software) has to do with products being created by engineers and programmers, rather then by marketers?
Notwithstanding the merits Gizmo’s usability, I disagree with Garret on his comparison of Asterisk with a Cisco, Nortel, or 3Com PBX. This implies that Cisco, Nortel, or 3Com are easy to use.
Far from it. As I have dabbled into the world of VoIP for the last 5 years, I have learnt one new lesson: Carrier-grade means only experts can use it (read: difficult) and it’s more expensive. Ciscos and Nortels of the world belong to that heap.
PS: Asterisk with TrixBo or freePBX UI are probably much easier to use than Cisco or Nortel. But it won’t be “carrier-grade”.
True Cisco and Nortel are not easy, but there are far more individuals with the skills and abilities to utilize these platforms then out of the box Asterisk. I get calls all day long from customer who could barely get Asterisk installed - not the case when speaking with those that I know are working with Cisco and Nortel - the talent base in wider and deeper for Cisco/Nortel then Asterisk.
Regardless, the point of the comparison I made was that you would not hold Asterisk to the same standards as a Cisco/Nortel solution when comparing them. They are totally different animals - which I was implying was the same for Gizmo Vs. Skype, MSN, etc.
Leave a Comment