- PilotHouse Vendor Rating
- Contact Center and Customer Engagement
- Cloud and Data Center
- Cost Models and Total Cost of Ownership
- Enterprise Trusted Advisor
- IT Innovation, Transformation, and Enterprise Technology
- Mobile and Network Services
- PilotHouse - UCC
- Security, Risk Management, and Compliance Research Initiatives
- Unified Communications and Collaboration
At the recent Genesys 2015 G-Force, I saw a futuristic demo in which pressing a button on a broken fridge automatically connected a person to a live agent to report an issue.
On WebRTC Interoperability
Over at NoJitter Eric Krapf has a post on Oracle’s recent announcement of a WebRTC session controller designed to enable service providers and enterprises overcome the lack of standard implementations and codecs in current WebRTC implementations.
As I noted in my recent ”WebRTC: Is There a There There?" webinar, the biggest challenge for WebRTC right now is the lack of a universally supported video codec, and the differences in WebRTC implementations across browsers. These limitations add cost and complexity to those wishing to leverage WebRTC to enhance or extend UC platforms, to engage with customers, or to deliver new and innovative services. The Oracle solution highlights the potential that session border controller vendors have to leverage their existing capabilities for SIP interworking to build gateways and policy managers for WebRTC sessions, but one has to question whether or not the cost of adding a layer to mediate among different protocols, codecs, encryption mechanisms, and even applications will outweigh the benefits of aggressive WebRTC implementation.
WebRTC is definitely a hot topic among the enterprise IT leaders we speak with. They want to understand the opportunities, limitations, vendor strategies, and roadmaps. As we plan for our 2014-15 benchmark we’ll look at how the current limitations are impacting real-world WebRTC plans.