There are an awful lot of people who really understand some of the nuance and fine points if Skype and the various pros and cons that come with using it. Many of them are talking about it today. Ok, most of them are talking about.

There are two posts in particular that caught my eye. I want to point them out because they're well written, make good points, and made me think.. Both in some way, relate to Alec's IM Detente discussion that I mentioned earlier today.

First, from Jim Courtney in Skype's Opportunity for IM Federation Leadership a couple of nice points. I think the first is understated, Jim points out that he takes a pragmatic approach. I think it's important for both Skype and these new competitors to understand that we users are going to be pragmatic. We're going to do as Jim says and most of us will primarily look "at how can I use Skype more effectively as a business and personal communications tool as opposed to worrying about all the implications of any Skype protocol publication. "

He also points out, not Skype as a VoIP client, but Skype the IM client. For me, that IM client is, just like Jim describes, something I miss when it isn't accessible.  With the recent talk of interoperability between MSN and Yahoo clients, this really made me think about the client software.

Phoneboy added some really good thoughts today on the IM client aspect as well, so he contributed to my thought process with his IM Cold War post.'

I would like to see a totally federated IM world. The one question I have is, when the revolution does come (or rather if it comes), how are we going to resolve the fact that many people have more than one "identity." After all, I have an account on AIM, MSN, Yahoo, ICQ, GTalk, Skype, and Gizmo Project. How is that apparent "conflict" going to be resolved?

There's some more food for thought. I'll come back to the point, so bear with me.

While his post was a little earlier in the afternoon, Phil Wolff shows a great deal of thought and effort in Skype protocols opening up, ready or not. He clearly thought things through and has some well-respected thoughts on the subject. I don't agree with Phil on some things he says and some of the approaches he takes. But he knows Skype, he knows the environment he works in, and he's got a good eye for the issues as he sees them.

I'm not going to attempt to delve into the protocol itself or the client comparisons. But here's what Phil said that I've been thinking about this afternoon -

I'm not sitting at the management table, but Skype has several choices.

Open. They're already on the path to opening up more of their apps at the API level. Skype could embrace this at the protocol level too. This is the hardest thing to do, but may pay off in the long run. Exposing these protocols is the only way for the Skype network to become an industry standard. And it would put Skype in a position of leadership the way Microsoft is for dot net, Sun is for Java, and Adobe is for Flash.

Switch. Skype could change the protocols, breaking the new software. This is a costly and temporary solution; tricky but doable. Replacing Skype clients for updates is hard enough; getting everyone to migrate could kill the brand love. It won't be long until the Chinese engineers figure out how to get in again.

Quash. Skype might try to blow out the startup's fire. eBay has a powerful combination of
PR, lobbyists, litigators, and business allies. Even in China. Skype could try to accuse the startup of piracy. My guess is Skype will tread litely. These tactics rarely work in China and often tarnish the reputation of the outsider applying the pressure.

Ignore. Skype has enough to do. Wait and see.

Invest. Buy the team, put them to work. 

I'd like to add another idea, then like everyone else, I'll punt to the Skype team and watch to see what they do. The only option on the list above that's viable is to Open. All the others have negative repercussions that will either hurt Skype or drive it into a slow death spiral. Skype has an opportunity right now, thanks to this Chinese team of innovators.

Opening the protocol is a nice idea. It's enough to diffuse this whole situation and keep things on an even keel. And if all Skype wants to do is maintain the equilibrium and hope the status quo is enough, it's an option. A better option is to open aggressively, quickly and collaborate for interoperability.

Don't just open. How quickly can you interoperate with MSN and Yahoo in both voice and IM to give me a federated client that lets me do all from one device? Integrate IM. Integrate VoIP. Open your proprietary protocol, but at the same time, let me the user choose SIP. Give me a client that will talk either Skype or SIP and the IM piece will interoperate with all the other IM clients. Detect the protocol for me? Awesome.

Skype has an opportunity to seize the leadership reins. It's nice that MSN and Yahoo decided finally after all this time to pretend the interoperate and tell us there's a beta somewhere. Nice, but not innovative. Not aggressive. Not relevant until it's in my hands. Skype has a window of opportunity to wrest control of direction from MSN and Yahoo if they lead by example.

They can be a leader. They can be a follower. Or they can be a distant memory  as a company who had the chance to disrupt the industry and died because they chose the safe path of doign nothing.

I hope they step up to the plate and swing for the fences myself.


Technorati Tags: Skype, IM detente, integration, VoIP, IM