IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) Status Report: Emerging from the Trough of Disillusionment

IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) Status Report: Emerging from the Trough of Disillusionment provides a valuable independent IMS status report that can help all in the industry have a clear view on its current status and the likely paths operators will take in the evolution of their networks.

Report Structure:

This report provides an independent and quantified view of what is happening in the industry with IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem), through the presentation of results from an industry-wide survey that encompasses 137 interviews (101 of with network operators). The report also includes operator and supplier case studies, presenting a factual based current state of the market, without the hype and marketing spin that has frustrated many people on this topic. These two objectives are reflected in the two main sections of this report: Market Survey Results and Case Studies which include Verizon, China Mobile, and Vodafone Spain.

Key Findings:

IMS remains niche, with only 8% of those operators surveyed deploying IMS. (Note, none of those operators have completed the conversion of their network, all considered it a 5-7 year process) Another 12% are in an extended field trial, which is characterized by services being launched on the IMS core, with in some cases paying customers; but a decision has not yet been made to commit to service migration onto the IMS core.
IMS does not appear to be entering a period of rapid adoption, rather a linear growth in initial adoption over the next 5 years, with by 2014 about 32% of operators commencing an IMS deployment.
Regionally, NAR (North America Region) provides the bulk of the growth in years 2010 and 2011, while EMEA (Europe Middle East and Africa) and APAC (Asia Pacific) regions provide the bulk of growth in later years.
Lack of business case, lack of standards compliance and BOSS (Business and Operational Support System) integration were the top three barriers to adoption as identified by operators.

Target Audience:

Network operators including mobile (CDMA and GSM), fixed, broadband and cable operators: Provides an independent status report to cut through the marketing hype to aid in the definition of a realistic network evolution plan.
Network equipment providers: Provides the market analysis necessary to determine where and when to make product investments, better meet operator requirements, better aid operators in their network evolution, and guidance on where to focus sales resources over the next 5 years.
Related network component suppliers (BSS and OSS suppliers, service broker / service middleware providers, SDP providers, customer premise equipment suppliers, mobile handset and software suppliers): Provides the market analysis necessary to determine where and when to make product investments and where for focus sales resources.
Application developers: Provides information about where to invest in building IMS applications, and where to focus.
Investors: Determines where the investment opportunities reside in the emerging IMS landscape.

Companies in Report*

Operators

AT&T
Belgacom
Bermuda Telecom
Bharti Airtel
BSkyB
BT
Cable One
Charter
City Telecom
Cox
Deutsche Telekom
Etisalat (and operating companies)
Hong Kong CSL
Indosat
KPN (and operating companies)
Kuwait Telecom
Maxis
Mobilcom
O2
Optus
Orange / France Telecom (and operating companies)
Qtel
Rogers
SingTel
Sprint
Swisscom
T-Com
T-Mobile (and operating companies)
Telecom Italia
Telecom New Zealand
Telefonica (and operating companies)
Telenor (and operating companies)
Telstra
Telus
Three (and operating companies)
TWC
Verizon
Vodafone (and operating companies)

Suppliers

4dk
Alcatel Lucent
AppTrigger
Argela
Camiant
Cisco
Comneon
Comptel
Converged Network Systems
Dialogic
Ecrio
Espial
Genband
HP
hSeind
HTK
Huawei
IBM
Intellinet
jNetx
Motorola
NeuStar
Nokia Siemens Networks
Oracle
OpenCloud
Sigma Systems
Tekelec
Telcordia
TM Forum
Veraz
Wipro

*Note: This is not a complete list, representing only those willing to have their company name listed in this report. Many operators were happy to share their views but preferred not to be identified because of their PR (Public Relations) approval process.