Interview: Mauro Bonomi, CEO, Minerva Networks

In [itvt] Issue 6.12, we published an interview with Brian Baker, CEO of content-security company, Widevine, in which he warned telcos against using Microsoft TV's IPTV Edition end-to-end IPTV platform, and alleged that Microsoft TV is using that platform's free content-security component, in order to "gain complete control of the customer through a closed, proprietary system" and thus create an effective monopoly in the IPTV space. In the same issue we published a response from Microsoft TV's director of marketing and communications, Ed Graczyk, and in [itvt] Issue 6.14, we published an interview with Andrew Burke, CEO of BT Entertainment, in which he explained why his company selected IPTV Edition for its planned IPTV service rather than a solution that mixed and matched components from multiple vendors. In this issue, we are publishing an interview with Mauro Bonomi, CEO of IPTV middleware provider, Minerva, in which he explains his company's take on what might be called the Microsoft vs. Mix-and-Match debate, and outlines how large systems integrators are working with IPTV technology companies to assemble multi-vendor, end-to-end IPTV solutions in an effort to take on Microsoft.

[itvt]: As you know, we recently published a series of interviews in our newsletter on the pros and cons of Microsoft's end-to-end IPTV solution versus mix-and-match solutions that use components from multiple vendors. Presumably you come down on the latter side in that debate?

Bonomi: We are strong proponents of an open-platform approach to the IPTV problem. So, we are more in agreement with the point of view of Brian Baker at Widevine than with the approach that Microsoft is taking. However, while we believe that the benefits of an open- platform approach are going to be obvious over the long term--lots of companies with unique expertise contributing best-of-breed technologies to an end-to-end solution--the reality right now is that large telcos are concerned that the proponents of open-platform IPTV solutions are currently small vendors. And that makes them nervous. Large companies derive a certain level of comfort from knowing that a big player like Microsoft with "unlimited" resources has committed to developing their IPTV platform.

[itvt]: Some Microsoft competitors allege that the company is struggling to deliver a working IPTV platform. What is your take on that?

Bonomi: The challenge that companies embracing the Microsoft platform are going to face is not whether Microsoft will deliver a working solution. A company like Microsoft with a lot of very capable engineers and a lot of resources will eventually deliver a working product. The question is when will that platform be ready for deployment, and, once available, will it be easy to scale and easy to manage? Early data seem to indicate that the Microsoft solution requires a lot of bandwidth and computing power to implement the functionality--for example, fast channel change--that they are proposing as core features of their IPTV offering. The other problem is, of course, that it's a closed system. All of the key elements of the Microsoft solution--including the operating system running on the set- top box, the video servers that stream the on-demand content, the operating system powering the video servers, the middleware, the television applications, and even the digital rights management system- -are developed and controlled by Microsoft. It is currently an all-or- nothing proposition: once you embrace their IPTV platform, you're really tightly joined at the hip with Microsoft.

[itvt]: We recently conducted an interview with Andrew Burke, CEO of BT Entertainment, and one of the things he said had been a key factor in their decision to go with Microsoft was that Microsoft is a purveyor of software for many different devices. So because BT is interested in offering programming across the home network to multiple devices, with full DRM, they see Microsoft as a partner that can help them ensure that they can--in Andrew Burke's words--"take our video product and make sure it works as effectively on the PC and other devices as it does on the TV." How do you address that consideration?

Bonomi: I absolutely agree that it's very important to be able to deliver "triple-play" services seamlessly to multiple devices. This is one of the major advantages of IP-based service delivery networks. In fact, it's not only important for the IPTV platform to be able to deliver services beyond the set-top box--to PC's and mobile clients--but it's also important for the IPTV platform to be controlled remotely by a variety of devices. For example, if I am on the road I can use my mobile phone to schedule a recording.

But, having said that, I don't believe telcos need Microsoft in order to deliver services to multiple devices. If you want to support multiple devices, I think you're better off with an infrastructure software solution that's not necessarily tied to Windows or Windows CE. As you know, there are very cost-effective set-top boxes powered by Linux or VxWorks. Likewise with mobile appliances: there are all kinds of mobile appliances that leverage reliable and cost-effective embedded operating systems other than Windows CE. Many DRM vendors offer solutions that can protect content delivered to multiple devices including PC's, set-top boxes and mobile appliances.

So I believe that the argument that Andrew Burke made in favor of Microsoft is an argument that, in fact, can just as well be made against the Microsoft solution. An open-platform IPTV delivery system with advanced DRM capabilities is the ideal solution to support a broad range of devices, powered by a variety of operating systems, including, of course, Windows and Windows CE.

[itvt]: So are you planning to support Microsoft components as part of an open-platform IPTV delivery system?

Bonomi: As a supplier of open-platform IPTV middleware and applications, we support best-of-breed components from a variety of vendors, including Microsoft. We will support Windows CE-powered IP set-top boxes and mobile devices. We're also looking very closely at potential interactions between our Client software, running on the IPTV set-top box, and the Microsoft Media Center. Our middleware features open API's for the integration of third-party conditional access and digital rights management systems. We could integrate the Microsoft DRM platform if requested by a customer.

However, I believe that if the Microsoft end-to-end IPTV solution emerges as the winning platform, it would not be good for the industry. Operators would end up late to market with a less efficient, less reliable and more costly solution. Consumers would suffer as the quality and variety of interactive television applications would be limited, since closed systems don't foster as much innovation and change as open systems do. But I also believe that an approach that is entirely hostile to Microsoft's technologies is not good for the industry. That's why at Minerva we are implementing powerful, robust and scalable IPTV solutions based on best-of breed components, some of which will inevitably be supplied by Microsoft.

[itvt]: How do you see the IPTV space developing over the coming months?

Bonomi: I think that a lot of progress will be made between now and the end of 2006. Competitive forces in the marketplace are putting pressure on the telcos. It varies in different markets, but where cable operators are particularly strong and are deploying VoIP services, the pressure is high on telcos to offer triple-play services. Over the next few months all of the key ingredients--the MPEG-4 AVC video compression technology, the broadband access technologies, the low cost IP set-top boxes, the middleware and the advanced applications-- needed to offer IPTV services to millions of subscribers will be available. As deployments mature it will become apparent that IP-based triple-play delivery platforms will enable unique "converged" services that exceed those offered by competing solutions. New services like time-shifted television, network-based PVR, video mail and targeted ad-insertion will fuel the rapid adoption of IP-based triple-play services.

[itvt]: What kinds of concerns are you hearing from telcos? Is the Microsoft versus mix-and-match debate on their minds?

Bonomi: Most telcos are very interested in open platforms, as they are well aware of the advantages of open systems. Many operators, though, feel that if they are going to go with an open platform, they need to see a set of players, led by a large system integrator, coming together to offer an end-to-end solution based on best-of-breed components.

Microsoft has, for want of a better term, "pumped up the volume" over the past 12 months and probably caught some of the big global integrators by surprise. Those integrators are now saying to themselves, "If Microsoft wins, I have a lot to lose." So what we are seeing now are big players preparing to go to market with alternative open-platform solutions. Telcos will soon be able to say, "I can select a closed system or I can deploy an open-platform solution. Both of them are delivered to me by a very strong vendor..."

[itvt]: Who are these large system integrators that will be backing these alternative IPTV solutions? Presumably one of them is Siemens?

Bonomi: Siemens is indeed proposing an alternative to the Microsoft solution. The players I'm referring to though are the networking companies and system integrators that have a lot to lose from Microsoft and Alcatel locking up the market. I have to be very careful here, because we are under NDA. But what I can say is that Minerva is now working very closely with large players that are planning to be first to market with a proven and technically superior open-platform IPTV delivery solution--a solution made up of best-of-breed components.

[itvt]: When can we expect some announcements on this?

Bonomi: It is likely that by the end of this year some major telcos will announce high-profile selections of open IPTV platforms. They will broadcast a strong message to the industry that, indeed, there is a compelling alternative to Microsoft's closed system. It will be very good for the future of the IP television industry.

Click http://www.itvt.com to subscribe to our free email newsletter, which contains all the news stories you see on this Web site, as well as breaking news and scoops, in-depth features, interviews, and other exclusive content.