<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Of course customers want interoperability!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.saunderslog.com/2008/01/16/of-course-customers-want-interoperability/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.saunderslog.com/2008/01/16/of-course-customers-want-interoperability/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=of-course-customers-want-interoperability</link>
	<description>An outcome-driven leader, proven technology product developer, and  marketer with over 20 years of hands-on experience including start-up, small and large business environments, and the board room. This is my blog.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:15:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Graves</title>
		<link>http://www.saunderslog.com/2008/01/16/of-course-customers-want-interoperability/#comment-6100</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Graves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:53:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saunderslog.com/2008/01/16/of-course-customers-want-interoperability/#comment-6100</guid>
		<description>Oh no, they can do it. They already interoperate with the PSTN. That&#039;s known to use G.729a. If they can do that there&#039;s not technical reason why they can&#039;t interoperate with SIP based networks. It could change their topology quite a lot, but its possible. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh no, they can do it. They already interoperate with the PSTN. That&#039;s known to use G.729a. If they can do that there&#039;s not technical reason why they can&#039;t interoperate with SIP based networks. It could change their topology quite a lot, but its possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.saunderslog.com/2008/01/16/of-course-customers-want-interoperability/#comment-6099</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:32:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saunderslog.com/2008/01/16/of-course-customers-want-interoperability/#comment-6099</guid>
		<description>This &#039;no one asked for it argument&#039; is probably the most hypocritical argument that could be made by Skype.   I would suggest that no one asked for &quot;free p2p calling on the internet&quot; but clearly there was a need that wasn&#039;t being met. 
 
In general, customers don&#039;t ask for disruptive, game changing features - that is the job of the innovators and pioneers in any industry (Apple, Slingbox) perhaps Skype just &#039;can&#039;t&#039; do it. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This &#039;no one asked for it argument&#039; is probably the most hypocritical argument that could be made by Skype.   I would suggest that no one asked for &quot;free p2p calling on the internet&quot; but clearly there was a need that wasn&#039;t being met. </p>
<p>In general, customers don&#039;t ask for disruptive, game changing features &#8211; that is the job of the innovators and pioneers in any industry (Apple, Slingbox) perhaps Skype just &#039;can&#039;t&#039; do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

