Download - SyncML Enquiry
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
1/25
Results of the Enquiry on
SyncML
Synchronization of mobile devices
David Buchmann
Dr. Rudolf Scheurer
April 2002
Telecom Research Group
Department of Informatics
University of Fribourg
Switzerland
Supported by
http://www.esprit-consulting.de/http://www.esprit-consulting.de/http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/http://www.unifr.ch/ -
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
2/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 2 / 25 -
SummaryThis document is the result of an enquiry among companies and institutions having that are
concerned with informatics. About half of the companies were selected to participate
because they are known to do SyncML development, the other half are members of the IT
Valley Fribourg association (www.itvalleyfribourg.ch). A total of 274 companies have been
invited by e-mail to participate in this enquiry by filling out a web form, and about 50 of them
gave a usable answer within the deadline.
The main goal of the enquiry was to determine to which extent SyncML, an open standard
for data synchronization, is accepted. It appeared that although some technical and
organizational problems exist, the majority of the companies give SyncML a good chance
under the condition that it gets widely supported.
Several technical aspects are investigated, revealing the perception of benefits and
drawbacks of SyncML. Another part of the enquiry deals with realized products, listing a
whole bunch of product names. The standards compliance testing process gets its questions
too. The final part of the enquiry asked for the marketing interest in SyncML, revealing a
rather small interest from private customers, but a considerable interest for business
customers.
About the AuthorsDavid Buchmann, an undergraduate student at the Department of Informatics of the
University of Fribourg (DIUF, diuf.unifr.ch) in Switzerland. This enquiry has been
performed in the scope of his diploma thesis about synchronization issues.
Dr. Rudolf Scheurer, head of the Telecom Research Group (diuf.unifr.ch/telecom) of the
DIUF, supervisor of the diploma thesis.
http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://diuf.unifr.ch/http://www.unifr.ch/http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/http://www.unifr.ch/http://diuf.unifr.ch/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/ -
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
3/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 3 / 25 -
Contents
1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................4
1.1 SyncML....................................................................................................................4
1.2 The goal of this enquiry............................................................................................5
1.3 Concept of the enquiry.............................................................................................5
1.4 Procedure of the enquiry..........................................................................................51.5 Notations..................................................................................................................6
2 Results ............................................................................................................................7
2.1 General part .............................................................................................................7
2.2 Technologically part .................................................................................................9
2.3 Development and products part .............................................................................15
2.4 Marketing part ........................................................................................................18
3 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................20
Appendix A: The email sent to the companies......................................................................22
Appendix B: Companies that answered the enquiry .............................................................24
Appendix C: Links for SyncML .............................................................................................25
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
4/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 4 / 25 -
1 Introduction
Mobile devices like handheld computers, mobile phones and laptops are used more and
more. They serve as personal information management (PIM) devices, are used for
business critical data and also just for fun. One important field related to the usage of mobile
devices is the synchronization of data. For private users, this could be just a backup, butbusiness users usually need to maintain data consistent with backend systems.
Until recently, every product used a proprietary protocol for syncing data. This leads to
compatibility problems as soon as devices from different manufacturers are involved. In the
year 2000, the synchronization markup language (SyncML, see below) initiative was
founded. The aim of the initiative is to establish SyncML as a general standard for
synchronization issues.
The Telecom Group of the University of Fribourg (CH) is interested in the area of data
synchronization for mobile devices. To investigate about industrial activities related to data
synchronization and specifically SyncML, an enquiry was set up. This report describes the
results of this enquiry and was written within the framework of a diploma thesis.
This chapter first describes what SyncML is, in order to know what this report is all about.
Then, the goal of the enquiry gets described. At the end of this chapter, there are some
remarks on the concept and the manner the enquiry was performed.
Chapter 2 contains the results to the four parts of the enquiry:
1. General part: Information about the companies of the answering persons
2. Technologically part: The possibilities of SyncML and its limits
3. Development and products parts: Examples of what has been realized using SyncML
4. Marketing part: How SyncML is used in marketing
Finally, in chapter 3 some conclusions are drawn from the results. In the appendixes, the listof companies that participated in the enquiry is given and the e-mail sent to invite companies
to answer the enquiry is shown, as well as a small link list of resources for SyncML.
1.1 SyncML
The acronym SyncML stands for synchronization markup language. A committee called the
SyncML initiative develops the specification of SyncML. The committee was founded in
February 2000 and the first specifications were released in December 2000 on the SyncML
website http://www.syncml.org.
The SyncML initiative founders want this XML extension to become a standard language for
synchronizing all devices and applications over any network. The focus is on mobile phones
and PDA's that need to synchronize to database servers, but other scenarios are envisaged
as well. To provide flexibility, SyncML can be used over HTTP, WAP, infrared and other
connections. Other parts of the specification address mobile device management, in order to
administrate large numbers of devices centrally.
SyncML provides a framework not only for complete synchronization but also for small
updates of changed data. This is especially important for slow wireless connections. The
hardware limits of mobile devices like maximal record size of free storage capacity are taken
into account with the exchange of Meta information.
http://www.syncml.org/http://www.syncml.org/http://www.syncml.org/ -
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
5/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 5 / 25 -
1.2 The goal of this enquiry
The Telecom Group of the University of Fribourg (CH) wants to determine the potential of
general standards for synchronization of mobile devices.
The SyncML specification has been open to the public for a year now. During this year,
some products for SyncML were developed and released. The Telecom Group wants to
know how large the interest in SyncML is and what experiences are made by companiesdeveloping SyncML solutions. What has been realized using SyncML and how well does it
work? What are the possibilities of SyncML and in which direction could development go in
future? The possible alternatives to SyncML were of interest too.
1.3 Concept of the enquiry
This section describes some of the principles for the design of this enquiry. Expecting just a
limited amount of replies we preferred open questions in order to get a more rich view of the
problem. Thus, for several questions with the normal response style yes/no, an open design
was implemented, i.e. it was possible to provide a more precise answer. The answers to
those open questions were categorized for the diagrams and relevant examples of some
more elaborated answers given in the text.
Because the questions cover different areas, they have been split into four parts. There are
general questions about the company, technological questions about SyncML, questions
about experiences related to SyncML development and products, and questions about
marketingand customer interest.
The idea was not only to group the parts for clarity, but also to allow employees of the same
company to answer the part they know best. Only one company, however, used this option.
For all other companies, one person answered all questions.
The number of answers changes for each question, as none of the answers was forced tobe non-empty.
The exact questions are given next to the answer diagrams and the questionnaire can be
viewed online at http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/syncml.
1.4 Procedure of the enquiry
To estimate how reliable the results of an enquiry are, it is important to know by which way
the answers were collected. We sent an email to 274 companies, asking for their
participation in the enquiry. The email is shown in the Appendix A of this document. The
companies were selected from the following sources: The SyncML.org web site, the ITValley Fribourg(an association of companies and educational institutions committed to IT in
the area of Fribourg, CH) and some important firms like IBM, Microsoft and SAP1.
Additionally, we posted into the newsgroups comp.text.xml, microsoft.public.xml and the
Yahoo forum http://groups.yahoo.com/group/syncml/, but nobody answered the
questionnaire because of this posting.
1Unfortunately, we got no answers from this last category, the important firms. This may mean
disinterest, but as we used general contact email addresses or the contact web form, our message
was maybe lost.
http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/syncmlhttp://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/syncmlhttp://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://news//comp.text.xml/http://news//comp.text.xml/http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&group=microsoft.public.xmlhttp://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&group=microsoft.public.xmlhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/syncml/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/syncml/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/syncml/http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&group=microsoft.public.xmlhttp://news//comp.text.xml/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://www.itvalleyfribourg.ch/http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/syncml -
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
6/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 6 / 25 -
To facilitate the handling, the questionnaire had to be filled in using a web form2. This web
form was open for answers from 15.1.2002 to 13.2.2002 using any browser over the
Internet.
1.5 Notations
For each diagram, you can see the N=XY, meaning the number of valid answers for thisquestion. As no question was forced to be answered and empty answers were not counted,
this number changes for each question.
Where multiple selections were allowed, the sum of all selections is given as = XY.
For diagrams with percentages, the absolute numbers for each category are given in the
format part saying yes / total number.
2
It is online on http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/syncml until end of 2002.
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
7/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 7 / 25 -
2 Results
There was a considerable echo to the enquiry. Of the 274 companies asked by email to
answer the enquiry, 61 visited the enquiry web site. About 50 companies , answered the
questions. The names are listed in the appendix (except for those 5 which dont want to be
mentioned).
Please note: the amount of 50 usable answers is clearly not enough for statistical
reasoning, but the answers can give an idea of the usage and perception of SyncML
and show some of the related problems.
In the following subsections we present and discuss the results of the enquiry, each
subsection dealing with one part of the enquiry questions.
2.1 General part
Now follows the evaluation of the answers to general questions about the companies. Those
answers position the field of companies that answered the enquiry and can help to estimatethe significance of their opinion.
2.1.1 Sectors the answering companies are active in
Multiple selections of sectors were possible. There was also an entry called other giving the
means to enter free text.
Sectors
4
17
27
15
9
8
13
31
23
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
No selection
Other (revised)
Consulting
Customizing
M-Commerce
Other Hardw are
Mobile Devices
Softw are on order
Softw are development
N= 61
The answers for the entry Other were (in summary): Infrastructure (6), Service (4),
Education (3), Association (2), Press (1), Selling (1).
=147
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
8/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 8 / 25 -
2.1.2 Company size
The next question was about the company size, i.e. the number of employees. The possible
answers were grouped into sections for small (less than 10 employees), medium (between
10 and 100 employees) and big (more than 100 employees) companies.
The figure illustrates that about half of the answers came from medium sized companies, a
quarter from rather big ones, and few from small companies.
2.1.3 Position of the employee answering the questions
To know more about the persons answering the questions we asked for the persons
position within his company. As mentioned in Chapter 1.3, Concept of the enquiry, we
actually expected that different persons in different positions could answer the questions. As
this has occurred only once, this diagram is just shown here and not repeated for each part
of the enquiry.
Position of the answering employee
Management
50%
Production
5%
Human
Ressources
2%
Other
15%
Research/Development
21%
Selling
7%
N=61
About half of the answers come from managers. Together with research / developer staff,
they are about of the persons.
As we will see in question 2.3.2, half of the answering companies are not (yet) working with
SyncML, but the bigger part is engaged in other soft- or hardware development (question
2.3.1).
Number of employees
100
21%
Not given
13%
N=61
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
9/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 9 / 25 -
2.2 Technologically part
One important goal of this enquiry is to find out how the SyncML technology is seen and why
companies are or are not interested in.
Note that the number of answers (N) gets smaller, because some 10 persons did not answer
the rest of the questions.
If you compare the questions to the questionnaire, you may notice that the ordering of the
questions in this report have been rearranged to a more logical sequence.
2.2.1 Did you know what SyncML is?
As not only companies known to be involved with SyncML had been addressed for this
enquiry, this basic question was needed to know if the answers are based on experience or
rather speculative.
Know what SyncML is
yes
(SyncML)
43%
yes
(IT Valley)
19%
no
(IT Valley)
38%
N=47
About two thirds already knew SyncML. If we only look at the companies of IT Valley
Fribourg, there is still one third knowing about SyncML. Of the companies known to workwith SyncML, all answered yes.
2.2.2 If not, does it seem interesting to you, now that you have heard about it?
As the question indicates, only persons not knowing SyncML before had to answer it. (which
explains the much smaller N).
If not, does it seem
interesting?
yes
39%
perhaps
61%
no
0%N=18
This could mean that everybody is at least a little interested in SyncML. But we think it
means rather that only people interested in SyncML answered the enquiry, so this result isnot representative for the development community in general.
All 18 answers come from IT Valley Fribourg Companies.
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
10/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 10 / 25 -
2.2.3 Do you think SyncML will become important for the mobile industry?
Will SyncML become
important?
less22%
no
5%
very
73%
N=41
SyncML is expected to become rather important. This is not only the perception of the
SyncML companies but also of companies from IT Valley Fribourg.
2.2.4 What do you think, how many of the mobile companies will support SyncML?
Mobile companies to
support SyncML
Majority81%
Minority
11%
none
0%All
8%
N=36
The opinion that SyncML will become important is reflected by this result. Even of the 9
companies who dont think SyncML is very important, 3 expect the majority of mobile
companies to support it.
2.2.5 How many of the database companies do you expect to support SyncML?
Database companies to
support SyncMLAll
9%
Minority
24%
none
9%
Majority
58%
N=34
For databases, there is more doubt whether SyncML will become the one standard that hasto be supported by all serious products.
Will SyncML become
important?
(IT Valley Fribourg only)
less
32%
no
5%
very
63%
N=22
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
11/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 11 / 25 -
2.2.6 What are the main benefits of SyncML for your work?
This question was an open question. The answers are categorized and some interesting
comments listed below. Some answers mentioned more than one category, so the sum of all
categories is more than 38.
Main benefits
6
7
11
11
13
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
No benefits
Other
Data backup /
synchronization
Good base for
development
Common / Open /
Licence Free Standard
N=38
Notes on the categories:
The benefits of open standards are explained in some answers as being the
independence from other companies for implementation, wide support and
interoperability.
Companies that hope to implement SyncML within their products see it as a good base
for development.
Some answered that they use SyncML for Data backup / synchronization, which is
interpreted as that the company uses SyncML solutions as tools for its own work.
Other mentioned points are:
o Support for different devices.
o Less development effort needed.
o Easy integration with existing business applications.
o Especially for areas with poor network coverage / quality.
o Web development.
The most important feature of SyncML is being an open standard. The synchronization
framework is seen as a good development base for syncing devices. Some companies use
SyncML products as tools for their own work.
Some of the companies not interested in SyncML can not see any benefits at all in theexistence of SyncML.
2.2.7 What are the most important problems of SyncML?
Like the previous question, this question was posed openly. The answers are once again
categorized and commented.
=48
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
12/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 12 / 25 -
Other points mentioned:
Implementation of the protocol: some features are mandatory although they are not
very important
SyncML is missing a clear leader
Standardized access to network data stores
Interoperability of devices, SyncFest3 is not the correct way
Problem with big objects, because SyncML 1.0.1 cannot split objects into parts for
transmission.4
Clearly the largest doubt is if enough manufacturers will support SyncML to become a
general standard. Some fear that the big companies like Palm or Microsoft could try to use
their own proprietary concepts. SyncML can only play its role if most devices support it
(mobile phones, PDA, PC, databases and other back-end systems). There were also some
complaints about the implementation, especially about usability and access control. Only one
person wrote explicitly that there are no problems.
The 23 persons who did not answer this question either had no problems or, more likely,
have never worked with SyncML.
2.2.8 In your opinion, can SyncML cover all synchronization tasks or does your company
have to make extensions?
This once again is an open question. The answers are categorized into yes, no and not
decided. In a second diagram the answers are related to the duration of SyncML
development (see question 2.3.2).
Do you need extensions?
7
13
13
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Don't know
Need for extensions
It covers all
N=33
3SyncFest is an event by the SyncML organization where new devices can be tested for their
standards compliance.4
This problem has been solved in SyncML 1.1, published in February 2002
Main Problems
1
5
10
13
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
No Problems
Other
Implementation problems, Usability
Becoming w idely accepted
=29
N=26
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
13/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 13 / 25 -
This question is rather undecided. Some of the persons who said that SyncML covers all
theirneeds expect that, depending on the project, there are special cases where extensions
will be needed. Most who indicated the need to build extensions did not specify what for. But,
twice the connection to proprietary systems was mentioned.
Most of them who didnt know if they need extensions don't do SyncML development at the
moment.
Some comments on extensions where:
The main add on is to send a SYNC without command, only data (ITEM) to ask a
synchronization of two services.
Relational synchronization needed (the official specification for this field is in alpha
stadium)
Only the fields of mass market are important to be really standardized (agenda,
address book)
Companies that need to build extensions
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Since the
beginning
6-12 Months 3-6 Months < 3 Months
Duration of SyncML development
%t
hatneedextensions
N=19
There are not enough answers to make this relation representative, but it indicates that little
of the firms, which worked with SyncML for some time, needed to build extensions.
Of the companies that started with SyncML development in the last half year, more needed
extensions, (especially those who already released some products). Maybe they dont know
SyncML well enough to see how to use it, but more likely, they are making innovative use of
SyncML that was not thought of during the specification phase.
2.2.9 Are there also other standards and if yes, has your company investigated them?
Are there other Standards?
13
15
2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
No others
Only proprietary protocols
IrMC
N=30
Exact numbers(See Chapter 1.5)
beginning: 3/9
6-12 months: 1/3
3-6 months: 3/5
less than 3: 1/2
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
14/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 14 / 25 -
This open question yielded a whole bunch of proprietary protocols that are used. Only one
more or less standardized protocol was found: IrDA Mobile Communications (IrMC)5.
This industry standard defines some protocols for infrared communications. It defines
exchange of data via IrOBEX, a HTTP style protocol. One of the companies naming IrMC
said that SyncML would replace it. It may be seen as a predecessor of SyncML with limited
capabilities.
Proprietary protocols mentioned:
ScoutWare from Aether Systems Inc
PalmOS Hotsync
Microsoft Outlook
PocketPC
Instant Messaging standards such as Wireless Village (message exchange and
presence service6) or SIP/SIMPLE
7. Not directly within syncing, but may be relevant in
the syncing arena.
Some other protocols, not specifically designed for wireless applications were mentioned:
MPEG-7, formally called "Multimedia Content Description Interface". This is notintended to be a general sync standard but a multimedia description standard for wired
and wireless devices.8
SNA (Systems Network Architecture, general secure network concept by IBM)
TCP/IP
2.2.10 Will you continue working on proprietary synchronization protocols for your products
or are standard protocols sufficient for your needs?
Continuing on proprietary protocols
perhaps
41%
no
31%
yes
28%
N=36
This question reveals that SyncML will not replace the proprietary protocols. And the large
wireless companies like Palm, Nokia, Motorola, Ericsson or also Microsoft did not participate
in the enquiryAs mentioned in question 2.2.8 about making extensions to SyncML, the integration of
proprietary protocols seems to be difficult.
5Read more about IrMC on
http://www.irda.org/design/irmc_solutions.pdf
http://www.extendedsystems.com/NR/rdonlyres/idqkwvz3ycwvk6owme6iorqlle7eqn5rvuwooa2tpkml7cz
jftodeftt2wjn23xxovp3ogqv7w3426ogpe4wlkh4sh/bt_synchronization.pdf6Read more about Wireless Village at http://www.wireless-village.org
7For more information see the homepage of the author of SIP: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs/sip/
8More information on MPEG-7 http://www.darmstadt.gmd.de/mobile/MPEG7/
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
15/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 15 / 25 -
2.2.11 Comments
Some interesting comments where made to this section:
There are no existing products for sync between phone and pda/pc.
(Only for syncing with special servers)
Device management is a very important feature.
Devices supporting SyncML will become widespread for 2003 or later only.
2.3 Development and products part
2.3.1 How long has your company been active in the development of hard- or software for
the mobile industry?
To get an idea of the general development experience, the duration of development had to
be selected among the given choices.
Duration of development
3-5 Years
15%
Recent
15%
None
26%
2-3 Years
26%
5-10 Years
7%
> 10 Years11%
N=46
About a quarter of the companies that answered the question are not developing own
solutions. Those are either consulting companies or educational associations. Of the others,
about half have been in business for a long time, the other half are rather young companies.
2.3.2 How long has your company worked with SyncML?
As SyncML is relatively young, the choices can be made quite precisely. The beginning of
SyncML is December 2000, because then the first official specification 1.0 was released.
Duration of SyncML development
6 Months - 1
Year
9%No
56% 3-6 Months
11%
less than 3
months
4%
Since begin
20%
N=46
More than half of the companies did no SyncML development at the time when this enquiry
was held. But some of them did not answer the remaining questions, so the fraction of
experienced companies is more than 50% for those questions.
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
16/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 16 / 25 -
2.3.3 Are you currently developing SyncML support for some of your products? If yes,
which products?
Currently developing SyncML support
16
23
0 5 10 15 20 25
yes
no
N=39
The products being developed are:
SymbianOS
PIM9
(2x)
Voxoffice, VoxPIM, VoxClub
atchik VAS multi-access platform
Synthesis Sync Server 1.0
SyncWiseMobile (SyncML server platform)
NeXync(tm) clients (WindowsCE, PalmOs, Qualcomm REX, AMX, vxWorks version),
NeXync(tm) server
XTNDConnect SyncML client SDK, XTNDConnect Server
Hermes
Healthcare Mobility Solution - MobileDOC; Containing modules for physicians and
nursing desk to automate and mobilize their operations and information access
methodologies
2.3.4 Do you already have products that are SyncML compliant (tested by the SyncML
Interoperability Committee, SIC)? If yes, which products?
The SyncML Interoperability Committee (SIC) tests products submitted by the manufacturer
to ensure their compatibility with other SyncML systems. Those tests are made at the Sync-
Fest events. Only if this test is successful, the SyncML logo may be used in product
marketing material.
SyncML compliant tested products
7
32
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
yes
no
N=39
This shows that much more products are being developed as have been tested by the SIC.
For an interesting opinion on SyncML compliance, see also section 2.3.7,Comments.
The tested products mentioned are:
SymbianOS SyncML Client v1.0
VoxSync Operator Server, VoxSync Enterprise Server, VoxSync Companion for PC,
VoxSync Companion for Palm, VoxSync Companion for Pocket PC
SyncWiseMobile9
PIM stands for Personal information management, this commonly means integrated service for
mobile/handheld and outlook, lotus notes or other backend system.
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
17/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 17 / 25 -
DCM SyncML Client
NeXync (tm) client, NeXync (tm) server
XTNDConnect SyncML client SDK, XTNDConnect Server
2.3.5 Do you plan to let the SIC test some of your products?
Planning tests
13
22
0 5 10 15 20 25
yes
no
N=35
That there are so little products already tested does not mean that companies dont want to
test, as this question shows. It seems rather that most have not yet reached a stable version.
The interest in certifying the standards compliance is rather large for the companiesdeveloping their own products. 3 companies said that they are offering services and design,
so they have no products, which could be tested.
The products mentioned are:
SymbianOS
atchik m-Organiser
MobileDOC - but not right away. May be after a couple of months.
Address Plus, de COBRA
PIM offering
VoxSync Operator Server, VoxSync Enterprise Server, VoxSync Companion for PC
Hermes
Synthesis Sync Server 1.0
eXync (tm) client, Nexync (tm) server
As some of those are the same as in question 2.3.4 above, this may be understood as the
intention to test coming versions of those products.
2.3.6 Companies having SyncML products in relation to their size
Companies having SyncML products
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Small Medium BigPer
centofcompaniesofthissize
thatansweredtheenquiry
N=53
Exact numbers
Small: 1/9
Medium: 8/31
Big: 9/13
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
18/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 18 / 25 -
This is the percentage of companies of the according size that have any SyncML products
(tested or untested). We can see that the big companies do SyncML development most
actively and there are few small companies with own SyncML solutions.
It seems there are not many small startups offering SyncML as an innovative service, as one
may expect.
2.3.7 Comments
The following two comments explicitly show the conflict between standards compatibility and
proprietary extensions .
I understand that SyncML is intended to be an open standard, etc. However, many
small-medium companies are going to suggest and implement other solutions due to
the cost of entry. That in it self makes SyncML less open.
We have only taken the part of SyncML that is useful for us and have added a
proprietary extension to it. Thats why we are not compliant. Today we don't have the
need to become compliant. This comment may sound like one coming from a big
company not caring too much about standards. But in fact, it has been made by a
medium sized company.
2.4 Marketing part
The marketing section is not very large. We just wanted to learn the companies view of the
market interest in SyncML. As SyncML is not as famous as other standards, we didnt expect
that companies do much advertising for the SyncML aspects of their products yet.
2.4.1 Do you know if your customers are interested in devices supporting SyncML?
This was an open question; the following diagram is built using the categorized answers.
Are customers interested
in SyncML?
No
32%
Yes
50%
Don't
know
18%
N=38
Some pointed out
High interest for high value customers (business), Interest in service (but not regular
use) for medium to low end customers (mass market).
The end customer of a service provider probably does not care if the underneath
technology is SyncML or not. He wants the service to be convenient and to work.
The customers are not interested at devices supporting SyncML, but at the
functionalities and the user friendliness of the solutions.
Some customers are not even aware of their needs and what mobile computing
solutions could solve. The few of them who are do not have an idea of the options
actually available.
I don't know. In fact, I think that our customers don't even know that SyncML exists...
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
19/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 19 / 25 -
The interest of customers seems to be moderate. Private users probably won't care too
much about how it works as long as it works.
Business customers on the other side need interoperable services already. This is also the
primary customer sector interested in automatic device management.
2.4.2 Does your company use SyncML support as an argument in advertisements?
Advertisment with SyncML
plan
33%
no
46%
yes
21%
N=39Only 8 of the companies make advertising with SyncML. This probably reflects the fact that
customers do not care much about the used technology (see 2.4.1 "Do you know if your
customers are interested in devices supporting SyncML?)
None of the IT Valley Fribourg companies actually use SyncML as an argument in
advertisements, but 6 of 20 plan to use it.
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
20/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 20 / 25 -
3 Conclusion
SyncML raises a certain interest. The enquiry revealed no other open standard protocol
specifically for sync issues. Of course, data synchronization can be implemented building a
proprietary protocol over lower-level protocols like TCP or IrDA. This is being made by the
mobile and PDA industry as well as server industry. But the effect is that you need a special
plugin to synchronize Palm to Outlook and another for Lotus Notes etc, not to think about
syncing the Palm with an address book on a mobile phone.
As some answers to question 2.2.6 about the main benefits of SyncML show, companies
see SyncML as a ready to use protocol that covers most of what they need without having
to pay license fees and staying independent of any specific company.
If everybody is using the same protocols, servers and clients can easily be replaced. This is
good for customers, but a challenge for the manufacturers of the systems. They cannot sell
the simple fact that their system can synchronize, but the whole service it is providing must
convince the customers. This will improve the competition among manufacturers.
The largest doubt about SyncML is not of technological nature, but of an economic one. WillSyncML become widely used? If not, the goal being a general standard cannot be
reached. Or, as someone in the enquiry wrote poetically: it fails to meet to the very standard
of being a standard.
There are some companies behind the SyncML initiative that have the potential to make it an
important standard. The main sponsors are Ericsson, IBM, Lotus, Motorola, Nokia,
Openwave, Panasonic, Starfish and Symbian. Those are not only mobile phones
manufacturers (Ericsson, Motorola, Nokia), but also providers of backend systems (Lotus,
IBM, Starfish), and operating systems companies (Openwave, Symbian). Unfortunately, we
did not learn their opinion. Except for Symbian, none of the contacts given on the web page
http://www.syncml.org./contacts.htmlanswered to this enquiry at all.
There are not many innovative small startups building SyncML solutions. The companies
most active in developing are rather large and not very young (c.f. 2.3.6 Companies having
SyncML products in relation to their size).
SyncML in itself is just a protocol. For a solution to work there must be support from all
devices and there is need for a flexible server that can manage all this information. There
are no SyncML adapters for industry standard systems around, but rather whole servers
especially for SyncML. For private users, those small, specialized server can do, if they are
cheap and user friendly enough. But business customers will need SyncML connectivity for
their Oracle database, a SAP or Lotus back-end system.
As SyncML might not completely replace proprietary protocols, interoperability with them
could be an important field. But answers to question 2.2.8 (In your opinion, can SyncML
cover all synchronization tasks or does your company have to make extensions?) indicate
that SyncML seems not to be prepared for this binding. Perhaps this could be an extension
for a next version of SyncML.
Another problematic issue of SyncML is related to the encoding of the content data. The
SyncML standard defines the concept only, but no content encoding. The content type is
specified using media type definitions like text/vCard. If implementers work with other data
than the typical contact and calendar entries, they are likely to choose different media types
or even build new ones. But, if client and server dont understand the same type, they cant
exchange data.
http://www.syncml.org./contacts.htmlhttp://www.syncml.org./contacts.htmlhttp://www.syncml.org./contacts.html -
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
21/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 21 / 25 -
Astonishingly enough, there is just one comment that mentions this fact. In question 2.2.8
(In your opinion, can SyncML cover all synchronization tasks or does your company have to
make extensions?) someone wrote, Only the fields of mass market are important to be
really standardized (agenda, address book).
There is no big hype about SyncML, not like, for example, WAP, or even SOAP. The end
users mostly dont know about SyncML, as question 2.4.1 (Do you know if your customers
are interested in devices supporting SyncML?) indicates. The primary interest lies in
business customers with many employees using corporate date and address management.
But with more and more devices and services, we expect the need for a general standard to
grow for private users as well. Syncing one mobile phone with Microsoft Outlook on a PC
works well. But with each family member having his personal phone and computer plus
some PDAs plus a web-based PIM, there are too many combinations for proprietary
protocols.
There is no other common standard for synchronization in sight. If SyncML succeeds getting
over a critical mass, it may become commonly used as the standard for mobile
synchronization. The technological base is under fast development, during the enquiry,version 1.1 of the standard has been published. Some of the problems mentioned in the
enquiry have been solved, i.e. it is now possible to split large objects with help of the
tag. The developers seem to be aware of the problems of implementers and try
to solve them.
With the increasing number of mobile devices and the raising interest in open standards,
SyncML could become very important. But the success depends heavily on the support by
major companies.
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
22/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 22 / 25 -
Appendix A: The email sent to the companies
The following email was sent to the companies, asking them to answer the enquiry. For
some, an ID was assigned and instead of the link to the sign up page a personalized link
was given.
Dear Sir and Madam
We are conducting a market research effort at the University of
Fribourg regarding future trends in technology. We would very much
like to hear the opinion of your company on the subjects listed below
and we would therefore like to ask you to kindly forward this email to
the appropriate person within your company.
In order to minimize the effort and time required (approx. 20 min) and
to ensure a quick response, we have set up a web form. Please go to
http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/SyncML/ to sign up.
For more details please read further.
What this is about:
This is an enquiry about synchronization issues for using mobile
devices and the synchronization markup language (SyncML).
What is the purpose:
The telecom group of the University of Fribourg (CH)
http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom wants to determine the potential of
general standards for synchronization of mobile devices. This will
allow the development of hard- and software components for the mobile
industry to be gauged. The results will get published by the telecomgroup of the University of Fribourg.
Why do you need it:
You will be listed in the results as a reference for partners and
potential customers. You will receive the results of the enquiry for
your own purposes.
What are you supposed to do:
We kindly ask you to answer the questions in the enquiry web form
(http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/SyncML/) or to forward the
email to the appropriate person. Please do this by 12.2.2002.
Short Introduction to SyncML:The SyncML initiative founders claim this XML application to be a
common language for synchronizing all devices and applications over
any network. The focus is on mobile phones and PDA's that need to
synchronize to database servers. To provide flexibility, the protocol
can be used over http, WAP, infrared and other connections.
The SyncML initiative was founded in February 2000 and the
specification was released in December 2000 and can be viewed at
http://www.syncml.org.
We want to find out if now, after the specification has been open to
the public for nearly a year, enterprises are interested in SyncML and
if SyncML meets their needs.
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
23/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 23 / 25 -
Who is behind this enquiry:
Dr. Rudolf Scheurer, head of the telecom group is supervising this
enquiry, David Buchmann is working on it as part of his diploma
thesis.
The results will be published and sent to you via email. As we will
list the enterprises that answered the questions, this is an
opportunity for your company to show that it is interested in modern
technology.
We would be very grateful if you could answer the questions.
Best regards
Dr. Rudolf Scheurer
David Buchmann
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
24/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
- 24 / 25 -
Appendix B: Companies that answered the enquiry
The following 52 companies answered at least part of the questions and allowed to be
mentioned (ordered alphabetically):
AGI IT Services SA
Airping Technologies
ALRO Information Systems SA
Aranda - Conseils et Services Informatiques
Association romande des informaticiens - ARI
ATAG Asset Management
Atchik
BancTec
Birdstep Technology ASA
Bluewin AG
BNI - Business Network Integration
Boschung Mecatronic AG
Cambos Consulting
Chambre vaudoise de commerce et d'industrie CISEL Informatique
Colibria AS
COMMswitch SA
Compaq Comuter (Schweiz) GmbH
Comverse
CQS Srl - Member of IBIS Corporation
Cybernomade.com
Dartfish
DCM Technologies
Dpartement d'informatique - Universit de Fribourg
Dicoesa, Etablissements techniques SA
Euresearch
Extended Systems
Fenestrae BV
I.T. Unicorp (ITUC)
ICTnet
Info Media Com Management
Infoteam SA
InnoDeC Srl
Invoxis SA
Isoft Inc
La Libert
Megahertz Computer SA
Office cantonal de l'assurance invalidit
Orange Communications
Oxygen Company
PHOSPHORE - graphic design & communication
SATOM Informatique
Secrtariat d'Etat l'conomie
Serial SA
Solid Information Technology
SolveIT.ch Srl
Symbian
Synthesis AG
Toffa International Ltd.
VoxMobili
-
7/30/2019 SyncML Enquiry
25/25
SyncML enquiry Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg (CH)
Appendix C: Links for SyncML
The homepage of the SyncML initiative
http://www.SyncML.org
The SyncML yahoo grouphttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/SyncML
A java implementation of SyncML: sync4j
http://sync4j.sourceforge.net/
Research note by the Gartner Group:
http://gartner11.gartnerweb.com/public/static/hotc/00089713.html
Nokia SyncML informations:
http://www.nokia.com/syncml/
Symbian SyncML informations:
http://www.symbian.com/technology/standard-syncml.html
The site this document came from
http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/SyncML/
http://www.syncml.org/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SyncMLhttp://sync4j.sourceforge.net/http://gartner11.gartnerweb.com/public/static/hotc/00089713.htmlhttp://www.nokia.com/syncml/http://www.symbian.com/technology/standard-syncml.htmlhttp://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/SyncML/http://diuf.unifr.ch/telecom/projects/SyncML/http://www.symbian.com/technology/standard-syncml.htmlhttp://www.nokia.com/syncml/http://gartner11.gartnerweb.com/public/static/hotc/00089713.htmlhttp://sync4j.sourceforge.net/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SyncMLhttp://www.syncml.org/