Just came across the following WSJ column on location-based services. It's a bit old, but still a good read:
interactive.wsj.com
An interesting comment's made with regards to the functionality of Snaptrack's offerings when compared with those of its competitors:
The problem is that while these technologies will help you locate places more conveniently, they also will allow others to track you. SnapTrack Chief Executive Steve Poizner says even the most well-intentioned carrier can't always control disgruntled employees, overzealous police or even hackers who may misuse the location data. "All you need are a few incidents of misuse and the general public will be very upset," he says.
So far, though, only SnapTrack's technology is addressing this privacy concern, Mr. Poizner says. A feature on phones using his company's technology allows the caller to shut down the implanted chip, cutting off receipt of the satellite's signal, except when the user dials 911.
"Obviously, when someone punches in 911, they are giving permission to the police to track their whereabouts," Mr. Poizner says. "But otherwise, if that privacy button is shut down, it's not possible to be tracked."
Believe it or not, Europeans, on average, are even more privacy-conscious than Americans. From what I've ascertained, network-based location technologies make it virtually impossible for a given user to avoid detection. This should give GPS solutions a major competitive advantage; and Snaptrack, with its extensive patent portfolio (go to delphion.com and do a search for Snaptrack as "Assignee" - select all collections), seems well-positioned among GPS vendors.
On the other hand, the fact that GPS satellites are still controlled by the U.S. military might not rest too well with the governments of some nations, who often have the ability to directly and indirectly exert significant amounts of influence upon the carriers who operate within their jurisdiction.
Eric |
