UMA vs. IMS/SIP

Cleaning up my Google Reader today after the Pats game (oh yeah...13-0!) I came across this article on the "Tide Changing Between UMA-based and SIP-based FMC Services". I very much agree with what Phil Solis, is indicating: UMA indeed is a cool technology for which the hesitance of operators (to define their faith between a dumb bitpipe and a robust but expensive smart and capable network with services and content) prolongs the window of opportunity. However, all indicators are that between operators and device vendors, this is no more than a temporary, (poorly merchandised) offering: limited handsets, limited services, extremely complex pricing to the subscriber? They are just not serious about it.

Don't get me wrong, many kudos to Mark Powell and his entrepreneurs colleagues at Kineto for creating an ecosystem from scratch, correct technology and all. But in reality, there are too many moving pieces to make it, especially in NA.

No, nobody had fooled themselves that UMA creates an opportunity for operators to help themselves into the subscribers wallet while covering up for a coverage deficiency. However as a service, SIP and the services SIP will drive (Lead by integrated presence capable address book IMO), is truly the longer term vision. The sooner operators and vendors will dump the idle screen and replace it by that presence enabled Skype-like screen with calls to action and an embedded ad, the better.
And SIP is the way to do it.