Driving Quality of Experience in Mobile Content

Value Chain

Shima Mohseni

Department of Computer Science

University Kebangsaan Malaysia

Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

Abstract—Quality of service (QoS) has been a crucial research

topic in communication network for more than a decade;

however, it usually dealt with from a rather technical view on

service quality. Recently, a new concept, referred to as the

“Quality of Experience” (QoE), has emerged, redirecting the

focus toward end users and trying to quantify her subjective

experience gained from using content. This paper is first aimed to

precisely define the application domain of mobile content. Then,

the mobile content ecosystem is studied and the QoE is hooked to

its value chain. This paper highlights the role of users in the

value chain by using a framework that divides customers and

covers the whole type customers. Furthermore, there are lots of

societies that need to communicate to each other using their

specific language; thus everyone who wants to analyze human

experience has to deal with all these diverse languages.

Therefore, the languages between different parts of this value

chain are presented. Finally, QoE is driven into the mobile

content value chain through presenting a new architecture.

Keywords- Mobile content; ecosystem; value chain; happiness;

Quality of content; Quality of service; Quality of experience

I. INTRODUCTION

Mobile content is an excellent example of the convergence between Information and Telecommunications technologies with the content or media industries in the 1990‟s: video was broadcasted over the Internet to PCs using an early version of ADSL. However, it was only after the Internet bubble burst that Internet telephony and mobile applications were widely taken up. This convergence is simplifying the value chain, by delivering content directly to the end user, in addition to, complicating the business case; as direct distribution means that many different modules of network should be able to talk to each other thereby overcome market fragmentation [1]. Furthermore, this share with previous convergence provides opportunities to create huge possibility for developing new businesses, and the ability to fulfill user expectations.

Mobile content is placed at the crossroads of the success of mobile communication and the expectations of sparkling mobile future where users play the leading and active roles. Since in recent years mobile networks have experienced a leap, from the 2G era, to the 3G and 4G technologies, high quality contents are gaining more importance in the new generation communications environment. Therefore, many operators have realized that without good contents, they will face some serious challenges such as the channelization of mobile networks, and shifting of profits to the application layer.

Customers will obviously get better service quality, if some quality of service mechanisms is taken into account in the network. In reality, QoS solutions do not guarantee delivering high quality services and the quality perceived by customers might not be improved at all. Furthermore, the current internet with its rapidly changing set of services clearly demonstrates that the user experience is more important than any technical mechanisms used inside the network.

This paper is aimed to provide a reliable framework to consider the effects of technical performance for end users. To achieve this objective, an extensive framework with clearly defined concepts needs to be established. The two key concepts in this research are QoS and Quality of Content (QoC) where the marriage of these two leads to end-to-end QoE through mobile content value chain.

The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: In section 2, mobile content space is explored, including the content market that is usually transferred to the mobile platform. Section 3 introduces the basic activities that occur in a mobile content ecosystem. The necessity of shifting the focus from QoS to QoC which results in end-to-end QoE is discussed in 4.

II. MOBILE CONTENT AGREEMENT AND DOMAIN

As content becomes increasingly digitalized, more and more of it will be delivered over mobile platforms [2]. Among the general scope of digital content, this paper specially focuses on the content delivered over mobile or wireless platforms that provide users with “always on” connectivity.

First of all, definition of the mobile content needs agreement on the meaning of content. Content is an information good, which means that its production structure is characterized by high fixed and low marginal costs [1]. According to [3], content has two possible origins which are: creative content and processed Information. Creative content is defined as: “creation and distribution of goods with an essential cultural, aesthetic or entertainment value which appears linked to their novelty or uniqueness” [3]. Processed Information implies on the identification of information and adaptation to user preferences, where its main goals are usefulness and efficiency. This paper considers the mobile content as a mixture of both creative content and processed information. The reason behind this choice is to allow using an unconstrained area such as “the creative content industries” or “the copyright industries”.

4th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE DEST 2010) © 2010 IEEE.

320

The current domain of mobile content is growing and changing daily. According to [4]-[9], referring to mobile content leads to the following taxonomy: mobile television and video, mobile music that is including every possible music-related activity (Ringtones, full track downloads, Ringbacks, Music videos, etc), mobile adult (used rather incoherently, since it is composed mainly of images and video), mobile user-generated content, mobile gaming (location-based games, downloadable, and multiplayer games), mobile personalization such as wallpapers, images, mobile publishing(basically for books and specialized magazines on the mobile handset), mobile advertizing or branding , and mobile gambling.

III. OVERVIEW OF MOBILE CONTNET ECOSYSTEM

This section explains the nature of activities take place in the mobile content domain. The mobile content follows a five-stage model for digital mass with some modifications carried out in order to include the appearance of social computing. These stages are as follow:

Design or Development

The production and development of digital content has increased with the wide growing potential user base for high-quality content. Also, existing content needs to be modified for mobile platforms. For example, “Mobisodes”, short video dramas intended for mobile handsets, are either edited from full screen versions or reshoot to put actors closer to each other [10]. A detailed research on digital content developments is presented in [11].

Publishing or Aggregation

Content developers typically do not have a channel to promote content to consumers. Furthermore, it is difficult to manage their relationships with operators. Publishers and aggregators are specialists who get the developed contents from various sources, test and validate them to make sure their successful operation on different devices and networks, then price and promote the contents to different operators and other distributors independently, and finally create them bundles as appropriate.

Delivery or Mark

By emerging other players who entered this portion of the value chain, operators still are critical in the process by which consumers learn about new content, acquire and pay for it. Other key players in this part of the ecosystem are Original Equipment Manufactures (OEMs) where the handsets are pre-loaded with some contents

Mobile Advertising

There was no considerable advertising presence in the mobile market until recent years. However, mobile platform is starting to involve as an advertising platform by advertisers. Advertising could be delivered in many ways such as: Ads that accompany downloadable or streaming video, display space on websites accessed by mobile users, and Opt-in schemes to send ads via text or multimedia message. Thereby, advertisers are projected to become more important players in mobile content value chain.

To better understanding the process and activities through the mobile content, its value chain and the way each segment adds value to the chain is presented in Fig. 1. The most visible members are the content providers (e.g., ESPN and Sorrento) who design and develop the real content and applications for the mobile platform. They add the value of personalization, communication, entertainment, information, and transaction to the market. Content facilitators, who are the players of hosting stage in ecosystem, facilitate the use of mobile content and application (e.g., m-commerce, billing fulfillment, and Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs) specialists) adding the value of convenience, efficiency, and customer gaining to the perceived content.

Another group of chain members are content aggregators such as RealNetwork and MobiTV. There are also mobile content enablers who distribute mobile enabling software mentioned in the delivery stage (e.g., Microsoft and Fandango) adding ease of use, integration, variety, and convenience value to the market. Another group channel members are the mobile service providers or operators like Verizon and Cingular that provide mobile services to the end users. With their network resources and access to consumers, they add the value of network infrastructure, consumer access, and consumer intelligence to the market system. Overall, among all members of mobile communication, end users are the most significant players at this stage of industry development since they are the only ones who observe and judge about the perceived quality of content.

To sum up, the difference between mobile content ecosystem, mobile content value chain, and mobile content domain should be clarified since they are not equivalent and use of these concepts needs attention. A mobile content ecosystem is a loosely coupled, domain clustered environment settled by spices, each proactive and quick to respond according to its own benefit while protecting the environment [12]. Furthermore, the participants in mobile content ecosystem form a complex network which for simplicity can be summarized into the described functions in section 3. However, the mobile content value chain comprises various industry players and the positions that they are taking to add value to the whole system. On the other hand, in the scope of digital content, mobile content is the main focus of this paper concentrating on the content delivered over mobile platforms and offers users with “always on” connectivity. In a few words, existing applications in mobile content domain add several values such as “always in connectivity” to mobile content ecosystem.

Figure 1. Mobile content value chain

4th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE DEST 2010) © 2010 IEEE.

321

IV. FROM „QUALITY-OF-SERVICE‟ AND „QUALITY-OF-

CONTNENT‟ TO „QUALITY-OF-EXPERIENCE‟

There are various definitions for QoE in literature. Wikipedia gives the following description: “Quality of Experience (QoE), some times also known as Quality of User Experience, is a subjective measure of a customer's experiences with a vendor” [13].International Telecommunication Union (ITU) uses the following QoE definition: “measure of the overall acceptability of an application or service, as perceived subjectively by the end user”[14]. Muhammad et al. [15] highlights the difference between QoE and QoS as follows: the aim of the network and services should be to achieve the maximum user rating (QoE), while network quality (QoS) is the main building block for reaching that goal effectively.

Various QoE definitions in literature suggest that the main attention of future service and mobile content must be directed toward the end-users and their actual requirements. This shift moves the focus from design and evaluation of content toward the end user needs. It has crucial effects especially for the notation of the service quality. That is, the traditional and well-established concept of QoS has lost its importance, whereas content quality and end user perception have become more significant. Traditionally, QoS is used as a purely technical concept that is used to facilitate the interconnections between applications and network. Although in many cases a better network QoS will result in better QoE, satisfying all QoS parameters will not always guarantee a satisfied user. For example, an excellent throughput of network may not help if there is no coverage. The goal of QoS should be to deliver a high QoE. QoE may serve this purpose as it naturally refers to the human side of content development and consumption.

Since the whole purpose of communication is to be useful for end users, this paper does not consider the QoS as the only factor to judge about the effectiveness of communication. That is, the relationship between end user and content or service is more subtle [16], and the design of the mobile content must also be recognized as a quality factor similar to the QoS. Therefore, this paper introduces the new concept of “Quality of Content” (QoC) as a novel concept into mobile content value chain for future telecommunication services. A recent research [17] proposed a comparable term similar to QoC which is quality of design (QoD), in order to handle the same issues that are included in quality of user experience in our framework. The QoC along with QoS lead to an end user QoE concept that includes the subjective perception of customers. In contrast to QoS which may fluctuate rapidly because of operating conditions of the network, QoC is a relatively static parameter related to individual end users. It mainly depends on the attractiveness or importance of the piece of content satisfying all user demands, e.g., whether or not the content is entertaining, exciting, educational, or helpful.

If QoE is considered in a formal model, everything needs to be presented quantitatively. This paper considers QoE as a combination of QoS and QoC. Bear in mind that QoS is a technical concept which encompasses all functions, mechanisms, and procedures in the cellular network. It is expressed in measurable metrics and is defined in terms of network elements. These metrics has little meaning to users

[15]. Formulating QoC with formal parameters is like adding another model specific concept, as well as QoS, which leads to modeling of QoE. This model cannot include all features of our experience since experience is something created in our mind about quality of particular service and is expressed in human feelings rather than metrics like „excellent‟, „very good‟, „good, fair‟ or „poor‟ [15]. Even if we insist on the QoC formulating, the resulting parameters will be model specific and cannot include all features of our experience. This paper, therefore, defines QoC and QoE as generic terms used only when users experiences are considered in general.

The QoC is provisioned in content design process, as used in [18] with some modification to fit for mobile content. To achieve a high QoC, users‟ feedbacks must be considered into the content developing process in a systematic way to gain more insight into the user perspective, as shown in Fig. 2. This paper uses incorporating end users‟ feedbacks in three specific stages of the design process(see Fig. 2): (1) in the initial stage of gathering requirements in order to discuss potential scenarios and encourage users to propose new ideas, (2) in evaluating the first prototype and learn more about the user reaction (after the initial design and prototyping phase), and (3) in evaluating overall usability and general quality of user experience (after a thorough redesign of the content and the final prototyping). In each stages, different techniques like discovering current practices, gathering data about user needs, facilitating discussion, investigating current use and future problems are used to various extents.

The business of network operator is highly dependant on customer satisfaction. Therefore, the final objective of communication is to provide a good user experience or QoE. Fig. 3 depicts the four modules of mobile content ecosystem and their basic interaction through three quality messages, namely, QoS, QoC, leading to QoE. QoC concept is applied in the interaction between mobile content and content provider. Quality of experience, naturally referred to the human side of the content provision, is shown in the interaction between mobile content and end user.

Figure 2. Contnet Development process

Figure 3. Relationship between user, contnet, network, and service provider

The increasing importance of “user experience” is undoubtedly related to change in the mobile communication

4th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE DEST 2010) © 2010 IEEE.

322

ecosystem to a more consumer oriented mentality [19]. Kumar defines it clearly as “The consumer is king and needs high QoE” [20]. Actually, QoE is not a goal by itself, but it has important implications: if you provide your user with a high QoE, they will be happy and satisfied [21], but if you do not, you will create a “customer gap” between what they want and what they get [22]. These gaps mostly are due to the lack of insight in the totality of dimension of customer‟s experience. In order to anticipate the users‟ needs and their experiences, as mentioned earlier, they should be involved in development process .Some big players and industries already involved users in development of new technology and application. For example, gaming industry involves users in certain stages of development process of a new content or technology, although some challenges and difficulties has still remain unsolved regarding the real process of involving users (what Limonard calls it as “the dilemma of user involvement” [23], such as the types of involved users in the development process, etc.)

Users have a determinant role in mobile content ecosystem since they are no longer passive customers and have the opportunity to create content or to contribute to the crucial computing. This paper proposes two ways to look at users of mobile content ecosystem. First, a person who purchases a mobile content and then she makes a series of decisions about using the product, referred to as “passive user”. Second, a person who creates a new content directly or adds some creativity to an already existing content, referred to as “active user”. Obviously, the expectations, experiences, and the behavior of passive users are different from active users. Even though the definitions of QoE (in Section 4) are logical, they try to hook QoE to the interface of content or application and user. These definitions are obviously generic. Therefore, to deal with different roles like active and passive users, an additional qualifier is needed.

This paper applies the following method for making acronyms: QoPE (quality of passive user experience), and QoAE (quality of active user experience). As mentioned earlier, if QoE is considered in a formal model; the resulting parameters will be model specific and cannot embrace all features of our experience. The same remark applies for the quantitative model of QoPE and QoAE concepts. Thus, the assumption of this paper is to keep these concepts as generic term, used only when our experiences are considered in general. It is arguable to consider that people above all want to become satisfied and happy by making all kinds of decisions about selecting, and purchasing a service or content. Therefore, we are able to unify the passive user and active user by adding one more module, the person itself, with all the needs she has.

V. QOE AS A PART OF MOBILE CONTENT VALUE CHAIN

This paper is also aimed to clarify the language used between different parts of the environment, including various roles and scientific disciplines. Moreover, in mobile content value chain, QoE is related to other concepts such as messages applied between different parts of the chain. For example, ITU suggests measuring and expressing the QoE in terms of Mean Opinion Score (MOS) on a five-point scale ranging from 1.0 to 5.0 (from the poorest to the excellent quality).

The increasing popularity of this research topic has been examined by using the IEEE database contains over 1.6 million articles [24]. In [24], the number of repetition of parameters such as average revenue per user (ARPU), Mean Opinion Score (MOS), Churn rate, Service level Agreement (SLA), QoS, QoE, Network Performance, and Business Objectives have been investigated. Increasing usage of these terms reflect the popularity of this research area in ICT.

Service provider and active user communicate through two key parameters in their interface, average revenue per user (ARPU) and customer churn. Converting QoE to these parameters, a behavior description of this role could be provided. The parameter to be applied between mobile content and passive user is MOS which provides a numerical indication of the perceived quality of received media after transmission [25]. Furthermore, researchers dealing with business side of ecosystem probably mention business objective.

In some cases, especially when the customer plays an active role instead of being a passive user, in the interface between service provider and user SLAs will be used as the general approach. In this situation, however, the customer is a business player not an ordinary consumer. Thus, it is not reasonable to suppose a major part of interaction between a consumer and service provider conducted through formal SLAs because ordinal users are interested to obtain experiences not measurable benefits. The same remark can be made in the case of interface between user and mobile content. In the real world, the language between the service provider and user is marketing.

SLA and business objective are applied in the interface of network operator and service provider. That is an agreement targeting to guarantee the mobile content by defining mutual understanding and expectations between the service provider and network operator. The interface between network operator (business side of value chain) and network (technological side) is somewhat tricky but still could be managed. There are a huge number of network management functions (NM functions) to be utilized in that interface. A good example of NM functions could be found in our previous research [26]. The basic terminology of this part is presented in Fig. 4.

To conclude, each module of ecosystem has its own, special terminology, language and those languages and parameters should not bluntly apply in other modules. As a result, the natural language of interacting modules should be respected in each domain including human, business, and technical.

Meanwhile, careful consideration is necessary on how the interactions between the domains should be arranged. As proposed in this research, QoE belongs to the human side of ecosystem. That is other concepts rather than QoE are required at the interfaces between human and technical modules, also, between human and business modules.

VI. DRIVING QOE TO MOBILE CONTENT VALUE CHAIN

Mobile content value chain typically consists of components shown in Fig. 1. In each step of the chain, corrective actions must be carried out to move toward the goal of improving the customer‟s end-to-end quality of experience,

4th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE DEST 2010) © 2010 IEEE.

323

and also increasing the profitability of business players in the value chain. Four categories of functions and mechanisms should be taken into account to guarantee QoS and QoE [15], namely: network planning, QoS provisioning, QoE and QoS monitoring, and optimization

The first process is the detailed network planning and network dimensioning. Network dimensioning estimates the required number of radio transmissions, core network elements, and the capacity of related interfaces. The calculations are, therefore, based on the operator‟s requirements for capacity, coverage, and QoS. QoS provisioning is the process of deploying QoS in networks and mobile terminals. Results obtained from the planning process are translated into mechanisms and metrics. These results should be logical and comprehensive enough to interact with network elements and mobile terminals. With the increasing importance of user experience, it has become crucial for a network operator to accurately observe and measure the QoS and QoE of the network and improve it in the most effective way for future uses. Optimization can be seen as a process for improving the overall network quality as experienced by mobile users. This process is aimed to provide effective network utilization. It includes performance measurements, analysis of measurement results and updates of the network configuration and parameters. As a result of above mechanisms, a new QoE architecture is proposed in Fig. 5, aimed to the improve user‟s perception of content quality. This goal is achieved by considering the four mentioned mechanisms, as can be seen in the proposed architecture. Similar approaches as the following architecture can be found in literature see e.g., Figure 1.3 in [15], or [27].

This architecture monitors the process to improve the services to the highest value customers. It, moreover, reduces customer frustration and churn. Finally, it reduces actual or potential revenue leakage and excess costs. It includes physical components such as: GGSN, SGSN, Base station (BS), and RNC or BSC.

Two functions of the proposed architecture are passive monitoring and active monitoring by using of passive and active probes. Active probes are programmed to comprehensively simulate end users experience. That is, some of the handsets on network are designed to access the content source. In this way, the network observes the probes as normal handsets and communicates with them as though they are belonged to customers. Therefore, the active probes sample exactly what a user experiences in demanding a service or content. Passive probes sniff all packets and perform deep content inspection in order to achieve a comprehensive service monitoring without impacting the performance of the application. These sniffers are directly installed in the network data stream and configured to monitor operating parameters. An analyzer server is employed to analyze and correlate the data coming from probes with data from other business support systems (BSS) or third parties. Analyzer identifies trends as well as services, contents and customers. The users experience

evaluation is provided by a four stage process, as follows. Users experience assessment is the first stage. This stage provides great number of insights into the most threat areas and could be achieved within weeks. This assessment typically includes repetitively testing a subset of users‟ handsets accessing a targeted set of content services in a period of time. This information is used to establish an empirical snapshot of the quality and delivery from the consumer‟s perspective. The second stage shapes the user‟s experience monitoring by using the results coming from the initial assessment conducted in first stage. Thereby, the probes and the number of testing handsets are deployed.

Customers‟ experience monitoring allows network operators to derive a more complete and statistical set of analytics compared to the first stage where the number of testing handsets are limited. Network operators start to correlate data collected by active probes with that collected by passive probes. This, in turn, helps to improve the customer‟s experience consistently by monitoring. In the third phase, device master server analyzer links the analytical results (probe-generated data) with BSS and third parties data to consider the highest value customers that might be experiencing QoE issues. Device master will be able to determine whether the programs delivered the QoE satisfactory to end users.

This linkage is important because these high value customers have the greatest potential to affect a network operator‟s profitability. If these customers are dissatisfied, they are likely to stop buying some or all content services. The final stage is used to evaluate the changes implemented in earlier stages. It is an ongoing effort that becomes central to how a network operator thinks about and conducts his business.

VII. CONCLUSION

This paper presents a high-level exploration and discussion of some key aspects arising from a holistic view from developing to delivery of mobile content. First, it is necessary to shift the focus from design and evaluation of content toward the end user needs. This results in an approach that includes economical and user-related perspectives. It also proves the necessity of understanding end user quality as a chain comprising the conventional concept of Quality of Service as well as the novel notion of Quality of content. It is argued that, whereas QoS has lost its attraction, research on QoC has recently become extremely popular. Fig. 2 shows a scenario offering a paradigm for integration of end users into the design process of mobile content applications. In addition, the framework introduced in this paper (Fig. 4) depicts two interfaces located inside human domain, between passive user and person, and between active user and person. Since those interfaces are created in our mind, it is not sensible to standardize them. Finally, this paper clarifies what is happening inside the modules of value chain, describes the parameters used at the interfaces, and proposes architecture to satisfy users with high QoE.

4th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE DEST 2010) © 2010 IEEE.

324

VAS

provider

Content

provider

Service

Provider

Network

operator

Network

Active user

Content

AggregatorPassive user

Mobile

Content

Person

ARPU

Churn

NM Functions

MOS

QoS

Quality of

experience

by Active user

Quality of

experience

by passive user

SLA

Business objective

APRU

Customer churn

Needs

QoC

Figure 4. Key terms in Mobile Content ecosystem

Figure 5. Four stage process to derive QoE in Mobile Contnet Value Chain

REFERENCES

[1] I. Maghiros,” Information, Telecommunication Technologies and Media Convergencse Challenges”, Rethinking European Media Communications Policy book, By Karen Donders, Harri Kalimo, Caroline Pauwels, Ben Van Rompuy, IES Spring Lecture Series, 2008.

[2] Accenture‟s research, Competing on Digital Content: The New Frontier of Value Creation , 2004.

[3] I. Maghiros, F. Abadie, and C. Pascu. Introduction to the state of the art of the creative content sector. Institute of Prospective Technological Studies, Seville, 2007.

[4] Informa Telecoms and Media Report, Mobile content and services, 7rd edition., vol. 2, March 2009.

[5] iSuppli cooporation, Mobile content topical aggregators and platforms reaport. iSuppli, 2007.

[6] iSuppli cooporation, Mobile multimedia content and services service. iSuppli, 2008.

[7] W. Holden, Mobile Music. Juniper Research, 4rd Edition., vol.3. 2008.

[8] Ovum, 3G applications and services. Research document, Part1. Europe , 2008.

[9] S. Uglow, The race for mobile content revenues, Juniper Research, 4th Edition, 2007.

[10] Strategy Analytics Inc, Understanding the Mobile Ecosystem, a White Paper Prepared for Adobe Systems Incorporated, 2008.

[11] OECD Information Technology Outlook, 2005a, 2005c, Darlin. ISBN-92-64-02643, 2006.

[12] H. Boley and E. Chang, “Digital Ecosystems: Principles and Semantics”, IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies. Cairns, Australia. February 2007.

[13] Wikipedia, Quality-of-experience [Avaiable] 27. Jan.2010

[14] International Telecommunication Union: “Definition of Quality of Experience”, ITU-T Delayed Contribution 197.

[15] N. Muhammad , D. Chiavelli, D. Soldani, and M. Li: "Introduction" in Soldani, D., Li, M., Cuny, R., (eds.), QoS and QoE Management in UMTS Cellular Systems, John Wiley & Sons, 2006.

[16] R. Schmidt: “Adequateness - a Holistic Inquiry into-Business Process Design”. 8th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (BPMDS'07), Trondheim, Norway, June 2007.

[17] P. Reichel, From „Quality-of-Service‟ and „Quality-of-Design‟ to „Quality-of-Experience‟: A Holistic View on Future Interactive Telecommunication Services, Springer parsi, Annals of Telecommunicaitons. Vol. 65, pp. 189-199. December 2009.

[18] L. Baillie, R. Schatz: “Exploring Multimodality in the Laboratory and in the Field”, Proc. 7th Intern. Conference on Multimodal Interfaces, pp. 100-107, Trento, Italy, Oct. 2005.

[19] Lieven De Marez, Katrien De Moor, The Challenge of User- and QoE-Centric Research and Product Development in Today‟s ICT-Environment, (OBS*) Journal, 3, 001-022, 2007.

[20] K. Kumar. “A marriage made in QoE heaven”. CED Magazine , pp. 37-39, July 2005.

[21] Nokia, “Quality of Experience (QoE) of mobile services: can it be measured and improved?”, White Paper, 2004.

[22] C. Good. White Paper One: Building a Great Customer Experience to Develop Brand. Increase Loyalty and Grow Revenues, 2001.

[23] S. Limonard, N. de Koning. Dealing with Dilemmas in Pre-competitive ICT Development Projects: The Construction of 'The Social' in Designing New Technologies. In L. Haddon, E. Mante, B. Sapio, K.-H. Kommonen, L. Fortunati & A. Kant (Eds.), Everyday Innovators: Researching the Role of Users in Shaping ICT's (pp. 155-167), 2006.

[24] The IEEE website. [online]. Available: ieeexplore, October 2007.

[25] Thewikipedia website. [online] . Available: wikipedia Mean_opinion_score, January 2010.

[26] R. Hassan, R. Razali, S. Mohseni, O. Mohamad , and Z.Ismail, “Architecture of Network Management Tools forHeterogeneous System”. Vol. 6 No.3, pp. 31-40, December 2009.

[27] Lcc cooporation, The Quality of Experince Inititiative, White paper Executive Summery, 2009.

4th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE DEST 2010) © 2010 IEEE.

325