This is a problem perhaps felt acutely in the web world, where infrastructure and software as a service providers are expected to deliver always-on service and downtime can have big repercussions. For example the Amazon outage on Christmas Eve knocked Netflix offline, causing all kinds of customer complaints. As websites and services become more important so have the operations teams who are supposed to keep them up. Those teams are also dealing with a different type of infrastructure–sometimes owned by the ops team and sometimes managed by them in a cloud.

VictorOps, which is seeking software developers as well as software as a service companies to be alpha customers, is currently in stealth mode, so it’s hard to find specifics about the platform it plans to offer ops managers. But we know it’s mobile. The company sent the following information to me about the problem it wants to solve:

Until just recently, mobile devices did not provide enough functionality to enable team members to collaborate and contribute. Now, the same device can effectively be the alerting channel, the view into situational information flow and the point of interaction to allow participation.

So maybe VictorOps is the holy grail for the operations teams that let them handle a 3 A.M. page from their bed, using their phone or a tablet. Having heard the complaints of friends responsible for keeping sites up and running, if this software works, it could be awesome. It’s founding team certainly has the experience to pull this off. Its CEO Todd Vernon was the co-founder and CEO at Raindance, the web conferencing company, as well as the founder and CEO of Lijit, a web-ad business. The other two founders both have founded other companies and operated web-based businesses where downtime cut into sales as well.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A near-term outlook for big data
• What Amazon’s new Kindle line means for Apple, Netflix and online media
• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro

WhatsApp, the popular texting app that has taken a huge chunk out of operators’ lucrative texting plans around the world, has been working to get closer to carriers. But this deal is worth paying attention to because if it succeeds in giving customers what they want while also helping carriers mitigate the margin-shaving effect of over the top services, it may be the future of mobile data plans.

Instead of buying a bucket of bytes, what if users ended up buying a bucket of bytes and access to a few favorite apps? Then the mobile pricing looks more like an a la carte cable offering and less like forcing people to pay an arbitrary fee for a device ($40 for a smartphone!) in addition to the bucket of bytes as new plans from AT&T and Verizon do.

The pros and cons of the WhatsApp offering

While there are plenty of people who want to buy an amount of data from their mobile operators and use it exactly how they please, for many carriers such a pricing plan would be financial suicide — cutting their profits to the bone. It’s possible that in competitive markets carriers will arise who can do this: Take the lower margins and still support their business. That would be awesome, but for now those options are few and far between.

This is why carriers have killed off unlimited plans and are experimenting with family plans. It’s also why operators such as AT&T are thinking about how they work with popular app makers, with Ma Bell considering some kind of plan to charge app developers for the data their users consume. Consumers want their apps, carriers want to make money and appmakers want consumers to be able to use their apps without fear of ringing up a crazy bill.

The WhatsApp pass solves a lot of these issues in a way that offers carriers a way to monetize an over the top application that’s threatening their revenue stream, gives consumers more security as well as the international roaming, but also steers clear of network neutrality issues because consumers don’t have to sign up for this plan to use WhatsApp. While 3 Hong Kong declined to discuss whether or not WhatsApp has to do to get this deal, if the terms were fair to WhatsApp, then even app makers should like this.

For most normal customers who might use WhatsApp, but don’t want to worry about their data allocations, paying $8 a month for security and access to the app while they travel is a good way to offer value, above and beyond just bytes. And honestly, that’s what many carriers don’t seem ready to understand.

So what apps would you pay for?

Carriers have established ties to popular apps for years, with varying levels of success. One of the earliest examples was the creation of the Skype phone for INQ which helped boost revenue for the operator as new subscribers picked up the handset and used a lot of data. Verizon also did a deal with Skype to bring the service to handsets and let them use the actual circuit switched network to make calls. Telefonica is building its own over-the-top services to compete. Several operators around the world have Facebook-related plans.

So then for consumers the question becomes what apps would you actually subscribe to? And for carriers the question is how many apps do they want to work with? For example, consumers might love a YouTube app, but because video consumes so much bandwidth, offering a reasonable rate to consumers that won’t blow an operator’s network might be a challenge. But, if Google and the carriers managed to work together to make the app less piggy on the bandwidth side, maybe something would work. Perhaps we’ll hear more about that next week at our Mobilize conference when Shiva Rajaraman, director of product management at YouTube, shares how to build a mobile video app.

I for one would pay for a Google Maps everywhere plan simply for the security of not going over my data limits while traveling internationally or risk emptying my data bucket as I wander lost around my hometown of Austin (yes, I am that directionally challenged). I might also pay for an hour of guaranteed low-latency Skype or Tango video calling over the cellular network provided it wasn’t more than $5 a month. At that point, my mobile plan starts looking more like an a la carte cable plan and less like a bucket of bytes. If done well such plans could be good for operators, consumers and even app makers.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• CES 2012: a recap and analysis
• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech

Front-facing cameras on phones are becoming more common in handsets for video conferencing, not that many people appear to be using them for that. The iPhone 4 first sported the front camera in the Apple ecosystem back in June of 2010, while the HTC Evo also in 2010 provided video-calling for Android users. Popular new handsets from companies developing devices for the Android ecosystem are driving up the number of front-facing cameras in the market. The idea was that such cameras would be used for making mobile video calls, but I’m not sure how popular that is.

Skype doesn’t provide data on the number of mobile video calls, and Apple doesn’t break out Facetime stats over mobile devices. In fact, it’s tough to find a company willing to share stats on how much people use video calls on their mobile device. However, I pulled a chart from Sandvine’s global mobile internet report from the first half of 2012 that shows that video calls are a tiny percentage of the overall traffic generated by apps on mobile networks — somewhat surprising given that those apps use more bandwidth than something like checking Facebook.

Perhaps the difficulty in using the carrier’s data network as opposed to Wi-Fi contributes to the lack of users. In my case, it’s a lack of friends who are willing or available to participate in a spontaneous mobile video call, but for whatever reason, video calling hasn’t seemed to catch up with the cameras on their phones just yet.

But even if I don’t make a video call that camera is useful — albeit expensive. My trusty compact can now join my address book, my clip-on flashlight, my paperback and my little note pad in the list of items I no longer need to drag along with me when I’m out on the town. Of course, when the batteries are low, then I may have to choose between adjusting my make up and texting, but perhaps I’ll just use that room I created to bring along an extra battery.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Strategic Implications of the Microsoft/Skype Deal
• Report: The Consumer Video Chat Market, 2010-2015

Tango CTO Eric Setton told me in a phone conversation that the funding gives the startup a competitive advantage as the mobile video calling market heats up. More than that, however, getting a strategic investment from Qualcomm could help it improve its product. Since Qualcomm makes the chips used by mobile phone manufacturers, Tango has been working with it to optimize video delivery through its chat app.

Tango has quickly become one of the most popular options for multiplatform video chat on mobile devices. In the 18 months or so since launch, Tango has managed to attract more than 45 million users worldwide. And hey, those users are actually, uh, using the app: According Setton, 44 percent have used the app in the last 30 days, and about 10 percent use it every day. Altogether, the number of calls that Tango powers has doubled in just the last four months.

It’s also translating that usage into real revenue. In December, Tango rolled out new features that let users leave video messages for each other and also add animations to their calls. So far, “tens of millions” of users have used the new features. And surprisingly enough, it’s not just Asian superusers paying up to make their chats all cutesy: Setton told me that while about 50 percent of users are in the U.S., that market accounts for 80 percent of all revenues.

And so, with that in mind, Tango is also adding new premium features to the app to improve the experience and ramp up monetization. For instance, it already gave users the ability to leave video messages to one another — but that was a one-to-one experience. Now users can send a single video message to multiple contacts. And their contacts don’t even need to have Tango to view those messages — now they can be delivered by text and email and viewed on the web.

Tango is also adding new animations for users to choose from. In addition to driving revenue, its “Surprises” feature also increases engagement, leading users to increase call length by some 40 percent. It’s also created a storefront that it can update regularly, without having to release a whole new build of the app every time it wants to do so.

With a deeper war chest and even more monetization options, Tango hopes to take over the world. At least maybe give Skype a run for its money. Or something like that.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Connected Consumer Q2: Digital music meets the cloud; e-book growth explodes
• How to manage mobile expenses in a BYOD world

The landscape has changed however. Instead of video calling services that act like regular phone calls on the same cellular networks, a number of video-specific services have cropped up before and after FaceTime: Skype, Google Talk, Qik, and Tango, just to name a few. As more handsets and tablets gain cameras for video chat, you’d think this activity would skyrocket. But it doesn’t seem to be, at least not when compared to other mobile activities such as apps, web browsing, messaging and social networking.

Why is that? I can think of a few reasons. First and possibly the biggest obstacle is that many of these services aren’t cross-platform. You can only use FaceTime with other FaceTime users, for example. Qik — recently purchased by Skype — and Tango are the exceptions here; indeed Tango now works across iOS, Android and Windows Phone handsets.

Connectivity is another potential issue, as some services only run over Wi-Fi networks. And those that do work on 3G or 4G mobile broadband networks could quickly eat up a user’s allotment of monthly data on a tiered or capped data plan. Lastly, it could be — at least in the U.S. — that consumers just aren’t used to video calling or feel the need to do so while mobile.

I suspect that will change over time as our communication will be a mixed recipe with text messaging, voice calls and video chats as the ingredients. I’ve embraced it as a richer experience with my son, who doesn’t live with me.

Regardless of the slow video calling uptake, I know that some of our readers are using such services. I’m curious as to which are most used, given the limitations of both networks and lack of cross-platform support in some. I’ve left room in the poll for those who don’t use mobile video calling, so in the comments, let me know why you don’t.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Sector RoadMap: Social customer service in 2013
• Forecast: the converged mobile messaging market
• Analyzing the wearable computing market

According to Tango, iOS registrations were up 35 percent above average since the launch of the iPhone 4S, which is the biggest spike the young app maker has seen. That’s even more of a lift than it received on Christmas — the day that users typically unwrap new gadgets and try out apps on their devices. The increase in downloads moved Tango from the no. 12 spot in the App Store top downloads the week before launch up to no. 7.

But it’s not just iOS registrations — Tango has gotten a lift on other devices as well, such as traditional computers and Android smartphones or tablets. Total registrations were up more than 25 percent overall after the iPhone 4S launch.

For Tango, which provides a way for users to video chat with each other regardless of the device they’re using, the massive sales numbers the iPhone 4S has seen should not just help them in the short term. As users (like me) that upgraded from phones without front-facing cameras, discovering new features and applications will continue.

Tango, which competes with desktop and mobile video chat apps like Skype, has raised a total of $47 million since being founded two years ago. That includes a $42 million round it announced along with its desktop app in July.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Survey: the next wave of enterprise mobility
• Opportunities and challenges for mobile deals

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected world: the consumer technology revolution
• Mobile 2012 and beyond
• CES 2012: a recap and analysis

The Series B funding round was led by Draper Fisher Jurvetson and includes existing investors. It includes $8.7 million raised in a convertible note that was revealed through an SEC filing earlier this year. With the latest round, Tango has raised a total of $47 million since being founded just 18 months ago. The funding news was first reported by Bloomberg last month, but was just confirmed by the company today.

No doubt some of the investment comes as a direct result of Skype being acquired in a deal worth $8.5 billion, which is a huge amount for a company in what is still a very nascent video chat market. But while Skype began on the desktop and has been slowly (but gradually) adding support for the iPhone and Android mobile devices, Tango is taking the opposite route.

Tango launched with a mobile focus but is gearing up to start working on PCs, with the upcoming launch later this summer of a desktop app that will let users sign in and be contacted on their phone or on their computer. By doing so, Tango also hopes to attract more users to its service. It currently has about 18 million users on mobile devices, which is a far cry from the 600 million that Skype has attracted to date. But it sees desktop availability as a huge potential boost.

Eric Setton, CTO and co-founder of Tango, said in a phone interview that there are about 1.5 billion PC users worldwide, which is a huge addressable market. Not just that, but PC availability has been the #1 requested feature from its users.

The new app will mirror its existing mobile apps both in form and function, allowing users to be simultaneously logged into their accounts through multiple devices, and ensuring that their contact lists are synced across each. When an outside user tries to initiate a video chat, both the PC and phone will ring, enabling users to choose whichever device they want to talk on.

In addition to PC app development, the funding will be used by the company to ramp up hiring in general. According to Setton, Tango has added about 25 people in the last three months alone, bringing total headcount to 60 employees company-wide. He said it wouldn’t be surprising to see the company with more than 100 employees by year-end.

Many of those employees will work on increasing support for more platforms and mobile devices, as Tango struggles to deal with an incredibly fragmented device market. Some will also work on getting its software supported on the chip level, which will ease integration with devices once they finally come to market.

While Skype is the big heavy hitter in the video chat market, it’s not the only competition Tango has to contend with, particularly in mobile video chat. Over the last year, we’ve seen a rash of new entrants emerge, spurred on in part by the launch of Apple’s FaceTime application on iOS devices.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Connected Consumer Q2: Digital music meets the cloud; e-book growth explodes
• Strategic Implications of the Microsoft/Skype Deal

To me, the only issues to adoption are getting the mobile and standards networks in place to support it, and the handsets that have the front-facing cameras in more people’s hands. With FaceTime, Skype’s latest mobile client  , Google Video on Android phones, Tango and services like fring, the apps are already there. The eureka moment around mobile chat occurred because my family is looking for a new house. At one site, I wanted both to calm my four-year-old who was running around the nail-strewn home site like a tornado on Red Bull and to show my mom in Houston what the home looked like and reached for my phone.

My plan was to snap a few photos for my mom and then hand my daughter the handset for a calming game of Angry Birds. But as I held it, I realized the Skype Mobile video chat app would be a far better solution to both my problems. And just like that, I was convinced of the value of video chat.

Unfortunately, my handset doesn’t work with Skype’s mobile video client, but since that moment, I’ve seen opportunities where I would use the service if it were available. For example, snapshots of a home can’t convey the kind of layout information a video can, and a video of my daughter doing her first dive at the pool is very different from a picture of the same thing. Getting a briefing on a complex technology via video is far more engaging than the same one done via a phone call and PowerPoint.

So now, when I espouse the wonders of video chat on laptops or mobiles (especially mobiles) and people say they don’t want to talk and see others at the same time, I understand. Video chat isn’t for talking on the phone, that’s what the phone part of a phone is for. Video is for those other moments when a moving picture matters. Video chat will be additive to our communications portfolio, because for some situations, it will provide a better experience. The trick is getting users to find those experiences and making sure that when they find them, the technology is easy to use.

Think about texting. No one in the U.S. originally saw a lot of value in texting because of the high price. The price, character limits, numeric keyboards, etc. slowed adoption. But, as prices went down, people realized that texting served a real need (“I’m running 5 minutes late,” “Can you get milk,” etc.) and better keyboards evolved to help make it easier to send those 160-character messages. Heck, now we wring our hands about how many people text as opposed to talk.

As carriers (or app makers) roll out new services, there’s always an education period when people try to understand why they might want to send a photo image via their phone, but as their friends try out the technology and devices start integrating those features, it becomes just another means for communication. And if you  think that video chat will be any different because you can’t imagine taking a call while wearing no makeup and your workout clothes, it just means you haven’t found your killer video chat app yet. I have, and I can’t wait.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: The Consumer Video Chat Market, 2010-2015
• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Carrier IQ and the continued erosion of operator trust

The mobile video chat market is heating up, ever since Apple launched its FaceTime app with the introduction of the iPhone 4. Since then, a number of companies have sought to cash in on the phenomenon, including Skype, Tango, Yahoo and others. Like most of these video chat apps, ooVoo works on both 3G and Wi-Fi networks, and enables users to chat with friends on the web and on Android mobile devices.

The big differentiator ooVoo has is the ability to do multi-user chat. The app allows up to six different video chat partners to be logged into a call at once, and it does so with pretty fantastic video quality, even on mobile networks. In that respect, it primarily competes with Fring, which launched a multi-party, multi-platform group video chat app in early April.

There’s one other crucial difference: ooVoo’s user base. The company has long had a video chat application available on the desktop, where it mostly competed with Skype. But while Skype is used by many enterprise users and web-savvy professionals, ooVoo is being adopted by a very young user base, a trend being accelerated with the launch of its Android app. I have two teenaged sisters, and anecdotal evidence from their usage of the app shows that ooVoo is pretty cool with youngsters.

In a phone interview a few weeks ago, ooVoo CMO Matt deGanon confirmed my suspicions that the app has become a popular way for teenagers to keep in touch. According to him, about 57 percent of all ooVoo users are under the age of 25, and the overwhelming majority of that group are under 18. Surprisingly though, those teenagers aren’t necessarily using the app to just speak with their friends; deGanon said young ooVoo users were using the app to connect on social networks and meet new people live.

ooVoo has more than 25 million registered users now, but the launch of the iPhone app will surely drive that much higher. After announcing availability of the iPhone app to its 1 million Facebook fans, it has seen registrations at about three times its usual level, and expects to hit a record for registrations today.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Controversy, courtrooms and the cloud in Q1
• Connected world: the consumer technology revolution