Does the mere presence of Google’s HTML5 Apps Cast Doubt on Their Commitment to a Robust Android App Environment? Short answer – it depends… or so it would seem, as Google expresses a desire to move to the cloud, but is held back by poor web app performance versus locally hosted software. But for how long?
Google’s recent demo of their slick HTML5 version of Gmail, which was shown running on a Palm Pre at Mobile World Congress a little over a week ago, wowed onlookers with its native app-like functionality, particularly with respect to its ability to allow users to draft and organize emails while offline. Google accomplished these feats by taking advantage of the local databasing, geolocation and “AppCashe” functionality of the new, HTML5-based Webkit browsers, like those found on the upcoming, Palm Pre. Both the Apple iPhone and Android-based HTC G1 and G2 “Magic” handsets also incorporate Webkit browsers.
This demo of the HTML5 version of Gmail seems so good, so solid, robust and scalable, that one has to wonder if the conspiracy theory half-heartily put forth in our last post (i.e. Google encouraging Android OS fragmentation among device OEMs to favor web-based apps over locally hosted solutions) has any real merit. While undoubtedly interesting in its salaciousness (after all, who among us doesn’t enjoy a good Google conspiracy theory from time to time?), the theory seemed a bit flimsy… until Google’s recent HTML5 web app demo.
Ultimately, the question is if Google is truly committed to fostering a stable, robust Android development environment or is the Android SDK merely a stopgap measure for the search giant, until such time as most major application functionality can be migrated into the browser? At a recent Android Developer meetup I had the chance to ask Google Product VP Bradley Horowitz this very question.
Throughout the event Horowitz habitually brushed aside specific questions about the future of Android by steadfastedly emphasizing his lack of his direct oversight or visibility into the OS’s development roadmap. His perspective, however, did seem to change somewhat when asked about Google’s plans to eventually abandon a focus on native Android apps as soon as Browser-based solutions were up to the task.
For the record, Horowitz startlingly confirmed that “the end goal” for Google would be that “Webkit would swallow up” all the rich functionality which now can only be accomplished by native apps. Horowitz went on to express “frustration [that] even in desktop apps” there’s a performance hit when migrating app functionality to the browser, although one might argue that with respect to the mobile devices, with their limited processing power and available memory, that the performance difference between the two might not be so great… and the “uber” web app might just be the silver bullet we’ve all been waiting for. Ultimately, Horowitz hedged a bit in his closing remarks, stating that both web apps and the local Android SDK might align on parallel paths in pursuit of richer, more functional and higher performing solutions.
Weird stuff. One has to wonder if all the paranoia isn’t starting to make just a too much sense. Stay close to mobilestance.com for more on this and other popular conspiracy theories… Next week we’ll take a deeper dive into Sasquatch sitings at Area 51 (“couldn’t be a man in a gorilla suit, no f*ing way man you know he’s real”).
What’s Behind What Some View as Android’s Growing List of Self-Inflected Problems. Conspiracy? Complacency? Or Raw Genius At Work?
At first glance, it might appear that things are going pretty well for Android. The free-to-license mobile OS has quickly become popular among many cash strapped mobile OEMs (original equipment manufacturers). Heavyweights such as Samsung, Sony Ericsson, LG and Motorola, along with handset newcomers Garmin and even Dell (hold for laughter) have all announced plans to develop handsets for the Google-run platform.
Supposedly, T-Mobile even managed to sell roughly one million Android-powered HTC G1’s last quarter… a respectable, yet not exactly iPhone-worthy performance (but to be fair, Apple and AT&T set an impossibly high standard with iPhone 3G, accomplishing in three days what Android did in three months – who knew AT&T would deliver on their promise of “Raising the Bar” so literally!).
Yet a quick peek below the surface reveals a conflicting scenario emerging for everyone’s favorite “Little (open-source) engine that could.” Depending on your point of view, the OS is either plagued with systemic flaws, or designed with a profound sense of Machiavellian perfection. The exceedingly real threat of viruses, worms and other forms of malware, combined with a system seemingly “design to fragment” (read: seriously frustrate application developers) leaves one wondering if (as the conventional wisdom would have you believe) that Android’s model scales so well, and its backers so powerful and smart, that it can’t fail to become a serious contender over the long term… or what we’re really looking at is nothing more than “Yet Another (seriously flawed) Google Beta Product.”
The issue of Android’s well-publicized “open door” security policy reared its pathogenic head again last week in the form of an all-out malware scare, and although the jury’s still out on whether or not the now infamous “MemoryUp” application did (as was accused) take over a user’s mobile, spam out its contacts and wipe its memory, or is just (as was suspected by cooler heads), merely a poorly designed, near universally-panned app… the frightening fact remains that the only thing standing between us and just such a dark reality is the relatively low profile group known as the Android Security Team.
Unfortunately for Android users, this team (of which whose public presence appears to consist entirely of one message board post dated August 18, 2008) seems to operate in a decidedly passive capacity: rather than vigilantly seeking and tracking down security flaws wherever they might appear in the system, the model works more like a ticket-based complaint counter, addressing user-submitted security threats when (and only when) the Goog Squad is alerted to their presence by the public. It would be as if the local police force was replaced by an automated 911 system (and we all know how efficient that system can be). While it wouldn’t be 100% accurate to say that “no one’s minding the Android App store” (er, market) – there’s far more truth in that statement than many are willing to admit.
Moving on, the other significant issue facing the Android system – that of the looming threat of OS fragmentation – has (unsurprisingly) garnered scant attention in the trade press. I say “unsurprisingly” as so far the threat of OS fragmentation is fairly complex and has yet to be an issue as, with only one Android handset on the marketplace (so far) – the HTC G1 – there just isn’t that much of a marketplace to fragment. That said, this issue seems to have some real legs, not to mention real intrigue, and is, in our opinion, very likely to seriously impede Android application development over the long term.
Before we get into all the wide-eyed intrigue and half-baked conspiracy theories, a little background information on the subject of OS fragmentation is in order. At its core, the issue revolves around the fact that Android, as an open source software platform, freely publishes its source code to the world under the general assumption that under “the eyes of the world’s” constant viewing, tinkering, and deploying – the software will ultimately become more robust, stable and efficient than any system created and maintained by a finite number of (paid) employees. As is the case with a great many subjects, the devil is in the details. It seems that when Google formally launched the Android project back in late 2007, it chose the to advocate a licensing model (Apache) whereby third parties could maintain private ownership over any modifications made to Android’s publicly-available source code, and would not be compelled (as in other open source licensing models) to turn over said software modifications or enhancements back “to the public domain” – so that (among other reasons) these modifications could (potentially) be incorporated into future versions of the software… thereby making the whole system more unified, and less “fragmented.”
So here’s where things can really get messy. As said, mobile handset manufactures designing smartphones are turning to Android in large numbers, driven mainly by its price point (free), as well as its many innovative design features. That said, not all of these “Android” devices will be running the same version of Android, as handset manufactures will be under extreme pressure to modify Android in order to maximize the performance of the particular hardware components making up each of their individual handset models. This means that Android developers will soon have to create multiple versions of each Android application they develop in order to insure that their apps will run correctly on each “version” of Android in the marketplace (i.e. all the different handsets running “Android”). This time-consuming and labor-intensive process, known to overworked software developers the world over as “porting,” significantly drives up the cost of software development. Ultimately, Android developers will need to limit the number of Android handsets they can support as simply a matter of cost/benefit. This well-known problem has been identified as one of the primary barriers that has held up mobile software development to date, as the current crop of Java, Symbian and BREW feature phones are simply fragmented beyond belief.
We’ve already seen the beginnings of fragmentation in the Android system, as differences in handset specifications play out over the various geographic regions – and with the sheer number of players about to enter the space in the coming year this issue is bound to accelerate dramatically. That said, it is inevitable that that this scenario will negatively impact the development of innovative, new applications for Android over the short term. The only real question is to what extent will Android innovation be stymied?
What makes this issue to interesting to many is that, due to advocating the Apache licensing model for Android, Google seems to be actively encouraging Android fragmentation. Ironically, this apparent paradox was first identified by Sanjay Jha, Chief Operating Officer of Qualcomm’s chipset division (ironic in that Qualcomm is one of the founding members of the Open Handset Alliance and the Android initiative!) who, in a Register story that emerged out of last Spring’s CTIA conference, was quoted as saying that “Google wants fragmentation in the [mobile] industry.”
Here’s where the conspiracy theories start kicking into overdrive. Keeping all of this in mind, some have speculated that – in a thinly veiled strategy against its old desktop rivals (Microsoft), Google would potentially benefit from Android fragmentation in that it would be prohibitively expensive for any one developer to dominate any fragmented system with a mainstay-like platform such as Microsoft Outlook or Office, both “heavy clients” that rely on sophisticated software applications running on the device’s (local) hardware (e.g. the desktop PC, or the mobile handset). A fragmented system would ultimately favor companies like Google that favor thin client / “cloud computing” models (e.g. Gmail and Google Docs), where all the application’s heavy lifting is done on the server side (via the network), rather than on the client side (i.e. the mobile handset) – in this case the actual applications on the client/handset side usually reside in nothing more than a decent web browser. All of this poses a very intriguing question: Could Google be subtly sabotaging device-side Android application development in favor of its browser-based / thin-client model?
Bringing this post full-circle, it is possible that both these two issues (fragmentation and security) may cancel each other out, sort of… again, ultimately resolving in Google’s favor. The theory goes a little like this: The folks that write software viruses, worms and other such programs do so primarily for the notoriety that comes with affecting many systems/users all at once – either with benign or malicious intent. Platforms that don’t scale simply are unappealing to most virus writers. Similar to the natural virus protection afforded by using a niche desktop system such as a Macintosh (sorry guys, I love ya but you’re still using what I would consider a niche product), few developers will waste their time writing a virus that only affects a (relatively) small number of people, when they can get better “bang for the buck” elsewhere. The same forces that make it prohibitively expensive for (most) application developers to support a wide range of devices in a fragmented system will also similarly affect virus writers. In affect, by encouraging fragmentation, Google could be enhancing Android security while simultaneously crippling many of its former rivals in the desktop space (or is this giving Google just a little too much credit?).
Thoughts? If you have an opinion, share it… as there’s nothing like a good conspiracy to spice up the industry some!
Peer into Mobilestance’s Proprietary Crystal Ball!
Well it’s that time of year again… when pundits and publishers large and small exploit the slow end-of-year news cycle to recap the old and forecast the new. Here at mobilestance it’s a extra-special time of year… as it was nearly one year ago when we formally “came out” of beta with our 2007 Recap piece and spammed it out to our publisher’s 3,000 + email address book. Ahh… memories!
This year, rather than spend the next thousand words rehashing what was undoubtedly the most exciting year in mobile since the advent of the crazy frog ringtone, we decided instead to take the easy way out and peer ahead to future… casting our lot into a sea of like-minded posts from across the blogosphere.
So what will occur in 2009 at the intersection of Mobile and Marketing? Will location become (as Dan @ Organic so eloquently put it in a recent Facebook status) “just another input”? Will MMS finally become interoperable between carriers and ShortCodes, and finally emerge as a realistic marketing vehicle? Will a wave of consolidation sweep the industry, as smaller independent mobile agencies, technology vendors and ad networks become casualties of the “great recession”? Will newly legislated digital privacy-controls arrive just in time to kill the mobile web? And of course the big question on everyone’s minds: Will mobile finally jump from the backwater of marketing budgets known as “emerging,” grow some legs, ditch the tail, and finally walk upon solid (budgetary) ground?
So read on then, fearless time shifters… and arm yourself for the ensuing complexities that will envelope our fledgling industry in the coming year!
Mobilestance’s Top 10 Mobile Marketing Predictions for 2009
2009 Will be the Year of Mobile. After many false starts the Long Joke will finally end… and Mobile will finally have its moment in the sun. With the rising popularity of smartphones; the lower cost of mobile data; and the pervasiveness of mobile broadband, internet and other “beyond voice” services, Mobile (with a capital “M”) will finally achieve critical mass in the US – and agencies, brands and business infrastructure providers alike will finally start paying attention with the purse strings.
2009 Won’t be the Year of Mobile. What would a mobile marketing prognostication piece be without some conflicting signals? Call it hedging my bets… but I just couldn’t resist punching up the contradiction that is the current state of mobile marketing. Sure, everything I said in the previous ‘graph is dead on… the crystal ball is crystal clear on that. But will that make 2009 “The Year of Mobile?” Hardly. Sure, mobile has made some great strides of late in terms of its effectiveness as a marketing channel, and there is NO doubt that will come even farther, faster in 2009. But sorry kids, it simply will not find its way out of the “emerging” bucket when it comes to budgeting. No, the “Year of Mobile” can only be declared after we see dedicated “mobile” advertising, CRM and/or marketing budgets… or (at a minimum) a substantive breakout from a larger “digital” line… and with 2009 shaping up to the second coming of the “Flight to ROI” of 2002 (warning: pdf link) , we’ve probably got until 2010 until we can finally herald the end of the Long Joke. In the meantime there’s still plenty for Mobile Marketers to do – namely, hone our skills and prepare ourselves for when the money spigot really opens up in 2010.
Mobile Search Comes of Age. OK, enough with the levity… let’s get into some serious forecasting. If there’s one thing we’ve learned about mobile usage in ’08, it’s that smartphones = search volume. While previously a mere academic curiosity, this correlation will show real legs in ’09, as legions of iPhoners, Crackberry Addicts and the like will continue take to mobile search like a longshoreman on a bender (read: heavy consumption punctuated with colorful language) . We’ve already witnessed both Google and Yahoo fine tuning their mobile search products – albeit in very different ways – and in 2009 we will see the beginnings of a real business emerge in this sector. Watch for the leading engines and agencies make a major mobile plays in ’09, as both will look to the sector to help sustain revenue growth and counter the “leveling off” of the (once interstellar) growth trajectory of “traditional” online paid search and/or SEM – as both (especially the former) begin to show early signs of maturation.
Mobile Video (finally) Gets Interesting. Along with search, the other interesting affect that comes with increased smartphone penetration is increased consumption of mobile video. I say “interesting” as in “somewhat viable” or “worth experimenting with”- which should not be interpreted as “it’s going to explode” (or even that I’m reasonably bullish on the channel). No… while I’ve been a mobile video hater for many years for reasons too numerous to count, we’ll see enough scale in 2009 to merit some testing… as after all, leveraging the moving image remains (arguably) the most effective method by which one can influence consumer behavior.
Apples Grow on Trees… While Android Picks up Steam. A no brainer that simply cannot be ignored… and the importance of which cannot be overstated. Most likely, Apple will successfully keep its momentum into ’09 by rolling out popular, yet evolutionary iPhone models (think new colors and modestly increased storage capacity/performance, rather than new form factors or revolutionary new features or price points). Android will likely see a bigger increase in Mobile OS share (albeit from a smaller base) than Apple, as Samsung (Spring) and Motorola (Fall) roll out hot new handsets utilizing the Open Source mobile OS. And speaking of Open Source, it will be interesting to see if the (reasonably) open Android starts “out innovating” Apple’s proprietary mobile OS when it comes to features and applications. As it is we’re still waiting for Google to integrate a working commerce model (safe money is on Google Checkout… duh!) into the Android Marketplace so that developers will have an easier time charging consumers for applications (expected Spring, 2009) – so it might be awhile before developers truly embrace Android as tightly as they have with the iPhone SDK. Our prediction: in 2009 Android will become the “hip incubator” for mobile application and/or OS innovation… with Apple and/or independent iPhone developers skimming the cream and co-opting the most interesting ideas of the bunch.
Biggest Losers of 2008: Motorola, Palm and Sprint Stay Alive. Notable for their ability to keep breathing, the “Crap Pack” of ’08 will not kick the bucket as so many are predicting. Sprint will slowly turn the corner in ’09 under Dan Hesse’s steady hand (is it us, or is anyone else getting a “Fred Thompson” vibe from his gently reassuring, speak-directly-into-the-camera series of commercials?), making incremental customer support improvements and leaning on that “Clearwire Thing” to leapfrog ahead in the bandwidth arms race (see “Wi-Max Casts Wide Shadow” below for more on this). The great recession saved Motorola’s Wireless business, as the venerable Schamburg, Illinois red ink factory likely found no suitable suitors. Now the company is forced to do what it does best… crank out a hit product to save the company – which we believe we’ll see in the form of a swank Android handset sometime late next year. Until then Moto will occupy itself by doing the other things it does best: bleeding market share and taking on further debt… which brings us to our last lovable looser, Palm. The fact that Elevation Partners decided to invest $100MM to keep Palm afloat just last month proves that there’s somebody out there for everybody… no matter how unsightly, aged, infirm or otherwise unappealing. Seriously, we’re not entirely sure know how much lifespan $100MM buys Palm, but we’re betting 18 months, at best.
Cash Poor Mobile Start-ups Get Snapped Up by Web, Traditional Media Players. Another obvious one that needed to be said: the credit crunch / recession combo will start claiming casualties among the most vulnerable in the mobile sector, while traditional media giants and other web firms lacking mobile chops go bargain hunting. Specifically, the time might be right for WPP’s 24/7 RealMedia to formally acquire one of their partner mobile ad networks (such as JumpTap or Millennial), should the opportunity present itself. On the Cable side both Comcast and Time Warner have already made big bets on wireless with their Clearwire investments… yet neither have much else to leverage here in the form of inventory of other mobile-ready assets. A mobile video acquisition for each of these players on the order of a Rhythm NewMedia or Transpera might just be in the cards.
WiMax Casts Wide Shadow. While 2008 was all Apple and Google, newly-formed Clearwire (not to be confused with the “old” Clearwire, which had the same management yet different investors – a confusing situation that deserves a dedicated posting of its own) quietly rolled out what we believe to be the first real mobile broadband network in the US… (OK, well in Baltmore, MD – but heck, it’s a start!). As Clearwire partner Sprint Wireless brings new WiMax hardware to market, and the high speed service rolls into new markets like Portland and Chicago in 2009, look to Verizon Wireless and AT&T to fall all over themselves to attempt to bring their competitive 4G “LTE” (Long Term Evolution) product to market by the end of the year. It’s a moot point if Clearwire ever really rolls out a national WiMax network, or instead (like many are predicting) runs out of cash sometime in 2009 (prediction: cash-laden Clearwire partners Intel and Google will pony up an additional round of investment in the network while cash strapped partners Comcast and Time Warner sit this round out – slowing, but ultimately sustaining, Clearwire’s national rollout) what matters most is that Clearwire and WiMax is giving the industry a huge kick in the pants… and with this we’ll finally get the true mobile broadband experience we’ve all been waiting for. Cue the brass band!
MMS Gets its Act Together (Just in Time to Become Totally Irrelevant). It’s no secret that MMS never really caught on with the public… and even when the carriers got their act together in 2006 and brought cross-carrier MMS interoperability online, the bloom was already nearly off the rose, as it were. Marketing applications remained uber-niche, as lack MMS support for cross-carrier short codes left brands with two, equally unappealing options (e.g. the use of either a ten digit phone number or an email address in the primary Call-to-Action). Still, while some consumers are giving the “Most Morbid Service” a second chance, the last nail in the coffin may have come from Apple, when it shafted the technology by not supporting it on the iPhone. Now it seems the CSCA , along with their strong-armed cousin, NeuStar, are working with the US carriers to bring MMS support to intercarrer (common) ShortCodes… which, if achieved, would greatly expand the effectiveness of the channel as a marketing medium. The question is, will this work be completed before the technology becomes altogether irrelevant? Perhaps… although no one (including us) is betting on it.
Application “Bubble” Doesn’t Burst… Yet. A minor one, but just squeaks into our Top 10 (take that, “Privacy Concerns!”). First, in order to predict that a bubble won’t burst, you need to prove the existance of a bubble. Case in point: iFart (point proven!). Now just when will the “App Bubble” burst? Well, it would seem that in order to “burst”, the bubble would first need to achieve maximum volume, which won’t happen until iPhone and similar “ReallySmartPhones(TM)” achieve critical mass (we’re thinking 15-20% penetration) – and that’s not happening for at least a year or two – even in the rosiest of scenarios. Still, for all the whooplaa around “+300MM iPhone app downloads in the first six months of app store,” some have acutely pointed out that the iPhone app growth curve has already started to flatten out. That said… we’re likely to see a whole new crop of iFarts-like hits in 2009 – and needless to say Mobilestance awaits on baited breath.
Well folks… there you have it – our top 10 predictions for 2009. Feel free to leave a comment if you feel we’ve missed something… or if you just want to throw some gasoline on the fire… and check back with us throughout the year as we continue to chronicle this thing we call Mobile.
Consumer Dissatisfaction and the Macroeconomics of Mobility Provide Linux with the Opportunity to Achieve in Mobile What it Failed to Reach on the Desktop: Relevancy.
Last week Verizon Wireless was just the latest big player to jump aboard the Linux train. In joining the LiMo Foundation, “an industry consortium dedicated to creating the first truly open, hardware-independent, Linux-based operating system for mobile devices,” Verizon joins existing LiMo members Motorola, Samsung, Panasonic, NEC, NTT DoCoMo, Orange and Vodafone.
The Google / Verizon Open Access Wars Continue. Verizon’s move is consistent with it’s grudging embrace of “openness,” a relatively recent development and likely result of Google’s aggressive initiatives with their own Linux-based mobile initiative, the Open Handset Alliance (whose members read like a who’s who of the mobile ecosystem), as well as the search giant’s success in influencing the latest US spectrum auction to partially adopt “open access” rules. These rules prohibit the new “owner” of the highly sought-after “C-Block” of wireless spectrum to restrict network access – based on either device or software requirements. This was a landmark ruling by the FCC that upset established business practices by the US operators (especially Verizon Wireless).
Ironically (or by Google’s design, if you buy into the hype) Verizon Wireless, who vigorously pursued legal action against the Google-backed “open access” initiative, is by default its biggest backer, as the carrier ended up spending $9.4 billion to win the auction for the “open” C-Block wireless spectrum. Maybe “ironic” doesn’t quite cut it. “Asleep at the switch?”, “Poetic Justice? or just good old “Machiavellian Legal Mastery?” So much to think about I just can’t get my head even half way around this one… hopefully a “tell-all” book will hit the market and shed some light on what really happened here between Google, Verizon and the FCC.
Regardless, Verizon asserts that among its reasoning for joining the LiMo is that, unlike the Google-led OHA, LiMo software is truly open source (whereas Google maintains a relatively tight grip over its Linux-derived Android Mobile OS). That said, both operating systems are “open enough” in that developers are free to create and distribute highly robust mobile applications unencumbered by (the current) intellectual property and financial barriers maintained by the wireless carriers and (to some extent) the handset manufacturers.
All roads lead to Linux? In addition to all of this, macroeconomic forces also seem to be contributing to an environment favoring Linux as a mobile OS. With the majority of the world’s mobile users living under severely limited economic conditions (i.e. the so-called “developing” world), an open source product such as a Linux-based handset and / or application would enjoy tremendous price advantages versus competing proprietary models – and is therefore far better positioned to compete for the majority of the world’s mobile user base.
While the US mobile industry has yet to feel any real impact resulting from all of these developments, rest assured that big changes are coming – and soon. One only needs to peruse the recently announced finalists in the Android developers challenge to get a sense the coming spike in mobile innovation. The development of rich, life-enhancing applications like Android Scan, a promising app that integrates a traditional barcode reader with existing online databases to facilitate real time product comparisons and m-commerce, would simply not be possible under without an open mobile operating system and business environment unencumbered by powerful gatekeepers.
Now, it might be tempting to dismiss Linux-based mobile initiatives due to the failure of Linux to achieve success on the desktop. The various desktop Linux operating systems also enjoyed the considerable advantages of pricing and of an open development environment, and yet none of them realized anything more than marginal successes. Why should mobile Linux be any different?
The key lies in the differences between the development and limitations of the two channels. When Linux arrived on the market most desktop users were relatively satisfied with the PC computing experience. Sure, Microsoft (and Apple) products had their problems, but most users were content with the functionality and prices associated with the leading PC operating systems and applications. The same cannot be said for the mobile data space, where most users face an entirely opposite scenario: a high (perceived) priced product delivering a wholly unsatisfying experience.
Ultimately, perhaps the walled garden model that worked “well enough” in the desktop space just isn’t up to challenge in the more demanding environment of the mobile data space – a space far more restricted in terms of device size, bandwidth, processor power, memory and display resolution – and is inherently laden with costs far greater than that of traditional wireline data networks. Perhaps it is precisely this challenge that Linux is uniquely suited to overcome, and perhaps this is why Linux – and perhaps only Linux – will be the portal that will finally fulfill the promise of the mobile channel.
Five Year Old Case Studies, Babbling Activists, Sales Pitches and a Sneak Peek at What’s Coming Down the Regulatory Pipe.
Washington at its Worst?
By now many of you may have caught the occasional blurb / sound bite from this week’s Federal Trade Commission “Town Hall” on Mobile Marketing entitled “Beyond Voice: Mapping the Mobile Marketplace.” What you probably haven’t been exposed to is the unique combination of lunacy, tedium and righteous indignation that filled much of the event.
Luckily our hyperbureaucratic friends sought fit to publish complete online transcripts of the proceedings for those either unable or (more likely) unwilling to attend the two day event.
What’s this? You say you don’t have the time or the patients to read through the reams upon reams of “thoughts” relating to our industry’s regulatory future? Well fear not! Mobilestance.com has got you covered!
So sit back, relax, and learn of “The Shocking Truth” of what occurred at the FTC “Town Hall” on Mobile Marketing (part one in a special two part series).
9:00 – 11:00 (AM EST)
Welcome and Introductory Remarks Commissioner Jon Leibowitz, Federal Trade Commission
Content and Commentary
Jon Leibowitz, Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission kicks things off with some levity in the form of a video clip featuring the world’s first mobile phone (“unveiled right here in Washington D.C. a few blocks away”, the clip is of Maxwell Smart’s famous “Shoe Phone”). From there he starts with familiar stats on mobile voice and data usage in the US, but then quickly transitions into the actual purpose of the “Town Hall” (we’ve put Town Hall in quotes because lets face it, if you’re going to have a “town hall” in the “township” of Washington, D.C., and its being run by a US Gov’t regulatory body… call it what it really is: A hearing).
Leibowitz runs down a short list of “a host of [mobile marketing] consumer protection challenges” (read: things he aims to regulate), setting the tone of the two day proceedings:
Disclosure issues. Do consumers understand what advertisers are selling and how much it costs? Mobile devices make disclosures even tougher. How can a marketer explain key terms and conditions on a screen the size of a small Post-It?
Mobile advertising itself. Recent surveys have found that most consumers are annoyed by it (What? Advertising is annoying? Alert the media!)
Spam. Unwanted and sometimes offensive content… Text Spam invades your time, your privacy and your wallet. (Agreed)
Location Based Services. The sense of big brother or ex-boyfriend knows where you are at any given moment really raises troubling issues about government access, physical safety and personal privacy.
Location Based Mobile Marketing. Does America really need cell phones with ads flashing like lights in time square, do we want our PDAs turning into turning into digital pocket bill board? Personally I worry about clutter. (Leibowitz is really pushing the envelope here… sure, these are presented as his personal opinions, but when presented in this context it gives the impression that the FTC is angling to regulate what is and isn’t “tasteful.” I appreciate the sentiment, but he should really keep his aesthetic concerns to himself. Does he somehow think FTC stands for “Federal Tastemaker Commission?)
The Kids. A mobile phone that gives them access makes them easy pray for aggressive marketers… and we need to consider whether additional protection for kids and children are warranted.
Then, to make sure everyone in the room doesn’t forget who’s in charge or what’s at stake in this so-called “town hall”, Leibowitz drops the widely-reported word bomb on the room: “We strongly believe, as many of you know, in self-regulation – but we are also going to police the wireless space.” Make no mistake… Leibowitz is on the beat, nightstick a-swingin! “Our agency has a long history of studying new technologies and the consumer protection and competition issues that are embedded within these new technologies,” He continued, “And we have a long history of working with our sister agency the FCC when consumer protection concerns arise in the Telecom context.” At this point you can almost smell the tension in the room. Finally, he takes it up a notch by pointing out what’s at stake: “You can take our example of our work with them on do-not-call on Spam.”
And there it is… he might as well have just said “We are your overlords, you private-sector pawns. Kneel before us and grovel at our regulatory feet. ” And grovel they did… for the next two days, in fact.
Session 1: The Mobile Marketplace — What, How, and Who
“This session will provide an introduction to the role of mobile commerce, beyond traditional voice service, in today’s society. This overview will include a discussion of demographics, consumer habits, and popular and anticipated uses of mobile services within the United States. It will also refer to developments in mobile commerce outside the United States.”
Evan Neufeld, VP & Senior Analyst, M:Metrics
Steve Smith, Media Critic, Mediapost and Access Intelligence
Ruth Yodaiken, Staff Attorney, FTC Division of Marketing Practices
Content and Commentary
A whirlwind of stats, graphs, charts, definitions, et cetera on US habit and usage of mobile data services. Not a bad data set here (note: get your free research data in this section’s transcript, it’s a fairly comprehensive presentation). At the end of this session everyone is supposed to be comfortable with the alphabet soup of mobile terminology that will pervade the remainder of the talks. I suspect anyone not in the industry is trying their best to keep up… but finding these two a little manic in their rapid shifts from topic to topic.
Here’s a taste of the kind of language and topic jumping that was bound to throw the room: “Someone has a 3G phone for example is 1.4X likely to do social networking, 1.5X to browse, et cetera. Smart phones, similar. Though only 6.2% of the total US device market at this point, this is also another where you see tremendous increase in usage, with 4X and 3X for social networking browsing and music and video. Where this all ties in is the iPhone. Everybody talks about the iPhone. [I’m] not necessarily a huckster for apple per se. [In] my mind the iphone is an example of a phone with a good interface for browsing. Some say the secret is the interface, the URL doesn’t suck, there’s kind of what the standard is. So it’s less about the iPhone is the device and interfaces are catching up with consumers. When you do that the usage is tremendous.” No disrespect to Evan (whom I actually agree with on all of these points), but does anybody think that the room is getting all of this? I’d bet dollars to donuts that the good folks at the FTC aren’t among those nodding their heads.
Session 2: Mobile Messaging — Unsolicited, Premium, and Interactive Messaging
“This session will provide an overview of text/SMS (Short Message Service) and MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service) messaging, introduce innovations, and highlight billing concerns.”[Transcript]
Alykhan Govani, Head of BD, MX Telecom
William Haselden, Assistant Attorney General, State of Florida
Lisa Hone, Assistant Director, FTC Division of Marketing Practices
Content and Commentary
A lot more talk educating the room on the consumer benefits of mobile marketing balanced with the need for responsible practices (opt-in only, full disclosure, yadda yadda). A lot of the recursive, meandering language that is familiar to anyone who has attended a panel session at CTIA in the last five years… a tactical example here (say, MMS blogging), a brand reference there (say, Papa John’s), a consumer confusion point tossed in (fear of spam, cost, or just not knowing what a short code is), a statistical reference followed by a rapid-fire strategy statement (e.g. “it’s all about the mobile context”) – and then just repeat with different phrases. Sorry if that comes across as a little cynical, but there’s only so much of this one person can be exposed to before the sarcasm kicks in. Mozes then goes into a txt2screen demo, and walks us through what could well be their sales presentation (wait, this is CTIA!).
Next up is William Haselden, the Florida Assistant Attorney General, who walks the room through some of the very worst examples of bait-and-switch, “free ringtone” (I mean, $9.99 per month) marketing. Make no mistake, the Florida Attorney General’s office has a well earned reputation for their willingness to prosecute consumer trade practice offenders – and he’s got the room’s attention. His examples of Florida’s idea of regulating the space are highly detailed, and many are quite reasonable… so (for example) that when people click on a box that says “nine ninety nine” that they know that they are paying “$9.99 per month,” etc. Some are extremely granular regulatory suggestions, right down to color contrast restrictions so that prices can’t be hidden in (nearly) the same color as the page background (but who is going to enforce all of this? Ah… a bigger budget for the Florida Attorney General’s office, perhaps?).
Leigh Schachter, Senior Litigation Counsel for Verizon Wireless, finishes off the session with a talk on unsolicited SMS messages. She opens with what was basically a fairly comprehensive 101 on “how to execute a spam SMS campaign,” including instructions on how one would send unsolicited sequential text messages to handsets via email gateways on a carrier by carrier basis. Kind of reminds me of the Tyrone Biggums Drug Awareness bit on Chappell. Everything a young spammer might need to get started… Kids, get out your pencils! Her comments on the lengths Verizon goes through to thwart these efforts are impressive (from filters to prosecution), but ultimately the audience is left with the sobering reality that this is an issue (like email spam) that just isn’t going away anytime soon. It’s a real credit to the carriers that most mobile users aren’t even aware that SMS spam is even an issue at all. Go get ’em, VZW!
11:15 – 12:30 (PM EST)
Session 3: Mobile Applications — Games, Widgets, and More
“This session will offer a series of demonstrations about the many possibilities offered by modern mobile devices, which are barely recognizable from the cell phones of yesterday. Industry panelists will discuss how different mobile ecosystems open up the world of applications, from games to social networking.” [Transcript]
Steve Boom, SVP of Connected Life, Yahoo! Inc
Andrew Elliott, Director of Services and Software, North America Go-to-Market, Nokia
Thomas C. Ford, Global Market Strategist, Consumer Products, Opera Software
Rich Miner, General Manager of Mobile Platforms, Google Inc.
Ruth Todaiken, Staff Attorney, FTC Division of Marketing Practices.
Content and Commentary
Review of the development and distribution challenges facing downloadable and web-based mobile applications. Differing device, OS standards, and of the carrier walled gardens. Standard Yahoo GO demos and the like, and Google’s preference for openness as the solution for many of these market barriers (including, appropriately, security – using the old “false sense of security that comes with high walls” argument that Microsoft has basically proved to the world with their closed – and thus highly insecure – Windows and Internet Explorer products). Well played, Google.
1:45 – 3:00 (PM EST)
Session 4: Location-Based Services
“This session will offer a roundtable discussion of the emerging world of location-based services, through carrier-controlled environments or other mechanisms. This discussion will include reference to broadcasting commercial appeals and coupons to phones. There will be a discussion of disclosures about tracking and consumer control of information.”[Transcript]
Michael F. Altschul, SVP and General Counsel, CTIA
Tony Bernard, VP of Operations, Useful Networks
Alissa Cooper, Chief Computer Scientist, Center for Democracy and Technology
Tim Lordan, Executive Director, Internet Education Foundation
Fran Maier, Executive Director and President, TRUSTe
Rick Quaresima, Assistant Director, FTC Division of Advertising Practices
Peder Magee, Senior Attorney, FTC Division of Privacy and Identity Protection
Content and Commentary
Overview of the state of the LBS market, GPS and WiFi triangulation techniques, and various approaches to E-911 compliance. The CTIA has provided a very comprehensive breakdown of each of the US carrier’s LBS service offerings followed by their recommendations for industry Best Practices (all in all quite a good read). You can download here (warning: .pdf link). Many of their best practices hinge on the fact that current statutes governing this area deem the account holder, rather than the actual user, the party with right to set LBS data sharing privileges (child safety comes up often). Other areas of concern touch on disclosure (they recommend a lot), the need for securing the consumer’s explicit permission (opt-in) prior to engaging in location based marketing (nothing shocking here) and length (if any) of data retention (what he cleverly refers to as the “first cousin of security”).
Next up is the Center for Democracy and Technology, “a 501C 3 non-profit public policy organization dedicated to promoting democratic values and protecting constitutional liberties on the open Internet, that includes the mobile Internet and other mobile media.” As a watchdog group for consumer privacy in the digital age (these guys are the behavioral targeting industry’s worst nightmare), the CDT has plenty to say about LBS, including proposing their own set of standards they’ve published under the rather alarmist moniker, “Who’s Watching You Now?” (warning: .pdf link). It seems that many of their arguments stretch the concept of the individual’s expectation of privacy to the limits of rational thought… that because people “walking down the street and by the coffee shop don’t necessarily expect an ad for a latte to pop up on their phone” somehow means location based ads are 100% inappropriate (sidebar: when will folks tire of the “walking by Starbucks and get an ad on your phone” example? Don’t these people understand that having your business on every other street corner pretty much negates the need for location based marketing in the first place!) . CDT then veers way off topic in a lengthy diatribe exploring the dangers of government access issues to location data. I say “off topic” because this is a “mobile marketplace” discussion, after all – not an open discussion of all things related to privacy. Does the CDT think that somehow the Government is going to purchase this data? Seriously, this kind of agenda mongering wastes everyone’s time, and does little to advance their cause.
Overall, issues of consent, recurring notification, “approved LBS services” (complete with a “seal of approval”), child safety, and “where to draw the line?” (zip code? 300 meters? 2 meters) dominate the discussion. If it wasn’t obvious before today, it’s clear by the length and number of questions from the audience that LBS lies at the heart of consumer privacy concerns as it relates to mobile. Nothing else comes remotely close.
3:15 – 5:00 (PM EST)
Session 5: Mobile Advertising and Marketing – The Transition and Adaptation to Mobile Devices and the Small Screen
“This session will examine the general transition of advertising and marketing to mobile devices, discuss mobile-specific advertising campaigns, and address issues such as the targeting of advertising in the mobile space and strategies that advertisers use to adjust to small mobile screens.”[Transcript]
Jean Berberich, Digital Marketing Innovation Manager – Mobile, P&G
Jeff Chester, Executive Director, Center for Digital Democracy
Susan Duarte, Counsel for Marketing Practices, Sprint Nextel Corp
Jim Durrell, Director of Product Management, Greystripe
Gene Keenan, VP of Mobile Services, Isobar Global
Hairong Li, Associate Professor of Advertising, Michigan State University
Marci Troutman, Founder, Siteminis, Inc.
Mary K. Engle, Associate Director, FTC Division of Advertising Practices
Jamie Trilling, Staff Attorney, FTC Division of Advertising Practices
Content and Commentary
The grand finale for day one sported an all-star panel that didn’t fail to disappoint. The session started with an examination of Asian markets as (presumably) a precursor for what we can expect here in the US in the next few years (yes, yes – we all know the flaws that model presents, but at least it presents a refreshingly optimistic future of the US mobile marketing space!). This followed by more research (winner of the “most bullish” award was an M:Metrics stat claiming that 98% of US 18 to 24-year-olds own a mobile phone, with 92% using SMS. While we all agree that 18-24 is the “sweet spot” in mobile here in the US, 98% and 92% are pretty big numbers. I believe that’s even higher than Cable TV’s reach in the same demo). Ogilvy is talking about their interactive Time’s Square billboard for Dove. That one never gets old. P&G is talking about their Cover Girl WAP site. Ditto.
Luckily the FTC thought ahead and brought in Jeff Chester from the Center for Digital Democracy to stir the pot a bit. He was certainly in his element up there, mixing it up with all those agency, network and advertiser-types (How dare they try to measure the millions and millions of dollars they spend on advertising every year?! For shame!). He starts off on relatively safe ground in raising non controversial issues of childhood obesity and advertising, but then quickly lapses into his war against all forms of data-driven marketing (hey Jeff, how would you like to pay $18 for a tube of toothpaste? Keep it up and you just might find out!). On a personal note, Bob Walczak has to be pleased that his “MoPhap” was listed among his usual suspects of “rogue marketers” (read: behavioral targeted ad networks). Too bad Jeff didn’t get the memo that as of several months ago MoPhap underwent a much needed rebranding effort and is now known as Ringleader Digital.
Like many of the day’s earlier activists, Jeff did himself a disservice by bringing unrelated matters into the conversation. Take this example: “We are at a point of — I think almost unprecedented anxiety in the American confidence we have problems related to the current mortgage crisis, certainly, and gas and oil prices have gone up, we don’t want to have a system, particularly tied to youth, that is running amuck because it’s tracking everything we’re doing encouraging this kind of impulse buying.” Somehow data-driven marketing tactics are related to the current crisis in the credit markets? I mean, I realize that everything is connected, you know, in the Daoist, George Harrison-type sense… but can we all agree that we don’t want our industry regs influenced by such obvious windmill-tilters?
Stay tune’d for the second half of this disturbing, yet deeply entertaining odyssey!
New Format Lowers Barriers to Entry for Risk Averse Mobile Advertisers.
Last week Google quietly introduced mobile image ads last week by way of a nondescript post on the official Google Mobile blog.
The announcement is significant as this is the first time that a major publisher has committed to selling mobile display ads on a Cost-per-Click basis. The ads are purchased from the familiar AdWords dashboard, utilizing the search giant’s tried and true keyword bid for placement engine. Curiously, pixel dimensions on the new units do not follow current MMA-recommended standards for mobile ad banner sizes and aspect ratios, but instead follow a previous iteration of the guidelines.
Our regular readers will recognize that Mobilestance has been a vocal supporter of performance-based mobile display ads, as their availability opens up an entirely new base of mobile advertisers – from the more conservative major brands (“I’ll buy it when you show me it works”), to the smaller, more budget conscious advertisers (“I’ve got 10k a month to spend, and you want me to spend it on your untested format?”). Additionally, the display ads should help smaller publishers start to make a business out of their nascent mobile websites.
Still, several challenges and unanswered questions remain. Like Google’s existing (text-based) mobile ad offerings, conversion tracking continues to be problematic for mobile handsets unable to accept cookies (anywhere from 50 – 80% of total us handsets, or 20 – 40% of mobile traffic – depending on who you choose to believe).
Additional questions that come to mind include: Approximate # of monthly avail impressions (US, GLOBAL)? Approximate monthly reach / # of uniques (US, GLOBAL)? Approximate # of publishers in the Google “Mobile Image Ads” (display) network? (US, GLOBAL) Any publishers that I might have heard of? (any premiere pubs, or all “long tail”)? Any premiere advertisers signed up yet? Examples of “going CPC’s” for various keywords.
I plan on testing the ads soon, so eventually I’ll share whatever I can here w/o disturbing the peace…. Until then, enjoy Google’s self-produced home movie on their new offering – a serious “tell” that the Googliers are pretty excited about their new product.
Activist-Focused Initiative Opens Door for Innovative Marketing Applications.
Fluid Nexus, a decentralized (peer-to-peer) mobile messaging application that runs over Bluetooth, promises to do for SMS what Napster did for the .mp3 – democratize a key distribution channel by decoupling the medium from the message.
But… while the technology was originally developed to enable such noble causes as citizen journalism, protest coordination and disaster relief management, it also opens up a host of novel and highly desirable marketing applications. Once again, the law of unintended consequences clearly applies, much to the delight of the marketing opportunist in us all.
The open source project is being led by Nick Knouf, with help from Bruno Vianna, Luis Ayuso, and Mónica Sánchez. The Fluid Nexus application, which is already available for Series 60 Symbian devices, was submitted in 1st Round of the Android Developer Challenge on April 14th.
What is it? Officially, Fluid Nexus describes itself as “an application for mobile phones that is primarily designed to enable activists to send messages and data amongst themselves independent of a centralized cellular network. The idea is to provide a means of communication between people when the centralized network has been shut down, either by the government during a time of unrest, or by nature due to a massive disaster.”
Basically, the application (installed locally on each handset – a key “mass market” barrier that we are putting aside for the time being) establishes an oxymoronic-sounding “Wide Range Personal Area Network” of sorts, with each mobile device accepting and rebroadcasting message data to other “network” nodes (i.e. people running Fluid Nexus on their mobiles) all operating over Bluetooth. The word “network” is in quotes because what you end up with is less of a traditional network (where each element in the system is connected to each other via a serial or matrix-level architecture), but rather a dynamic, evolving, almost organic system that can only be described as, well… “fluid.” This is due to the system’s reliance on Bluetooth, which (in addition to having the advantage of not needing connectivity to the wireless “grid”) is also usually limited (at least on a mobile phone, anyway) to a range of about thirty feet.
This is where things get interesting from a grad-school activist, postmodern hipster, technophile-in-waiting perspective. The application’s creators presume that “if we can use the fact that people still must move about the world, then we can use ideas from sneaker-nets to turn people into carriers of data. Given enough people, we can create fluid, temporary, ad-hoc networks that pass messages one person at a time, spreading out as a contagion and eventually reaching members of the group. This enables surreptitious communication via daily activity and relies on a fluid view of reality.” Surreptitious, indeed… and hats off for the twist on Sneaker Nets. Who knew floppies would somehow become relevant again?
Why Marketers Should Care. By now you may be asking yourself, “Well that’s all well and good… but where is the clutter-clearing, super-interesting marketing application I was promised?” Well for me, it all starts at the end of the application’s official description, where Mr. Knauf and company, in an abrupt and seemingly self-conscious reaction to the aforementioned high-minded phraseology, come down from the clouds and throw the pragmatists in the audience this juicy bone: “Additionally, Fluid Nexus can be used as a hyperlocal message board, loosely attached to physical locations.”
The low hanging fruit here is clearly in the event marketing space – where countless applications for the technology easily come to mind. From basic messaging and exclusive mobile invites to celebrity chats and innovative crowd games. With this approach a marketer wouldn’t have to worry about wireless network coverage (a problem that comes up more than you’d think). Other benefits to the technology (over existing mobile messaging channels) include exclusivity (be in the know), cost (once the app is downloaded use is basically free to both the marketer and consumers alike) and the ever intangible and equally elusive “buzz factor.”
And that’s just scraping the surface of message-based, event marketing approaches. This technology also would work well for P2P distribution of other forms of mobile media – such as audio, graphic and video files, opening the door to even more options. Retail executions bring even more excitement to the channel. Extend a branded activation into an urban space and all of the sudden you’ve got a living, breathing, viral distribution path that can scale across any sized market – neighborhood by neighborhood. Combining this technology with other forms of dynamic media, such as digital outdoor – or even good old fashioned radio – provides creative marketers with a whole new set of tools by which they can forge interesting and (hopefully) meaningful relationships between brands and consumers.
If it were only that simple. Obviously there are many reasons why this technology isn’t for every brand. For one, the application has basically zero install base – and getting consumers to download and install a mobile application is a challenging (yet not insurmountable) task. Also, peer-to-peer technologies (by design) are not easily controllable – by brands or anyone else – and are therefore not for the faint of heart. This is especially prescient in light of recent unfortunate (or absolutely hilarious – depending on your perspective) blow-back from poorly managed viral, CGC or P2P campaigns. Fluid Nexus on Android Video Demo: Fluid Nexus on Android from Nick Knouf on Vimeo.
Rumors continue to percolate that HTC’s “Dream” Android handset will be unveiled to the world at a May 6th event in the UK. HTC has announced that it will be showcasing many upcoming and widely anticipated handset releases at the event, including the HTC Touch Diamond, HTC Raphael and Titanium. The handset manufacturer has issued no official word about the exact timing of the Dream release, or if it will be making an appearce at the event.
In a move seemingly pulled from Apple’s “secrecy and intrigue” playbook, the May 6th event was heralded by a press invite capped with the conspicuous phrase “Something Beautiful is Coming.”
While on the HTC rumor train, many have also speculated that the handset featured in the BBC clip below is in fact the HTC Dream. Hopefully we’ll know for sure in about a week or so…
iPhone, Android Developers Race to Bring Highly Anticipated Technology to Masses.
While we here at mobilestance prefer to poke fun at market predictions rather than make them, we’ve decided to go out on a limb and draw a big ol’ line in the sand: 2008 will be the year that QR codes become viable in the US, thanks largely to the efforts of Apple and Google.
While recent efforts by Scanbuy, Discovery Communications and Citysearch have been impressive in terms of ambition and overall scale, they were nevertheless hamstrung by two significant flaws: (1) they’ve relied on a non-standard, proprietary code format, and (2) nearly all participants were required to download a java app via SMS prior to engagement – a tall order if you’re activating an OOH general market ad campaign. That said, in either an odd coincidence or boldfaced market collusion (kidding), both Google (directly) or Apple (indirectly) have taken the necessary steps to breakdown both of these barriers… the results of which will begin to take affect in and around the third quarter of this year.
All of which makes for extremely fertile ground for the (third party) development of an iPhone QR reader, and develop they have. Even without a user-friendly distribution model in place, developers have been busy porting their existing QR readers for use on the iPhone. iMatrix has already developed an iPhone version of it’s dual use (proprietary shotcode + EZcode / standard QR / Datamatrix) reader, and no doubt many more will follow. The iMatrix reader utilizes the iPhone SDK’s relatively robust API set to not only launch web URLs and initiate messaging and voice call events, but can also “add contacts to your Address Book, add events to Calendar [and] add new notes to Notes.” Until the iTunes App store is online the only way to install the reader is a via a fairly manual process (and only on unlocked handsets), but it won’t be long before the average user can easily download and install the reader via what is sure to be a dummy-proof, Apple-branded experience.
Compared to Apple’s laissez faire attitude towards QR, Google has been far more proactive. In addition to make sure that every Android phone will include a non-proprietary reader preloaded as part of the standard application set, Google is also championing an open-source J2ME reader project dubbed “ZXing” (which supposedly stands for “Zebra Crossing”). Not only is Google helping the app’s development in terms of hosting / distribution, it has also been actively recruiting developers to help with the project (I witnessed this first hand at the Nokia Barcamp in New York last November, when Google’s Sean Owen led a packed house through a four-minute ZXing presentation that abruptly ended with a pitch to java developers to aid in its development).
So which will have greater impact on the market? Well, while Google’s approach has the advantage of having the reader app reloaded onto the handset, Apple has the (short term) advantage of actually having handsets on the market! Also, (as stated earlier) Apple could always add a reader app to the next firmware release and instantly increase the size of the US QR-reader install base by a factor of twenty or so. This scenario is not (purely) speculation, as Apple has been known to “pull a Microsoft” and co-opt a particularly useful software app or two… all in the name of “user experience.” Watson, anyone?
More to the point, the reason all of this is so interesting is because of the perfect intersection between technology and lifestyle. Start with the iPhone user base (mobile-dataphilic, upscale, big spending, early-adopting, Gladwell-style alpha-influencers), then add what we can assume to be first Android buyers (ubergeeks, tinkerers, mavericks and malcontents – i.e. current Linux users) and you’ve got the perfect launching pad for a QR movement – and not just any old QR movement, but one of the advertiser-friendly / “interesting to Sandhill road” variety.
Proof of concept video, iPhone QR reader, below:
Achung! Clip is punctuated with annoying whistling, nauseating camera movement and a few failed demos to boot!
Android junkies looking for the latest news and rumor need look no further than AndroidGuys.com, our new go to source for all things “Gphone. ” The site was founded “on November 5th, 2007… the day when Google made their long anticipated announcements regarding the Open Handset Alliance and Android” by “two guys who have a love for smart phones, gadgets, and technology in general.” The site asserts that while they “respect and admire practically all things Google, [they] are not unapologetic supporters.”
The site first caught our eye last week with its minor coverage of the numbers on the “initial round” of the Android Developers Challenge, but upon a closer look the site boasts far deeper Android coverage than otherwise indicated by the inconspicuous post. Sections include standard items such as news, editorials and interviews with industry execs, as well as other juicy tidbits such as leaked handset roadmaps, regular podcast posts, a “Developers Spotlight“, and our personal favorite, “34 Weeks of OHA“, a weekly feature highlighting each of the 34 founding members of the Open Handset Alliance.
Overall, we’ve found AndroidGuys.com to be an excellent resource for the Android fanboy in all of us, and plan on making the site a permant fixture around these parts. Scott, Jamie and Jordan… keep up the good work!