Mobile SDLC

An SDLC is a systems development lifecycle. For mobile I believe it's important to have a couple of additional items in addition to the traditional design, develop, test, etc. For me the mobile SDLC consists of conceptualize, design, build, test, launch, market and support. Now, some would say that there really isn't anything new or different about what I propose. However, what I believe is different is that conceptualize, launch and market are essential ingredients which absolutely cannot be overlooked in the overall process and are integral in driving the mobile application process.

Let me explain further by contrasting mobile with the web. A web application concept is obviously important, but the basic process is that you have to have compelling web content that is accessible via a fairly standard browser. By contrast a mobile application concept involves whether to be xHTML / WAP, iPhone app, Android app, RIM Blackberry (and which versions of the Blackberry OS to target), etc. The conceptualization phase for mobile TOTALLY drives everything else and once that decision has been made is can be much more difficult to change course.

Additionally, launching and marketing a mobile application (or mobile web presence) involves communication and coordination that requires more than just SEO or integration of a web address into traditional marketing collateral and advertising media. Again, depending on the application concept very different routes can be taken. If it's an iPhone app then obviously it's highly important to leverage that initial presence in the App Store while an xHTML / WAP site would need to canvas the universe of mobile web surfers.

In a nutshell ... recognize that while many of the ideas of other types of software apply to mobile it is a separate channel that requires slightly some different emphases.

Why Microsoft is missing it in the "NEW" mobile?

Let me start by saying that I AM a Microsoft fan and have done a number of applications through the years using Microsoft technology. We all know that many in the technology community love to poke fun at Microsoft. However, Microsoft has historically delivered (IMHO) good products that have been easy to use and have satisfied market demand. Furthermore, they have done a very good job of working with the developer community not only by providing good tools, but also by assisting partners in the partner's business opportunties.

So why is Microsoft falling behind in mobile technology? I believe that it's fundamentally because they have not allowed mobile to innovate outside of the the existing stable of Microsoft server and desktop products. Essentially, mobile has been tied too closely to both Exchange and SQL Server and this has stunted the growth of the platform. Yes it's had good traction for enterprise mobility applications and has had good development tools. However, if Microsoft mobile is to effectively compete with the iPhone and Android (among others) it's going to have to be allowed to innovate and flourish independently of the existing legacy applications.

Mobile: Strategy or Channel?

Should mobile be viewed as a strategy or simply a new channel? I believe this is an extremely valid question. Often we want to refer to something as a "strategy" or "strategic" so it appears important and conveys a lofty status on its creators. However, I think mobile (and especially mobile applications) is more akin to a new channel. Let me explain further. If you approach something from the vantage point of a strategy then it takes on this abstract, self-important tone that implies diligence and care in coming to conclusions. However, if you look at something as simply a channel then it becomes nothing more than another way to reach an audience. Furthermore, a channel implies that concrete action is needed to reach those who exist at the end of a channel.

I discuss all of this "mumbo-jumbo" to say that your target audience has mobile phones and many are using mobile applications. Therefore, spending an excessive amount of time theorizing your "mobile strategy" may simply be an attempt to put off the necessary concrete work of just figuring out how to reach out to your audience through a new channel.

Experimentation in Mobile Apps...

One of the interesting things to me about selling mobile applications in the past few months has been the timidity many companies and organizations have had in their approach and commitment. I think back to the dotcom days when companies were falling all over themselves to try ideas and test things out often with no really good way to measure outcomes or with any real expectation of what might work. In today's digital world ideas can be tested without a large money or time commitment and the world of mobile applications would seem a pretty good area for such testing to occur. For example, if I'm a retailer who wants to be prepared for the holiday shopping season why not invest 25K or so to build an iPhone application or to mobilize my product listings so that consumers who do not find the product they want can either buy online via mobile or search for the availability of the product in a different store nearby? In a nutshell, put in place and budget a process where you hypothesize a desired outcome, design a cost-effective solution, develop this solution, deploy it to the marketplace, promote it within your existing messaging and then analyze the results to either validate or negate your hypothesis. Then iterate based on the results. It's the scientific method at work, but today's digital tools make it doable without spending a fortune.

Blackberry App World on Device

Let me start by saying that I'm a fan of App Stores since I believe (and have said in earlier posts) that they solve the problem of mobile application distribution. That being said I have to say that RIM needs to expeditiously find ways to get App World more front and center on Blackberry devices. The beauty of Apple's App Store is that once you're up with iTunes that's it ... you don't have to do anything else to download or buy apps even paid ones (since Apple has your credit card info.).

I installed App World on a Bold a couple of weeks ago and I must admit that while it wasn't complicated it still required me to download App World, connect my device making sure that I had the Blackberry desktop software installed on a PC and then "slide-load" App World onto the device. My concern here is that too many users will find this process more of a pain than it's worth. Additionally, once I installed App World it was not readily apparent where it was installed. It ended up in the Downloaded Applications folder on my device which again sort of makes sense, but may not be completely simple for a novice user. RIM needs to take a page from the marketing playbook of Apple and make App World a core piece of the platform and easily accessible for all types of users.

New iPhone Announcements ...

This week's iPhone announcements - $99 model, 3GS, etc., has me thinking most about one thing ... Is it possible for Apple to completely dominate the SmartPhone/Converged Device space especially in regards to mobile applications such that other companies particularly in the software and consulting arenas can build legitimate businesses just working with the iPhone?

The reason I believe this is an extremely valid question is that if there is a critical mass of iPhone users that becomes large enough such that it can be segmented in such a way to support the software and services community then at that point it will become incredibly difficult for other competitors to make a dent in the marketplace. Put another way ... if I and my company can make enough money just doing iPhone applications then I don't care about supporting other platforms.

One of the historical challenges in marketing mobile applications especially to consumers has been the fact that in order to go after a large enough segment of a particular market many companies have needed to support multiple platforms. Supporting multiple platforms is difficult both in the expense involved in developing software for these various environments and in the pure headache factor involved. Yet if Apple succeeds in capturing a large percentage of mobile applications' users then it may make sense at some point in just working with the iPhone. While we're not there yet it's intriguing to consider the possibility!

The Palm Pre ...

As the launch date on the Palm Pre draws near I'm struck by all of the positive buzz surrounding the platform ... Walt Mossberg in the WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124407239691783093.html) is very bullish on the device and he views the Pre as a legitimate competitor to the iPhone and Blackberry. Additionally, Sprint is reportedly "all-in" in terms of hoping that the Pre stems its subscriber lossess. However, Mossberg mentions the fact that there are not many apps yet and that application developers have not really signed up for the platform yet and this is where I'll comment ... Palm has always had good, simple designs and its Pre which has a former Apple executive as part of its leadership team is no exception. However, where Palm has faltered is in its support of the application development community. They failed to invest in the Palm OS for the better part of the last decade and when they did invest it was almost always a non-starter. Hence, many of us are skeptical of spending much time and energy with yet another Palm device unless and until it proves itself in the marketplace. Therefore, I'd be surprised to see the mobile apps community rally behind the Pre until Palm proves it can be a force in the marketplace again.