Mobilesect Mobile Musings ...

Mobile SDLC

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:00:00 +0000

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?

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:48:00 +0000

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?

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:21:00 +0000

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...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:16:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 19:29:00 +0000

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 ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:57:00 +0000

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 ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:26:00 +0000

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.

Alcatel and Mobile Ads...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Fri, 22 May 2009 14:24:00 +0000

There is an interesting article in yesterday's WSJ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124286784197941713.html around Alcatel-Lucent entering the market for mobile advertising. Essentially, their service will be offered through carriers and allow for "opt-in" location-based advertising. So, for example, if I want to receive a promotion from a fast food chain around lunchtime I would get a text message with a click-through to a mobile web site offering me a lunchtime deal at a restaurant close to me.

What's interesting to me about this is the increasing momentum for mobile applications. Furthermore, I believe that this momentum is building from real data rather than just hype. By real data I mean that mobile web and mobile application traffic driven mostly (at least in the U.S.) by the iPhone and Blackberry are providing enough tangible/measurable traffic that companies are able to justify the investment in mobile. Sure, not all ideas will necessarily work, but it's becoming apparent that now is the time for most companies to get into the game.

iPhone Mobile Web Traffic

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Fri, 15 May 2009 13:08:00 +0000

There was an interesting article this week in the WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124208325352208449.html) talking about companies spending money developing (or buying) applications for the iPhone that could serve as ad mediums. The statistic that I found most interesting is that according to Mobclix over half the total smartphone Web traffic is from iPhones. To my way of thinking this underscores how fundamentally important investing in iPhone applications whether web-based or otherwise is for companies. To put it another way ... if you are going to spend $1MM dollars in mobile and your desire is to target the mobile web experience then $500K of your investment should be directed at the iPhone.

A Verizon iPhone ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Mon, 04 May 2009 13:34:00 +0000

I've been intrigued by this for the last couple of weeks as word has leaked that Verizon and Apple are in talks to deliver a version of the iPhone for Verizon. Verizon has 87MM subscribers ... AT&T has 78MM subscribers ... Apple has sold over 17MM iPhones since its launch and over 1B apps have been downloaded ... of those 17MM iPhones close to 14MM have been sold by AT&T (http://www.dailywireless.org/2009/04/27/verizon-iphone-next-year/).

So in a nutshell how would a Verizon iPhone change the landscape for application developers? Lots more potential customers ... Even if one assumes that some of the AT&T customers came from Verizon it still opens up a whole world of people who have been tied up in contracts or otherwise haven't been heavily marketed from Verizon who would now become serious iPhone prospects. Other things that would be interesting would be whether the carriers would begin to compete more to upgrade their networks to 4G capabilities (which helps the application ecosystem) and/or would they seek to want to cut exclusive deals on certain applications and if so would Apple even allow this to occur? What's clear is that a Verizon iPhone would be a clear win for both application developers and consumers.

Ordering pizza from my iPhone...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:48:00 +0000

A recent mobile commerce experience of mine .... Last Friday night I used the Domino's pizza mobile web site to order several pizzas for delivery. I had not used their site previously. However, I must say that I was impressed! What was most interesting to me were my thoughts as I went through the ordering process. First, mobile commerce in the U.S. is in its infancy so I had similar feelings to my early experiences ordering via the desktop web ... Are they going to receive the order? What about confirmation? Will I receive my pizzas? Will the amount be correct? However, I must say on all of these accounts Domino's literally and figuratively delivered. The second thought I had as I went through the process was would it just be easier to call them. Here is where the process flow was short enough (even with ordering three pizzas) that I did not really feel a need to make the call. Additionally, I must admit that the amount of the purchase ($20 roughly) made me less apprehensive even if things were to have been messed up. Finally, what prompted me to use my iPhone versus either looking up the number and making the call or sitting down at a PC was the fact that I didn't have to move from the couch in order to do it.

Takeaways ... 1. As people embrace mobile commerce it will take off just as the PC web did - essentially, once the "fear" is gone the comfort will grow. 2. Keep the order process flow as short as possible - if it's long and cumbersome you'll reduce your usage. 3. Recognize that people most likely are going to begin with simple orders and then move upstream. 4. Mobile is a new channel so even though people have multiple PCs, land-line phones, etc., they'll still use the mobile commerce channel for convenience.

Long Term Thoughts in Mobile Usage ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:36:00 +0000

I recall reading at some point during the dotcom frenzy Bill Gates' pronouncement that we as a society tend to over-estimate what can be technologically achieved in the next two years while under-estimating what can be achieved over the next ten years. Considering what's happened over the last ten years with the desktop Web there is no doubt that it is has fundamentally transformed society and continues to do so.

Now let's consider this concept with the assumption that teenagers are completely comfortable with mobile devices and their usage and are extremely capable with texting, social networking, etc. What will mobile applications look like in 2019 as today's teenagers come of age? First and foremost, I believe we'll have both ubiquitous, fast networks similar to today's broadband wireline networks and in those rare situations where connectivity might still be an issue, built-in storage or caching capabilities that are invisible to the end user. Secondly, social interaction and communication off all types will be facilitated in such a way that you and I will be able to communicate within our various micro-communities easily, yet we will be able to guard our individual privacy as needed. For example, I may be a Facebook user, but also a member of a gardening club and I will be able to easily interact with both "groups", yet keep the conversations separate if I so desire. Thirdly, mobile devices will be able to communicate with many different types of other devices in a seamless manner. For example, I will be able to quickly and easily make purchases using my mobile device using near field communication (NFC) (or other similar technologies) and I will be able to walk through my house and receive updates from the various appliances installed. Fourthly, much of this will happen on a global scale. No, I do not think that every country in the world will have the same network and device capabilities. However, I do believe that mobile networks become much more important (as they already are) in opening up new global trading patterns and opportunities. Finally, and this may be a big distinction from the desktop Web, I believe that personalization and true 1-1 interaction will drive many of the mobile application opportunities of the future. There is no reason why I shouldn't be able to receive on-the-go information that's directly relevant to me.

RIM 4Q Numbers ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 14:45:00 +0000

Wow! That's all I can say about the fact that with all of the concerns (justifiably) surrounding the recession and consumer spending that RIM could completely beat Wall Street's earnings estimates. Not only that but now half of Blackberry users are consumers. Think about that for a minute ... one of every two people who uses a Blackberry is not a business user. Incidentally, they also finally launched App World.

What does all this mean for mobile applications? It means the pie is growing. What do I mean? The smartphone is displacing the feature phone among consumers and the opportunity for applications especially for Blackberry and iPhone users is getting larger.

The Mobile Sell ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:25:00 +0000

What's the first quarter been like in terms of selling mobile solutions? While I cannot speak for the world I am able to give you what we've been seeing and hearing. Yes, everyone it seems has been holding their coins tight and concern about revenue and budgets has been high. However, it's also been interesting that everyone with whom we've spoken has recognized the need for a mobile strategy to tap this new channel. We have not had anyone say they don't need mobile. This leads me to think that compared to the Web time frame we are in the 1st or 2nd inning say 1997. The game has started, but we're not very far along yet.

What's also been interesting is that we have had numerous people mention the fact that they are seeing mobile traffic and particularly from iPhones. Yet we hear in the next sentence that while they're seeing traffic they're not sure where they want to invest and they want to make sure that they can project a positive ROI. This is to me where things have diverged somewhat from the early commercial days of the Web. In those days the same elements of it's new and it's important were there and since the economy was doing well people made the investment. I agree that in these times a positive ROI is important so I offer this as a solution. Fail fast (and cheaply)! Put together a mobile program that offers multiple smaller yet different apps - an iPhone app, a Blackberry app, an SMS marketing campaign. Then collect and track the data and continue to move forward with what works.

Additional Thoughts on App Stores ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:33:00 +0000

I know my previous post was on App Stores ... however, I continue to be intrigued personally by how this concept could thoroughly expedite the mobile applications space so please allow me an additional post. I wrote a book on the mobile web and have done serious work with the mobile web over the last few years. However, one challenge that has always befuddled me is how do you reduce the time it takes for someone to type a URL into the mobile web browser and retrieve a site. The reason I believe this is a huge issue is that the usage pattern of mobile is start/stop so the longer it takes me to start the less inclined I'm going to be to use it. Furthermore, take the example of shopping for houses and driving through neighborhoods. You can't really effectively type in a long URL unless you stop your car and then how patient are you to type in a different URL many times over (especially while you're driving).

So, you ask, what does this have to do with App Stores? Well, I believe that extremely thin on-device applications that pull most everything via the mobile web could dramatically reduce the start time. Here's what I mean ... the world of tomorrow could possibly have hundreds of thousands of downloadable applications for each platform. However, each of these applications is not a full-blown app that took months to develop, but a thin "shell" that uses web views to display data that has been pulled via XML feeds very quickly to the application. Yes, I would still have that initial download from the App Store, but after that I could more or less have an instantaneous ability to quickly get the information I need. To take it back to the real estate example ... if I know I'm shopping for houses in an area, I pull the four or five main real estate broker's mobile applications from an App Store and then I'm able to quickly and easily use my mobile application in the shopping process.

App Stores - Why I like them ...

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:01:00 +0000

The concept of the mobile application download store isn't really new ... in fact Handango (http://www.handango.com) has been around since at least 2000. Additionally, "on-deck" carrier content with ringtones, etc., has also been around for awhile. However, what is new (and credit must go to Apple for its implementation of the App Store in this regard) is the ease with which a 3rd party developer, company or brand can develop and distribute a paid application.

Let me explain a little bit more what I mean ... in the past the ability to develop a mobile application wasn't really a problem. However, the distribution and deployment of a mobile application was a big problem. How so? Well, if you wanted to go through a carrier then you had better get in line and not hold your breath since getting on the carrier deck meant big time and money. If you wanted to distribute as an online download then it meant download, install on the desktop (generally), then install on device, maybe register, etc. Whatever the method the idea of an impulsive download much less purchase was a fantasy!

Not so anymore. Now the rules are clear (more or less) and anyone with a computer, $99 bucks, and an Internet connection can distribute a paid application. I use the example of a paid application since what's also present in the App Store model is the fact that the provider already has your billing information so there is not the hurdle of having to go through this process when deciding to purchase. All in all, I believe that if nothing else the App Store concept facilitates paid deployment and distribution on a scale mobile applications have never seen.

Retail Cost of Communication

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:38:00 +0000

OK ... bear with me for just a minute as I present a theory on why mobile applications including voice are the current and next wave of communication. If you think through the history of how we communicate with one another whether individually or as a collective the retail cost of communication for the average person has plummeted throughout history.

Let me explain. As humans we started with storytelling around the campfire and if I had a message to communicate I could only do it to those in my immediate circle and to those with whom they physically had contact. Then messengers allowed for contact between groups of people followed by scribes to write things down followed by the printing press for mass distribution of physical media. Then came the telegraph to begin virtual communication followed by the telephone then the network computer then the Internet PC and finally the converged mobile device! Whew! The important pattern here is that for the average person or business or community each of these inventions has dramatically lowered what it costs to inform as well as to be informed. (Incidentally, this is why we'll continue to see developing nations adopt mobile over other forms of communication since the simple fact is that the total cost is lowest.)

So what does this mean? It means that the mobile channel follows in a historical trend of reducing the cost of communications and every company must have a strategy for how to adopt mobile applications into their way of doing business.

The iPhone as a "Game Changer"

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 15:17:00 +0000

Yes ... I know that this topic has been covered many times by both bloggers and the mainstream press. However, since I'm re-entering the blogging world I believe that I need to add my two cents on this topic. To put it simply ... the iPhone changed the game because it was developed and executed by a software company rather than a device manufacturer or carrier and secondly, because it alerted the C-suite to what could be done with mobile applications outside of simple email.

I think that number one (the fact that Apple did it) laid the ground-work for number two (the fact that the C-suite was exposed to something on a phone beyond email). The reason for number two being so important is that in order to have investment to build the next generation of mobile applications the persons making the allocations i.e. CEO's, CFO's, CIO's, etc., need to understand where the money is going. With the iPhone the C-suite can tangibly understand what a mobile application is and even be creative in thinking of what mobile applications for their industries can be. This was and is big for the mobile applications community.

Inaugural Posting

noreply@blogger.com (Richard Yates) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:36:00 +0000

We're kicking off the Mobilesect blog today ... on it Scott and I will opine on the mobile space - where we've been, where we are and where we believe we're going. I have taken a blogging hiatus for a year or so during which time I wrote my book on mobile web development. So please check back often as we intend to make several postings a week for the foreseeable future ...