Tag: iphone Page 15 of 16

iPhone 2.0 – it is not only the Enterprise, baby, it's the mix!

I know, I know, I know: it is all a bit tiring and I just wrote about the iPhone vs Blackberry thingee a couple of weeks ago but there is a nice new piece by one of my favourite columnists on this, namely the NY Times’ David Pogue. He considers the software update (nick-named iPhone 2.0) as more significant as the phone itself as it opens the thing up into 2 dimensions:

1. An attack on the enterprise market with MS Exchange support, push-e-mail and everything else RIM‘s Blackberry, Palm‘s Treo and all the others already have (although Pogue also readily concedes that the absence of a QWERTY keyboard might mar its success a bit; see here for Apple’s intro on it)

2. the awakening of a mobile phone as a true multi-purpose entertainment device (through the introduction of the developer programme and release of the iPhone’s SDK – which, incidentally – also extends to the iPod Touch).

Now, I have covered the first point but the let the latter one on the wayside. And, one could say, rightly so: all existing phones, J2ME, BREW, i-mode and all, have had – more or less – readily available SDK’s for (wireless industry’s) eons. And did it make it a mass market tool? No, it did not. Also today with all the super-powerful phones around, only a (growing) fraction of users actually make use of these things. Why should this change with the iPhone? Well, possibly for the same reasons that made the iPod such a success – in conjunction with iTunes that was.

What Apple managed with the iPod was two things: it brought a device to the market that even my mum could use (and she is rather technophobic) and it provided a clear-cut, transparent, easy-to-use retail model for the contents to be meant to be stored and played on that thing, and that was iTunes.

Now, incidentally, these two challenges are indeed the very ones mobile content often faces today: intuitive UI on mobile phones is still only to be found rarely (“the application you are trying to download is untrusted. Do you want to continue?”) and the retail space is cluttered and dominated by companies who excelled in building highly evolved technical networks but have rarely sparkled with superior consumer understanding. Apple is good at both…

Number 3 would then be discovery and here Apple’s novel business model with tight integration and control may actually bear rich fruit: because of the huge amount of influence (and commercial participation) Apple apparently retains with its chosen carrier partners, it is much easier for it to guarantee the placement of the app store on its phones. Other OEMs have a much harder battle at hand there: carriers routinely request that any number of applications, games, etc are being removed for phones they order; because of the huge power the large carriers have (in most countries handsets are subsidised by the carrier), OEMs struggle to assert themselves (although Nokia seems to be making at least some headway with its Ovi portal; see e.g. here and here). For Apple this is a home-run though, which is a significant advantage.

The only relief would then be that Nokia would still appear to be selling the amount of handsets Apple sells in a year within one week or so. Still…

Is the iPhone the new Black(berry)?

Here’s an interesting one: we will soon all be Cupertino-loving black turle-neck fashionistas whilst going on about our cold-nosed business. This is at least what this article ponders (following Apple’s announcement to add “business features”; could it really get push-e-mail?) .

The article has some interesting facts to offer: user satisfaction for Apple‘s iPhone is dramatically better than for anyone else (a distant first at 59% “very satisfied” users). And, somewhat noteworthy, the Blackberry had a drop of 8% in “very satisfied” users (47%) according to a recent survey — the first decline in its history. Nokia follows with 40% with the others behind.

Apple has only 5% of the smartphone market but, given it is only out on one carrier per country and only launched some 9 months ago, that is rather honourable. And user satisfaction is absolute key to business phones though: price is, for corporate IT buyers, less an issue than for the consumer. And no IT manager thrives on the thought of a mad manager breathing down their necks over an IT or phone glitch. So user satisfaction might in fact be an important lever to push it higher in the business smartphone sector, which is a sweet one with very high ARPU. The article concludes that there is “anecdotal evidence that Apple’s market share is growing. FTN Midwest analyst Bill Fearnley Jr. said that according to his checks, iPhone sales were helped in February by the introduction of a corporate iPhone plan that allows AT&T to bill employers directly.”

So an interesting battle at hand. It is also interesting (and may send shivers down open-source spines) as the two leaders in user satisfaction both run on rather contained software ecosystems. But it does show that it helps when things indeed work (comparatively) seamlessly and painlessly on a device.

I am yearning to see Gordon Brown and Angela Merkel in black turtlenecks wielding an iPhone (Sarko and Obama [do I even need a link for him?] are a given of course). Oh brave new world…

Mobile will be big, no really!

This is something of an old hat but, alas, the conference season in full swing (with my day job making serious demands there) and a little flu to go with it, and I keep falling behind.

Anyhow, at the Davos World Economic Forum‘s “power panel power panel” with the head honchos from Google (Eric Schmidt), Sony (Sir Howard Stringer), NBC Universal (Jeffrey Zucker) and, to top it all off, China Mobile (Wang Jianzhou), a couple of interesting comments were made that do merit some reflection, I think. Google CEO Schmidt in particular was vocal on a couple of points of interest.

One point is so blatantly obvious that I hardly dare to repeat it: “it’s the recreation of the Internet.” Doh. Yes, all the same features, all the same cornerstones: restricted bandwidth, warped business models (one used to pay per minute for dial-up and/or for KB of data, remember, and that would include any ads delivered to you [only that there weren’t that many — for rather obvious reasons]), restricted processing power of devices (my 80286 with a whopping 2o MB hard drive was considered a rocket at its time, and I was the first in my class with a 9,600 bps modem), etc, etc. So for the whole world to get all excited when Mr Schmidt mentions these parallels, I was, well, somewhat disappointed.

Moving on, Schmidt suggested that mobile phones, in particular future ones, would increasingly offer the wonderful touch of being location-aware, in other words come with GPS, and this is indeed what users seem to want. China Mobile’s Wang pondered that phone calls might in fact come for free as LBS may well take over… But isn’t Google one of a very select few who can actually can run carrier-independent zone detection, i.e. get proximity data already? Why do I need to know when a user is within 3′ from my burger shop, aren’t 100 yards enough? As long as he/she’s hungry, I’d say it is. So, is it all there already then? It of course is only one piece…

I would venture that it is in the process of unfolding: next to the handset technology (data usage per se isn’t much fun on a 4-year old black-and-white 6310i), the main obstacle to a more comprehensive take-up is costs of use, namely data charges. Do you remember the Internet in dial-up days? Connect, retrieve e-mail, disconnect. Not much time for anyone to get additional messages (commercial or not) across then. Only when flat rate data packages became available did people start to use the medium to its potential. And this seems to be where we will go in 2008. A lot of the large carriers now offer flat rate data plans and, as it wouldn’t be much fun otherwise, open their walled gardens in the process. This effectively gets the Internet proper onto the user’s phones, and not only a minutely small, hand-picked extract from it. Will this stir usage and uptake? You bet!

Could it be better? Oh, the holy grail of connecting data: see who was where when with whom doing what… This meets widespread privacy concerns and would also require a number of rather complex arrangements between key players that all guard their little secrets jealously as they don’t want to give their advantage away: the carrier doesn’t want to tell, the advertizer either, and the solutions provider wouldn’t ever.

But, hey, aside from that, it is only the “usual”, i.e. the things that I and so many other frequently lament: fragmentation, non-availability of consistent platforms and interfaces. But on all of these fronts, huge steps have been made forward (e.g. do Apple iPhone users google 50x as often as others, and 95% regularly use the Internet; other carriers moan the data usage is “unheard of“). If it is Google’s 4 demands or less doesn’t matter so much: as long as there comes more consistence, so that users get familiar with the approach and the use, it’ll fly. With the mobile phone always sitting in their pocket, i is too close to people’s hearts — well hands.

EA, the iPhone and Mobile 2.0 in general…

EA‘s Travis Boatman, VP Worldwide Studios, recently commented about the adverse effects Apple’s iPhone would have on the sales of mobile games. He moaned that, whilst the device was good, “it’s a replacement for someone who had a Razr before. They still want their content but there’s no distribution platform in place so there’s a negative impact on the industry.”

Now, is that short-termism or the understandable fear of someone who oversees classic game development studios of being replaced by something else, namely online games. Because this is in fact what the iPhone is promising: a replication of the web on mobile. One could say, it’s the entry of mobile 2.0. Online games on desktops became prevalent with the ascent of broadband and data flatrates. This is exactly the environment quite a few people predict for mobile, too. And whilst it was “World of Warcraft” et al that gave the EA’s of this world the shivers on PCs, it is now the iPhone – but not because it’s the iPhone but because it is the first device that, due to its intrinsically different approach (OS, touchscreen), focuses solely and only on the web as the fulfillment medium of content dreams.

Someone then also smartly noted that “[t]he problem of transferring games to new phones has actually plagued the mobile gaming industry since its inception. When users upgrade to a new phone, they most often can’t bring a game that they bought for their old phone along with them.” And the market data seems to confirm the challenges the industry faces: the percentage of mobile phone users who have ever bought a mobile game increased from 10 percent in 2005 to just 12 percent in 2007; that’s not much…

Moving from downloadable games (or other content items) to ones that can be played (or consumed) online reduces the complexity to users enormously. Due to bandwidth challenges, there are some constraints as to what can be played with a certain level of satisfaction online and what can’t: as a rule, everything turn-based, casual puzzles, etc would appear to be adaptable, heavier, more action-related games can’t. However, is this any different on the desktop or, for that matter, the console? Has anyone ever heard of online versions of Call of Duty or EA FIFA? No, because they would not translate in such a constrained environment. Now, Tetris (published on Apple’s iPod by, guess what, EA), Zuma, Luxor, Bejewelled, Poker, on the other hand, provide a rather splendid user experience even when played online and, lo and behold, they are predominantly found as online games on the desktop, too.

The same applies to other content sectors, too: prior to YouTube, the consumption of video via desktop was niche. One might watch a DVD on a long-ish train ride but who in their right mind would download shorter clips to watch them later (well, maybe with the exception of certain post-watershed offerings)? YouTube came and made it easy to consume AND operated in an environment dominated by an economical usage ecosphere, i.e. data flat rates and sufficient bandwidth, and off it went.

For EA (and any other mobile games publisher) this may mean that, in the mid term (i.e. once now pertinent issues such as data charges, bandwidth constraints, etc have been tackled), users will go online on their mobiles, too, to play such casual titles. However, fans of more intense genres will continue to download. The challenge is therefore not so much someone like Apple and any of their products but the current distribution and commercial environment (namely regarding billing) that would appear to slow down take-up. So, yet again, the finger points to the operators who, from their position understandably (why would they be reduced to a bit pipe if they don’t have to?), are in the way of turning mobile into a media consumption channel like any other. The front is however getting diluted: more and more operators throw their data plans into the open and offer more generous plans to users (led by 3 who even offer dedicated Skype mobile phones with the respective data plan to come with it).

And what will EA do? Well, continue to publish games which only make sense when played on dedicated devices. Oh, and they will probably release the Sims as an online version… Not so bad then…

GPS Most Wanted

The Global Positioning System (better known by its acronym GPS) sees a meteoric rise to popularity on mobile phones. According to a survey 24% of all Americans want GPS as a feature on their next phone, and they seem to be served: nearly every large OEM offers the feature in their higher-end models already and others rack up to get there (Nokia N95, HTC Touch, Blackberry 8800, to name a few). And – no buzz without the iPhone these days – there is rumour that one of the GPS leaders, TomTom, is developing the respective module for the iPhone.

As the feature shows appeal to a very wide demographic, this might become a feature like the camera today: initially dissed (“who needs a camera in his phone?”), camera phones are the overwhelming standard today and are putting ever-increasing pressure on digital cameras (well, OK, probably not the high-end SLR but otherwise).

This is not entirely surprising: one does not normally turn to one’s phone when feeling the urge for a movie but it provides true value-add when you walk through the streets of an unknown city (or unknown district of your home town) looking for the right street, and you can actually turn to your phone’s GPS function.

GPS of course provides a completely new take to the holy grail of mobile services, namely LBS (or: location-based services), too. I prefer the term location-aware as such offerings need not necessarily be “based” on this. Way beyond simple “sat nav”, everything from dining out, clubbing, flirting, and generally looking for like-minded people in a given environment would be greatly enhanced by such features. Not to mention marketeers of retailers and consumer brands who are surely already drooling on the thought of what they could do when they could lure consumers into their shops with tailor-made offers just when they walk past their shops. ZagMe was a bit too early for this, it seems but then this was pre-GPS. Brave new world?

German iPhone exclusive again…

German carrier T-Mobile today scored a victory against competitor Vodafone: the court declared that the exclusive deal the carrier struck with Apple over the distribution of the iPhone, the coveted darling of mobile fashionistas, in Germany.

The court ruled that it could not find a violation of German competition or anti-trust laws. Vodafone had invoked an injunction forcing the sale of unlocked devices, following which T-Mobile offered the unlocked device without a contract for a whopping EUR 999. This let a competitor, Debitel, into offering a cheaper contract to owners of such unlocked iPhones under the terms of which they would also get EUR 600 back (the difference between the T-Mobile price for locked and unlocked models).

The decision is not final; Vodafone has the right to appeal. Also, the judgment does not do away with the fact that French law prevents the closed business model favoured by Apple where it is also on offer unlocked. Under European law, unlocked French iPhones can be re-sold in every EU country once deployed in the marketplace.

The biggest impact of this of course is that it effectively puts Apple’s approach to force operators to pay it cut of the usage revenues under threat. This might now be averted as cross-border trade will likely remain marginal compared to overall sales.

Page 15 of 16

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén