Web Services Critical to Mobile Internet

I believe web services will be a critical driver of the success of the mobile internet.  They bridge the challenges of multiple platforms, they bridge the need to work across the three screens (computer, mobile, and TV), and they offer the advantages of continuous updating and off-site storage.

Google offers good examples of web services that they are reformatting to work with the mobile internet well.  The latest example is Google's upgrade of its Reader application for the iPhone and Smartphones.  I have come to rely on RSS feeds to get my news and updates throughout the day, and value the Google RSS Reader as the place where I collect my feeds.  I like the interface, and I like that it is available on any of my computers and devices as a web service.  Now it should work even better with a smartphone.

To me this is a good example of a "three screens" application, where I do some of my reading and flag articles on my mobile device then more of the heavy lifting -- such as forwarding and blogging articles -- on my computer.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal_tech/smartphones/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=207603256&subSection=Management

How Many Mobile Operating Systems Do We Need?

We are all familiar with the expressions:  "it will get worse before it gets better" and "it is always darkest before the dawn."  Maybe that will apply to mobile operating systems.

We now have at least seven major operating systems or platforms in play around the world:  Blackberry, iPhone, J2ME, Linux, Palm, Symbian, and Windows Mobile (in alphabetic order).   Several of these have real strengths that make them contenders for the final round.  Blackberry has a strong foothold in the enterprise; Apple has come on strong with iPhone in just one year; Nokia uses Symbian and is usually among the leaders; Microsoft keeps breathing new life into Windows Mobile, with version 9 due out next year; and now Verizon, a heavy hitter, has breathed new life into Linux with the announcement they would use this as their preferred operating system.

I would like to think the explosion of platforms results from the industry waking up and realizing the mobile internet is here and we need the right tools to seize the opportunity.  This is creating unfortunate confusion in the near term.  Application writers will need to choose which platforms to write for, and even then deal with the confusion about different devices having different screens, input, storage, processing power, etc.  Advertisers and media content providers are also  frustrated by the wide range of platforms, complicated by different media codecs and streaming rates.

My bet is the winner in all this will be web services, which users can reach from just about any device with a browser.  There will be some page-formatting challenges for a while, and we will still see fights about which web standards the devices will support, such as Apple's refusal to support Flash.  Once we get past some of these challenges, the focus on web services will benefit the users who will find it easier to access and manage their applications and data across the three screens (computer, mobile, TV), and will benefit the wireless carriers by doing more across the network rather than within the devices.

Central Control Versus Openness on Mobile Internet

Many real and wannabe macro-economists like to debate which economy will grow the most in the next 20-30 years:  India or China?  Singapore or Taiwan? Much of the arguments boil down to whether central control is more or less effective than entrepreneurial and organic growth.

Now we can bring that debate to the mobile internet.  Apple represents controlled and centralized growth with the iPhone, even keeping a lid on who gets access to the SDK and managing the distribution of new applications via iTunes.  Google seems to be taking the opposite approach with the Android platform.  They have just announced the 50 winners of development seed capital, which according to Eric Zeman at InformationWeek, cover a broad range of location-based services, security, safety, social networking, and media applications.

Over the next few years we will be able to watch to see which approach works better.  There is room in the market for both to work, but for different audiences.  My guess is:

• Apple, by controlling the technology environment, will be more expensive but able to assure a more reliable platform that will appeal to the affluent masses;


• Google, along with other Android players, will offer a broader range of applications, customization, and lower prices, but at a cost of platform hiccups and a greater need for do-it-yourself fixes, which will appeal to techies and new entrants.

Hmmm.  Sounds like Mac versus PC?

It's the Whole System, More than the Device

The New York Times ran an interesting story about how the Apple iPhone is going to take a bite out of RIM Blackberry sales.  I have credited RIM for doing an excellent job targeting the corporate market for email and PIM synch functions, while making the CIO comfortable about security.  They opened up the corporate smartphone market with a head start on Microsoft's Exchange offering.

However, as I pointed out in my blog "Enterprise Customers are People Too",  RIM may have squandered their lead by failing to innovate quickly.  This article describes how they are stepping up to the challenge on device development.  Where it falls short is to look at the entire "system".

Smartphones are more than stand-alone devices.  They are increasingly part of a broader system or network of computers, applications, and networks.  RIM scored early wins by seeing how to incorporate a smartphone into a corporate network.  Apple plans to match this by announcing that in June they will support Microsoft Exchange as well as offer corporate VPN and security features.  I am still looking for evidence that RIM understands that when they add media functions (music, etc.) they need to understand that Apple has a lock on the iTunes application and many propriety playback devices.

I am a sample of one, but may represent many "corporate" users.  I held off buying an iPhone, needing Outlook Exchange functionality, but will buy iPhone over Blackberry because of the way iTunes pulls down my favorite podcasts and because I have iTunes connectors in my cars.

More and more the tech community is becoming a large system in which devices, content, networks, and applications must "play well with others".