Hey Companies, Where Are Your iPhone Apps?
A funny thing happened on the way to the airport. I searched through the iTunes App Store on my iPhone for a Southwest app that allowed for flight check-ins, only to find that it didn't exist. I don't know why I expected it to be there, but I did. Southwest is one of those companies that seems so "with it" when it comes to this digital age we live in. They have a blog, a Twitter account, a Facebook page, a flickr account, and a YouTube channel. So why no iPhone app?
It was so surprising to me that there was no Southwest iPhone app, that I initially didn't even believe it. I switched over to Safari and performed a search. That's when I stumbled across this page. Apparently, someone had built an Southwest iPhone check-in application in the absence of an official version and the company had asked him to take it down. What's going on with that? We hope that means Southwest is busy building their own app and didn't want any competition.
Yet they're hardly alone when it comes to big businesses that are missing out on leveraging this new mobile platform. Several companies that should have apps, don't. Why is that?
Listen Up: We Want Apps!
Today, there are numerous companies that could and should have iPhone applications or, at the very least, an iPhone-ready mobile web site, do not. Another that comes to mind immediately is My Coke Rewards. Coke Rewards are the points you can collect from the bottle caps and 12-packs of Coca-Cola beverages. You enter them in on the company's dedicated web site or via SMS in order to receive free prizes and discount coupons. Yet, there's no iPhone app for this. In fact, the entire site runs entirely in Flash, so there's no way to browse to the site using the iPhone at all. It's a terrible mobile experience from one of the world's biggest retailers.
Other companies missing the boat are those in the travel industry - companies like Priceline for example. Although Priceline operates a mobile site at www.priceline.mobi, there's no app available in the iTunes store. Imagine the missed opportunities! Who doesn't want to get a cheap flight or hotel? However, one of their competitors already has an app up-and-running: Travelocity. The Travelocity app offers several travel tools and a one-touch button for booking tickets. But where are the other big players in travel? Orbitz? Expedia? No apps from you?
While still on the subject of tickets, the giant ticket brokerage Ticketmaster is also sorely missing from iTunes. Instead, the lesser known Tickets Direct is getting all the iPhone owners' business as their app lets you search and purchase tickets for thousands or concerts, sports, and theater events.
Then there is Apple's partner, Starbucks. Given the integration between the two companies when it comes to music, it's hard to believe there isn't an iPhone app for ordering your latte by now. Although a lot of iPhone owners desperately want this, we do understand that building a system to handle mobile orders would take time. (Still, we hope this is something that they're working on.)
For that matter, we hope all the restaurant chains and pizza places are working on mobile ordering systems. Many chains have mobile web sites, but this isn't enough for us anymore. We want one-touch access from our homescreens. Especially for those restaurants who already provide curbside-to-go services. Why not have an app for this? It just makes sense.
Other businesses that should be leveraging the iTunes platform are the shipping companies like UPS and FedEx. There are several different mobile shipping trackers available now, but all are third-party applications. None come from the actual shipping companies themselves. Without their own apps, these companies are missing out on an opportunity to establish a brand presence on a platform that is increasingly being used in the workplace, thanks in part to the iPhone's ability to receive Microsoft Exchange email...not to mention the CEOs who are now demanding that I.T. support the device.
Also missing from the App Store are apps for major retailers. Where's our Best Buy app? Circuit City? What about our favorite clothing store? Grocery store? Car dealership? Although there are price comparisons apps aplenty and Amazon's app of course, several brick-and-mortar operations are still missing from the store. And while Jaguar's iPhone-only magazine launched in 2007 was clever, we want more. We want real apps.
Finally, why haven't local papers thought to use the iPhone platform to save their dying businesses? Most papers of any decent size already have developers on staff who work at maintaining the paper's web site - why not ask them to build an app instead? Some larger news organizations have already done this including AP News, USA Today, and the New York Times (Disclosure: RWW is syndicated by NYT). But where are the smaller, local news organizations? This could be how they could save themselves. Who wouldn't want to read the local paper on their iPhone? Add in mobile coupons and ads from local businesses to the app and you could breathe new life into the industry.
Who's Getting it Right
Surprisingly, some of the companies getting the iTunes experience right are the ones that don't immediately spring to mind when you think about companies needing an iPhone presence. For example, you may be surprised to find that retailers like Nike and Kraft have recently launched iTunes applications. Kraft's iFood Assistant helps customers create shopping lists and find the nearest grocery store, all while maximizing exposure for their product line through the 7,000 searchable recipes it contains.
Nike also recently launched an iPhone app to promote their sponsorship of Italian soccer. Called Nike Goal, the app is an extension of the Nikefootball.com web site.
Major retailer Target not only gets points for knowing to advertise within Pandora's mobile app, but they have their own iPhone application, too. The app is a gift finder app that lets you search for gifts by price and gender. Clearly, the app was launched just the for holiday shopping season as it came out in November, 2008. However, this app could be so much more that what it is today. We could use our iPhones to add items to our Target gift registries, collect mobile coupons, or check out the latest sales. So Target, you only get half credit for this one.
According to AdAge (link behind paywall), apps will be the new way to engage and advertise to your customers, but frankly, we're not seeing many big companies with apps just yet. We hope in 2009 we'll begin to see more. It's certainly time.
Let us know what companies you think should have an iPhone app. You can comment here or on our earlier discussion on FriendFeed.
1 TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/9815
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
But why do you NEED an iphone-specifc application? Wouldnt it make much more sense for companies to build standards-based web applications that work EVERYWHERE: desktop browser, mobile browser, etc?
That was quick blogging :)
Posted by: Bwana
|
January 15, 2009 9:39 AM
The big difference between web apps and native apps is speed. It's MUCH faster to have the app already loaded on your iPhone and have it query only the data you need, instead of loading the whole damn app or web page.
I don't know if there's a Fandango iPhone app, but have you tried loading that turd on a mobile device?
There are third party applications for some companies. I'm one of the developers of TimmyMe (free, finds Tim Horton's locations) and BucksMe ($0.99, finds Starbucks locations). These are simple tools that enable users to get to a company's retail stores and nothing else.
I'd be open to discuss this further with you, Sarah, we have a lot of experience in this field even outside the two applications under our name. You have my email address.
No love for the FriendFeed feedback...? :(
Posted by: Mona N.
|
January 15, 2009 9:44 AM
@Blaine thanks for the invitation...I'm mostly interested in whether or not the companies themselves are going to launch official apps. BucksMe is ever so handy, btw! :)
Gilzow: My question exactly in the FriendFeed post that preceded this post (http://friendfeed.com/e/192e693b-0ab6-4de6-afa8-116278b0a583/What-companies-should-have-an-iPhone-app-but-don/).
I would hope that the companies (I work at one mentioned) would step back and create application that anyone could use and then specialize where they can to take advantage of specific features of specific platforms. In most instances that would put an iPhone app just after a functional Mobile Web app that had access to information consumers want... after that is done building and expanding features on an iPhone is a much easier proposition.
No, this was not about Web 2.0, but major retailers and businesses outside the Valley. Sorry! (Besides, we have fftogo.com and Nambu for now).
Posted by: Sarah Perez
|
January 15, 2009 9:47 AM
Excellent point. We certainly DO NOT need an iPhone centric world. The iPhone is buggy enough to concentrate on real smartphones that allow you to copy and paste information... Anyway the iPhone is has been now, time to move on.
I think that the apps for businesses do need to come for the iPhone in order for it to really become the "one phone to rule them all". Just saying...
Posted by: Damien Franco
|
January 15, 2009 9:48 AM
I think Mona means, no mention that you got the feedback from that FriendFeed thread? amirite Mona?
Posted by: Bwana
|
January 15, 2009 9:51 AM
Oh - I meant acknowledgement/credit for the FriendFeed contributions... :( Bwana - thanks for clarifying. :)
Posted by: Mona N.
|
January 15, 2009 9:52 AM
Oh, heh...I understand...how should I add that in? Comments came in through Twitter, too.
Posted by: Sarah Perez
|
January 15, 2009 9:54 AM
Damien: Do you believe it should be the one phone to rule them all? I mean I use my iPod Touch for web hours a day but the landscape is a bit wider for most folks... All: Did you all know that many if not all iPhone specific Mobile Web sites work exactly the same on Android? That's quite a selling feature for that approach of companies I would suspect.
Posted by: Ben Hedrington
|
January 15, 2009 9:55 AM
Better yet, why not have a sort of Adobe Air for mobile devices? Buy/install the container application for your iPhone, Android device, Blackberry, Palm Pre etc, and then install apps to that which have been written once in a web-like markup language. You could run the same apps on your desktop, and features like GPS would be enabled or fail in a friendly way depending on your device's capabilities.
Sure, J2ME is a bit like that, but clunky and idiosyncratic: something from a more consistent web-orientated interface and programming perspective would be awesome.
Is it against RWW policies? Ben - I think Sarah is talking about native apps.
Posted by: Mona N.
|
January 15, 2009 9:59 AM
I'm also not sure, given the NYT syndication, but for now, I added it at the bottom. I will have to bring this up.
Posted by: Sarah Perez
|
January 15, 2009 10:00 AM
@Guillame B - I understand that there's more to the mobile world than iPhones. However, apps should be a part of a company's mobile strategy - a strategy which should also include device-agnostic mobile web sites and SMS (if SMS makes sense for their service). But ignoring the popularity of the iPhone platform (and any others that come next - Palm? Android?) is not a smart decision. This isn't an "iPhone hoorah!" article...just pointing out how companies are missing out on an easy way to access and engage their customers.
Thanks, Sarah!! :)
Posted by: Mona N.
|
January 15, 2009 10:02 AM
@Sarah Perez, this doesn't have anything to do with "Web 2.0". The iPhone still has nothing as far as market penetration in the world compared to Nokia or in the enterprise compared to Blackberry. Why would a company want to develop an application for one specific device with such a small market share when they could, instead, develop one application that EVERY device equipped with a browser could use?
@Ben Werdmuller is on the right track with Adobe AIR, though I would prefer to see a non-proprietary platform used.
@Michael Gaines, they need to build a better application then. The only bottleneck should be network/data transfers if it has been built correctly.
Of course. :)
Posted by: Sarah Perez
|
January 15, 2009 10:03 AM
OMG the link is in red!! FriendFeed got a RWW mention! THANK YOU SARAH AND THANK YOU RWW! - I swear I am not employed by them, I jsut get excited when our community gets credit. ;)
Posted by: Mona N.
|
January 15, 2009 10:08 AM
@Gilzow: Because "the iPhone's current market share is 23 percent this month, an increase from the 17 percent market share...in September, and more than twice its share when the 3G model was launched in June." - Source: http://tech.yahoo.com/news/nf/20081223/tc_nf/63713
iPhone is a rapidly growing platform. Maybe not the world leader, but certainly becoming popular in the U.S. where many of the retailers I mentioned in post are located. Again, I reiterate, iPhone should not be the entire mobile strategy, but certainly should be a part of it. Of course companies should have a device-agnostic app, too.
The iPhone App Store is censorious -- they have banned art and books. Companies should be applauded for not being associated with it. Personally I think worse of anyone who develops anything for the App Store as it currently stands, the same way I think of the character Louis in Casablanca: collaborating with an oppressive regime in order to get a leg over.
By the way, shame on you for attempting to shame your betters.
One of the problems that companies face when trying to produce an application for the Apple App Store is the complete lack of communication from Apple during the review process. Most companies have dead lines and milestones to reach, and submitting an application into the Apple black hole where you lose complete control of when the application will be available is unacceptable. TripChill is a mobile travel assistant that works on all mobile phones. We are trying to leverage the App Store's viral benefits as one of many sales channels for our service.
@Sarah, ok, then how long before iPhone users become overwhelmed with all of the company-specific applications? I'd like to order a Pizza from Pizza Hut. Oh wait, I've got to do download the Pizza Hut application from the Apple store and install it. Tomorrow, I think I'd like to order a pizza from Papa Johns: oh wait, I've got to go download and install the Papa Johns app from the apple store. The next day, repeat. How long before you have hundreds of company-specific apps? Contrast that with a company that builds a solid mobile-capable application. You want to order a pizza from Papa Johns? You go to their site and do it; no install necessary. You want to order a Latte from Starbucks? You go to their website and order it; again, no install necessary.
as for here in the US, yes, the iphone is gaining traction, but then, it's only available on ONE network. ONE. The iPhone has the best mobile browser available, no questions asked. As an iPhone owner, shouldnt you be advocating that companies build better mobile-accessible web applications that better utilize the capabilities of mobile Safari?
Again, doesnt it make better business sense to develop one application that all devices can access than commit resources to building an application that only a small segment can utilize?
Plaxo! Yes, I know I can just go to their website, but it would be so much better if there was an app specifically designed for Plaxo. Or, am I missing something?
@Gilzow Who really varies that much day to day on what brands they use? Seriously?
@Gilzow I'm with @logicslayer on this one.
There may be a million store/retailer apps available, but it's not like I would download them all. I would only use the Papa Johns app if I was an *extremely* frequent customer. Otherwise, I would probably call or use the web site, for example. As far as the retailers' apps that I could see myself using on a regular basis, I could probably count them on one hand. Favorite clothing store, a couple fav restaurants, Starbucks, & my local paper. Everything else would be on an as-needed basis. For ex, when I was flying to CES, I would have added the app for my airline and hotel. When I returned, they would have been removed. Apps are far easier than mobile websites.
I feel like you're still not hearing me though about the iPhone apps vs the device-agnostic sites/apps. I never said that companies should build iPhone apps INSTEAD OF mobile sites. But I'm starting to feel like a broken record, so I'm going to quit saying that now.
@Gilzow why not advocate both? Why can't a company have both native apps and mobile friendly sites? In that way the customer benefits by being able to use whatever platform suits/benefits him and the business benefits through easier customer access, and potential rise in consumers/sales.
That was a fast and well written article. I am happy Expedia, Best Buy and Target got mention b/c I mentioned them too. FedEx and Travelocity are good calls as well. FedEx should be all over this. I think that certain fast food restaurants would be crucial. I ALWAYS go to Chipotle so I would keep this app on my phone. Also, AAA would be an interesting one. Newspapers and even magazines (Vibe, Sports Illustrated, Fortune, Maxim come to mind) would be beneficial. Distribution is key. And it doesn't have to be an iphone app. G1 platform is good as is Blackberry. The more distribution the better.
Posted by: Amani
|
January 15, 2009 12:23 PM
@Amani Magazines - that's also a great idea! I was sad to hear about PC Mag shutting down their print version...an iPhone version of their mag would be a great alternative. (And thanks for the compliment, too!)
Posted by: Sarah Perez
|
January 15, 2009 12:27 PM
I was quite pleased with Bank of America's new iPhone optimized mobile site (not app). I was also surprised to see WalMart's iPhone optimized site. Seems like a good trend.
Posted by: Hao Chen
|
January 15, 2009 12:33 PM
Great Article! as a company that is focusing on building Enterprise apps for the iPhone, I completely concur with your post. It would be great to discuss some of the obstacles, issues and other ideas I have to share with you based upon the feedback we get from speaking with enterprises about creating, managing, deploying and supporting iPhone applications within enterprise eco-systems. Email me to set something up.
Nabyl.
I hope they spread out to other mobile operating systems as well. I just bought the G1 and I love it. I wold like to see some apps like this on the G1.
Good article. I concur.
It is a pretty low investment to get a custom App made and placed in the App Store with an outsized payout e.g. additional sales, higher customer satisfaction, higher brand awareness, etc.
Sarah has it right by pointing out that this would be in addition to other forms of marketing / PR / IT e.g. website, mobile website, twitter, facebook, etc.
Your argument can be applied to Windows too. Why don't all these companies have applications for Windows? Sure they have websites so that any standards based browser (or IE ;-) can access their services in a very simple manner, but a native application will certainly be faster. Moreover, Windows has a much bigger user-base than iPhone.
Bottomline is that iPhone applications are nice, but they drive you to yet another proprietary platform. iPhone's best application is "Safari," because using that application, you can access services from all the above mentioned companies already.
While it's not an app, Coldwell Banker has a real estate site created specifically for the iPhone. Not install needed. Just web access to search.
Sarah, one reason Southwest doesn't have an iPhone app yet is that they don't have an API. Companies with open APIs find that people build iPhone and Blackberry and other mobile apps for them - without even being asked. Mashery has several customers, including very large ones like Netflix and WhitePages.com, who have been pleasantly surprised by unrelated third parties who have quickly built excellent mobile apps "for" them using their APIs.
This shouldn't come as a huge surprise, for two reasons:
1. For the geeks among us, a typical web app is three layers - the data layer (what we know), the logic layer (how we manipulate the data), and the presentation layer (the UI that is rendered on a web browser. An API bypasses the presentation layer and gives direct access to the logic and data layers. Since a mobile app is simply a new presentation layer - a new UI that makes different use of the data and logic layers - it follows that the easiest way to get a new presentation layer to work is to start with an API, and not to design all three layers anew; and
2. Southwest's core competency is being an airline. They have also proven that they are quite good at creating a user interface and web experience that makes it simple for non-geeks to buy airline tickets. But this does not mean that they have a similar skillset on making great mobile apps. Sure, as one commenter said, a mobile app can just be something that runs on the browser. But that is not necessarily the best experience possible. Using location info, it can default to listing flights from the closest airport, for example.
Companies often have very passionate customers. Some of those customers also are developers, and they want to build a great app - and will do so for free.
As it turns out, the open API is the quickest path to a mobile app. who knew?
Oren Michels
CEO
Mashery
good point:)
How do I get an app into the App-Store?
I would have to strongly disagree with you: I might be a bit of a gook and my iPhone might have way too much crapware â but I kwon I'm not the only one with limited slots. One App from SouthWest, one from British AirWays, one from UA. . . That's a bit too much, and not very convenient if you can't remember the operator of your flight. What we need, and what the App Store encourage, is fresh ideas and solutions that are not tied to such or such providers. I want one application that is tailored for my use of transport, and Companies feeding it with APIs.
I do not want a Starbucks App, because I prefer micro-brands, and because all the Starbucks where I go are filled with tourist queues (and don't call me snob until you've heard *when* my local shop was founded). I want a map of local coffees available on Google Maps, with a one-click button to call them. When Object centric internet will be able to tell me whether they have a working Wifi or if there is a table that is not too lit for me to work on my lap
@ Bertil: Hmmm, sounds like the real problem is limited slots and limited screens on the iPhone, if you ask me. Maybe in time, Apple will think of new ways for us to access our apps differently so that space is not a limiting factor when it comes to the number and variety of apps we want to use.
However, I like your idea of the companies banding together to create one app by combining their APIs...that would rock.
Great article Sarah! After reading through all of the comments, I think the key point to take away from this is that (and correct me if I'm wrong, Sarah) she's not saying EVERY company should create an application to make their task easier (whether it's checking in for a flight or ordering pizza). AND even if they did, it doesn't mean that you would have to download each company's app if you wanted to order a pizza from this place one night or fly from this airline because they had cheaper tickets for that particular day. That would be silly! For the companies where you are a frequent customer, of course it makes sense. Whether you’re an iPhone user or not, smartphones are supposed to make lives easier! Why wouldn't companies want to improve customer service by enhancing the user experience, whether by streamlining certain processes or offering a mobile experience?
The iPhone isn’t the be all and end all, but it is helping to drive the industry. While I have an iPhone, the applications I decide to download on my phone are the ones that I am most likely to use frequently. They ultimately help cut down time from just using Safari. For everything else, it’s Safari.
iphone apps are pretty ridiculous. even though i love my iphone it has limits. the processing power is low and apps never expose as much functionality as the main web site of the company. i'd rather they work on their main web offering rather than split development/qa/deployment costs among multiple platforms.
frankly the only reason i'm on an iphone is because the web browser is so good. as other phones come up to speed and over open platforms that dont force you to install a shitty mac sdk, i'm ditching my iphone.
@Sarah, I know you think you are "starting to feel like a broken record" but not once in your article did you mention standards-based web apps. Your entire article is focused on building iphone-only applications. It wasnt until the comments that you mentioned anything about building "device-agnostic sites/apps".
RWW has consistently written articles on how the browser is, or should be, the next platform. And the main push behind this argument has been that browsers are virtually everywhere. Which means that if an app can run in a browser, then the app is available almost everywhere.
Thank you @Someone! My point exactly! Why are applications like Google Docs, Google Mail, Flickr, Mint, etc. so popular? Because they are platform agnostic; they work on any computer that has a browser: Mac, Linux, Windows, Symbian, Palm, etc. IMO, by advocating for a proprietary, platform-specific, application we are returning to the days of "this site only viewable in IE".
I'm not saying there shouldnt be ANY iphone-specific applications. Obviously, certain things (like games) are going to NEED low-level access to the OS and hardware in order to perform. But of all the examples you (@Sarah) gave (coke rewards, starbucks, priceline, ticketmaster, restaurants, pizza places, UPS, FedEx, Best Buy, Circuit City, local newspapers) not one of them would require low-level access and all of them could be made as a mobile-agnostic web application.
And no, not everyone is completely brand-loyal.
@Oren Michels is on the right track. An open API that allows access to the underlying data and business logic would be fantastic. But, developing a solid API is not easy nor cheap. And then the company has to then either build something on top of its own API, or hope that someone else will build the app. Again, from a business standpoint, it makes economical sense to build an app that covers the largest base. Then, if resources are available, build out something more specific.
@Marie Goltara: "Why wouldn't companies want to improve customer service by enhancing the user experience, whether by streamlining certain processes or offering a mobile experience?"
They should! And that is what I am trying to convey over and over again. By following web-standards, and progressive-enhancement, companies can build applications that virtually every browser in existence can use. So why would a company want to limit themselves to just one small community of their user base?
I'm the developer of the Southwest iPhone Web app and I had been told that there was a new mobile site in development but that was a long time ago, almost 9 months ago. For someone who almost always flies Southwest, I really want a Southwest iPhone App. When the web app was up, it made getting ready for a flight so much easier.
My ONLY disappointment at moving from windows mobile to iPhone - where is my mobile Delta access? Delta re-directs Safari to the http site - yuck. Pllleeaaassse.... Delta... I promise I'll use it every week!
One of the things we try to sell is mobile web sites for companies and the occasional iPhone app, and prospective clients tell us why they aren't building apps. From my perspective, many companies that we contact just aren't ready to embrace mobile, and their limited IT budgets mean that they'd rather focus those funds on their standard web site. The fact that iPhone app development is more expensive and serves fewer users than mobile web sites is another contributor, although I am well aware that an app can perform better and do cooler things than a mobile web site (especially if the mobile site is poorly built).
I do think as mobile browsing continues to get more prevalent the ROI case for mobile apps or sites will improve. Granted, we're not on the radar of companies the size of Southwest. FWIW, I also don't necessarily want iPhone apps for every company (especially if I have to pay for them) -- a well-done mobile web site is cool with me in many cases, and sometimes existing apps feel redundant. Case in point -- I don't want an app from the local paper. I'd instead prefer several RSS feeds that I can use in my favorite RSS reader which will probably do a better job of letting me read how I want anyhow.
Lastly, I'm the first to admit that I may not be the target market of all these apps, but that's why this is just my $0.02. :)
As I was out in bar/club last night, I thought of an additional genre to add. Dating sites should totally have their own iphone app. Jdate.com , eharmony.com and match.com are big ones in the US. I see enough people messing with their phones (including me) while they are out an about. Why not?
Posted by: Amani
|
January 18, 2009 9:58 AM
1 2 Next