Is the Mobile Web Dead? Some Mobile Entrepreneurs Say Yes
Former Yahoo! Mobile evangelist turned startup entrepreneur Russell Beattie announced today that he's calling it quits for his company Mowser because the market for mobile browsing is taking a fast turn for the worse. "The mobile traffic just isn't there," Beattie says, "It's not there now, and it won't be."
Beattie's announcement comes just two months after mobile blogger and consultant Michael Mace wrote a much discussed post titled Mobile Applications, RIP. "The business of making native apps for mobile devices is dying, crushed by a fragmented market and restrictive business practices," Mace wrote.
Update: Several commenters below have disagreed strongly with my reading of this discussion and Jason Grigsby's comment in particular makes a strong case that I've framed the whole thing incorrectly. Such is life, thanks Jason!
While Mace concludes that apps are being killed by the mobile web, Beattie says even mobile web traffic is a non-starter. His site Mowser specialized in rendering the rest of the web mobile friendly. Except for smartphones with good native browsers, Opera Mini and iPhone users, though - Beattie says the billions of people mobile advocates expected to come online aren't.
"I don't actually believe in the 'Mobile Web' anymore, and therefore am less inclined to spend time and effort in a market I think is limited at best, and dying at worst. I'm talking specifically about sites that are geared 100% towards mobile phones and have little to no PC web presence. Two years ago I was convinced that the mobile web would continue to evolve in the West to mimic what was happening in countries like Japan and Korea, but it hasn't happened, and now I'm sure it isn't going to.In other words, I think anyone currently developing sites using XHTML-MP markup, no Javascript, geared towards cellular connections and two inch screens are simply wasting their time, and I'm tired of wasting my time."
Beattie says traffic at Mowser was poor and 80% of it was made up of porn seekers.
Personally, I like mobile friendly web pages and use them often. I love Netvibes Mobile, I check Techmeme Mini throughout the day and always smile when clicking through a ZDNet post that I can read via Alex King's WordPress Mobile plug-in. I am sad when I realize that CenterNetworks is barely readable in IE on my Windows Mobile phone and this blog here is not readable at all that way. RWW looks great on Mowser, by the way.
Apparently I'm unusual in those feelings, though. Or at least unusual enough to make up an insignificant market.
Mobile Apps
Mace's argument is longer, more detailed and focuses on apps you download for your phone. Despite our interest in such apps here at RWW, we rarely review them and those reviews get very few comments. Yahoo! Mobile's newest developments got rave reviews at CTIA (the big mobile conference) this year but perhaps the mobile users really aren't there.
Sometimes a great idea, or a collection of them, just doesn't work out. Do you think it's time to declare the mobile web, except for the iPhone, dead? Not everyone does, but when two respected voices in the industry say it's time to call it quits and move on to something else - that seems like a good time to ask some hard questions.
For another perspective on Mowser's demise, see our network blog Last100 - where Dan Langendorf argues that the mobile web is just beginning.
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
I think they're both right, it is dead to some extent. Unless you have an iPhone or maybe a Nokia N-series, there's not much you can do on your phone with a web browser, especially if it's WinMobile.
The ringtone business is the only mobile business that is always booming. I don't know of too many others that can say the same.
Posted by: Corvida | April 14, 2008 5:47 PM
Aside from reading, there isn't too much you can do on the mobile web on a BlackBerry. The screens are to small and there is no ability to follow through on anything. I always laugh at the little ads I see, they can't get much conversion.
Posted by: Alex | April 14, 2008 5:58 PM
Russ is dead wrong.
If Mowser received funding would Russell be stating that the mobile web is dead? No, he wouldn't. His blog post was bitter and reflects his financial frustrations -- not the frustrations of the mobile web.
Did Mowser not get funded because the mobile web is dead? No, that's not why. It appears Mowser didn't get funded because they had no plan.
They have a good technology with no plan and nobody is going to fund that. You don't make money off of a tool that is given away for free.
Bottom line, if Mowser received a $1MM round of funding his post would have been that the mobile web is booming.
Take it for what it's worth people.
Posted by: Thomas | April 14, 2008 5:59 PM
Reposting twitter comment (1) :
@marshallk : is the mobile web dead? Yeah, good riddance! We can now have the regular web on mobile devices - the iPhone got that right!
1. http://twitter.com/afrognthevalley/statuses/789244217
Posted by: Sylvain Carle | April 14, 2008 6:15 PM
My only clients who really use mobile devices and need apps are senior government bureaucrats. To me, that would not be a positive indicator for investment in the field ;-)
Posted by: Harold Jarche | April 14, 2008 6:23 PM
Certainly not dead. Its time has even come yet -- and just simply because of that.
Posted by: 113.com | April 14, 2008 6:27 PM
>Certainly not dead. Its time has even come yet
Certainly not dead. Its time hasn't even come yet
Posted by: 113.com | April 14, 2008 6:28 PM
From the day I first saw a MW-capable phone, and heard the pitch by the Verizon hawker in the store, I thought it would be a loser. The postage-stamp screen is the killer. WAP was lame, and just look at all the enrgy the W3C group(s) burned on trying to put anything meaningful through a pinhole. I'm chuckling now.
Now the iPhone, on the other hand, is another story. It has (barely) enough screen space to be useful, and it uses "real" markup. The back story on the glass keyboadrd is that it shares KB space with display, giving a much larger display in a phone. Very well done, Apple. Well, too bad it's chained to Cingular...er... AT&T.
Posted by: Bob Denny | April 14, 2008 6:30 PM
I'm staggered that Russell would say that, after being one of the leading MW evangelists out there - certainly one of the most respected.
I have to agree with Thomas (commenter #3), I think Russ would be whistling a very different tune if Mowser had done better. The iphone and the latest Nokia phones show that the MW is nowhere near dead, in fact many people (myself included) have awakened to its power only over the last year or so.
Re Marshall's point about RWW not rendering in IE mobile, that is an ongoing concern of mine and something I hope to fix up soon. I have to say tho that I haven't viewed it as a priority, because of the very things that Russell and Marshall have pointed out! Did I just contradict myself? ;-)
Absolutely not dead. On the mobile projects I've worked on in in the last couple years, growth has been in the thousands of percent, it's actually pretty incredible.
Sorry to hear Russ B so down on it, and sorry to hear about mowser's fate.
Posted by: Jesse | April 14, 2008 6:51 PM
Hilarious. Just a month or so after Google announces they've seen the biggest jump toward mobile (and are gearing up to accomodate it), this guy bails out?
Sounds like he wants out for other reasons and is just being a negative person. I've never heard of his so-called app, but my nearly 2-year old Samsung phone handles websites just fine when I use Google's mobile search, as Google filters it and displays it for the web. And that doesn't even count what the Opera browser could do natively.
No offense to him, but who really needs his app?
Meanwhile, us webifying folks are busy trying to learn stuff like Cameron Moll's mobile work, so we can create our own mobile style sheets.
While I'm not in agreement that mobile SHOULD be taking off like it is (safety, and folks not having a life), the fact is that it most certainly is taking off very rapidly. Seems silly that he would blame the market (that is very well identified and tracked elsewhere) rather than his poor timing or unneeded app.
The name is lame, too.
Posted by: Lawrence Salberg | April 14, 2008 6:53 PM
mobi.alabama
Posted by: Nerdo | April 14, 2008 7:01 PM
I think he's right the way he put it. He mentions he's talking about sites with little or no PC or web presence (By the way, he says this, and then RWW goes and mentions all the sites they use that have web presences. Come on people, read your own freaking quote!)
I can definitely see why there would be no interest in mobile web-only sites. After all, when you come home, why would you want to access the mobile web when you can get the real web on a big screen? People don't want to have to use their phone for everything when a bigger computer monitor can work better. I think its obvious that it would be hard to make it work with just a presence on the mobile web and no presence on the real web.
But I think there's definitely life in dual development. That means having a strong web presence, but also having a strong mobile presence. If RWW wants to make sure their site looks great on a mobile, then they should make a mobile app that specifically displays their site the way they want it. Or have a separate mobile site that formats it properly in a mobile browser.
What this guy was talking about would be RWW deleting its regular website and trying to make a go of it as a mobile web site. I agree with him that it would fail.
Posted by: Tom | April 14, 2008 7:12 PM
the mobile web, together with locative mobile services has been announced since more than 10 years now, following the unfulfilled dream of the widespread use of video telephony. mobile applications tend to gravitate around specific services: take navigation devices for cars vs. outdoors. or ipod vs. transistor radios. you rarely need and can manage the interface complexities of doing all with one device, and when you want, it has to work 100%. just look at the screen sizes, which are between EGA and VGA. so why not downgrading? this is where the eePC went, defining a whole new territory, next to overpriced "smart phones". btw, the mobile device for the rest of us needs to be more hackable of course...
Posted by: pit schultz | April 14, 2008 7:19 PM
I use my blackberry as a mobile internet device regularly - the top bookmarks are for mobile twitter, the bus information from the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority so I can see how late the bus is, mobile weather from the Weather Underground, and parking structure availability from the Ann Arbor DDA.
It's not that hard to create mobile content, even for the crummy Blackberry browser, just pretend it's 1993 all over again.
Posted by: Edward Vielmetti | April 14, 2008 7:33 PM
He is wrong. Big time. My company is THE major data interop provider in the US and for CDMA roamers in EU. Mobile data, INCLUDING BROWSING, is growing beyond our wildest dreams. My job is to forecast this stuff, and frankly, it looks like we are sandbagging. Sorry buddy.
Posted by: interop | April 14, 2008 7:37 PM
There are two tracks to this - the mobile web and the mobile app.
The mobile web is dead primarily because the web, as it is on the desktop, can now be rendered by mobile web browsers such as Opera mini, Mobile Safari, etc. There is no longer a need to customize the web, except perhaps for a few screen resizing.
The mobile web's answer was WAP/WML - which sucks big time! I never used it and never will. It is not an experience that people want.
The mobile app, on the other hand, is different. Look at Symbian apps, iPhone native hacks, Windows Mobile apps and Java apps - there is value to have a full native app running on your mobile device. And this one is not dead - yet (until Cloud computing becomes really reliable and net connection affordable).
Posted by: rom.myopenid.com
|
April 14, 2008 7:45 PM
Saying the Mobile Web is dead today strikes me as similar to saying the Web was dead back in the days of HTML3.2 and dial-up. Back then, there was no interactivity via JavaScript, no multimedia such as video, slow access speeds, little useful content, inconsistencies in page rendering, and high prices for decent service. Sound familiar?
Things like falling bandwidth prices, Opera Mini, mobile Flash, and the iPhone will certainly help mobile traffic increase.
Tom does raise a good point in that Russell mentions sites with no non-mobile presence. The MW sites I use most are Gmail, Facebook, and TechMeme - all sites that succeed because of their desktop counterparts.
However, the Mobile Web does have more to offer, it just hasn't been tapped yet. For instance, we're just now starting to see technology that takes advantage of location, such as Google's triangulation approach and Yahoo's FireEagle. Perhaps we'll eventually see mobile uploads that don't involve MMS. Who knows what MW features have yet to be created?
The Mobile Web is not dead, it's just in its infancy. Give it time - just look at the desktop Web to see how big it could get.
Posted by: Joey Tyson | April 14, 2008 7:45 PM
@rom.myopenid.com: I disagree. Not everyone will use smartphones like the iPhone, and while Opera Mini can handle desktop pages, sites specifically built for mobile work far better on a typical small screen. And such sites do work - I've used Gmail and Facebook enough to testify to that.
The Web is not and long has not been about one platform of access. In the future we'll likely see other devices using the Internet that are far different from desktop machines. That's why specs include ideas like different CSS stylesheets for "screen," "mobile," "print," etc. The Mobile Web certainly has its place for many users - many of them just don't have the pricing plans, awareness, or breadth of services to take advantage of it yet.
Posted by: Joey Tyson | April 14, 2008 7:48 PM
Reading/writing this on an iPhone while on the road, I just wanted to add a few points:
1. 'it depends': when u need full functionality in a small form factor, you need it badly, and a few compromises (a la iPhone Safari or Opera Mini) are acceptable, but huge compromises (a la WAP or XHTML-MP) are not - classic tradeoff.
2. Major players like BBC News do an amazing job of providing multiple GOOD renderings for every imaginable device, and the payoff is high (e.g. if u need quick news updates on an 'older' or 'simpler' gizmo, it's great).
3. Russ (regrettably) didn't have the resources to do the controlled experiment: a niche company offering Mowser-like middleware tools for BBCNews-like content providers who thrive on multiple renderings COULD conceivably hit a sweet spot... it's a tough call when you're burning through personal cash, so I'm sorry to hear Russ's news, but for the specific angle he was trying, his conclusion is correct. Other angles/niches have plenty of mileage, and I'm sure Russ will be in there - best of luck with the next one!
4. Yaaa tapping this on an iPhone is tiring... let's have that Bluetooth kbd!!!
Posted by: Marc Eisenstadt | April 14, 2008 8:31 PM
Thanks Marshall - I have found that Opera Mobile (not mini) is freaking awesome - it renders pages perfectly, does Javascript and while you might need to scroll a tad, you can zoom out and not really need to scroll at all.
The way CN renders on the IE winmo is that it shows the left menu, then the middle content - so you need to scroll down a bit to get to the content but then the pages are fine.
I am looking at some alternatives as well. But I'd say CN renders better than I expected and with Opera Mobile it's perfect.
Posted by: allen stern | April 14, 2008 8:34 PM
What is Mowser? I'd be willing to bet his business failed due to poor marketing/advertising. Never even heard of it. I think mobile web is the future. Sure, I have an iPhone and yes, I run native apps on it for the mobile web. Loving every minute of it and can't wait to see where it goes.
Posted by: William Smith | April 14, 2008 9:09 PM
Oy.
So many confused terms in this article and Russell's original post. Let's see if we can separate them out.
First, when Russell says Mobile Web, he is narrowly defining it as "developing sites using XHTML-MP markup, no Javascript, geared towards cellular connections and two inch screens are simply wasting their time." Basically, he is describing building sites for pre-iPhone mobile devices.
What we know now is that given the right browser that mobile web usage takes off. And every phone manufacturer is working to copy the iPhone experience. Russell seems to equate this iPhone-like experience with desktop browsing.
Russell's argument is that the mobile web is moving towards the iPhone experience. He acknowledges that Mowser was a "short term bet against Moore's law." And he lists the numbers that show that web browsing increases for iPhone users.
To put this in perspective, Russell is arguing that there is no money to be made using Gopher (xhtml-mp w/o javascript) now that Mosaic (iPhone) has been released and consumers have released that they don't want anything less than the Mosaic or better experience.
That's not proclaiming the end of the mobile web. It is the beginning.
Michael Mace's argument is the opposite of the Mobile Web being dead. Instead, he is arguing that the mobile web is killing mobile application development. I don't buy that either because there are still things that you cannot access in a browser that are critical mobile features. But whether or not I agree with Michael's argument, his article certainly doesn't support this article's headline.
Maybe I can be accused of having mobile-color glasses on, but I don't see anything in a careful reading of either article that suggests that the mobile web is dying. If anything, both authors seem to be saying that it is poised to take off.
Posted by: Jason Grigsby | April 14, 2008 9:14 PM
I have to agree. The point he's making is that it's too late for the mobile web in the US, since it took so long to arrive that we're on the virge of bringing the normal web to mobile phones instead. More and more phones will have iPhone-like experiences: rendering full web pages in a real browser, not pages designed specifically for mobile use, and definitely not the old WAP stuff. Firefox, Opera and Safari on the phone are already happening...
Posted by: Dan Grossman | April 14, 2008 9:34 PM
Jason, I think you may be right. I may have been totally wrong in my coverage of this. The only thing I'd question is wether high-quality mobile web browsing experiences will ever be ubiquitous. I suppose ubiquitous mobile connectivity in general used to seem unrealistic, too, though. If the whole world gets iPhones, I would worry about the ecological impact - but that's a drop in the ocean. I think you are probably right and I am wrong. Thanks. :)
@marshallk No problem. Russell's post was a bit confusing, and he makes distinctions that I find odd. It is strange to think of Safari on the iPhone as anything but the mobile web. His overall point is difficult to follow.
You also say that the only thing you question is "whether high-quality mobile web browsing experiences will ever be ubiquitous. I suppose ubiquitous mobile connectivity in general used to seem unrealistic, too, though"
First, ever is a long time. ;-)
And you're right. The numbers in 94-96 for the percentage of people with web access were even smaller, but those were some of the most explosive and exciting days of the web.
And then there is the churn. Phones get replaced every 18 months on average. As new phone with new browsers are released, it won't take as long to see them spread as it did personal computers with net access.
I think the real question is how fast the adoption happens. That's certainly up for debate. I think we'll know much better once the next wave of phones inspired by the iPhone are released.
Ecological impact. Yeah. That's a tough one. :-(
Posted by: Jason Grigsby | April 14, 2008 9:54 PM
I've been one of the people chasing after the mobile web for close to a decade now. I *wanted* desperately to be an early adopter. Bought the painfully slow AT&T brick-phone back in the day, signed up for pricy data plans, tried (and failed) to use mobile apps on my cell phones.
Finally, I gave it up as dead. Bought my iPod Touch last December purely as an iPod replacement and long-overdue PIM.
Guess what? I'm also using it as a mobile device, much to my surprise. Now, most evenings, I'm not even bothering to boot up the laptop - instead, I can check work email, my personal Gmail account, Google Reader and Twitter - all from the Touch using my house WiFi network, from the comfort of my living room couch.
I never thought I'd say this a year ago - but now that my Sprint contract has expired, I'm waiting for the 3G iPhone - and I'll be *so there*.
Even though last year I'd written off the 10 year dream as a mirage...
But it's not just me. My 9 year old daughter stole the Touch and had herself set up on YouTube Harry Potter videos within 5 minutes. And my 15 year old son is now lustfully eying the Touch that he thinks will be his once I get my iPhone.
*That's* the market/generation that already assumes mobile web devices and applications will be theirs for the asking, once they pony up money for their own devices.
Posted by: Betsy | April 14, 2008 10:10 PM
I wouldn't agree with Russell. Mowser is just plain technology without any viable business model. In fact, he should try to talk to the telcos to persuade them to embed the mowser technology directly into their WAP proxy. That would be a better business model.
Posted by: Steve | April 14, 2008 10:21 PM
These are interesting comments from an industry insider. Coming at it from the other direction, I have asked many of my clients, who run niche content websites, whether their clients are demanding better mobile access to their information. Not one (out of over 100 site owners) has said they think mobile access is important. These sites cover both B2C and B2B subjects in the US and Europe.
Posted by: Miles Galliford | April 15, 2008 12:25 AM
I dont agree with this at all. The mobile web is simple evolving from a wild west to a standards based approach with browsers like Safari on iPhone. On older devices service ( Nokia, Sony) applications like Shozu are the most useful, not tiny versions of current sites. Allot of news sites have mobile versions which are great for a quick fix of information. Take the BBC for example the mobile site is amazing, you can easily spend a long period on the site. Making money as a startup in the space may be difficult but the market is not dead.
Posted by: gareth | April 15, 2008 12:39 AM
I have to admit it just seems to me that he expected this to be huge and just bailed when he realised it wasn't.
I agree with a commentor above this is just the start of mobile. More and more people are starting to realise they can surf the web on their mobiles. I think facebook mobile is a good example of non techy people I know using the mobile web.
I think we are 12 to 18 months away from it taking off.
Posted by: Darren | April 15, 2008 1:22 AM
IPhone will definitely fix this.. It is the device that will boost mobile internet usage..
Posted by: Sudoku Maniac | April 15, 2008 2:34 AM
Bango has been around since 1999, betting that the arrival of the internet on mobiles would generate some great business oppportunities. We saw the mobile web traffic take off in early 2003 here in the UK and it's been growing ever since spreading to the US and the rest of Europe and has now become a global phenomenon. Take a look at our live ticker of the mobile web in action at www.bango.com/live and see this for yourself.
Posted by: Sarah Keefe | April 15, 2008 3:13 AM
as soon as a generation comes of age that has been doing stuff for years on a 2.5 inch screen, you can call them squinters, the thing will take off
Posted by: gregory | April 15, 2008 3:42 AM
The mobile web is not dead. What's dead is trying to slam traditional web principles onto a tiny screen. Web apps that are built this way naturally fail. The ones that work are built for the mobile environment, and then start spreading into the PC environment They naturally understand their native medium. Check Icebreaker out for an example.
Posted by: Geoff Livingston | April 15, 2008 4:53 AM
Quitters are those who cannot see the future ahead of their own limitations and skill set. I don't know if it's dead or not, but the only application needed for mobile is a browser and the add-ons that run on it.
Posted by: Joel Mismo | April 15, 2008 5:22 AM
I love my viewty, I didnt even find the mobile web before it useful, but the viewty just makes it kewl.
Posted by: christopher jack | April 15, 2008 6:52 AM
imho he's not right. the problem is mobile internet haven'T started yet because of lack of standarts and modern devices.
added this post to http://www.tectrnd.com
Posted by: Vincent Nicolai | April 15, 2008 7:10 AM
The iPhone's important, but that and its clones aren't the be-all end-all. For instance, pity this poor Mets fan here. When I go to Mets.com, it's all flash, video, and imagery, and way too many components to navigate on a small screen. Yet when I go there from my Windows 5 mobile browser, I get the latest score and other info. Even if I'm on an iPhone, I'll want the WAP site.
Meanwhile, it is ridiculous to think that there will be a new mobile web totally separate from the web as we now know it. Big brands like Google, Yahoo, Facebook, NYTimes, MySpace, and the like will have a following on whatever device people use. People don't say, "I'm surfing the mobile web now." They're just going to their favorite sites. And there are sites that are really capitalizing on it. Weather.com's mobile site gets over 5MM uniques monthly, while toward the end of (American) football's regular season ESPN's mobile NFL section traffic surpassed traffic to its main site.
Posted by: David Berkowitz | April 15, 2008 7:21 AM
How can something be dead that actually isn't born?
The industry is just too impatient and I don't understand why mobile web is said to be dead when one app fails.
Why do we expect a rapid development of human's behaviour just because the technological development goes on so fast? It's just impossible.
Posted by: Julia | April 15, 2008 8:09 AM
I know it is easy to say this now, but I never did think the mobile web would take off. What up with the small screen?
Posted by: The Masked Millionaire | April 15, 2008 8:16 AM
I think we need to look at Asia to see if the mobile web is dead. Remember, we in the US are years behind the global market in mobile broadband. I'm no expert, but I travel a lot, and I see kids in Singapore browsing the web on cell phones. When the carriers put in the correct infrastructure, mobile web will be fine. And yes, I have an iPhone.
Posted by: francine hardaway | April 15, 2008 9:36 AM
I love mobile view on Opera Mini 4.X . I really appreciate when a site has mobile and desktop version.
My boss thinks i'm cool because i access web using my old 3230. Full internet/web experience on mobile phones is very much alive for me.
Posted by: Philry4n | April 15, 2008 10:19 AM
Generally, NorthAmericans use desktops/laptops, and use internet capability on phones as a last resort.
The time for Mobile internet has been "almost here" for sooo many years now, I remember all the excitement and hype about java mobile, wap and wml years ago. And it still hasn't taken off in a big way.
Most north american's have easy access to desktops/laptops.
I think Russell B. should go to Japan, it's a whole other mobile world out there.
Rajesh Duggal
Posted by: Rajesh Duggal | April 15, 2008 11:02 AM
The mobile web has no realy live..
Posted by: Red Devil | April 15, 2008 11:16 AM
(Scary Question)? Some (title of experts in field) say (answer in agreement with scary quesiton)
Posted by: Zac Echola | April 15, 2008 12:47 PM
Wow - one guy decides that startup life isn’t for him and this is supposed to throw a whole shadow over the industry.....hmmm I don’t think so.
I like Russell, I’ve been a long time reader of his blog and an occasional user of his Mowser application.
I think the key point here is that...."Mowser was filling a temporary problem”, with the release of the iPhone and the imminent massive model variants of the Android OS on the Horizon and the sure but steady improvements in the Windows Mobile 6 OS I think Russell is throwing in the towel as handsets are getting “good enough to no longer need Mowser”.
Now do I think he threw it in too early with only 12 months operation - sure but thats because I’m a serial startup entrepreneur with 2 listed companies under my belt.
As an employee of http://www.Amethon.com one of the worlds first mobile browser specific analytics applications I for one am seeing huge growth in mobile content.
Amethon’s clients are seeing traffic build month on month, and yes I think a lot of that has to do with better quality handsets and better quality browsers and most importantly higher data speeds with somewhat more reasonable flat rate unlimited data plans.
With a better user experience more people are finding the convenience of accessing content on the move .....or standing still but getting it right where they are standing with a mobile device never far from their hand ....
The best part about this mobile content is the volume of advertising coming into the space is funding a better user experience, and with tools like Amethon Mobile Analytics users analytics information and a solid roi can be demonstrated against this advertising spend.
Am I sad to see Mowser go, yes - Will Russell bounce, for sure - one of the smartest pioneers in the mobile business, Do I think USA consumers are a little behind eastern consumer patterns in mobile content consumption - YES but that has more to do with carriers and handsets than personal desires and usage patterns.
The mobile space is just taking off, with all the fallouts and successes that there was in the desktop browser wars in the 1990’s.
Watch this space and get in early......your customers are waiting.
Regards,
Dean Collins
http://www.Amethon.com
Posted by: Dean Collins | April 15, 2008 1:56 PM
This sounds like a North American problem. It's also seemingly not paying attention to portable mobile *devices*, only phones, which I think could be part of the problem. A telephone isn't the only thing to access the web on...
And to the commenter above re: Japan, yeah, I just got back from there, and my mind is in a totally different place as a result. My faith in mobile is even stronger than before, especially when it arrives here in NA.
Posted by: Eric Rice | April 15, 2008 7:20 PM
Well, I don't know about the rest of the World, but the cost of accessing the Web and data on mobile 'phones here in Australia is, to me, exorbitant, and personally, I wouldn't bother. Not just because of the cost, but I can't see any point in reading minuscule text, pics and data. I can't even see the point of having built-in cameras! What a waste of resources! If I want to take pics I use a proper camera, not a Mickey Mouse one.
Mind you, I fail to see the point of having a mobile 'phone anyway, I never use mine!
My 2cents!
Posted by: Fred Boulton | April 15, 2008 11:48 PM
Maybe I am being suspicious, but to me this sounds like link baiting... Saying something highly controversial in order to gain exposure. Nice trick though, I'm sure a lot of people have heard about his site now. Maybe I should do the same when I launch my new mobile 'optimised' site lol.
I agree with Joey Tyson #18, this sounds like the dot.com crash talk of a few years ago... It'll never catch on blah blah. Look what happened next! This time next year I feel we'll all be talking a different tune... Or maybe I should say. Yeah mobile is dead for sure, it'll never catch on!!! ;)
Posted by: Tom | April 16, 2008 9:21 AM
1 2 Next