Paul Walsh, the Irish Opportunist

[Update: 5th August 2008. I don't actually think dotMobi would try to buy their way. My title was a little unfair. Perhaps it should have had the words naive or inexperience in there]

I wrote a post recently about how dotMobi is purposely confusing people into thinking that .mobi is right and .com is wrong when it comes to promoting your mobile-friendly Web site. But now they’re stepping up their game. Read on…

When hosting industry awards, one of the most important tasks is to ensure that they are open, inclusive, transparent, fair and above all, independent. By independent I mean free from influence by outside contributors such as sponsors and media partners.

So, why aren’t the Mobile Web Europe awards called the dotMobi Awards? I know why, because then it wouldn’t look independent. Instead, dotMobi has paid for sponsorship, promotion bags and they are on the judging panel and worse still, they mandate the use of their guidelines and their domain name as part of the entry criterion.

Do these look like independent awards to you?

Criteria for submission:

1. Sites must be built on the .mobi domain; redirects to sites built on other naming conventions via a .mobi domain are not allowed.
2. Sites must score at least 4 out of 5 on the free http://ready.mobi testing tool. ready.mobi evaluates mobile readiness using industry best practices and standards
3. Site must meet dotMobi compliance requirements, which are outlined in the dotMobi Mobile Web Developer’s Guide, available at http://dev.mobi.
4. Sites should follow best practices as outlined in the dotMobi Mobile Web Developer’s Guide, available at dev.mobi .
5. Members of the judging panel and their company’s are unable to submit entries to the awards

I love point 5, because anything else would look corrupt LOL.

As if it’s not bad enough having the partner/sponsor’s own staff on the judging panel, it’s non other than Vance Hedderel, Director, PR and Communications, dotMobi

I wouldn’t have believed it without seeing it with my own eyes. Thanks to Alfie and Pat for highlighting this on Twitter.

As long as I’m Chair and the support of the Executive, The British Interactive Media Association (BIMA) will never support dotMobi until it gets it’s act together. BIMA members are made up of dotMobi’s audience - i.e. the agencies (not to mention the upcoming graduates and future students) that build the mobile-friendly Web sites.

Helen Keegan also thinks they should be renamed. Helen also points out that there are only 3 women speaking for the entire 3 day conference. What rock do these people live under?

What do you think?

I was unable to attend a dotMobi presentation entitled “Avoiding the Top 10 Mistakes in Mobile Web Marketing” at the Hospital recently. So, I was delighted to receive an email from the Director of PR and Communications to acknowledge my absence with the presentation slides attached. Great communications and follow-up to an event.

I very much enjoyed reading the presentation and it referenced some good statistics along with useful tips.

Useful statistics referenced in the presentation

Among smartphone users in the US, mobile browsing has increased 89% year over year, and page views have increased 127%.

The world market for mobile marketing and advertising is expected to grow to an expected $24 billion by 2013 (vs. $2B billion in 2007) Among 5,398 North American consumers queried by Forrester in 4Q07, 48% said they wish they could look up things online when they’re on the go, but 58% said the mobile Web fails to meeting their needs - moreover, 60% said their mobile device screens are too small for activities outside of making calls and sending text messages.

I was surprised by their hard-sell approach on slide 17, entitled “MISTAKE 4: using a .com name for a .mobi experience”.

Without going into the technicalities of Tim Berners-Lee’s vision of ‘One Web’, as I could almost write a book on my interpretation and I don’t want to subject you to such an epic, their statement is completely wrong, technically speaking.

Is it wrong to use a .com (or any other) domain for a site which works on a desktop computer and mobile phone, or any other device? No, of course it isn’t. Nor is it wrong to use a .com for a site which has been created specifically for mobile phones. In fact, it is desirable in my opinion, to only use one domain as to not confuse users with multiple domains for multiple devices.

It is desirable for your Web site to automatically detect the device being used to access the site and then render the content according to the capabilities of that device. So, when a visitor uses a desktop computer they get a desktop experience and when they use an N95 they get a site which is user friendly on that particular phone. If you’re really good, your site will take into consideration, the additional capabilities that a phone has over a computer, such as GPS, SMS, MMS, voice…

Technically speaking, it is not necessary to differentiate using different domains. dotMobi is a marketing vehicle for its investors (namely Nokia, Samsung, Vodafone and others) and they’re in the business of selling domains - that’s why they say it’s wrong to use .com. But in my opinion, that’s unprofessional. You shouldn’t slag off the competition. Moreover, dotMobi is confusing people. dotMobi is not a standards body. It is a non-profit organisation in the business of selling domains.

According to it’s very first press release (which I can no longer find), it was setup to encourage developers to build mobile-friendly Web sites for the provision of encouraging consumers to buy more high-end devices to access said mobile Web - thereby also increasing the amount of data consumed - which obviously generates more revenue. In other words, set up a non-profit organisation under the guise of helping industry when in fact, it’s setup to generate more revenue for their profit making companies. It’s a bit like Google Android, which comes with Google applications pre-installed each time. Oh, a bit like Microsoft’s OS pre-installed on computers, but without the ‘non-profit, community-loving cloak’.

Sorry, back to dotMobi - that was the plan before they probably realised how flawed it was with companies such as MAXroam demonstrating to operators, what they should have done years ago; offer customers value for money instead of ripping them off with ridiculously high roaming charges. The iPhone is almost forcing operators to provide unlimited data tariffs and handset vendors are being encouraged to stop providing 3 features per model - just put it all in one device! Google Android should encourage operators and vendors to actually collaborate like real stake holders in the same industry. Crap. I’ve gone off-topic again.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think it was wrong to setup dotMobi, we all need to ensure our shareholders are happy. What’s wrong, is the confusion that has been caused and the fact that dotMobi does little to help the situation.

It’s not wrong to use a .mobi domain for sites which are specifically created for mobile phones either, irrespective of how much I dislike the idea. Although some would argue it is.

Some people may wish to use a .mobi domain for mobile friendly Web sites. That’s their choice. It is no more, or less appropriate than say, .org for non-profit associations. Take the BIMA Web site for example - it makes sense to use http://bima.org but unfortunately it has been taken by another organisation. That’s why it uses http://bima.co.uk. Is that wrong? Of course not. However, it is wrong according to the dotMobi presentation. That’s what is wrong in my opinion - it’s sending out the wrong message to the industry behind closed doors, as I’m almost certain dotMobi wouldn’t dare to make such a bold statement on a W3C Mobile Web Initiative mailing list.

Going off-topic slightly, something I never do, the presentation stated that dotMobi generates $10m annually. I suggest they revise that statement because being given a $10M annual budget (as of Year 1) for marketing, is not the same as generating revenue.

My advice to Web site owners and the agencies building their sites: stick with .com or whatever domain you already have. Then, when it comes to adjusting the site to work better on mobile phones, follow best practice design guidelines.

Check out the W3C Mobile Web Initiative Best Practices to find best practice design guidelines for mobile Web development. This is particularly useful if you haven’t designed for small screens before. It’s not particularly useful if you’re a WAP developer, as you’re more inclined to stick to WML based sites.

Disclaimer: Segala is one of the original Founding Sponsors of the MWI.

James Whatley wrote a post where he describes why he feels Carephone Warehouse should employ an evangelist. I tried to leave a comment but the blog has a horrendous registration process which I got bored with. So instead, I’ve decided to publish my comment here.

I’d rather encourage all staff into becoming evangelists, but that will only happen when they care enough about the brand to become brand guardians. Having nominated evangelists only works when they’re evangelising specific technologies - like you get with companies such as Microsoft and Apple. By demonstrating that you care to educate and listen to people about your technology, you end up doing the marketing bit indirectly and in a much more discrete manner.

My advice to Carphone Warehouse is for the senior management team to take stock of public perception and put in place a plan to change the culture across the company. They have a serious culture issue which I believe is management’s failure to evolve as the company changed direction over the past few years. Only then will staff care enough to treat customers as customers and not second class citizens.

Carephone should consider hiring new management, not tech evangelists. Change must come from the top, even if instigated and encouraged by those on the ground.

Read previous posts about my Carphone Warehouse rants.

Sign up to Wubud.

[Update 19:21 - I've just tried to reinstall the software. It managed to delete what I had but failed to restore it. "Unable to complete your iTunes store request'. So, looks like I'm back to the old one for now]

I appear to be experiencing authentication issues and starting to wonder if it’s a widespread problem, or just me. My POP email is behaving weird. It took at least 20 attempts before it authenticated my details. When I finally managed to get it working it only downloaded one email from today and two from yesterday. How weird is that?! There’s no logic to the issues I’m experiencing.

I’m still unable to sync mobile me with my Mac Pro. The account is setup but it fails to authenticate when I try to sync.

I’m wondering if there’s a general authentication issue due to server load. Are you aware of known authentication issues with the new 3G iPhone or the old phone with version 2.0 of the software?

Picked this up on AppleInsider.

Concerned with its image, Apple watched nearly 50,000 of its loyal customers sign an anti-Rogers petition at ruinediphone.com, which has in turn sparked hundreds of potentially damaging reports on the matter by bloggers and members of the mainstream media.

Until now, Carriers have been permitted to do whatever they like when it comes to handset prices and tariffs. Those days are numbered, at last. I mean, how the hell did Rogers expect to get away with tying customers into 3 year contracts and requiring a minimum monthly payment of $60 for just 150 minutes, 75 text messages, and 400MB of data? That’s even more dumb than O2 Ireland’s tariffs for the iPhone. Note, I didn’t say O2 UK.

I’m an extremely happy iPhone customer on the O2 network and can’t help but feel we have it a lot easier than most people realise. I’m looking forward to my new (free) upgrade on Friday too

This post was inspired by a debate taking place on the Mobile Monday London forum. It has never been this easy to predict mobile. It has become increasingly easy since the first release of MMS (picture messaging) in 2002, which almost revolutised how users consumed content on mobile phones.

We have some historical data to go from when trying to predict the next few years of Mobile - in terms of connection speeds to help mass adoption of Mobile Web anyway.

Trying to predict mobile in 2015 is a little too far for my liking. I’d have to lay on a bed and dream about something so far stretched that most would probably laugh at. Some of my greatest failures include not having the balls to execute ideas because of colleagues laughing at them - such as charging hotels and restaurants for online advertising. Long story which I won’t bore you with. Instead, I’ll bore you with another story about connection speeds. For the sake of the record, I’m not bragging - it’s easy to say you had ideas, it’s another to execute them.

Some historical data which may help.

During the early days of the Web I remember writing modem strings to help get the best out of 1200bps modems. Before that I was using them to download interest rates from a bank in Paris to a bank in Dublin - all I knew was that some machine made noise and it all just happened.

We were delighted to eventually see the delivery of 33.6k modems after having 28.8k for so long. We were told by BT that it was *technically impossible* to get anything faster down a phone line. Then, one day, BT came back and said “hey, we’ve managed to squeeze 56k by reducing the line noise”.

1200bps to 56k happened between 1995 (roughly) and 1997. That’s just 2 years.

In 2002 the rollout of Broadband helped to achieve a major spike in users on the Web. I wasn’t involved in that, but some of my friends were, and still are.

So, it took about 5 years to make a huge jump in speed to help accelerate mass adoption of the Web. If we consider that the growth in mobile technology (and possibly technology in general) today is just twice that of Internet technology during the mid to late 90’s, we should see a major spike in mass adoption for mobile web in about 2 to 3 years. This argument is boosted in my opinion, by our generation’s knowledge and experience and the newer generation’s expectations.

Explaining the benefits/possibilities of the Web during the early days was much more difficult than it is to explain the benefits/possibilities of accessing the Web via a mobile today.

The future is bright, the future is not Orange or any other Operator. If this isn’t realised soon, Operators will end up like AOL - i.e. going out of business holding onto old business models

It took just two days for HSBC management to resolve this issue. They were extremely helpful and apologetic for the miscommunication and misunderstanding.

It’s not company policy to refuse bank account applications from social networking or mobile related companies. However, there’s a little more to it than that simple statement - look at my vblog if you wish to learn more.

Download the video to your iTunes (2:77MB; 01:42 minutes)

To be clear, I didn’t do this as a way of ranting about my situation with a particular bank. I brought attention to this subject to help ensure some change, however small, took place, so that others would benefit.

Firstly, there are no missing features in the new iPhone. Well, as far as Apple is concerned anyway. They haven’t done anything different to any other handset vendor - how else are they to encourage consumers to buy the next release and the next and then the next… Nokia is actually the worst offender in my opinion. When has Nokia for example, ever released a device with everything you ever wanted - without the need to auction one of your internal organs to buy one. Which brings me onto my next point, how can anyone have anything negative to say about the new pricing structure? It’s free on certain tariffs. I think the same skeptics want everything for free in life and forget that every other vendor charge through the nose for high end devices.

It’s ridiculous (embarrassing even) to hear an audience applaud Steve Jobs announce a flush socket for a headset. It’s something that should have come in the first release. Get a life.

I’m a loyal customer of Apple but it’s just one (of the smallest) players on the field. It might be a George Best of our industry, but it’s still one player. I’m looking forward to the rest of the vendors playing catch-up to help encourage mainstream adoption of Web enabled phones at a reasonable price.

Regarding an improvement to the development community ecosystem I’ve been reading on the Mobile Monday email list - I don’t see a major change - major change occurred with the release of the first iPhone. For some reason, most people need to see a screen shot before they’ll believe what’s coming. The first iPhone changed the development community’s perception with respect to ‘how’ consumers will consume content. I remember when the *vast majority* of public comment from the mobile development community on mobile Web for example, was “it will never happen anytime soon, long live WAP’”. That was up to the actual release of the iPhone. After which, the comments were “it’s too expensive”, “it’s too slow”…

It’s not rocket science. Nor does it take a fortune teller to see that mobile technology is not only changing at incredible speed, but that the speed at which change occurs, is also gaining momentum all the time. Hope that last sentence makes sense Furthermore, connection speeds are improving, pricing is coming down and the interface is improving. So, nothing different to the landscape changes we witnessed on the Web during the mid 90’s.

I’m delighted to see a new 3G enabled iPhone, as mine, which currently supports EDGE (slower connection speed) only works satisfactorily when there’s an EDGE connection available. Without one, the connection speed is either too slow to download email or browse the Web, or it dies altogether. The new version is also more supportive of the development community. This means you won’t have to unlock your phone to download non-Apple applications. Check out Twinkle if you’re a Twitter user - it’s fantastic. The downside is that we’re going to see Apple-specific applications, meaning developers have yet another non-standard device that needs to be ported.

This is my first ever video post so please forgive the fact that it’s very rough around the edges. Please feel free to provide tips and feedback.

Download the video to your iTunes (4.2 MB; 02:43 minutes)

Links

• Official Web Mission Web site
• Coverage of the Web Mission on TechCrunch.com and TechCrunch.co.uk
• Some information about wubud on TechCrunch.