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?