When Web 2.0 Goes Mobile, Things Can Change

[Antoine Wright]

Right now, there is a disproportionate amount of attention being paid to the term "Web 2.0." Lots of places, online and off, have touted Web 2.0 as being the Holy Grail of sorts for widespread Internet adoption. And while it's true that some of the principles behind this movement called "Web 2.0" have made things more accessible, for much of the world that connects to the Internet via something other than a high-speced laptop, it is nothing more than a glass ceiling.

For starters, there is no clear definition as to what Web 2.0 is. For some, this term means the collaboration and social nature of web sites that has blossomed. For others, this term has mean the realization of "big brother" and the concept of "the network as the office."

Whatever the definition you want to take, its clear that information is being brokered across several devices, via a web browser, in order to connect and make people productive in ways that are more seamless than paper and file cabinets could ever have been.

And yet, what has been missing in all of this rush to be social, collaborate, and work from the network is how to scale applications and services so that mobile devices -- smartphones, PDAs, and smaller Tablet PCs -- can best take advantage of them with their limited hardware but personal connections.

Opera has shown with its Opera Mini browser that its not impossible to fit the larger world of computing into the small screen. However, despite its success, Opera nor anything else outside of SMS (text messaging) has really taken off on standard mobiles. It seems that for all of the bevy of services and programs that come under this "Web 2.0" umbrella, there is still confusion as to where mobiles fit best.

A recent acquisition of Zimbra, by Yahoo!, might shed some light as to where mobile devices can fit it, but it will take a bit of work on several fronts to make this happen.

The Why

The reason why people carry a mobile device is because there's some aspect of information they want or need to access as simply as possible. Whether that is a GPS device to get from point A to point B, or simply a phone book so that a call can be made. Mobile devices thrive when getting information has as few layers as possible.

The big play for this "right now" space is in the area of mobile web portals and widgets. Both are service-based applications which sit front and center on a mobile device and give access to needed information in as few taps as possible. Of course, there is only so much information that can be viewed on a small screen, but considering the regional and occupational differences across mobile device users, this is a hotly contested arena where any number of players can win out.

Part of Yahoo's Answer

One of these players is Yahoo. Yahoo offers a mobile portal application called Yahoo! Go that is a Java-based application that is usable on Windows Mobile and Symbian smartphones. Yahoo! Go is essentially a portal to many of Yahoo's popular services: Mail, Flickr, News, Search, and MyYahoo.

What is noticeable about this offering is that it integrates well with the mobile device, and gives quick online and offline access to what most want for their mobile devices. In using it on a Nokia N95, I noticed that if I were Yahoo-centric, it would be all that I would need on a device. However, there are some things missing, such as better support for Word, Excel, or PowerPoint email attachments. This makes Yahoo! Go great for a casual consumer, but it misses steps that would otherwise entice a more enterprising user.

This is why I see the Zimbra addition to the Yahoo portfolio -- and a most probably similar move from Google and Microsoft with their online offerings -- as something interesting for mobile devices. We can all agree that it is not efficient to be connected online all the time in order to have to read a document or get something done. But if in a portal, or portal application such as Yahoo! Go, you could access documents that are stored on a server, and then view/edit/sync them locally, the mobile device becomes a better platform for the "right now" viewing of documents and information that would otherwise be a hassle to keep track of or carry.

How This Solution Can Play Out

Mobile is more than just sync and carry. Because a document would be linked on a public, secured server, you could shoot a SMS/MMS/email message with just a link to view an item, instead of attaching the entire file. Documents can be tagged for being "mobile-friendly" or even formatted on the fly for mobile devices to better cater to whatever it is that the person has to view the document.

Because of this, we then get back into that Web 2.0 idea of information being something worth sharing, which in many respects is all that Web 2.0 is saying. Mobile devices have been left out because they have not had enough compelling reasons to be used as a part of the sharing circle. I believe that Office documents will be a important part of Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, and others' mobile strategy, and that this aspect of using a portal to connect the data with the person -- irregardless of device -- will be the push the mobile web needs to step into the forefront of user's hands.

Issues To Overcome

With nearly 3 billion mobile phones, and countless other mobile devices that are in use, it is impossible for one type of solution to meet every need. It is possible, though, to minimize the layers that mobile devices and users have to go through in order to use these services. Whether that is creating better web browser, streamlining networks and hardware so that devices can stay usable for days on end, or something that hasn't yet been invented; innovation has to be allowed to continue.

Manufacturers have to push outside of conventional uses and seek better form factors and work out better deals with carriers and consumers in order to at least get the ball rolling.

Carriers need to lower prices, and instead of closing innovation within their own walls, making innovation something that's shared across networks, nations, and devices.

And lastly, customers have to be invited to take a chance in doing something that they have never done before.

All of that together can play out into making Web 2.0 a bit more than a mobile myth, but something that really enables the kind of participation that birthed the Internet and will take us all to the next level.

 

[Ed Hardy]

Mobile is more than just sync and carry. Because a document would be linked on a public, secured server, you could shoot a SMS/MMS/email message with just a link to view an item, instead of attaching the entire file. Documents can be tagged for being "mobile-friendly" or even formatted on the fly for mobile devices to better cater to whatever it is that the person has to view the document.

I love this idea. It will be hard to implement, but has tremendous potential.

I suspect this is close to what Microsoft had in mind when it decided to base all the new Office formats on XML.

-

[A_Str8]

Web 2.0 (and the web in general) is slow to move to the mobile realm because many of the manufacturers and service providers make it extremely inconvenient for people to use their mobile devices for much more than phone calls. Just look at the options an average person has:

- Pay a few hundred dollars for a device that they can use to view webpages and run apps. This solution is not acceptable to the average customer. Even after paying hundreds of dollars, the device you get still locks you to a single service provider. That means that if you want the freedom to change providers at some point, you will have to consider your device disposable to some degree. Average folks don't pay hundreds of dollars for disposable devices.

- Pay a few hundred dollars more for an unlocked device. The problem here is that unlocked devices cost $400 or more. Sure, geeks and web-addicts will see it as money well spent, but your average person will not buy.

- Unlock your phone through a third party. It seems that many these services are shady at best, and unlocking a phone through a third party adds risk of breaking your device and voiding your warranty.

Because these three options will not be taken by most people, that leaves the fourth option:
- Get a free, cheap, or mid-range phone. This is what most people end up doing. If it's going to be disposable, it should be cheap. The problem is that cheap and even mid-range phones aren't good for much more than making calls, taking bad pictures, and sending text messages. The web experience sucks compatible applications are few. There is little support for syncing these phones with computers, so when a person changes handsets, they often start from scratch. Many of the GUIs on these phones are horrible. the list goes on.

Basically, owners of cheap and mid-range phones - that is to say most cell phone owners - have a ton of reasons not to use their phones to get online and to organize their lives. The people making the websites are just responding to the demand - and there is not a whole lot of demand for mobile-optimized web-sites right now.

What the mobile web needs is:
Standards - A standard OS would help us avoid the crappy propietary ones. Standard accessories would make people more willing to invest in their phones.
Openness - Unlocked phones means non-disposable phones, so once again, people will invest more.
Affordability - The mobile web will not really take off until there are cheap, easy to use devices that offer a good experience. We need a phone to do for the mobile web what Napster did for digital music - bring it to the masses.

[Antoine Wright]

Hey A_Str8 (always good seeing a Philly native on the boards);
Its a chicken egg thing in a lot of respects. Building compelling software and peolpe will pay for almost anything, but not necessarly building something inexpensive will mean that peolpe will value it enough to use it.

[A_Str8]

Hey A_Str8 (always good seeing a Philly native on the boards);
Its a chicken egg thing in a lot of respects. Building compelling software and peolpe will pay for almost anything, but not necessarly building something inexpensive will mean that peolpe will value it enough to use it.

I'm not from here originally, but this city has grown on me over the years

I agree that cheap won't necessarily make people use something, but if it's not cheap and accessible, that will make people not use it. Look at wi-fi and how it's taken off as the price on laptops and wi-fi cards has come down - mobile internet is something people want. People already value it enough to use it if they had it, but there is an accessabilty problem.

[Antoine Wright]

WiFi has taken off because of accessiblity, price of access points, and that people want to do something (Internet, email, etc.) when not cornered in a room at home or library. Mobile devices have yet to do that in anything that's not been voice calls and SMS. Until a service comes that makes accessibilty (cost of service and device) a issue, nothing will change.

[A_Str8]

http://arstechnica.com/journals/hard...ces-the-centro

It looks like Palm plans to work on the accesability problem

[Antoine Wright]

In terms of devices, yes. Now if the browser and internal apps could pull something neat, and not intimidating to the end user, then we have a winner.

[dmccunney]

I'm not from here originally, but this city has grown on me over the years

I grew up there. Where in Philly are you?
______
Dennis

[dmccunney]

In terms of devices, yes. Now if the browser and internal apps could pull something neat, and not intimidating to the end user, then we have a winner.

Part of the problem with Web 2.0 from a handheld standpoint is the extensive use of AJAX, and another is the design of the sites.

AJAX makes extensive use of dynamic HTML and asynchronous JavaScript. I've looked at half-a-dozen Palm browsers, and JavaScript support is inconsistent and CSS support nearly non-existent. If Palm gets a Linux based OS out the door, we might see a port of something like Minimo, which would help a great deal.

But we'd still have the problem of site design. Unless the site has a mobile-friendly version, accessing it from a handheld is fairly painful. It would be nice to see evolving standards in mobile site design, and tools optimized to help developers do that.

In a sense, mobile access is a bit like the web in the old days, when the developer had to assume a user with a relatively low-res screen and dial-up access via a 14.4 modem, and code accordingly.
______
Dennis