The two largest US cellcos went on the warpath this week with
contrasting statements about their web strategies.
Verizon Wireless formed a far reaching partnership with Google,
echoing the search giant's existing alliance with Sprint and pointing
to Android dominance of the CDMA carriers' own-branded web services
platforms, which will be vital to differentiation in the open access
world, and will take shape from 2010.
AT&T is exploring its own options to create an AT&T mobile web
experience that will compensate for falling data rates and the loss
of the usual carrier lock-in weapons -- exclusives, subsidies and
closed network/software platforms. It increasingly seems to be
distancing itself from Google and turning to a range of partners
usually more associated with European operators, from Opera to Nokia.
The three mobile web models
1.
The mobile web world is likely to break into three distinct
battlefields from next year, and major carriers will have to take
account of all three. First, the conventional smartphone approach,
where the phonemaker and carrier engage in a tug-of-war over brand
visibility and commercial relationship, but the handset itself is the
key to customer choice.
This choice increasingly rests on the availability of downloadable
apps and the overall software environment of the phone, not just
hardware features. Of course, the premier example of this in the US
has been the AT&T-iPhone relationship, which Verizon Wireless has
failed to match for impact with a branded smartphone range that
relies heavily on BlackBerry and Windows Mobile.
2.
It is likely to ally with Android manufacturers such as Motorola and
HTC to redress this balance, but its initial Android announcements,
made with Google this week ahead of the CTIA Wireless and
Entertainment show in San Diego, fall into the second mobile internet
category. This is the creation of an operator branded platform, with
a distinctive set of user interfaces, applications (with the
mandatory store) and mass market webphones.
In this model, the carrier tries to keep customers loyal by offering
a cost effective, usable and attractive web experience from which
users, especially those below the smartphone uplands, will feel
comfortable, even when not tied in by a long contract or closed
network. To make this model work at all, operators need to move well
beyond their conventional and limited portals and attract large bases
of developers and device partners - as Vodafone has epitomized with
its transition from old-style Live! to its new Vodafone 360 (see
separate item on Telco 2.0).
They also need to harness the differentiation they can derive from
their networks, opening proprietary features such as address books
and location to third party programmers. The operator branded 'smart
pipe' approach is much discussed, but actual offerings are only just
emerging -- Orange Partner, China Mobile oFone, Vodafone 360, and now
Verizon and AT&T are trying to create their own offerings.
3.
The third mobile web model could disrupt the other two in time, but
only when wireless networks have the capacity and robustness to
support vast amounts of data traffic and still generate profit for
their operators. This means WiMAX and LTE, probably both in their
next iterations, plus plentiful spectrum and advanced new networks
and devices geared to maximum efficiency.
This is the 'Google vision', where the browser replaces the functions
of the full-blown operating system and all applications are created
and run in the browser, using standard techniques like HTML 5 and
JavaScript, with data and back end processes located in the 'cloud'.
Downloads, apps optimized for specific devices or networks, and
semi-closed portals all disappear in favour of a fully open web akin
to that on the PC -- where, of course, the carrier becomes a bit pipe
rather than a smart pipe.
Current networks do not support this however, as highlighted by
Google itself in its eagerness to work closely with the carriers it
eventually seeks to sideline, pushing Android even as it develops
Chrome as the browser/OS of the future. This raises the ironic
prospect of Palm webOS being closer to the open web dream than Google
itself (see inset).
My thoughts: Almost regardless of how this plays out, Sprint and
T-Mobile risk being marginalized by the Verizon/Google vs AT&T/Apple
battle, with Palm as the wild card. A big question is how Nokia will
respond. Another big question is whether or not Microsoft can stay in
the game by reinventing Windows Mobile, which I think unlikely.
--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>
If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:59:16 +0000 (UTC), Nate Bargmann
<n0nb.DO.NOT.SPAM@ME.n0nb.us> wrote in
<pan.2009.10.11.00.59.38@ME.n0nb.us>:
>And all I want is a simple phone. To make telephone calls with. Anyone
>remember those?
Sure. Still lots of them on the market.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:59:16 +0000 (UTC), Nate Bargmann
<n0nb.DO.NOT.SPAM@ME.n0nb.us> wrote:
>And all I want is a simple phone. To make telephone calls with. Anyone
>remember those?
>- Nate >>
Sure. There are specialized cell phones for seniors:
<http://www.jitterbug.com>
and kids:
<http://www.fireflymobile.com>
Probably a bit too simple for most users.
Incidentally, I'm also going the 'simple' cell phone route. Cheap
junk commodity cell phone for talking and a fancy PDA (Apple iPod
Touch 2G) for wi-fi web surfing and productivity functions. I've been
doing it this way for about 4 months and find it much more useful than
a conglomerated smart phone. The only thing I lack is some way to
sync phone numbers directly between the LG cell phone and the iPod
Touch without going through a computah.
NEWS: Verizon/Google vs AT&T/Apple 
Linear Mode
