Well Deserved Disruption

ram — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 01:38:12 +0000

This size of image is 16 kilobytes, the same size as one hundred full-length SMS messages of 160 characters each.

Instant Messaging (IM) applications have been around on cell phones and mobile platforms for a long time now. But over at The Business Insider, Dan Frommer (@fromedome) is calling AOL’s new AIM app for the iPhone “Disruptive to AT&T”. It may be, but not because there’s anything fundamentally new about the AIM app.

First a bit of background: About two and a half TRILLION SMS text messages are sent each year. In North America they are outrageously expensive. AT&T’s basic data plan for the iPhone costs $20.00 per month and includes only 200 text messages. Exceed 200 and you’re charged 5 cents for each additional message you send or receive. …and international texts get charged at 20 cents each. Unlike much of the world, US users get charged for receiving a text message as well as sending one. So a 160 character message that costs the sender 5 cents, and the addressee another nickel, is getting billed at an astounding $625 per megabyte. Spill over to 165 characters and it costs twice as much since it’s broken into two “messages”. No wonder the wireless carriers love texting!

Enter AOL’s new AIM app for the iPhone. The new 3.0 version of the iPhone OS includes a feature called “push notifications” so an app can “wake up” in response to a network event. The AIM app uses this to implement an instant messaging client that does an end run around the outrageous carrier fees. They move over either the WiFi or cellular data connection. And they do it as part of the flat $20/month unlimited data connection.

“But…”, I hear you say, “If the person I want to text isn’t an AIM user, I can’t text, right?”. Wrong… you can address an AIM instant message to a cell phone number and AOL will forward it via SMS. Your recipient gets charged by the carrier, but you don’t. Now if that isn’t a near perfect viral campaign tool to spread AIM as an SMS replacement, I don’t know what is.

All of this works on the iPod Touch as well, so if you’re seldom out of WiFi coverage, then a Touch running Skype and AIM keeps you connected without paying AT&T a dime.

But platforms like the Blackberry and Symbian have also had IM clients for a a long time. The operating systems on these phones can run applications in the background, so they don’t need to rely on a technique like push notification to build SMS replacements. Why then is a viable SMS replacement for the iPhone such a big deal?

I think it’s because of two factors. First, the media love the iPhone and it gets more than it’s fair share of media coverage, due in no small part to Apple’s brilliant marketing. Second, Apple iPhone users seem to make much more use of the web than users of other phones. At WWDC Apple made the somewhat incredible claim that 65% of mobile browsing happens on iPhone and iPod Touch. (Look here for the slide. Scroll down to 11:46 AM). If anyone has real data to support that claim, please leave a comment). I can’t substantiate that number, but AvWx.net, a mobile site with weather for small plane pilots, the iPhone users do have higher page view counts than other platform users, with Blackberry users a distant second.

So if iPhone users desert SMS in droves in favor of free IM, they will be efficient in spreading the word. And if that happens, can the users on other platforms be far behind? …and AT&T can kiss the $625-per-megabyte transport business goodbye.

Asking the Wrong Question

ram — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:57:24 +0000

A question floated across my screen a few minutes ago through both Twitter and the Mobile Monday group. @sdevo says:

Wondering who the top 10 mobile app companies are ? My client (an MNO) wants to know who to follow, and in whom to invest in or partner with.

I think Steve’s client is asking the wrong question. I understand that the bizdev folk at the MNO have a strong desire to build relationships with the current leaders of the pack. It’s the way MNO’s think. But…

There’s a shift happening in mobile apps development which virtually guarantees that kind of thinking will miss the next big “killer” mobile app. The mobile world is becoming more like the web. As the cost of entry to become a mobile devloper falls more and more talented people with truly innovative ideas will jump in. That’s where the stunning applications originate.

Steve’s MNO client would be better served if they spent their resources figuring out how to lower the barriers of entry to enable more developers to create applications for their customers. Look at what Apple has done with the iPhone and the iTunes App Store. A programmer with a good idea but exactly zero experience writing mobile apps can, in about an hour learn everything he or she needs know know to develop, test, and sell an app. Apple has made the process clear, easy to understand, and easy to implement. …and $99 gets you all the development tools and certifications you need. To it’s credit Apple has kept a corporate culture that values the things that come out of garage shop development organizations, and I doubt it’s just because that’s how the company started.

I don’t actually know, but I suspect that Steve’s MNO client has a huge percentage of Symbian based phones deployed. See how much you can learn in an hour about how to develop and distribute an app for Symbian S60 (Soon to be Symbian^2). There’s a bewildering array of issues having to do with needing MNO approval for access to some system components, and handset manufacturer approval for some others. …and no clear path to market even with the advent of the new Nokia OVI store.

I think simplifying and adding clarity to the mobile app development – testing – approval – sales life cycle is the biggest challenge facing the Symbian Foundation moving forward. Yes, harmonizing, and opening, the various components that have been Symbian, S-60 and UIQ is a big job, but it’s not what’s going to bring the next killer app to Symbian first. I fear that the Foundation sees the handset manufacturers and the MNOs as their client base, and as long as those groups are asking the wrong questions the path to market for Symbian apps will remain far too complex and far too costly for the guys in the garages to do their first apps for Symbian^N.

We’ll see how things develop for Android, Palm, Windows Mobile and LiMo, but I’m confident that the platforms with the lowest friction development and delivery paths will get the killer apps first. …and aren’t killer apps what Steve’s MNO clients really want?

By the way… If I’m wrong about a one-hour tutorial for those other platforms, send me the link or post it in a comment here. I enjoy being wrong about things like that!

Shiny Pebbles... » Symbian

Well Deserved Disruption

Asking the Wrong Question