I just heard an interesting rumour concerning mobile operator billing services: It looks like a Finnish mobile operator will enable (mobile Internet) content providers to charge for their content from users using their GPRS/3G Internet access point (not WAP Access Point). I have been talking with the operators' technical personnel for quite some time already about the availability of such a service, and they've been just telling me that "they are working on it". I actually asked the operator's technical contact immediately if there was any truth in this rumour, and he confirmed that this is the case. They are going to start a commercial pilot in the near future.
This is actually very good news for all content guys out there. At least those ones who have been selling content to Finnish WAP users (we've had WAP-based click-to-pay-billing services in Finland available for many years already). The problem with the WAP-billing has just been the fact that according to Nokia, less than 25% of the mobile phone users are actually using WAP access point to connect to the Internet; the great majority of the users use the Internet access point to connect to the Internet (and bypassing the WAP gateway). Therefore, they have not been able to pay for the mobile content.
Enabling users to pay even if they are on an Internet access point will be damn good news for the mobile service industry. Can't wait to get my first client to launch a premium content service that supports it. Hopefully it will become possible in other countries / networks ASAP.
2008/12/03
Make money too, with mobile internet
When companies are thinking to have somekind of presence on mobile internet, I mean having a mobile site, they usually think that as a way to share information, news and other content as an additional "media channel".
Too often it just stays this way, yet another channel to publish information for those who perhaps find it and are interested. It should not stay this way as next logical, and necessary, steps should be to start thinking and working how companies can utilize this channel, which is not tied to location or wires, much more better.
Some companies are getting this. World's third-largest pizza chain, Papa John's has generated 1 million dollars thru their mobile web site in less than six months. Its still peanuts when compared to their yearly online sales (more than 1 billion USD), but encouraging and fast results.
So, kids are ordering pizza online via their mobile phones... suprisingly not, as user demographics covers all age groups. Group of 35-44 years old is roughly the same size as 18-25 years old. Just another good example that its not only kids who are willing to use advanced mobile functionalities or mobile services. Older ones are too, if the service is needed, easy to use and useful. Are yours?
Too often it just stays this way, yet another channel to publish information for those who perhaps find it and are interested. It should not stay this way as next logical, and necessary, steps should be to start thinking and working how companies can utilize this channel, which is not tied to location or wires, much more better.
Some companies are getting this. World's third-largest pizza chain, Papa John's has generated 1 million dollars thru their mobile web site in less than six months. Its still peanuts when compared to their yearly online sales (more than 1 billion USD), but encouraging and fast results.
So, kids are ordering pizza online via their mobile phones... suprisingly not, as user demographics covers all age groups. Group of 35-44 years old is roughly the same size as 18-25 years old. Just another good example that its not only kids who are willing to use advanced mobile functionalities or mobile services. Older ones are too, if the service is needed, easy to use and useful. Are yours?
2008/11/28
413: Page Cannot Be Displayed
Most of the major internet sites cannot be used with mobile phones! This was a conclusion of resent research done by english company Bango. Alarming result, especially because by IDC there will be by the end of this year 1,3 billion people using internet services via their mobile phones. Or, at least willing and trying to use but can they...
In this perspective it is praiseworthy how some companies, which has been traditionally considered stiff and slow moving ones, like BBC and YLE (Finnish National Broadcasting Company) have one of the best mobile services. Regardless of the ways how services are measured - by number of the visitors, by usability, by amount of content or by how willing the company is to try and explore - YLE has been sometime now been the most active on developing mobile internet services. They have been also advertising their mobile sites, both yle.mobi and ylex.mobi, quite actively on the web, tv and radio. BBC has been surveying how its services has been used and what users think of the services etc. and as a result of those surveys, BBC has increased marketing of its mobile internet services.
Today there was news story in Finnish digitoday.fi service where was some speculation of possible coming new launches next week by Nokia. The most interesting part of the story was comments of Gartner's mobile area analyst Carolina Milanes. She said that Nokia's own (mobile internet) services meaning and value is quite high and provides better position for Nokia in the future because for the consumers mobile internet services are now more important than number of the megapixels of the camera in the mobile phone.
Its quite easy to agree with Milanes. But when big (and smaller) site owners do understand that consumer is out there, literally, and using her/his mobile phone and not only for talking.
In this perspective it is praiseworthy how some companies, which has been traditionally considered stiff and slow moving ones, like BBC and YLE (Finnish National Broadcasting Company) have one of the best mobile services. Regardless of the ways how services are measured - by number of the visitors, by usability, by amount of content or by how willing the company is to try and explore - YLE has been sometime now been the most active on developing mobile internet services. They have been also advertising their mobile sites, both yle.mobi and ylex.mobi, quite actively on the web, tv and radio. BBC has been surveying how its services has been used and what users think of the services etc. and as a result of those surveys, BBC has increased marketing of its mobile internet services.
Today there was news story in Finnish digitoday.fi service where was some speculation of possible coming new launches next week by Nokia. The most interesting part of the story was comments of Gartner's mobile area analyst Carolina Milanes. She said that Nokia's own (mobile internet) services meaning and value is quite high and provides better position for Nokia in the future because for the consumers mobile internet services are now more important than number of the megapixels of the camera in the mobile phone.
Its quite easy to agree with Milanes. But when big (and smaller) site owners do understand that consumer is out there, literally, and using her/his mobile phone and not only for talking.
2008/11/19
Tourist is mobile
Tourists and travelers do carry nowadays mobile phones all the time with them, but are not using them only for calls and sending text messages. More and more, because of faster mobile phone networks, they are using mobile phones for chatting, checking emails and using other network based services, like searching for information. And use most likely will increase, especially here in Europe as European Union bureaucrats has taken lately active role for making use of mobile phones more cheaper while traveling in Europe.
Country and city tourist offices, as well as other organizations publishing information for tourists and travelers, traditionally have lots of information available on the internet. Background information, history, practical information like about transportation, sights, restaurants, bars and nightlife, not forgetting maps and other content types like videos and audios. Unfortunately this information is not easily usable, if at all, by mobile phones and mobile phone browsers thus making it practically unusable for tourist after s/he has left home and started her/his travel.
Its actually surprise how little there's usable tourism and travel information which can be used with mobile phones. Here in Finland Helsinki has its own mobi site but, well, not so attractive service and could have more content. Especially if compared for the mobile service provided by eg. SAS, even their focus is a bit different.
What's the problem? Most likely that those tourism offices and boards are just so traditional, slowly moving elephants. This have seen already when internet, as term and a "channel", was new and how slowly tourism and travel communications moved into the net. Now the good sides, more cost effective and up to date communication, has been seen but hopefully value of mobile phones and services for them wont take so much time as it did with web services. Because the tourists and travelers are here, now, and willing to use information if that's just available.
Country and city tourist offices, as well as other organizations publishing information for tourists and travelers, traditionally have lots of information available on the internet. Background information, history, practical information like about transportation, sights, restaurants, bars and nightlife, not forgetting maps and other content types like videos and audios. Unfortunately this information is not easily usable, if at all, by mobile phones and mobile phone browsers thus making it practically unusable for tourist after s/he has left home and started her/his travel.
Its actually surprise how little there's usable tourism and travel information which can be used with mobile phones. Here in Finland Helsinki has its own mobi site but, well, not so attractive service and could have more content. Especially if compared for the mobile service provided by eg. SAS, even their focus is a bit different.
What's the problem? Most likely that those tourism offices and boards are just so traditional, slowly moving elephants. This have seen already when internet, as term and a "channel", was new and how slowly tourism and travel communications moved into the net. Now the good sides, more cost effective and up to date communication, has been seen but hopefully value of mobile phones and services for them wont take so much time as it did with web services. Because the tourists and travelers are here, now, and willing to use information if that's just available.
2008/11/18
Future of mobile TV
Some modern mobile phones have the capability of receiving Mobile TV signal (DVB-H, to be exact). In Finland, Digita Oy launched DVB-H mobile TV network rather recently and the network covers nowadays something like 40% of the Finnish population. Some of the Finnish media houses are broadcasting their (regular) TV and radio-programmes to DVB-H network. Would all this mean that people are going to watch TV on their mobile phones?
Personally, I think that DVB-H has rather slim chances to actually make it. There are many things which make the success of DVB-H questionable.
1) why would you watch TV on your mobile?
I haven't been able to figure it out myself. I haven't seen a single (public) consumer survey according to which mobile TV would have been seen as something that people are willing to pay. Apparently, Nokia's studies haven't identified DVB-H chip as something important as they haven't been promoting mobile TV anyhow (compare to camera / navigation).
2) if you wanted to watch TV on your mobile, why not picking DVB-T signal instead?
Some people have told me that DVB-H is definitely needed, if you want to put TV on a mobile phone. There are several arguments:
* DVB-H uses MPEG4, which offers compression superior to MPEG2 in DBV-T. This makes DVB-H much more battery-friendly
* DVB-H uses higher frequency, which makes the signal more suited to urban environment. You can pick the TV signal even inside buildings
I understand enough about computer science and physics to realise that both arguments are valid. It is propably impossible to develop a mobile phone with integrated DVB-T-receiver that would have decent battery-life - at least today. But would it be possible that in the future microchips used in mobile phones would be able to decode MPEG2 so effectively that they would not need that much power? Or maybe it becomes possible to manufacture batteries that can hold 100 times more energy than today?
3) Is there content for mobile TV?
Or is it the regular TV content that would be used on mobile TV? Today, mobile TV is sending the same programme as the regular TV. I wonder if this is going to be the use for DVB-H?
No matter what the content eventually will be, one thing is sure: there will be lots of negotiations (read fights) between mobile TV-broadcasters and those from whom they are licensing the content. Producers want more money for their content as it is being now distributed in a new channel: mobile-TV. Obviously, TV-broadcasters argue that it is NOT a new channel, so they don't have to pay extra money for the rights.
Before those licensing problems are solved, and DVB-H becomes business-compatible for all the involved parties, I am sure that quite many of us are already watching DVB-T on our mobile phones.
Personally, I think that DVB-H has rather slim chances to actually make it. There are many things which make the success of DVB-H questionable.
1) why would you watch TV on your mobile?
I haven't been able to figure it out myself. I haven't seen a single (public) consumer survey according to which mobile TV would have been seen as something that people are willing to pay. Apparently, Nokia's studies haven't identified DVB-H chip as something important as they haven't been promoting mobile TV anyhow (compare to camera / navigation).
2) if you wanted to watch TV on your mobile, why not picking DVB-T signal instead?
Some people have told me that DVB-H is definitely needed, if you want to put TV on a mobile phone. There are several arguments:
* DVB-H uses MPEG4, which offers compression superior to MPEG2 in DBV-T. This makes DVB-H much more battery-friendly
* DVB-H uses higher frequency, which makes the signal more suited to urban environment. You can pick the TV signal even inside buildings
I understand enough about computer science and physics to realise that both arguments are valid. It is propably impossible to develop a mobile phone with integrated DVB-T-receiver that would have decent battery-life - at least today. But would it be possible that in the future microchips used in mobile phones would be able to decode MPEG2 so effectively that they would not need that much power? Or maybe it becomes possible to manufacture batteries that can hold 100 times more energy than today?
3) Is there content for mobile TV?
Or is it the regular TV content that would be used on mobile TV? Today, mobile TV is sending the same programme as the regular TV. I wonder if this is going to be the use for DVB-H?
No matter what the content eventually will be, one thing is sure: there will be lots of negotiations (read fights) between mobile TV-broadcasters and those from whom they are licensing the content. Producers want more money for their content as it is being now distributed in a new channel: mobile-TV. Obviously, TV-broadcasters argue that it is NOT a new channel, so they don't have to pay extra money for the rights.
Before those licensing problems are solved, and DVB-H becomes business-compatible for all the involved parties, I am sure that quite many of us are already watching DVB-T on our mobile phones.
2008/11/12
Internet radio to mobile phones
Finnish Broadcasting Company (YLE) just launched mobile versions of their net radio services. Twinapex delivered YLE the system to convert those net radio channels to mobile phone-friendly format. Before, YLE had been broadcasting its radio channels live to the Internet users only in Windows Media format. The mobile radio offers the same content, but the format is compatible with the 3G mobile phones (AAC/RTSP that is).
One of the reason (that I know) for YLE to offer their radio programmes to Internet users is to serve Finns living abroad. Net radio makes it possible for them to listen to their mother tongue abroad. Now, what's the deal with the mobile radio then?
YLE's project manager did ask me some time ago if it would be technically possible to re-format their net radio to mobile phones. "Sure", I said, "but why?". I could not see what purpose this would serve as quite many mobile phones have a built-in FM radio. Why would anybody use (often quite expensive) mobile packet data service to listen to a radio channel that you can pick free from the air?
The answer is quite simple. YLE has something like 15 local radio stations (one for each province in Finland) and 8 nationwide channels. So, in any particular place in Finland, you can listen to the 8 nationwide and the one local channel. The mobile radio service enables you to listen to any of the local stations anywhere in Finland (or abroad, but that might get expensive to pay for the roaming data). This more than doubles the choice of radio channels for the user.
When our team was testing the service internally, I was curious to see if it would change my "radio listening" behaviour. Every morning, on my way to the office by tram, I was listening to the local station of the area where I come from (I am not born in Helsinki). And thanks to the poor FM radio I have on my mobile, I started to listen to the YLE national channels, too (the mobile radio thing was working much better on Nokia E90 than FM radio!). I still use the mobile radio more than the FM radio, so I must say the service did change my habits (I used to play blackjack at Yahoo's mobile Internet site on my way to work/home).
I came to a conclusion that the mobile Internet radio might become actually very popular service. It truely has some extra value to offer to the user. Maybe I setup a mobile Internet radio channel for myself featuring Internet radio channel "Boot Liquor": Americana roots music for Cowhands, Cowpokes and Cowtippers. Yiee-haa!
One of the reason (that I know) for YLE to offer their radio programmes to Internet users is to serve Finns living abroad. Net radio makes it possible for them to listen to their mother tongue abroad. Now, what's the deal with the mobile radio then?
YLE's project manager did ask me some time ago if it would be technically possible to re-format their net radio to mobile phones. "Sure", I said, "but why?". I could not see what purpose this would serve as quite many mobile phones have a built-in FM radio. Why would anybody use (often quite expensive) mobile packet data service to listen to a radio channel that you can pick free from the air?
The answer is quite simple. YLE has something like 15 local radio stations (one for each province in Finland) and 8 nationwide channels. So, in any particular place in Finland, you can listen to the 8 nationwide and the one local channel. The mobile radio service enables you to listen to any of the local stations anywhere in Finland (or abroad, but that might get expensive to pay for the roaming data). This more than doubles the choice of radio channels for the user.
When our team was testing the service internally, I was curious to see if it would change my "radio listening" behaviour. Every morning, on my way to the office by tram, I was listening to the local station of the area where I come from (I am not born in Helsinki). And thanks to the poor FM radio I have on my mobile, I started to listen to the YLE national channels, too (the mobile radio thing was working much better on Nokia E90 than FM radio!). I still use the mobile radio more than the FM radio, so I must say the service did change my habits (I used to play blackjack at Yahoo's mobile Internet site on my way to work/home).
I came to a conclusion that the mobile Internet radio might become actually very popular service. It truely has some extra value to offer to the user. Maybe I setup a mobile Internet radio channel for myself featuring Internet radio channel "Boot Liquor": Americana roots music for Cowhands, Cowpokes and Cowtippers. Yiee-haa!
2008/11/11
Android and Motorola
It looks like Motorola is to focus on Android and Windows Mobile in the future (see the story on Financial Times). I understand that this is double-or-nothing-kind of a decision for Motorola; their mobile sales have been going down so rapidly that they HAVE to do something if they want to stay alive.
Is this a good move from Motorola?
Personally, I think Google's Android may as well be a huge success. The business case for Google is obvious; they give the OS free of charge to anyone [as far as I know], and they do it to support their main business [advertising that is]. This may help Motorola to cut costs. If it is going to help them to sell more phones, nobody knows for sure, but I think Android will be a commercial success. And if Motorola jumps on this train now, it may as well be that they get back in business in some years time.
I wonder what this means for people developing mobile Internet sites?
Is this a good move from Motorola?
Personally, I think Google's Android may as well be a huge success. The business case for Google is obvious; they give the OS free of charge to anyone [as far as I know], and they do it to support their main business [advertising that is]. This may help Motorola to cut costs. If it is going to help them to sell more phones, nobody knows for sure, but I think Android will be a commercial success. And if Motorola jumps on this train now, it may as well be that they get back in business in some years time.
I wonder what this means for people developing mobile Internet sites?
Mobile phone users skip PCs
Recent research done by IBM Institute reveals quite interesting facts about the use of mobile phones and network based services. IBM interviewed 600 people in USA, UK and China and more than half of them were willing to use internet (services) via their mobile phones. It was seen also that in some cases, especially in China, that first time people used internet, they used that via their mobile phones, not PCs.
Most popular services were quite natural: map and location related services, quick messaging with others, email and news services. More than half of the 15 to 30 years old were seriously considering to lose their PCs and start using mobile phones (or similar devices) as their only way to access internet....
Most popular services were quite natural: map and location related services, quick messaging with others, email and news services. More than half of the 15 to 30 years old were seriously considering to lose their PCs and start using mobile phones (or similar devices) as their only way to access internet....
2008/11/08
Privacy vs mobility
Many people think that the thing about the mobile services is the fact that they are mobile. As you carry your mobile phone always, you can access the service from pretty much everywhere you are. Your PC does not go in your pocket, but stays at home or at your office, so the Internet stays there.
Sure. Mobile services have the advantage of being accessible nearly everywhere compared to the good old fixed Internet services. Personally, I still think that the mobility is not the thing. Far more interesting aspect of mobile services is the privacy. Pretty close to everyone in developed countries have a mobile phone. I read rather recently an article which stated that approximately 70% of the Finnish households have broadband Internet access (at least 256kbit/s). I am quite sure that the vast majority of those households just have one PC connected to the Internet. And as the average size of a household is about 2, it makes me assume that Personal Computer as a term is questionable.
Mobile phones are far more personal than PCs. People are often sharing a PC, but none of the people that I know are actually sharing a mobile phone. In 99% of the cases, you know for sure who will answer, when you call a mobile number. This has made me believe that exactly this is the key to understand why some mobile services will fly and others won't.
Forget the mobility: "mobile Internet" is not about bringing the Internet everywhere you go. It is about being able to do personal things. Some folks have already figured that out. Maybe it was obamamobile.mobi that made the difference in the US presidential elections [BTW - the site seems to have disappered] ? Possibly not, but Facebook's mobile site is the most popular mobile site in UK for this very reason.
Sure. Mobile services have the advantage of being accessible nearly everywhere compared to the good old fixed Internet services. Personally, I still think that the mobility is not the thing. Far more interesting aspect of mobile services is the privacy. Pretty close to everyone in developed countries have a mobile phone. I read rather recently an article which stated that approximately 70% of the Finnish households have broadband Internet access (at least 256kbit/s). I am quite sure that the vast majority of those households just have one PC connected to the Internet. And as the average size of a household is about 2, it makes me assume that Personal Computer as a term is questionable.
Mobile phones are far more personal than PCs. People are often sharing a PC, but none of the people that I know are actually sharing a mobile phone. In 99% of the cases, you know for sure who will answer, when you call a mobile number. This has made me believe that exactly this is the key to understand why some mobile services will fly and others won't.
Forget the mobility: "mobile Internet" is not about bringing the Internet everywhere you go. It is about being able to do personal things. Some folks have already figured that out. Maybe it was obamamobile.mobi that made the difference in the US presidential elections [BTW - the site seems to have disappered] ? Possibly not, but Facebook's mobile site is the most popular mobile site in UK for this very reason.
2008/11/07
what the heck
This blog is all about the mobile Internet. I just thought that it might be a good idea to share my thoughts and views on this topic, as I happen to work in this Industry. We at Twinapex
develop mobile Internet sites for our clientele, whom are mostly using our services to publish their content to mobile users. Some of them do actually make money on the content itself (premium content), others use the mobile medium to advertise their products or services.
I've personnally been in the mobile industry since 1997 when I joined a small Finnish software company. That was the time when "mobile" was still equal to text messages. I actually did in co-operation with my first employer, my final thesis on the quite new phenomenon called "WAP" (Wireless Application Proptocol". It was basically a study on the commercial opportunities of this thing called WAP, and it was approved by my professor back in December 1997. Heck. It may have been the first scientific publication on this matter, actually. The whole term was introduced not earlier than June 1997 (if I remember correctly).
The world has changed a lot from those days (11 years). The first WAP phones were still using GSM data call as the way to connect to the network. All of the phones just had black and white (or black and green) displays and there were manufacturers whose phones did not support SMS! Surfing the net was pretty similar experience as it was with the first Internet browser I used (Mosaic on an unix workstation at the university). Still, I thought back those days that this mobile thing will be something BIG in the future. You could just tell it from the feeling that you got when you were able to get something on your phone's display from your server connected to the Internet.
Today, my Nokia E90 is perfectly capable of fetching and rendering a page from the Internet in no time. I have (flat rate) 2 Mbit/s data subscription, and it actually does deliver me the 2Mbit/s most of the time. The world is now ready for all the companies to publish their content for the mobile audience. And, of course, for all the regular Joes out there to start using the services in the mobile Internet.
I will write on this blog on my observations of the mobile Internet as it is currently in a rapid groth. Just heard someone claiming today that in Finland, Google would get more mobile searches than fixed Internet searches already this year. I think it is bull, but possibly not that far away from the truth.
develop mobile Internet sites for our clientele, whom are mostly using our services to publish their content to mobile users. Some of them do actually make money on the content itself (premium content), others use the mobile medium to advertise their products or services.
I've personnally been in the mobile industry since 1997 when I joined a small Finnish software company. That was the time when "mobile" was still equal to text messages. I actually did in co-operation with my first employer, my final thesis on the quite new phenomenon called "WAP" (Wireless Application Proptocol". It was basically a study on the commercial opportunities of this thing called WAP, and it was approved by my professor back in December 1997. Heck. It may have been the first scientific publication on this matter, actually. The whole term was introduced not earlier than June 1997 (if I remember correctly).
The world has changed a lot from those days (11 years). The first WAP phones were still using GSM data call as the way to connect to the network. All of the phones just had black and white (or black and green) displays and there were manufacturers whose phones did not support SMS! Surfing the net was pretty similar experience as it was with the first Internet browser I used (Mosaic on an unix workstation at the university). Still, I thought back those days that this mobile thing will be something BIG in the future. You could just tell it from the feeling that you got when you were able to get something on your phone's display from your server connected to the Internet.
Today, my Nokia E90 is perfectly capable of fetching and rendering a page from the Internet in no time. I have (flat rate) 2 Mbit/s data subscription, and it actually does deliver me the 2Mbit/s most of the time. The world is now ready for all the companies to publish their content for the mobile audience. And, of course, for all the regular Joes out there to start using the services in the mobile Internet.
I will write on this blog on my observations of the mobile Internet as it is currently in a rapid groth. Just heard someone claiming today that in Finland, Google would get more mobile searches than fixed Internet searches already this year. I think it is bull, but possibly not that far away from the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)