A new study from the UK says that just 11% of British mobile users have “browsed the Internet on a mobile”, compared to 28% worldwide. I find the UK stat pretty hard to believe, given the healthy mobile content market there, though it does appear to jive with M:Metrics’ usage figures from March. The survey also says a third of British users are interested in surfing the mobile Net, but “only if it is like the true Internet environment”.
What I’m wondering is if something’s getting caught up in semantics here, if people aren’t realizing they’re accessing “the Internet” when they actually are surfing carrier-linked mobile sites, or downloading games, or using a Java portal. The technical hair-splitting isn’t the point, but rather the idea that what operators are giving to users as “the mobile Internet” is falling well short of what people expect. When T-Mobile launched its Web’n'walk initiative, it made a big deal of using Google as its home page so users would “know” they were accessing the internet, making the distinction clear.
Of course, what many operators offer their customers very much isn’t the Internet. It’s not open, it’s not a place where the content one can access is limited by so many factors, or one where the network owner plays such a role in determining just what users can and can’t do. But mostly, it’s not a place where users can easily find content they’re interested in.
There are two important takeaways here. First, users should be empowered to access whatever they want. This means no walled gardens, and powerful browsers that can access full HTML sites. Second, operators should focus on adding value to users’ internet experiences by recognizing that mobile browsing is different than browsing from a computer and add to (not replace) the open access with more customized services and sites for users that want them. It should be an additive strategy that takes full browsing capability as a starting point, then builds on top of it, not a plan that throws the Internet that people know and love out the window, then opens up tiny holes to let only particular content through.
[tags]mobile, mobile internet, mobile web, t-mobile[/tags]
Carlo, you said it. Especially after we launched Opera Mini worldwide in January 2006, we see that people love browsing the full Web on their phones. With almost 3 million users browsing an average of more than 5 million pages per day, Opera Mini demonstrates the viability of the mobile Web.
WAP and walled garden content has never really caught on, but with a powerful browser and the full Web at ones fingertips, people actually use it. And operators are cashing in big time in increased revenue per user for all the data traffic they generate. Opening the mobile Web is not a threat, but a great opportunity for mobile phone carriers. T-Mobile has realized this. Let’s hope the others follow suit.
i find these numbers hard to believe - simplly because the technology in europe is superior and the people more sophisticated.
That’s quite a generalization there, Jenny.
Putting the wallgarden issue aside, what I find interesting is that people may not know, or care, that they are actually using/accessing the Internet per se… And I find that interesting, as it is an indication of pervasiveness and transparency of the (mobile) web… Or, is this wishful thinking?
ceo
I agree with Eskil: Full access to the Internet is not a threat to operators, it’s a big revenue generator. Same goes for IM, but that’s another story.
Operators have to realize they are WISPs.
Regarding C. Enrique’s comment:
Yes, it’s true that most users don’t realize that when they download a ringtone, color picture or game they are actually using WAP, and the link to the content is increasingly sent via WAP Push, even though SMS is still much more common for that.
WAP in this case is just a way to download a file. Consumers don’t care at all what’s being used. They only want the digital thing they paid hard-earned money for.
The only reason is pricing. Everyone knows that it is expensive to access the net by mobile but no-one has a clue how much the data is costing, or how much each page/minute etc is costing them so steer clear.
As i always preach, and anyone who knows me will be sick of hearing it, “geeks” designing products for the general public but only ever testing them on “geeks” will never work. (i use geek as an affectionate term for a techie)
I am a non “geek” working in telecoms, and I don’t access the internet on my awful XDA2s because O2 charged £18 in one day for browsing while stuck on a train, so will never use it again. Clear simple pricing, clear easy products, T-mob had it right to use Google as the home page now get teh pricing idiot proof and everyone will be happy.
One thing i’ve done for my mobile site is to provide a way for desktop users to use the site. I put up a page at http://wampad.com/full.asp, using bitty browser. It’s basically a way to show people what they would see on their phone. Then you can use it on pageflakes, live.com and google’s start page. I’m also working on a way to make the site useable via google sidebar and vista’s sidebar.