One of the pieces of wisdom currently flowing around the industry is that it’s incredibly hard to get users to download mobile applications.
It’s a refrain I hear from everyone from seasoned investors to rueful executives of companies who have staked their all on a compelling mobile app - after all while most users don’t download apps, it’s going to be different with their app, right?
There’s exceptions to every rule obviously. Mobile games are downloadable applications and that’s surely a thriving business. But the Devil’s Advocate would argue that in the user’s mind, they’re actually downloading a “game”, not an “application”.
Many would argue that in this respect, the mobile is simply following the PC, where applications have been equally difficult. Exceptions are P2P and IM, but outside this relative niche, it’s hard to think of any runaway successes.
So I have a few questions for you, which I’ll cross post at the ForumOxford, to get some of the more vociferous folks chattering over the weekend:
1. Do you agree that mobile apps so far have been a bit a dud?
2. If you do agree, why? Is it because the apps themselves are simply not compelling enough? Are good ones just too hard to explain in marketing terms?
3. Are the functions being undertaken by apps going to migrate to the mobile web, as it becomes cheaper, faster and ever more usable?
Quite a wide-ranging subject, but I would be fascinated by the collective thoughts of MobHappy readers.
So far I’d say Mobile Apps that arent installed at an operator level have been a dud, i.e. Apps that need t be downloaded on to a phone, or a PC and transferred to a phone. Apps that are installed at the Operator level, have and will continue to do well.
I dont think its so much that people are unwilling to download applications, as you note games do sell, if not as well as most people believe. Most people who buy the most high end of smart phones, are looking for a couple of things on their phone: Voice, Messaging, Email, Basic Web Browsing, maybe some entertainment. The people who buy the lesser phones want voice, and sms and maybe email. I think more than anything its lack of a good way to interact with the phone. The size of the keyboard, even qwerty keyboards, just dont lend themselves to doing much on the phone that requires user input. The relatively high number of Blackberry type device users we see who have their phone attached to their fingers, might have led to the belief that its a usable device as is, its just a matter of getting used to it.
Without their being some significant changes in terms of how we interact with the devices, I dont see the Mobile Web having much more success than the current application market has.
I believe a factor could be when/where do apps currently get used
An article about mobile gaming by Michael Mace last year interestingly showed that many japanese users use mobile game devices at home, not in transit.
http://mobileopportunity.blogspot.com/2006/12/mobile-gaming-in-japan-different-world.html
Taking this idea a huge step further, if say this research was found to also be valid for both apps and countries other than Japan then what implications does that have as to the potential market for mobile apps?
One application that is doing really well is Opera Mini… Their application has been downloaded millions of times, and as per their press release, is the most downloaded mobile application, ever…
That said, the application has no use without a data plan, and at least in the US, people are reluctant to sign up for one… Further, the 3rd party applications that I use the most are all dependent on a network connection.
I believe that when mobile data usage becomes more widespread, not only in the states, but across the world, 3rd party developers will see a surge in application purchases.
But once again, you need look no further than Opera Mini to find a 3rd party application success story. As a matter of fact, this entire post was written in Opera Mini, from an N95, using my keyboard and its 3rd party driver.
Edit: Well unfortunately, the above is no longer true… According to Carlo, because of an anti-spammer plugin Mobhappy runs, I could not post this comment using Opera Mini… Ironic, considering the post is about mobile applications, and that I tried to post from my mobile, using a popular mobile application, to a mobile-centric site… I suppose it’s a testament to how far mobile applications (and their interaction with the world) still have to go…
Regards,
Phono (from a PC)
Me, me, here… I have to write something here.
Web or local — it is about value. People will download, if there is any value to the application….
1. Do you agree that mobile apps so far have been a bit a dud?
ceo: yes, the majority have….
2. If you do agree, why? Is it because the apps themselves are simply not compelling enough? Are good ones just too hard to explain in marketing terms?
ceo: yes (to first part), because they haven’t been compelling enough, or, because there are better or more effective non-application approaches to accomplish the same thing (such as texting, where the native texting app takes precedence). Second part of the question: nah, if they are too hard to explain, then the real value isn’t there.
But web apps can’t be as rich as local are, not today. For application that don’t require to be rich, mobile web is just fine.
ceo
mobile widget = midgets
i stand up and full support midget tossing. the more mobile midgets are, the better in my book
Hmmm
Are mobile app a dud:
So far very few of the applications have had any kind of success.
Why is this:
IMHO there are three main factors to this
a: it is a non trivial amount of effort required to download an app, ’specialy if you have to pay for it.
b: the applications end up in a folder buried in the phone menu, and out of site oi out of mind.
c: the applications are not able to sustain enough interest to keep the user returning to them, because to date it has been so hard to create excellent apps that work on a broad range of consumer devices.
I posit that most apps will be used for a month, and no more.
mostly because of a combination of b and c.
Despite the assertion that the phone is personal and imediate for the user, most live their lives inside bags/pockets, out of sight.
So to turn the question round, how do you make an app survice longer than a month ?
again imho you need to find other routes to remind the user to use the app and keep their interest in it. Thus external stimulation is required, unless of course you can get your self on the idle screen, which is not possible for the majoriy of the mid/low tier consumer devices.
Steve
I just came back from Monaco (MEM 2007, wrote my insights at http://www.degardener.com)
The key insight was from a teenager user forum. Out of 10 participants, only 1 downloaded a mobile client. Ever. All ten, on the other hand, use mobile internet.
Mobile clients still don’t make the cut. They are too complicated to download and install, do not connect to the network smoothly enough, get hidden in conspicuous folders and provide too little value for the hassle.
with the exception of (a) preloaded games, (b) very focused applications for niche markets such as travel assistance and (c) horizontal killer apps of mega brands such as gmail, I don’t see the effectiveness of launching a client. If you’re a mobile innovator, your chances are much higher with reaching users through the standard mobile browsers. Just like PC services migrate from the desktop to the web, only with much greater incentives.
[...] Applicazioni Mobile o Mobile Web? Quale la strada migliore per il successo? Difficile convincere gli utenti a scaricare applicazioni per telefoni cellulari, con l’eccezione di giochi e software come Opera Mini e Gmail. Forse più facile raggiungerli attraverso il mobile Web… Dibattito molto interessante. (tags: mobile web) [...]
See my personal experiences in a recent blog note. Maybe you got the idea for your note from there :).
Fully agree with Steve on the fact the downloaded applications become hard to locate if you press a wrong button right after the download is finished. Let me list two other reasons from my experience:
* mobile applications may be hard to update via Web. While some of them are capable of upgrading themselves, the majority isn’t.
* some applications are extremely hard to uninstall (Jaiku being one of the examples - I’ve been trying to uninstall it from my Nokia N70 for probably half a year or so).
1. Service-independent mobile apps, yes. Yet, the trend is that mobile applications are developed to act service frontends, in other words the user interaction and phone feature access. Not even Ajax can do the latter, yet. People want to communicate via their phones, so the service dependency is logical.
2. They are not compelling enough, as someone else said. I developed an application that I thought would be a hit, but no. Applications that don’t cost anything, that aid user-to-user communication, and that also make using a phone less expensive, seem to be slam dunks though (read: free SMS, free chat, free email). The question is then how to get alternative revenue streams. Advertizing is low-hanging fruit.
3. If we talk stand-alone non-communicating apps, no I don’t think so. If it’s not compelling one way it’s probably not compelling any other way either, unless part of an interesting whole (like a mobile community).
Also, volume of course doesn’t necessarily mean revenue if the application is free for the consumer, but in the case of Opera Mini there’s revenue. I believe Opera gets revenue both in terms of search advertizing and by bundling it with certain operators’ phones.
My take is that outside of the smartphone market (6% in the US), there aren’t enought compelling applications that make people’s lives easier.
I wouldn’t put Opera in the applications bucket, as web browsers are somewhat of a commodity.
The one exception to this is location based services. GPS-enabled applications are doing well and making money. In Q1, LBS applications accounted for 33% of carrier revenue in the apps space (games excluded). It seems to me that most people care where they are and care where they are going and these applications command price points at a premium to other types of content, specifically becuase of thier inherent utility.
We distribute our games completely off deck and have had no issues getting downloads in the millions both off our site and off partner sites. Sites like Getjar report numerous tools with impressive download numbers.
I think typically, you just have to create something that people want to download. It starts there.