It's Time to Build a Real Mobile Web

I'd like to see a mobile web that feels just like the world wide web. The world wide web has unleashed a wave of creativity and technical achievement and has impacted society on so many levels over the past twenty years. We can have a mobile web that will do the same, but we don't have one right now.

The world wide web is a global network of interconnected communications systems that allows any computing device to connect to it. Those devices run operating systems that allow any application to be installed on them. And so any developer anywhere in the world can build a web app (or desktop app) that can participate in the world wide web.

That is not true of the mobile web. The mobile carriers have all connected to each other and to the web. But not every device can run on every mobile network. And not every mobile app can operate on every mobile device that is connected to the mobile web.

I've been saying this for quite a while on this blog that until we get a truly open mobile web we will not have a platform for innovation like the world wide web. Not everyone gets it.

That's why the Google Voice/iPhone situation is so important. I don't use the iPhone (AAPL) and I tried and didn't like Google (GOOG) Voice. So the decision by Apple and/or AT&T (T) to prevent Google Voice from running on the iPhone does not impact me in the least. But this incident clearly shows that a business and technical architecture that does not allow (require?) every mobile device to operate on every mobile network and that does not allow every mobile app to run on every mobile device it was written for is bad for consumers, bad for innovation, and bad for society.

I agree with my friend Bijan that market forces are better than government meddling in markets but in this instance, I think the government is right to be paying close attention to this situation. At a minimum, the saber rattling by the FCC will make mobile carriers and device manufacturers think twice before creating proprietary platforms and networks. And I would like a simple and well articulated public policy on the mobile web.

I believe it should be required that:

1) the consumer owns his/her phone number and can use it on any network (we've got that).
2) the consumer owns his/her mobile device and can use it on any network.
3) non-malicious mobile apps should be able to run on any device they were built for.

I don't have a problem with subsidies and I understand that carrier subsidies are helpful in bringing down the cost of mobile devices. The iPhone has benefitted enormously from the lower prices made possible by the AT&T subsidy. But that subsidy is ultimately paid for by the consumer in the form of a contract with an early termination fee. Subsidies are a financing vehicle and they should be encouraged. But subsidies in return for exclusive devices should not be allowed. Let the market work, let each and every carrier compete in the market for the consumer's business by offering every device on their network and the best and most competitive subsidies. Exclusive contracts between device manufacturers and carriers don't let the market work in the consumer's interest, driving down prices and increasing choice.

I love what Google is doing with Android and while I've yet to find an Android phone that can replace my trusted Blackberry (RIMM), I think Android is going to be a big success. They've got the right approach to the market, they are open in every way possible. That's the winning model, for Google, for the consumer, and for the mobile web. I'd like to see Apple emulate it, but they did not with the Mac twenty-five years ago and they may make the same mistake again. I hope not.

Comments

[FloridaBoy2:]

I worked for Southwestern Bell Telephone many years ago and AT&T
did their best to keep 'inferior equipment', AKA non Western Electric, from being used on its sacred network? Seems that little has changed.

Aug 02 11:19 AM

[Don Bowey:]

Now that Cellular Networks are not just for telephone service, but also for data transmission, everyone should sit down and write the FCC a non-bitchy letter. This letter should ask the FCC to look into (have hearings) about having the data transmission capabilities of the Cellular Carriers in the US, expanded to function as part of the common internet. As part of this, consider that customers of the Cellular Carriers should be able to subscribe, separately, to either the telephone access or to the internet access, or both, and each would have a separate charge. The internet access should be as a "pipe," without regard to the use to which the bandwidth is used by the customer.

It is understood that existing bandwidth for this data access will be limited, but steps should be taken to expand the bandwidth as spectrum becomes available and customer service demand increases.

It may be advisable to identify whether action by the National Standards groups is necessary, and they can consider the value of harmonizing with the International Standards body.

-------

Ok folks, go do something useful.

Aug 02 01:02 PM

[sleepy:]

I think Apple wants openness too, but it's a long term goal. Meantime, for at least five years, they have to work with carrier cartels. Exclusive carrier deals, including the Apple imposed condition that the standard contract for iPhone must have unlimited data, and insisting that that data transport is neutral and not linked to carrier walled gardens for content delivery, navigation etc. are far bigger issues that Apple has achieved for us. The penalty (for now) is that they protect the carriers voice revenues.

Aug 02 02:22 PM

[deep:]

I would love to take the "El" from Addison Street in Chicago to Van Nuys in San Francisco. Give me a break...

Networks are networks. Platforms are Platforms. They take time and massive amounts of money to build. Once one is successful you can't just say that it should be open to all parasites!

"I think Android is going to be a big success. They've got the right approach to the market, they are open in every way possible. That's the winning model, for Google, for the consumer, and for the mobile web. I'd like to see Apple emulate it, but they did not with the Mac twenty-five years ago and they may make the same mistake again. I hope not."

Brilliant analysis! You obviously have a contradictory idea as to why Apple is currently on top and why all the rest are operating at the thinnest of margins or profiting in a different arena (Ads).

Your arguments are so insightful and comprehensive that Apple should certainly reverse their business model because you "think so"!

I mostly love your "proof" that Android is the wave of the future.

Excellent demonstration of facts and knowledge. You are clearly performing at the absolute peak metric of journalism!

I'm sure the Pulitzer is in the mail!

Aug 02 07:00 PM

[CGP:]

I read online somewhere that the thinking goes there will be more buildout of public wifi now, mainly because of the success of iPhone/iTouch.

I doubt wireless carriers would anytime, in the near to intermediate future, want to become just "dumb" pipes. Their build-out costs of the infrastructure is probably a lot more than the incremental costs of adding web servers here and there by a critical mass of universities, government and corporations. 3G has finally built out to a meaningful point and already the push is on for 4G, it's a big country.

Aug 02 11:14 PM

[brewer:]

Pretty naive to think that the web is open. Sure, that's how it was designed, but we also have windows media (only works in windows) Windows Explorer (only supported in windows, no support of standards, but a perversion of them, etc...) and many other examples.

Aug 03 11:03 AM

[Syed R Ahamed:]

Allowing GV into Apple would be the better option for iPhone. In case GV turns out to be a big winner, Apple will anyways seek ways to fend the threat of GV by digging into other apps similar. With GV, it is so much easy what with the way Google and Apple have approached things when they thought their interests were similar. About AT&T being threatened, there is definitely a certain amount of overlap with GV, but not much. As with all regulatory bodies, FCC seeks to give the best advantage to the end-users by trying to question Apple's move to yank GV off the line. Apple may well be arm-twisted to bring back GV with some changes.

Aug 03 12:39 PM

[Cheraiman's...:]

Personally, I think the iphone revolutionized mobil web browsing. Before it, no web browser came close to the functionality and simplicity of it.

Aug 03 09:40 PM