Daniel Appelquist on Mobile 2.0, and views on a different kind of Mobile 2.0

A number of Mobilists have been taking stabs at the definition of what the next generation of mobile is – this sometimes is referred to as Mobile 2.0. Ajit and Tony at OpenGardens took a stab at defining Mobile Web 2.0, and Daniel Appelquist has taken a stab at defining Mobile 2.0. My view of Mobile 2.0 is a bit different from the definitions I've seen around… I've been meaning to document this for along time, and I will, but I'll take advantage of Daniel's definition to kick this off…

On his post What is “Mobile 2.0” (Beta), Daniel writes about the characteristics that define Mobile 2.0:

Daniel summarizes this as follows: “…mobile 2.0 leaps the mobile platform forward to where the Internet is today, and shows us how the mobile phone can become a first class citizen, or even a leading citizen, of the Web.”

While I appreciate Daniel's attempt to define the term “Mobile 2.0”, and agree with some of his points, I've a fundamental issue w/ his definition for the next generation mobile. More than a transition from A to Bs as described above, it is about maximizing, leveraging the mobile context (and I will be saying this a lot), and the mobile experience… regardless how we get there. But this is to be accomplished through 1) finally realizing the potential of functionality (and technologies) already existent (for example, SMS, Push, Presence and Location), together with 2) the convergence of these different functionalities and media.

I'm going to briefly go over some of Daniel's items to explain what I'm saying…

• “SMS -> IM, mobile blogging”— in his case Daniel is failing to see the convergence on messaging…where “SMS, IM, MMS, voice” will all co-exist. Same with “Presence & Push-To-Talk -> VOIP applications” where these will co-exist and in some cases even converge,
• “Location services -> Google maps application” — Google map is “location services”, no transition here. With respect to the mobile context, it is about “Location services, Presence, and notifications”,
• “Java Games -> Connected Applications (e.g. photo sharing, blogging)” — this one I need to point out, as two different beasts are being compared…. gaming is a category all on itself and will always be, and it won't transition to photo sharing,

• “WAP push -> RSS readers” — this transition is an example of an unrealized and powerful concept of Push, into RSS readers. Push (regardless of WAP or not) is yet to be fulfilled, and it will, once implementing Push becomes cheap, open, and handsets become totally visible on the net… RSS readers are a way to implement quasi-push. My point here is that these two will co-exist.

:
:

But I agree with these:

• “Content consumption -> Content creation (e.g. mobile blogging)”, except that I would have said “Content consumption -> Content consumption and creation (e.g. mobile blogging)”,
• “Operator Portals -> Mobile Web and search” (with or without carrier's involvement) except that I would have said "Operator Portals, Mobile Web, search, no closed/walled gardens” where all come together to provide an open network and access to content, and which is related to the next item,
• “Operator chooses -> User chooses", all of which are important concepts behind open access to content and collaboration.

Some missing are:

• “Services on the network” (the return of the platform) that promotes collaboration and sharing of services and content — this is one of the fundamental characteristics of the new Web,
• Also missing is "better ways to access others" – and this is fundamental to the mobile context, as mobile handsets by its own nature is a social apparatus (long before Web 2.0 came along)… It is about enhancing the communication and mobile experience!.

ceo