by Ewan Spence
April 7, 2008 at 6:14 am · Filed under Google, Communication, Convergence, Email, Gmail, Android
Remind me again what use Google Android is? I mean, I know what the party line is, to create an open platform, to have a standard approach, to let it run on lots of handsets, to give the Linux community another White Knight OS running on standard phone hardware (as opposed to OpenMoko, or Sava JE, or whatever Motorola’s Strategy department liked using last month), there may be another useful side effect.
While it will be good news if Google succeeds in getting a foothold into the Handheld OS market, it won’t be because they have a standard platform. With all the best will in the world, Apple’s market hare of mobile phones in the US could not be described as a standard; a foothold, yes. Even Symbian’s worldwide share of the total mobile market (and not just the ‘smart’ section) has a long term goal to reach 10% (2007 sa their share rise to 7%). So I just don’t see how Google can manage to make any ground selling handsets.
Maybe they have something else in mind? After all, Google’s strength is in advertsing. What they need is eyeballs over their sites and properties. It is leveraging the mobile search space with browser tie ins and plug in search widgets – all driving browser footfall back to Mountain View. If the fragmentation in the mobile space continues, then one of the key applications is going to be using the phone as a think client, via the web or small Java applets, back to destinations such as Google Maps and Google Mail.
If Google can keep the tech elite switching between devices like the iPhone, the Nokia NSeries, and now Android, then these cross platform properties become more and more useful to the users, they gain more presence and become even more sticky. So people can squabble all they like over the Operating System. Google will keep gathering knowledge via the Android project, but the real value comes from keeping everyone arguing over a lot of systems, while the tools used continue to stay with Google.
by Imran Ali
December 26, 2007 at 12:53 pm · Filed under Mobile messaging 2.0, Voicemail, Facebook, Communication, Email, Gmail
Recently, here at Mobile Messaging 2.0, there’s been much discussion as to the definition of a ‘mobile message’.
There’s been some great commentary and debate with a focus on context, usage, the means of transmission, however there’s a parallel question which I believe to be of some importance - our messages exist in various places, how can we ensure that those messages have mobility?
More specifically, as messaging usage fragments across many services and devices, how do we make sure that those messages - the emotional and professional fragments of our lives - can move with us when we switch services or devices.
Voice messages, text messages, email, photomessages, Twitters, RSS posts and Facebook messages aren’t simply dry digital constructs, but the ‘emotional bits‘ that comprise a large part of our individual and collective memories, yet our tools for archiving and mobilising them are crudely shortsighted.
- The last voice message from a recently deceased relative is a precious memory, yet voicemail is treated ephemerally often disappearing after just a few days, with no way to archive.
- People often keep precious text messages from loved for long periods of time on their handsets, yet when they switch phones, there are no consistent mechanisms to port messages from one phone to another.
- I’ve been a Hotmail user since 1999 - after 8 years I’d love to switch to Gmail, but Microsoft offer me no mechanism to export eight years of deeply personal content to another service. Damn, I’d even pay them for such a feature.
Google’s recent adoption of IMAP for Gmail is one of the first clear moves by a major messaging provider to support such needs. In a recent interview, Gmail Product Manager, Keith Coleman, stated that:
Millions of people start using Gmail each month, and many of them tell us how hard it can be to switch email accounts, particularly when switching from a service that doesn’t offer POP, IMAP or forwarding. We didn’t want Gmail users to have to go through that if they ever wanted to move away.
Thought Google’s intentions are noble, IMAP doesn’t go far enough in providing the level of openness that is neccessary; Google’s own support documents illustrate that Gmail’s innovative message labelling doesn’t map directly onto the antiquated IMAP folder structure…also, it’s only good for email!
What’s needed is an open data format supported by all messaging applications such that mailboxes can be imported, exported or synced - preserving the message metadata and content, whether text, video or audio.
For service providers concerned about user retention, adding such capabilities may even add further value. I don’t mind keeping my voicemail with O2, as long as I can archive it to Gmail, or leaving photomessages on my mobile handset as long as my Flickr account can pull them into a longer term archive.
Perhaps a combination of embedded microformats, IMAP and mbox could provide the technological framework of a new Open Message Box standard for mobilising our messages.
