Mobile Web 2.0 Summit
group profile | members | imagewall
Live Qik page
Osney Medias' Mobile web 2.0 Summit aims to:
Clarify the principles of Mobile Web 2.0 and understand how to create the business models required for an enduring industry
Determine who has value in the value chain and discover
Find out what tools can be used to understand the Mobile
Explore the role and revenue potential of Mobile Web 2.0 in advertising and brand impact
Discuss how to ensure excellent end to end user experience
Examine what social networking means from a mobile
perspective and how to monetise user created content
Discover the realities of billing models surrounding Mobile Web 2.0 and their impact on the market
Compare the world of PC and Mobile Web and determine how
Web 2.0 and Mobile Web 2.0 will share content
Hear from the latest start-ups and their ideas for the newest applications and services
Learn about the next generation platforms and enablement and the implications for Mobile Web 2.0
Add the Mobile Web Sumit Moblog Widget to your blog or website by copy-pasting in the following code:
Search this moblog
Recent visitors
Sugar Free
In this day and age, more and more devices are web-enabled. Some have browsers, some don't. Mobile phones are probably the biggest category of devices that are web capable and have web browsers. These mobile devices range from older Nokia green-screen to fancy iPod Touch high dpi screen. These are both mobile devices, but can access and display the web in very different ways. The concept of a "mobile web" experience is completely different just between these two types of mobile devices.
The misconception is that the "mobile web" is about the device. A phone has mobility, but so does a laptop. "Mobile" actually describes the situation, the lifestyle, the context.
The iPhone and iPod Touch browser is WebKit, which is a complete full desktop type browser. When sitting at home on the couch watching TV, I am happy to use the iPhone to browse traditional websites and wade through templates designed for full-size monitors. I am in no hurry, usually looking for supplementary information about someone I just saw in a movie or checking weather for tomorrow. If browsing requires a few extra navigation clicks through multi-levels of navigation items, then so be it. On the flip-side, sometime I am at sitting at my desk looking at a website which is so poorly organized, the "mobile site" is actually more helpful. As well as, when I am running between airport terminals trying to catch a flight, I don't want to click through a site designed for people sitting in-front of a 19 inch monitor with a mouse and a keyboard. We all probably can put ourselves in similar situations and when we look back, it is not about the device we have in-front of us, it is everything but that, it is the environment around us we are really interested in.
I would argue that the term "mobile web" is the wrong description, something we should stop propagating. When we develop new "mobile" sites we should try to think of them as "sugar-free" websites. We cut all the corporate jargon, mission statements and consider the customers' needs and the situations in which they would be needing this information. They are probably in a rush, under pressure and/or doing three things at once.
These activities could be at a desk at work, while on the morning commute or sitting in a cafe in a foreign country. By cutting back all the un-needed navigation and fluff, the customer is left only with the bare minimum useful functionality. This new site concept is less mobile device centric and more about "sugar free" information. So whenever we start any new project, we keep that mantra at the forefront as we develop.
Continuing to talk about designing "mobile websites" continues to hamper adoption. As the number of mobile phones surpass that of traditional computers, and the variety of mobile devices continues to grow, the "mobile web" will become more popular than "The Web", at which point it just IS the web. Like when alternative music became mainstream - so what is the alternative then? By framing the conversation not as "mobile vs. traditional", but instead, "sugar-free vs. full-fat" (or more aptly - minimal, common functionality vs. every-edge-case and the kitchen sink) everyone benefits. This doesn't mean that your site is not allowed to detect and cater on a device-to-device basis, but instead, device targeting is in the details which make a site more useful - they don't make a site "mobile", they compliment your mobility no matter which type of site you visit, "sugar-free" or "full-fat".
-- brian suda
suda.co.uk
Posted by Alfie
,mobile web,mobile web summit,suda
mat says:
*round of applause*
to put it in fewer words - "it's the internet, stupid"
There's no reason to have the fat - the corporate jargon, mission statements, useless navigation, etc - on a website at all. That stuff is only there because Marketing people think it's important. It's not. Cut the crap, keep it lean, make sure the stuff that needs to work works for everyone, regardless of which device they choose to look at it on. Dress it up with fancy interfaces and animations and so on if you must, but not at the expense of making the site break in less powerful circumstances. Web Accessibility 101, basically.
That's how the web should be - simple, fast, accessible, easy. Viewing platform should (and hopefully 'will') be almost irrelevant.
Alfie says:
You've really summed it up perfectly Brian, if only there was more focus at the business strategy level on this than on frippery.
brian(brian-at-suda-dot-co-dot-uk) says:
mat, while i generally agree, the corporate cruft is pointless marketing speak, there are older established companies who might have a history section, or be required by law to disclose their board members, etc. This is great for researchers and students doing book reports, but not for me when comparing prices when shopping. A good site should be goal driven, and we don't always have the same goals at the same moments.
mat says:
Good point, but stuff like history doesn't come under "useless crap" - it's in the 'About' section on the nav, you don't have to click on it when you're trying to find out when your train is, etc. Good design can make pages like that work.
It's the pointless crap that has to go. The leader graphic on the main page that the CEO came up with in a dream, the pointless flash intro, the daft animation, the over-complex navigation, etc.
But yes. I do agree. User's should goals come first.