Reacties op "The end of the app"-artikel

Mike Gauba

Helaas hebben we niet meer de rechten op de originele afbeelding
adformatie

Vorige maand heb ik op Mobilecowboys, MobileMarketer en Linkedin een geschreven over 'Het einde van de App'. In het artikel schreef ik dat door de opkomst van de compatible HTML5-standaard de App-voordelen deels wegvallen en dat alleen frequent gebruikte apps een plaats op het mobiele scherm behouden, al is het alleen maar als short-cut naar een HTML5 site. Het artikel was natuurlijk niet bedoeld om app-bouwers een hak te zetten. Door de opkomst van oa mobiele betalingsmogelijkheden zullen zal de mobiele development industrie nog groter worden. Alleen is af te vragen of dit dus nog in 'App vorm' zal zijn. Er zijn veel reacties van mensen uit de mobiele wereld gekomen. Zie hieronder:

Dana Farbo • There is an old saying, Don't buck a trend. Some may argue that apps are a fad but it looks like a trend to me.

Richard Otto •
Just as I have mentioned in my article; there will still be a market for frequently used apps like Facebook, Linkedin and Foursquare, but will this not be more than a shortcut?

Jonathan Raveh • Hey Richard, Yes - for some it will be nothng more than a usable shortcut. Apps will be the way we manage our lives. Everything used to be done through the web. Mobile is now taking over. This is only my opinion, of course, but I think we are going to see more big things in the App scene
Marcel Henry • The biggest risk to apps is lack of innovation. Innovation will only take place where there is investment and competition and ultimatel,y rewards. Appstores are owned and regulated by the OS providers. The OS providers are offering increased functionality in their operating sytems and restriciting what app developers can do. The trend may mean that the phone literally becomes one big app with the line between OS and App becoming very blurred.
Marcel Henry • The biggest risk to apps is lack of innovation. Innovation will only take place where there is investment and competition and ultimatel,y rewards. Appstores are owned and regulated by the OS providers. The OS providers are offering increased functionality in their operating sytems and restriciting what app developers can do. The trend may mean that the phone literally becomes one big app with the line between OS and App becoming very blurred. I specialize in high technology marketing and have spent the last seven years understanding the dynamics of adoption and usage of high technology applications. Most of us use mobiles for making voice calls and for sending SMS, but there are more than 100 odd applications that

Mike Gauba • I specialize in high technology marketing and have spent the last seven years understanding the dynamics of adoption and usage of high technology applications. Most of us use mobiles for making voice calls and for sending SMS, but there are more than 100 odd applications that are offered by the operator that we don't use. At times, we may even purchase them but still not use. Purchase and Usage are two different paradigms.
Conscience typically makes a call on anything that costs very little and takes a considered advice of the subconscience on things that it considers costly. Subconscience takes a very pragmatic approach at things and governs usage - that is why it is a greater challenge. One can excite a conscience but not the subconscience

1. Apple is playing with the values that encourage people to purchase. It excites the iPhone users with the applications pricing them a few dollars, who without giving a second though download them
2, These applications are not necessarily used after the purchase for the "usage" is yet another story.
3. In the case of mobile phones, the applications that are likely to be used are P2P (voice, chat, email, short messaging), LBS etc that typically synergize with the "on the go" needs.
4. iPhone users are likely have a very causual approach towards the applications that do not synergize with "on the go" needs and someone rightly said in the comments that they are "fads"

Marcel Henry • Very well put and ties in with the notion that the average life span of the vast majority of apps is a couple of weeks at most. So for an app to be useful it must either deliver interesting content or allow the user to generate content for sharing with others.

Jonathan Raveh • Let's not forget, this is only the beginning. the App market will stabilize at some point, Some Apps will be regarded as a must (Facebook, email, IM etc.) and the rest as temporary. But even if most Apps are a trend, I wouldn't regard the App world as a trend. Looks like it's here to stay

Mike Gauba • Applications that do not synergize with "on the go" needs can typically wait for the person to be at home or in the office, where he can browse over a PC/Notebook in an environment, where he can sit back and has a greater control. Since Facebook has a P2P element "though not live" will be accessed in a mobile environment - however the preference will always be to access it in an environment over which the user has a greater control

Jacques Ledisco • I have content for a street slang guide to 18 languages, including gambling & drug slangs, put Apple won't accept it.

Lauren DeLisa Coleman • I think until we all start to look at an incorporate the stats that show who actually out-indexes on mobile (i.e. has phone, more likely to use features, make purchases via mobile, etc = African Americans) and incorporate that understanding organically via collaboration with agencies that specialize in that market; CMO's and /or the app "industry"/ - or whatever form it will take in later years - will continue to miss opportunities.

Mike Gauba • People are not likely to use a non mobile application while mobile unless a very special focus is created. This can come in very different ways including enticing with a rich reward.

Felix Portnoy • The only reason we use apps is because the online browsing experience sucks. To fact that we need to *download* and *install* an app for every little thing is completely insane. I give it another 3-5 years max.

Ulf Deeg • Sure, apps will remain for games and large preinstalled static content, but....
...thank goodness, there are technology providers out there that enable engaging mobile web experience for a large audience and a myriad of devices.

Yes, I am talking of TODAY, not tomorrow.
Jon Arne Sæterås • Trends does not always make sense... :)
Still, many use millions on marketing of iphone apps targeted at 3% of the population with phones.... does not make sense to me...

But I think the trend is changing... Adobe does too;
André Kempe • Apps are not new. Remember the J2ME apps on Symbian and other plattforms?! I think the synergy of apps and browsing will be the future ... and regarding the 3% issue: it is ok because these 3% have enough money to spend for products advertised on these phones. What do you want to advertise on phones which were sold for 1 dollar? Is that your target group even if 97% are using these? On the other side have a look on webstatistics. How many % visits are from phones sold for 1$?

Ernest Radal • - Spot On!

Sander Munsterman • @ Felix Portnoy
I agree with your statement, however....
3/5 years, that's a long period in the digital age don't you think? If we have 5 years with apps and webapps, than I guess few company can refuse to have a mobile apps...

Cyril Dunworth • Apps which continue to provide valuable and rewarding content, along with being an engaging tool for the consumer and a shop window for the advertiser will always have a place. The more "gimicy" type of app will always be the latest fad. Why is there such a concentration on iPhone when the subject of apps arises? While Apple should be congratulated on their marketing prowess there is a much larger non apple market to be addressed.

Ulf Deeg • @ Felix
e.g. the finalists of ME Awards 2009: Mobile IQ, Wapple, Netbiscuits, Kilrush, Mobrool, Fonestarz ->
Others include UsableNet, 2ergo, boost communications, crisp wireless, clanmo, mobiletech.... Some collect content from regular websites, others are some sort of cms or even cloud-based platforms that include pont-and-click site building, hosting, managing, billing etc...

Ernest Radal • Remember that previously the developed countries were the ones that drove the mobile traffic, now it is instead developing countries who have taken the lead. Take a country such as Phillipines, where Google searches in the mobile phone is already more than on the laptop! And in Phlippinerna they did not even launched the iPhone 4... Noatble!

Alessandro Colucci • Marketing Managers' Apps frenzy is over! It lasted longer than Second Life ,-)
Harvesting free publicity from "an app" was a bad idea in the beginning.
Anyway, while frenzy fades, value for consumers remains. I'd wait for Android to take-up, as it will, while Apps will be very nice if not used alone (e.g. outdoor, point of sale)...

Hugh Curran • I'm sorry but I just can't agree that apps are on the way out. If anything they're going to continue to grow, Shazam, the popular music identification app is growing at the rate of 1m downloads per week and as more and more apps become cross platform friendly then the app markets will continue to grow. Sure there are some crap apps out there but there are also crap websites and crap magazines etc so its to be expected. What you're not taking into account is the number of apps the spring up around certain events, like the world cup for example. Then there are the staples - Facebook, Twitter, 4SQ and Score Mobile being good examples of that.
Finally you're not taking into consideration the proliferation of smartphone technology around the world and with that the growth in mobile data packages. Having apps run in the background scraping information as you go about your business means not having to log on to find out the score in the match or who is where in the leaderboard at the open. It means you can see what your friends are saying on twitter etc without having to use the browser on your smartphone. Apps are here to stay but not every business or company needs one. It's the apps that are unnecessary that are on the way out. Apps shouldn't be seen as just a short cut. They are viable communications channels that are made all the better for proper consideration.

Mark Stephens • It is an interesting debate, but it appears to me that all the largest players in this market are investing billions into the ability to generate revenue through application software sales and services for a lot more than the next couple of years. The i-phone has shown the way, but rapidly taking over is Google's Android operating system. The boundaries of what is possble on mobile are only restricted by what the platforms can do. Most apps with a limited life expectancy seem to be no more than mobile website links. This reminds me of the rush to develop websites without any understanding of what it was supposed to do for the business.
I recently spoke to the CEO of a £100m turnover business about their new app and he did not have a clue why they had developed it without the ability to generate an ROI and why there was no interactive element, so that they could survey, promote to specific demographics, make offers and generally enhance the consumer experience. It was no more than an information portal that they had paid over £20k to develop. He just knew that the company needed an App .... ? Really cool Apps that provide on demand relevant data and information for travel, news, entertainment, location based services, critical assistance (medical / life critical solutions), travel, sport and I could go on, seem to have found a medium that is not restricted to time or a location and that suits our life modern styles. The app usually tends to be a gateway to many other apps behind it so the user experience is tailored more towards each individual. Until we move away from what is probably the most personalised divice ever created (the mobile phone) I think that this 'fad' has a long way still to go ....

Mike Gauba • As Newton's Law of Gravity helped the scientists open up newer frontiers, I hope the laws of Convergence Dynamics (published in 2006 on 18003Gguru.com) help the entrepreneurs/software developers to more wisely invest their money Convergence Dynamics - Governing Laws
Law of Convergence: Diverse applications or applications addressing the same need in a convergent suite dilute each other's focus; hence dilute each other's "perceived value".

Corollary 1 Users subconsciously nominate an application in a convergent suite that is the most important to them as the principal and all other instantaneously become secondary

Corollary 2 Applications addressing the same need are more likely to co-exist and experience lesser dilution in their "perceived value" than the diverse applications

Corollary 3 Secondary applications that are diverse, typically struggle through out their lifecycles, unless a very special focus is brought on to them. These applications will only experience greater usage for the time the focus is there

Corollary 4 If the primary application has a strong value proposition, then all secondary applications diverse or otherwise will have to struggle much harder to experience greater usage

Corollary 5 Human Psyche will not allow two principal applications to co-exist in the same convergent suite

Humans are excited to buy convergent applications but they make a little use of all but one - an interesting conflict between different faculties of human psyche

I would also encourage the sequel to this a model - "Conscious-Subconscious Model: A Winning Approach to Designing Successful High Technology Marketing Strategy" published in 2008 and can be accessed through the link

Tom Horsey • Personally I'm not an app fan, neither on my PC or my mobile, yet the trend is there. 99% of all proposal requests that we receive from brands these days are to develop apps for them. Why not html5 I ask, then it will even work on your television when the time comes!!!

Mobile Marketing
Online Advertising
Mobile Advertising
Video Streaming

Mike Gauba • Hi Tom - If you remember the insanity that prevailed during the late nineties in the Internet domain - that is what we see building up today

Tracy R. Hill • Hmmm...just loaded a bunch of apps on my phone (Android). I think it comes comes down to common sense - like just about every other form of marketing/advertising. If the app does something useful for people, and you can find a way to promote/advertise around it, then great. I would never expect anyone to download an app just for a promotion, or if it doesn't do something quicker or more efficiently than the company website or other sources. It seems like mobile is a bit like where social media was in its infancy - developers/digital agencies are trying to make a buck and brand managers aren't really sure what to do with it yet. So we end up with barcode promotions....when only a handful of smart phones even have barcode scanners. I'd rather spend the money on promotions around Yelp of Citysearch.

Patrick Mork • The problem here is discovery. Unless you have signficant marketing budget to drive people to your application it's almost impossible to get cut through unless you have direct relationships with apple or google. there are ways to get free publicity for your app though. GetJar has service called App it! (formerly known as ADP). As soon as you upload your app to GetJar (which you do via ) it creates a unique link called App it! You can then place this link anywhere: on your website, mobile site, on Twitter, Facebook etc. When a consumer clicks on your App it! link they are directed to a download page on GetJar which detects what handset they are using and only serves them the version of the app for that handset (assuming you've uploaded multiple versions). Since Getjar supports Android, Blackberry, Java, Symbian, iPhone and Windows Mobile and Mobile Sites that means you can pretty much put all your content up there without having to send consumers to multiple sites.

here's how a publishers used Twitter to promote their app: otherwise just email me with questions:

Elias Crum • HTML5 is great for usability and easiness of use (both for developer and user). However it is not a set standard yet, Microsoft is not sure on how to support in in Phone7. That html5 will make an end on apps is pretty sure, mainly on the development side there is a huge advantage. No need to develop your app for all existing and new platforms. it just works. We have just released our software to enable companies to mobilize their app thru html5.

Greg Cornelius • I think it is fair to predict that improvements to mobile web browsers (html5 and Flash) will render the vast majority of apps obsolete.

Alexander Gregori • & Richard I believe you are spot on. We have been advocating this argument for the last two years and recently released studies by Morgan Stanley and Opera Software indicate same. But companies don't have to wait for mobisites to become "fancy" if they want to utilize their power. Join me at our next Live Webinar on where we discuss "How To Create Custom Made Mobisites that Boost your ROI Today".

CN Chiu • I would be interested to get your estimates of the timeframe for when html5 will make apps obsolete.

Kimberly Schick-Puddicombe • very interesting and true.

Scott Middleton • I agree with what Patrick Mort has said. Its all about discovery. People have realised that even though they can get an app built for $10,000 or less they still need to get it out. Having a huge marketing budget isn't the only solution. A creative approach is to look for partners that would benefit by promoting your app or mobile service.

Jeff Ostiguy • I keep equating it to the rise and fall of desktop apps.

Bruno Missoni • Mobile websites seem to get much more support than apps. See
Mobile Commerce Survey Reveals Significant Interest in Developing Mobile Websites at

Seems that retailers understand that there mobile websites are more effective in adressing customer requirements resp. the total of their mobile business

Chris Brassington • Check out the Mobile Insight and Behavior Group to gets some views on apps.

Mark Bamber • I'll be as brave as to say for most there is no future in developing native apps. Fragmentation is nigh and apart from select groups who can maintain ongoing investment, the majority entering the mobile market won't be able to maintain their investment in updating multiple native apps. I see the majority of apps today are nothing more than RSS readers that wow consumers with snazzy transitions and menus, most of the functionality is not achieved by interacting with the core features of the phone and could easily be achieved within mobile browser sessions. With mobile OS updates demanding ongoing testing and updates at least every quarter, organisations will struggle to maintain consistent user experiences across devices unless they formulate a centralised approach where they can deliver an app like experience across all or most Smartphone devices. There will always be innovation around games, branded experiences and some utilities but post current glory days they'll soon need to review their mobile strategies to leverage their ROI. With the pace of mobile development I'm not sure build once and run everywhere solutions will become a reality in the short term but it's an exciting ride all the same.

Michael Walenius • In my opinion the mobile application world is going through a fantastic period of possibilities. I have worked in the mobile services and applications world since 1993 and the last 4 years have been fantastic, and my forecast is that it will continue. I don't believe that any technology for letting people being creative on our smart phones will outsmart the other. There will be several options available on how to develop mobile services and applications. At the moment the mobile world is in a tryout phase. There is so much happening and so many initiatives going on that there is no possibility to predict who will end up on top, if anyone ever will. But there are market forces that are going to make sure that there will be productive technologies available for each platform. These top of the breed actors are at the moment Apple, Google and Microsoft. I have little experience in the RIM development platform so I can't make any comments there (sorry). These actors will make sure that there is a platform that is capable to perform new and even more fantastic features that lets us use the full potential of the hardware. These tools will make sure that software and business developers may bring life to their ideas on what we need in our mobile life. One of the strong believes I have is that there will never be a development platform for all devices that outpaces the dedicated platform for each device itself. There is no perfect platform for compile once run everywhere. There will never be one. And we will not within close timeframes come to the point where Objective-C or C++ developers aren't needed due to the fact that there are some new web development language that has appeared. They will live a symbiotic life side by side. The topic for business and software developers is to understand how to use the tools needed to get the job well done and profitably. If there is no business case to develop three software packages for three platforms, maybe the idea isn't good enough? The market size for the best applications are definitely large enough to allow for triple version developments. There is no option to use a web technology just to make the life of the developer easy, if there are features needed to make the app shine and become successful on the market. That is not a reason good enough. So make your analysis right and pick the tools that fit the purpose. Don't forget the general formula that whatever perfect solution, technology, idea or product you have it won't matter if you haven't planned to tell your customers. This applies equally in the mobile app market. Only in the early days of iPhone app making there were apps the marketed themselves, just by be let out in iTunes. This time will never come back again. You have to think about marketing to become successful in you app-making.

Alexander Gregori • There is a great article by Mark Suster called "Why the App is Crap" in which he totally disassembles any argument for apps from both a business and technology perspective. Please read

Krasen Hinkov • I think the majority of the people make one simple mistake: trying to think about technology before defining their value proposition for the clients. One you decide what you want to offer - the technology follows the features needed.
I think that both apps and mobile web will live side by side in the future. As far as you want to deliver information or any other content - the web will be ok. When it comes to functionality and features strongly related to the device capabilities - the app will be the obvious choice.
Just make a parallel to the PCs. The similarity is pretty obvious.

Allen R. Gibson • Great discussion, folks. Thanks!
As a consumer, I have to say that I'm still willing to bet on apps for some time to come. The idea that mobile web browsing will work as well as my desktop browser someday soon does NOT fill me with anticipation, nor excitement.
Apps are cool. Apps are fun. T hey do things FOR me, if well designed, and let me use less of my brain to perform a task. This is a win for me. And I spend a good chunk of my day on my browser, so it's not like I don't value what it does.
But a good app, for me, is like having somebody ELSE's brainpower, condensed into thinking about how to actually SERVE ME. And I don't see a whole lot of that in my browser, even tho Firefox does manage to excite me about once a year.

Jeff Cozart • The bottom line is that we need to learn from history. The "irrational exuberance" with the internet drove values sky high and created a gold rush of investors competing to spend marketing dollars. Remember Blue Mountain Cards? Neither do I. The lesson? Business needs to be built on a profitable model. Web sites are cool, but they need to support the business, not be the business. Mobile will shake out the same way. Yes, apps are cool. But do they deliver more real value than HTML 5? Perhaps in some cases. That will just depend on the specific business case.

Dawn Rowley • Fantastic, just as everyone’s jumped on the band wagon and with new consumers signing up every day to smartphones and the apps marketplaces, we find it’s all over :) Apps might not have the longevity, but they are quite fun. Look forward to seeing how HTML 5 can rival in getting people as excited and creating the buzz that apps have.

Enda Mannion • Comparing the SMS to MMS shift that failed: MMS was theoretically better, but was charged at higher rates to consumers and didn't work as well. Apps work better than mobile sites right now, and can be monetised better since the stores have got their act together.
I prefer not to create device-specific apps, but HTML5 is just a dream right now. I can give other technology examples which failed to become accessible and therefore never reach critical mass. Will HTML 5 go that way too? I hope not, particularly because it is more open than device-specific platforms and right now attractive features are still not open.
So, the end is not near, neither for apps nor simple sites, and we continue to develop with these.

Noel Tenorio, PhD • This has been coming for a while: duplication of apps functionality, once you buy you cannot return, too many players, fractioned market, impossible to gain visibility, tight Apple control over pricing structures, content and content players. Top 1,000 apps make 350K/yr. in revenue.

For the consumer, it can vary from connecting to your favorite brand again, convenience of automating a task and therefore value, or just another stuffing stocker to give to yourself. I am in the business of creating new technologies, products, impacting values to old product lines and company's core competences, and creating strategies and products for market domination. After begin an iphone user for a couple years, I bit the bullet and went to the ipad and iphone 4.0. I needed to see for myself how convergence was being executed. My summary judgement is that the ipad is not ready for prime time yet. The reason is that lack of essential hardware features (it is far from being a big iphone), lack of writing tools, and, most of all, the poverty of meaningful and valuable software for work. You can say today that the ipad is a big ipod - great for incoming passive content: books, movies, photos, text, newspapers and magazines. Simple text editing with format to more sophisticated work apps are none existent. Everyday I read about another college that adopted the ipad or a city mayor that is pushing for the ipad everywhere. The apps world is simply not ready to be more than toys. I wonder if this excitement is going to die down just like many other fly-by technologies. Moving from the ipad to the iphone, the cost and screen limitations make it impossible for large serious adoptions, which like MS Office, has held the pc industry to thick and thin. Synchronization is another issue. As a consumer you are required to give up a lot of information and to make a commitment to data entry without any cross platform support. The few apps that synchronize some do it to mobileme, others to their own site, other to google, and other to the desktop. This is not a serious option for some recording contact conversations, plan coordination, must keep lists and critical data such as contacts, health logs, etc. The lack of cohesion and the inexistent cross-platform migration and inter-apps data transfer are blatant problems. For example, you can cut and paste some data from a field into another field. But if the apps have different field structures, then no game.
I have not used all the functions in the iOS4 yet, because I keep coming back to the ipad. The text entry on the ipad is supposed to be superior because of the larger keyboard. However there is a function that guess your word and forces it on you unless you stop typing and touch the text. I can tell users of iDevices from their emails, skype chats and other texts, Their are filled with strange words and meaningless text perfectly spelled. If I type confort, it will force me to fight with it imposing all the words starting with con* but cannot recup into coMfort.
My most beloved toys, filled with eleven pages and containers of apps, from my most beloved brand, are nothing but that TOYS.

Cas Tuyn • Indeed. Many Apps can be represented technically by just a few webpages. I make mobile websites for music festivals that work on all modern browsers, and I only test in Firefox + my own Android phone. People using the rarest phones comment that it works good for them. Granted, there are some functions so interwoven with the platform, that they rightfully come as Apps. Then you have the problem of which platforms to support. Choose too few and you limit your target audience, choose too many and you lower your profit (if any) and waste your time-to-market. Conclusion: where possible, write a mobile website.

• Karel
De appstore economien lijken nog het meest op de Second Life bubble van 2007.
De iPhone is wat dat betreft nog het meer een soort gaming device dan een werkbaar stuk gereedschap.Niet voor niets heeft RIM het grootste marktaandeel in de VS and worden er meer QWERTY toestellen verkocht dan touchscreens. Laat je niet gek maken door die amerikanen, er staat in de nationale veiligheidsagenda dat de VS op technologisch gebied wereldleider moet zijn dus de pers en de aandelenmarkt hobbelt er vrolijk achteraan zonder te beseffen dat er landen zijn in de rest van de wereld die op ze voorlopen op dit gebied (Japan, Korea, etc.) Je zult ze er niet over horen.
"De iPhone is echter van alle toestellen de grootste mobiele dataverkeer verbruiker"
Dit beeld is vooral ontstaan doordat AT&T ongelimiteerd dataverbruik aanbood naast flinke subsidies op het toestel zelf. dit hebben ze nu onlangs stopgezet en ook in Nederland is dat niet meer goedkoop. Wees dus voorbereid op een buitensporig hoge telefoonrekening als je al te enthousiast over het web surft.
Tenslotte, ondanks alle jubel berichten is het smartphone marktaansdeel van de iPhone gedaald van 17% naar 14%, en zijn er veel minder iPods verkocht. Ook is het ongelimiteerde dataplan voor de iPad in de VS door AT&T inmiddels stopgezet.
Apple heeft een geweldige PR & Marketing afdeling, maar het blijkt goedkope chinese meuk waar je veel te veel voor betaalt. Ook is het zo dat de mensen die zelf reclame maken, zelf het meeste erdoor worden beinvloed. Laten dat nu net de mensen zijn die Apple PC's gebruiken. Apple heeft beloofd de oude media te redden maar wordt zelf al net zo ongeloofwaardig. Als ze niet geforceerd waren om ze gratis weg te geven hadden ze voor 100 miljoen aan rubbertjes verkocht.

Richard Otto
Mijn artikel gaat over apps van alle diverse platformen en niet specifiek iPhone.

• sinterklaas
Je hebt wel een tunnelvisie wat jij zegt en wat de cijfers laten zien komen niet echt overeen.om een goede kijk op dingen te hebben moet je ze van alle kanten bekijken.apple doet het goed, het verkoopt zijn dingen en bespeelt de markt daar kan je alleen positief over zijn het is maar dat je een kunstje bezit en niet velen kunnen dat nadoen en daar moet je over zeuren juist.neem een goede bril en kijk alles maar eens van beide kanten. Heel mooi stukje tekst Richard, ik had er zo nog niet over gedacht. Maar bedoel je nou eigenlijk dat "mobiele sites" de apps overbodig gaan maken? en waarom nu dan wel en niet 5 jaar geleden?(ok ... omdat "apps toen nog niet bestonden ;-) )Hoe Karel als reactie hierop met een hele hate-speech over Apple van wal steekt snap ik ook niet helemaal... en dan ook nog doen alsof hij er verstand van heeft; dan kun je toch beter eerst de oorspronkelijke tekst lezen denk ik.

• Farl
Tja, als je voor je bedrijf een website laat bouwen is het ook lastig om op te vallen tussen miljoenen andere websites. Dan valt de hoeveeldheid app's nog wel mee. Populaire platformen en media trekken nu eenmaal de aandacht van marketeers.

• sygys
, wat karel naar mijn mening stoort, en mij persoonlijk ook, is het feit dat er van alles door apple geroepen wordt en vervolgens het enige wat ze doen is de klant misleiden. Hoorde iedereen maar eens juichen tijdens de pers conferentie van jobs toen hij het revolutionaire antenne idee showde aan de wereld van de i4. en nu? lijkt het allemaal niet zo geweldig meer! sterker nog apple moet condooms bij de i4 gaan leveren om ervoor te zorgen dat hun klanten bereik hebben. Ik kan niet anders dan toegeven dat de PR van apple uitmuntend werk levert! Ze wisten zelf s mij bijna te verleiden een i4 te gaan halen. Achteraf gezien zou ik hem alleen maar kopen voor die paar bruikbare apps. Achteraf gezien ben ik blij dat ik niet mee ben gegaan met de golf mensen die alleen maar apple willen omdat het een appel logo op de cover heeft. Ik verwacht wel dat met de komst van de steeds geavanceerdere websites er straks helemaal geen programma's meer zullen zijn. Ik verwacht dat binnen nu en 20 jaar alles online zal lopen. Je koopt dan een game en speelt deze volledig online. met de huidige glasvezel kunnen al snelheden behaald worden van 171000 megabit dat is zo'n 21 gigabyte per seconde. dat zijn dus 4 volwaardige games in 1 seconde.
Nu zijm de servers en techniek nog niet zover dat een groot publiek deze snelheden allemaal kunnen halen maar de kennis is er al wel. Als we straks met 200 a 300 megabyte per seconde data binnenhalen kunnen games en software van een paar gigabyte makkelijk gestreamed worden van het internet. Hierdoor wordt het onmogelijk illegaal games te downloaden. Geloof mij dat is de toekomst! Microsoft gebruikt momenteel al een klein gedeelte van deze functie. onder de titel "games for windows" worden games nu al vaak verplicht om online je data op te slaan. waardoor je wel het spel kunt spelen maar niet kunt opslaan zonder in te loggen op je live account. Steam heeft momenteel al de service om online games te kopen en te downloaden. met het programma steam kun je dan inloggen en vervolgens het spel spelen. Het voordeel van steam is dat je overal ter wereld en op iedere computer steam kunt installeren en direct de game kunt downloaden je moet echter ingelogged zijn om te kunnen spelen, en uiteraard kun je maar op 1 account tegelijk spelen. Online is de toekomst, omdat ontwikkelaars meer grip hebben op het aanbieden. als het woord "apple" maar genoemd wordt gaat hij helemaal los...

• Evert
Applicaties blijven bestaan zolang je via een website geen gebruik kan maken van functies op een telefoon zoals GPS, Camera en dergelijke. Met HTML5 is er al meer mogelijk, maar de meeste browsers op mobiele telefoons bevinden zich in een sandbox waardoor je geen gebruik kan maken van de telefoon functies. Widgets (applicaties bestaande uit HTML, CSS en Javascript) zoals deze door Opera en andere zijn ontwikkeld zijn een oplossing hier voor, die cross os kunnen worden ingezet. Doormiddel van telefoon API is het mogelijk om bepaalde functies te gebruiken. Aangezien de widget op de telefoon zelf draaid zit deze niet in een sandbox.
Wat de markt zal voortstuwen voor het ontwikkelen van mobiele websites en online applicaties is het vrijgeven van gestandariseerde API's waarmee gebruik kan worden gemaakt van alle functionaliteiten van de telefoon. Hiervoor moeten telefoon ontwikkelaars gaan samen werken (mobiel open alliance). Maar aangezien dit voor Apple geen geld op brengt (zij lopen geld mis uit de applicatie markt) zal dat nog wel even duren voor er iets van terecht komt. Ondanks dat de iPhone en iPad maar een heel klein gedeelte van de markt tot zich mogen rekenen. Krijgen zij momenteel de meeste aandacht. Het is dan ook verstandig om hiervoor te blijven ontwikkelen en daarnaast je te richten op de toekomst door zoveel mogelijk je diensten online in website of widget vorm aan te bieden. De kosten voor het ontwikkelen van een apps voor iPhone of iPad dalen gestaagd. Net als website ontwikkelaars verzadigd de markt van app ontwikkelaars de komende tijd waardoor de prijs zal dalen.

• Richard Otto
Ik denk inderdaad dat mobile websites veel van de huidige apps overbodig gaan maken. 5 jaar geleden waren er nog geen HTML5 websites..
Ik ga er van uit dat je functies zoals GPS en Camera straks ook via een website kan benaderen.
Misschien vind jij de Nokia N900 het beste toestel, maar dit toestel is nog geen groot succes. Zie:
@ Pieter: Bij Aston Martin betaal je niet belachelijk veel voor de naam, maar je betaalt meer omdat er veel handwerk in zit, kwalitatief hoogwaardige onderdelen worden gebruikt en omdat er jaarlijks geen 1.000.000 aston martins van de band rollen.

• Pieter Bayens
Otto
Ik vind het altijd zo interessant dat mensen zo aan het verleden voorbij gaan. Ik snap de strekking van je artikel hoor - deels zelfs mee eens. Maar we krijgen eerst een tussenstap, namelijk die het 'vaste' internet ook heeft doorgemaakt. Vroeger moesten we allemaal inbellen en betaalden we per minuut. Daarna kwam ADSL/kabel met datalimiet, maar qua duur onbeperkt. Toen kregen we FUP's, wat in de praktijk onbeperkt betekent voor 99% van de gebruikers. Ondertussen gingen de prijzen per minuut (MB) sterk omlaag, maar dit werd door de schaalvergroting (meer gebruikers) uiteindelijk opgevangen. Waarom maken mobiele providers geen gebruik van hetzelfde businessmodel? Waarom rekenen ze niet gewoon 1 realistisch bedrag, waarvoor je onbeperkt kunt internetten en bellen? Stel dat bijvoorbeeld op 60 euro, met FUP. Dan kun je er donder op zeggen dat mensen de stap naar een abonnement van 60 euro echt wel willen maken, in plaats van de 40-50 die ze nu betalen. Die 10-20 euro extra hebben veel mensen graag over voor 'onbeperkt'. En je kunt mij echt niet wijsmaken dat je met 6 miljoen klanten x 60 euro per maand geen 'onbeperkt' mobiel datanetwerk in de lucht kunnen houden. Vergeet niet dat 'het gemak van geen omkijken meer naar hebben' zeker een grote factor is! Waarom zijn er zo veel lease-auto's? Waarom is 'onbeperkt spare-ribs' zo populair? En waarom kopen mensen een OV-dagkaart voor 8 euro in Amsterdam? Niet omdat het altijd per se goedkoper is (zeker een lease auto niet!), maar het gemak dat 'onbeperkt' met zich mee brengt. Je weet van tevoren waar je aan toe bent en kunt dat dus gewoon als vaste factor incalculeren elke maand. Veel breedband-abonnees zouden in feite goedkoper uit zijn met betalen per minuut, want gemiddeld tik je toch zeker 35 euro per maand af voor een breedband aansluiting. En heel veel van die abonnees zitten echt geen uur per dag te internetten, maar gebruiken dat puur om even wat te mailen. Meer niet. Prijs speelt dus in zoverre geen rol meer, als de propositie aantrekkelijk is. "Voor 60 euro nooit meer teveel verbellen of internetten" is in de ogen van veel consumenten een zeer aantrekkelijk alternatief. En nee, dan heb ik het niet over Tatjana van 16 met de nieuwste lady-phone met diamantjes, maar over de gemiddelde 30 tot 50-jarige met een gemiddeld belgedrag. (wat dus zo'n 40-70 euro per maand kost). Het idee dat 'onbeperkt internetten' 10 euro kost is inderdaad waanzin, dat redt je nooit. Maar het gaat dus om het totaalpakket aan diensten dat je afneemt - iedere minuut die je belt kun je immers niet internetten - en dat is echt wel te realiseren voor een schappelijk bedrag. Vervolgens krijgen we namelijk ook nog de discussie: "wat zijn belminuten als je gebruik maakt van VOIP?"... Dat hele businessmodel moet dus op de schop. En dat betekent of datalimieten invoeren voor 'lage' abonnementen of de prijs omhoog voor 'hoge' abonnementen. Maar het totaal aan maandbedrag zal echt niet stijgen hoor. Geef mij maar onbeperkt internet voor 60 euro per maand, dan doe ik wel VOIP'en en ipv SMS'en stuur ik iemand wel via een social network een berichtje, krijg ik ook een pushmelding van namelijk. Dan mag je die belminuten en SMS'jes van mij houden, net zoals ik tegenwoordig geen telefoontikken meer afneem bij KPN.
Het relativeren van problemen kan soms zo opluchten.

• Pieter Bayens

De iPhone 4 kost 188 dollar om te fabriceren - in pure componenten dus. Tel daar assemblage, verpakking, distributie, marketing, de software (en updates!) en customer support bij op, en je komt aan een bedrag dat een factor 2-3 hoger ligt dan de gemiddelde Nokia smartphone, waarbij de gemiddelde VERKOOPPRIJS (van Nokia aan retailers) op 143 euro ligt. De gemiddelde verkoopprijs van een iPhone aan retailers en dus aan consumenten ligt dan dus ook een factor 2-3 hoger. Dat wil niet zeggen dat een iPhone goedkoop is, maar wat ik duidelijk wil maken is dat het echt niet allemaal geldklopperij is. Theoretisch zou je kunnen stellen dat het handmatig in elkaar schoeven van een Aston Martin 'geldklopperij' is, want als je het gewoon gerobotiseerd zou doen en 1.000.000 units per jaar aflevert, de prijs van een Aston Martin ook gewoon naar 100.000 kan, i.p.v. 300.000. Overigens ben je vervolgens zelf nog helemaal vrij om Apple producten te kopen of links te laten liggen.

• Claire Boonstra
De app van nu kun je een beetje vergelijken met de CD-Rom van vroeger: een mooie gesloten user experience (namelijk op een CD-Rom, je moest hem afsluiten voor je ergens anders heen kon), een gecontroleerd distributiekanaal (een winkel), voor het eerst echt 'rich multimedia' (tekst + foto + video!), en adverteerders waren er gek op. De Microsoft Encarta CD-ROM tov de encyclopedia Brittanica was een waanzinnig grote stap. Het duurde echter nog even voor het medium "internet" doorontwikkeld was totdat Wikipedia kwam. Een vergelijkbare ontwikkeling zie je ook in mobiel. De apps van nu zijn rijk in multimedia, via een winkel te krijgen (iPhone app store), zijn een gesloten omgeving (de app moet afgesloten worden voor je er uit kunt) en adverteerders zijn er gek op. Ook in mobiel moeten er nog een paar stappen gezet worden voordat volwassenheid bereikt wordt. Maar we zijn hard op weg en zaken als HTML 5 plus echt 'medium specifieke content' als Augmented Reality zullen daar absoluut mee helpen.

Good thinking.If one is browsing Internet on a PC, hits upon a LBS application, costs only a dollar - downloads it. Come to think of what good is a LBS application on PC but then it costs a dollar only - who cares. If millions are excited by the application and download it - it is a good revenue for the vendor. This is exactly what is happening on the mobile side
Just to explain you how it happens - a good piece of technology can easily excite conscience and if it only costs a few dollars - it doesn’t bother (intentionally avoids) consulting sub conscience, which takes a very pragmatic view of every action. The result is purchase of something that probably will not be used.
I have not done enough research on "common sense" but I am inclined to think that common sense is a "considered view" - which comes from the sub conscience
Some "consciences" are more inclined to involve "sub consciences" for making decisions and others tend to act more arbitrarily. Thus some people have more common sense than the others.

Reacties:

Om te kunnen reageren, moet je lid zijn van Adformatie. 15.000 vakgenoten gingen jou al voor! Meld je ook aan en betaal € 1,- voor de 1e maand.

Ja, ik wil lid wordenLog In

Ook een reactie plaatsen? Word lid van Adformatie!

Word lid van Adformatie → Login →
ankieSaini
This is a big prefer for the every person who want to include in the <a href="http://myspades.org">online spades</a> and according to the given complete game series we can say it make too much interest for the people. All the options are works silently but given the sound option which you can make enable or disable.
Lees meer Lees minder
Advertentie