Okay, the previous post got sidetracked from my intended point(s), so I will try to return to them here shortly.
1) You don’t need a smartphone to use advanced services
This is a point equally valid for service providers and users alike. Users often don’t realize everything their phone is capable of doing regardless of what type of phone they have. For service providers, the obsession with building, say, only an iPhone app for their service hugely limits the potential user base. Even in the most “advanced” markets, iPhones account for about 10% of the install base – by building only for the iPhones, you are effectively shrinking your potential market by 90%. For some services this is fine, but for many others it’s sheer stupidity.
Analysts generally don’t help with their smartphone-obsessed views. It’s therefore refreshing to see reports like this one from Strand Consult: Mobile operators forget to tell their customers that they do not need a Smartphone to be able to use smart services on their mobile phone.
Still, to offer advanced services on non-smartphones, you have to take into account their limitations. Browsing-based services, for example, are not very usable on old handsets. But remember SMS? ALL phones support that. And who says you can’t build “advanced” mobile services on top of SMS? Do electronic boarding passes as SMS not count? Or train or event tickets? Or paying for parking? All these and much, much more exist. The mobile industry is suffering heavily from not looking outside their own market for ideas – it’s very much like William Gibson has said; “The future is already here – it’s just not evenly distributed.”
Ironically, it’s especially the supposedly “advanced” markets that, while apparently waiting for smartphones to reach all subscribers in order to be able to offer advanced services, are in danger of ignoring the potential that is already there. A lot more ingenuity is happening in the developing markets.
2) People who have a smartphone don’t necessarily use it any differently
Back when 3G networks were new and cool, many operators desperately wanted to show how high their “3G-penetration” was. In Finland, operator subsidies were allowed for the first time for 3G phones, ostensibly to kick-start the usage of advanced mobile services. With subsidized phones, people did start buying 3G phones. 3G penetration figures increased. Everyone was happy – except that most people who bought 3G phones continued to use them just like before. Nobody cared about 3G services, the source of all that additional future revenue operators were looking forward to.
Even today, many smartphone owners just don’t use the phone for things like browsing. They may use the camera and the music player, but most of the time the usage of these doesn’t bring revenue to anyone, it’s just an additional convenience for the user. And is it really that big of a surprise? If people aren’t aware of the potential their “normal” old phone has, how would they know everything their smartphone is capable of doing?
To fulfill my daily nitpicking quota, I’ve GOT to comment that it was actually William Gibson who said “future is already here, just not evenly distributed”.
lavonardo, yes, you are right. Corrected. Thanks!