Does the iPhone keep dotMobi awake at night?

We've had a number of questions (and seen plenty of commentary) regarding the recent launch of the iPhone and how it might affect us and the mobile web in general

I posted some of initial ideas on this very blog back in January (it feels like an age ago!) - and, despite the fact that I personally don't yet own one :-), I pretty much feel that our original assessment holds up.

In a nutshell: the iPhone changes the way that tastemakers think about their online existence. Interacting with the web, clearly, is no longer a solitary, sedentary and constrained activity.

Now I've personally believed this for a while, so arguably it's no big deal :-)  - the long-term evolution of the web to become a largely mobile (and, by the way, subtly different) medium is inevitable.

With the iPhone, however, this vision starts to become reality for a broad population of users. Not because it's an especially great phone (I believe it is, although not without its flaws). Not because it's doing anything other handsets elsewhere haven't done before, or better. And not even because there's some significance in the way the handset's usage is packaged with sole carriers. (Phew! Coming to Europe soon...)

No, the iPhone is significant simply because mobile access to the web is now, well, cool. No longer are you branded a technogeek or crackberry addict when you pull out your mobile in public and start Twittering or Google/Readering. No. I'm getting down with the pinchy-fingered mobi generation. Could the mobile web really become as de riguer as white headphones?

Maybe. Probably. And if so, how can that be a bad thing for any of us?

(Certainly not a case of "iWhatever"!)

But what does that mean for the .mobi top-level domain extension? Does it mean the proposition is doomed? Why would I ever go to a .mobi site when my shiny new browser does a really admirable job with most (but oh, not all) web pages?

Well of course not. Only if you might naively think that .mobi is only about catering for the constraints of a particular class of browsers. And only if you think that the user's mobile context is not something interesting enough to warrant special attention.

(If you do think that, you've obviously not yet become a mobile web user! Go get yourself an iPhone!)

"Mobile Content for the Mobile Context" is what a .mobi domain is all about. And whilst the iPhone browser removes many of the constraints of today's average mobile browser, there's no Jobsian magic that can suddenly turn the world's web corpus into something contextually compelling by default for mobile-users-at-large.

You've probably heard me give examples of genres of web sites whose constitution would ideally change based on the mobile context. Some are glib perhaps. But think about it. If you've ever accessed a traditional (I'll say sedentary) web site on a mobile device, you'll know exactly what I mean: you nearly always come away just a little dissatisfied: wishing that the search engine or the sites that you used had somehow, let's say, cut to the chase.

"I'm mobile, goddamnit! I don't have time for your sedentary context! When I asked about coffee, I didn't mean I want to read research papers about the growth of Coffea Canephora plants in Brazil! I meant I need caffeine! Now! So where's the nearest cafe?!"

For the seasoned mobile web user, that's the sort of frustration that will immediately sound grimly familiar. Surfing about on regular web pages with my phone is a neat trick, but rarely meets my expectations in terms of a high-demand user. (At least not without a fair degree of persistence and patience on my part, which I always feel is merely my professional obligation to have to tolerate!)

Yes, I can't wait to rotate my iPhone about, and wipe my sweaty fingers around on the screen to zoom, pan and scroll. But that's playing. Pretty soon, the novelty is going to wear off. And I'm going to be left looking for sites and services that are so exciting that I'm compelled to use my expensive new toy to access them, rather than waiting a few hours until I am sedentary again ;-)

So the main reason that I'm excited about the iPhone is that these frustrations and challenges are going to be exposed to a far larger, trend-driven propulation. And with the size, motivation and influence of the Apple cult (both on the user and developer sides of the equation), the iPhone's greatest legacy may well be the catalysm of the world's site owners and developers doing something about it.

With the mobile web's historical challenges of cost, speed, browser (and fashion!) removed from the equation, I hope we'll now see an explosion of interesting, innovative, mobile-centric services burgeoning. The "iPhone mobile web aftermarket" you might even call it.

Will this be a movement that understands the value of the .mobi domain? A way of letting site owners state their mobile credentials? A way of letting the user indicate their mobile context by default? A way of large brands providing competive and differentiating services?

Well, of course we hope so. Certainly nothing about the iPhone breaks that logic.

Ultimately, the TLD's context-centric proposition is as strong as ever - and with spectacular phones like the iPhone continuing the mobile web's unstoppable aggrandizement, it seems to me that these are all winds blowing in the same direction.

I've never been more excited about the future.

Comments

[Paul G]

James, great entry. I don't see a downside to the iPhone in relation to .mobi either. This device and more importantly its ad campaign is adding to the ranks of mobile internet users. Those are the main customers for .mobi sites, what's not to like?

[binary man]

Great news James. But what must one make of the following news? One of your biggest backers Vodaphone seems to be heading off on it's own tangent leaving .Mobi at the starting gate.

http://www.domainblog.co.uk/news/mobi-backer-shows-colours/

[James Pearce]

Yes, that's an interesting point, but I think you've painted it a little dramatically ;-)

Obviously Vodafone UK's ultimate objective was to help kick start the mobile web (as is ours) - and they saw this idea of aggressive page transcoding as a way of bringing at least some semblance of the markup of the existing, unwashed web to mobile handsets.

However, in the interests of journalistic honesty, it's fair to say that this internet technology "relaunch" over the last few weeks has been fairly controversial:

http://www.seoprinciple.com/how-vodafone-and-novarra-killed-mobile-commerce/20/

and

http://mobhappy.com/blog1/2007/06/06/vodafone-uk-doing-a-lovely-job-of-supporting-the-mobile-web-by-breaking-it/

and

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/06/vodafone_mobile_internet/

Our investors (who, incidentally are Vodafone Global, not Vodafone UK) continue to pour in support for standard-based approaches such as the W3C. In other words, helping developers think about mobile as a first-class medium rather than a transcoded after-thought. And that's totally in line with what we're trying to do with them (and the W3C) here at dotMobi.

In fact, it more recently emerged that .mobi domains are in fact on the whitelist to pass transparently through the Vodafone transcoding platform. This wasn't done with our prior knowledge, but does show that this decision does still value the principles of .mobi as a brand and our styleguides as a best practice.

I should conclude by reminding you that the .mobi TLD is ultimately not about hacking about with bits of markup on a page. It's designed to indicate that the content and services on the site have been built with a mobile user in mind - and no transcoding platform (however smart) will ever be able to do that.

[tomsey]

Hi James. One criticism of .mobi made by some people including some supporters of .mobi is that the investors don't appear to be seriously supporting it. For example, Google and Microsoft have yet to market their .mobi sites or even reference .mobi from their main sites (.coms) at all. Can you say if there are any promotions by these and other investors in the works? Thanks.

[James Pearce]

In fact nearly all of our investors have strong .mobi entry points today - our showcase contains a selection: http://www.mtld.mobi/showcase?filter0%5B%5D=72

Of course the branding strategies and marketing budgets of companies like our investors is not within our control! So I can't speak to why some do more promotion of them than others.

But we are always urging those companies, other big brands, web developers - and of course all domain owners - to embrace the opportunities of mobility and build compelling, well-promoted content on their sites.

We will continue to push all of these sectors to fulfil their mobile aspirations and adoption. We're happy with the progress so far - but yes, of course there's always more to do!

[Sam Huang]

So James let me ask you a question:

You pay PR newswires to "announce" numerous .mobi sites with news releases including: 1800flowers.mobi , NBA.mobi , Weather.mobi, etc.

Guess what all those sites work on my phone RIGHT NOW via .COM.

Now that .mobi has been speculatored out, what makes you think an end user will EVER use .mobi over a .com.

I wouldn't like it when a .mobi of my favorite .com site is a parking page on Sedo (which btw doesnt make your score).

But hey, the .com works on my phone! Brilliant!

You are on a race.

Vodaphone is leaving you behind. Google is leaving you behind with a great google.com that works on my cellphone.

So is Yahoo and MSN.

#1, 2, 3 websites in the world all leaving you.

Facebook is too, the same young market you are trying to corner.

I can list countless other sites that are all doing redirection scripts. So please tell me why should I use .mobi.

If all users type is .mobi and get parking pages, then I don't think the regular user of the internet will EVER adapt.

Its longer and harder to type then .com itself. Isn't convenience your goal?

Please don't try and hide behind your smokes and mirrors about "investors". Your "investors" are leaving you behind.

[James Pearce]

Sam, you're right in identifying that there is still lots of work to do. But pessimistic if you think any game is yet over.

The mobile web is still in its absolute infancy and it's still wide open: there's everything to play for.

Market forces rule. If there are great sites being developed, deployed and promoted under the .mobi banner, then it's our hope that consumers will start to rally to it as a brand that says "yes, this suits my mobile device - and my mobile context".

I don't know what you mean by "Vodafone leaving us behind". Quite the opposite. And similarly Google: in fact they consider well-built .mobi-compliant sites highly because it's a characteristic that indicates that the developer has thought carefully about the myriad of mobile considerations at play here.

(That's probably one reason why they're so active - like us - in the W3C "Mobile OK" standards and implementation groups and so on)

I personally think that it's premature to declare the future completely determined for this embryonic phenomenon.

Ultimately we just want to play our part in assisting the birth of an exciting new medium - and to help brands, companies, and individuals make the most of the amazing mobile opportunities ahead of them.

[Sam Huang]

Hi there James,

Thanks for your reply. So you are saying you are trying to push for W3C "Mobile Ok" standards. So what if, again, all the .com websites develop W3C compliant sites with a redirection script. This is the key mystery i am trying to get at, and so far I have not gotten a sufficent answer.

How do you persuade multi-million companies to adopt ".mobi" when they can do a simple browser detection script? Its easy, fast, and simple, and also keeps customers in line (no confusion).

Thanks,
Sam

[Josh Fitzgerald]

It's easy to criticize pioneers in a new and emerging market. What's difficult is to embrace their spirit, support their vision, and effectuate their change.

Sam Huang, if you're not invested in .mobi, then the fact that you are debating it here today is evidence that .mobi is already impacting our society.

I haven't yet formed an opinoin regarding .mobi, but I do know that is has generated a lot of debate, and I also know that everything that generates debate this early on usually ends up changing the world.

I support positive change.

[Sam Huang]

It is of course easy to criticize. Most businesses fail within the fist year (and thats a general fact). It takes a lot knowledge, luck, and favorable market conditions to make a "new" thing a success.

[gary]

Given the low entry cost of having a .mobi presence I would believe that many companies will make this investment regardless of whether it makes up 10% or 90% of their 'mobile market'
I agree with an earlier post that 'parking pages' are not great for the TLD but how many 100,000's (or millions for that matter) are there parked at .coms? this problem isn't exclusive to .mobi thats for sure... there simply aren't enough developed .mobi sites but given that we are barley 10months (give or take) down the road I'm not convinced that that in itself is cause for concern.... get developing .mobi sites & the traffic will come, that will generate its own growth.... to analogise; at the moment we have a great new retail / residential / business development, nice new roads leading to it, lots of facilities, car parks & apartments..... but no tenants & hence no customers.... it's not rocket science... what Vodafone are doing is simply trying to engage a public into using the net away from their desks & the whole of the web has to be accessible because their isn't the volume of .mobi only sites there yet.... once the trend is there the .mobi will pick up pace because it is specific to that usage... the web is just a few hours old in the scheme of things, let it grow, let it develop! people will use the mobile content that they need.... mobile versions of their favourite sites.... sports, communications / networking / GPS / shopping / sports / enquiries / directories all huge areas for growth in .mobi

[JP]

I have another point to raise relating to one of the .mobi backers - Google.
Google's earlier (beta) version of mobile search had an option to only display results for mobile content (not including standard websites).
I imagined that this would be a popular option, and that .mobi sites would be well featured under this option. Google mobile search now seems to have changed. There is no longer an option to search for mobile-specific sites, and the search results are very similar to those found in the desktop version - with a notable absence of mobile-specific results. Google does give you the option of re-rendering the content of standard websites to be more suited to the mobile device. This means that the owner of a standard website is now sitting pretty, at the top of mobile search results, with no mobile-specific work required. Meanwhile, the .mobi site owner with mobile-specific content is omitted from the very results where he would be most relevant.
I am very concerned that mobile websites (.mobi or otherwise) will not be favored or even listed in Google mobile search results, which is obviously a huge issue. Does anyone know any different? I would appreciate mTLD's viewpoint on this.
On the other hand, Yahoo does display mobile-specific results separately, albeit at the bottom of a long list of search results.
The current state of mobile search does not look positive for .mobi.

[James Pearce]

Hi JP (from another)

Google did recently change their mobile search UI. I think that, like any responsible search engine, they want to return the best results for the users' situations and desires.

I suspect that only if all other things were equal (keyword relevance, search optimisation etc) would one expect to see certain top-level-domains magically rise above others.

Google tell me that there is certainly no wish on their part to de-emphasize the mobile web results in the new search interface. It helps bring the mobile web to users who would otherwise have been searching the default "web" search option previously and seeing only transcoded web results. They tell me that this blended search result set is still relatively new and being tweaked in response to testing and feedback.

All of the various search providers' approaches are having to wrestle with the fact that the volume of not-made-for-mobile content vastly exceeds that of made-for-mobile. Until there's a critical (even if not comparable) mass of content primarily appealing to the mobile context, these will be shifting sands.

I think the bottom line would be that quality of relevant content (as shaped by the context) comes first, and search rankings are determined appropriately. That's why we put so much effort into initiatives like dev.mobi - until folks get out there and create tomorrow's rocking mobile web, it's going to remain a pale (or should I say transcoded?) facsimile of today's familiar PC-focussed medium.

If you, as a developer, creates great mobile content - including using a .mobi domain to demonstrate that that's been your intention :-) - then one would hope that an effective search engine will reward it appropriately.

[Mike]

Regarding what JP said, I posted this message on a forum last week. Why isn't areacodefinder.mobi still on yahoo's mobile search results?

"Maybe it's just temporary but last week and for the past few months my StudioCity.mobi and AreaCodeFinder.mobi were listed in the top 3-4 results for the terms "Studio City, Area Codes, and Area Code Finder".

Today they are nowhere to be found for those keywords.

I do get a major part of my traffic from yahoo's mobile site. Does anyone know why my sites dropped? I didn't change anything. Did they change their algorithms?

Thanks,

Mike"

[James Pearce]

Hmmm - pretty odd. Have you tried contacting them?

I can see a whole "mSEO" sub industry burgeoning a year or so out...

[Mike]

Hi James,

"Hmmm - pretty odd. Have you tried contacting them?"

I contacted them a few times. Directly through their mobile email contact, and through their "mobile support request form."

It's been almost 2 weeks and they haven't responded. I contacted them a few months ago about some other mobile questions and they were quite polite and promptly helped me out.

I had the number 1 spot for "area codes, and areacodefinder." But they dropped areacodefinder.mobi completely. Despite there being a ton of links to it.

James, if you have any contacts at Yahoo or can mention something about this to them that would be greatly appreciated. I did spend alot of time getting this developed, and spent a good amount of money with admob and adsense to promote it. I want the mobile web to grow and become huge, but this hinders the progress a little.

Thanks,

Mike

[James Pearce]

Some interesting extra comments relevant to this post by (the esteemed) Dave Winer at http://www.scripting.com/stories/2007/07/25/iphoneMonth1.html :

"It also seems we're going to have a long-term discussion over whether it makes sense to have a 'mobile web' or take the iPhone trade-off, more effort to use its web (lots of scrolling and pinching), but making the whole web accessible, mobile sites or non-mobile sites. I think what Apple has attempted is noble, but it's not going to work. The screens have limited resolution, and even if they didn't, even if they could cram a billion pixels into every square inch, there's the limit of how much detail our eyes can see and how big our hands are."

[Mike]

James,

Can you offer any other input as to why Yahoo dropped my page from their mobile search?

Feel free to email me if you would like to privately discuss this.

Thanks,

Mike

[Mike]

Thanks for your prompt response James.

It looks like that today Yahoo thankfully re-indexed areacodefinder.mobi. :D

For all of you sitting with a bunch of .mobi names that are parked I encourage you to develop them.

[cricket fan]

development has got to be the way to go, until there are a large amount of made for mobile sites out there why would they build search engines to find them.

If you build it, they will come!