Game @ MindSay

Don’t you hate when technology laughs in your face?

In a access of fury I broke this 2€ Tetris game in two. And do you know what it did next? It acted as if I hadn’t done anything! It continued flashing its game over screen while playing its totally unfitted, electronic version of Mozart’s Ode to Joy.

I was so mad that I just wanted to throw the damn thing in the garbage bin. But I couldn’t! I still had to reach around and take out the two batteries for recycling!

Stupid machine! Die in trash! That was the last time you made me lose a Tetris game!

I guess it was somewhat impossible to avoid the inevitable.

1. Comment with your name and I'll respond with something random about you.
2. I'll tell you what song / movie reminds me of you.
3. I'll pick a flavor / color of jello to wrestle in with you.
4. I'll say something that only makes sense to you and me.
5. I'll tell you my first memory of you.
6. I'll tell you what animal you remind me of.
7. I'll ask you something that I've always wondered about you.
8. If I do this for you, you must post this on your journal. You MUST.*

*Amending on #8, I'm sure many of you have already done this, so make #8 optional.  Many of you know, I'm not one to force things upon you and your blog.

Nokia must turn itself into a platform, which must be more open than existing ones.

---

 

[+] Handset operating systems are getting increasingly unimportant.

 

In the mobile communication industry, Nokia is a legend of invincibility. According to the data released at the end of January, Nokia sold 134 million handsets in the 4th quarter of last year, with a market share as large as 40%, way ahead the 15% of Samsung, the closest follower.

 

If you were the CEO of Nokia, you would think: "can I further do something with these users?" when you see the data. Lucrative as the handset business is, isn't it better to squeeze something more out of the users? Internet becomes a target.

 

For years, Nokia has been dedicated to the development of its handset operating system Symbian and a series of smart phones to battle with Microsoft - with eye-catching sales. Worldwide, 60% of the smart phones are driven by Symbian. Only 11% use Windows Mobile.

 

What's clear is, however, amid the tide of wireless Internet, handset operating systems are getting increasingly unimportant. It is not that players on the stage will give up operating systems, but they have found that the ability to provide services is even more important.

 

If, as described in the previous section, Yahoo! introduces Yahoo! Go to enable service delivery across operating systems on the wireless Internet, and Google's operating system becomes available to handset developers for free. Where is the value of those different operating systems? The users would care nothing else but the services available.

 

Apple iPhone is an amazing product. But the central topic is not the operating system iPhone uses. In terms of sales, it would have a long way to go before becoming a threat to the market leader Nokia. However, iPhone's ability to drive sales with its music service is something that Nokia cannot afford to ignore.

 

[+] Nokia moves into the Internet market.

 

According to data released by Google internally in January 2008, during the 2007 Christmas season, page views of Google through iPhone was next only to that through the Symbian smart phones. iPhone's share of the smart phone market was as low as 2%, while that of Symbian was 63%.

 

What's the reflection it would give Nokia? Obviously, iPhone offers better Internet experience than Nokia - easier to use, more user-friendly browser functions. Maybe Apple is better able to attract users with high demand for Internet accessing to buy its smart phones.

 

To Nokia, both the improvements to the interface and the selling model of handsets bound with Internet services are shockingly new. A player that has been traditionally regarded a computer manufacturer is now one step into the telecom industry after a successful transformation into an Internet service provider and a consumer electronic product manufacturer.

 

What will be the right move for Nokia to infiltrate into the territories of its rivals? The first idea would be to provide proprietary contents, which could be obtained through M&A or through partnerships. Fortunately, many Internet players are interested in getting their services available on Nokia phones.

 

Therefore, Nokia introduced a series of services, including Nokia Search, Nokia Maps and Nokia Music. Most of the services, however, require download of special software into handsets in prior, and are not compatible with all Nokia handset models. Therefore, pre-installation of the software becomes a necessary means to sell handsets.

 

Nokia Search is a service offered jointly with search engines such as Google, while Nokia Music is a fee-based online music store through partnerships with leading labels - something similar to the iTunes music store of Apple. To Internet players, Nokia is both a partner and a rival.

 

Nokia service list: http://europe.nokia.com/A4496273

 

[+] WidSets: an open platform that pulls together the Internet world

 

It takes time to build such services. To establish itself in the Internet world as soon as possible, Nokia will have to pull the entire Internet over to its side. Don't forget that the Internet is a huge eco-system that needs a common leader to open the gate to the world of wireless Internet.

 

Nokia must turn itself into a platform, which must be more open than existing ones, to enable the upload of any service, regardless of the handset operating system - Symbian, or whatever else. If the handset operating system is no longer important, sticking onto Symbian would become Achilles' heel.

 

To Internet players that Nokia wants to pull over to its side, the prospect of handset-based Internet services available on any handset is a deadly attraction. Perhaps it was based on this idea that Nokia introduced its open platform WidSets.

 

For handsets, this open platform is a small Java program. Any handset that supports Java can run the software. Theoretically, Internet players would be able to provide services to all Java-enabling handsets, so long as the services are developed on the basis of the small program.

 

In terms of operation logics, what WidSets offers is similar to that Yahoo! Go does. Internet service providers could ignore the specifications of various handsets and make their services available on the wireless Internet through simple programs, so long as the receiving handsets have WidSets.

 

Currently, a number of leading Internet players, such as Wikipedia, Blogger and Flickr, as well as news media including Routers and BBC have started to develop applications on the Widsets platform. In addition, many amateur players are developing small games on it for downloading by users. Obviously, application development has become an easy thing.

 

Download WidSets at: https://www.widsets.com/widgets

 

[+] Can handsets be free?

 

Theoretically, Nokia's WidSets can be installed into a GPhone, or an iPhone, so long as it supports Java. In this regard, what operating system a handset uses is really unimportant. Why then is Google still sticking on the development of its own handset operating system?

 

What's really in the mind of Google, perhaps, is to extend its advantages in online advertising. By knitting Google services closer with handset functions, it would be able to continue its leadership in the handset-based advertising market as the wireless Internet population grows, or even use the income to offer cheaper or free handsets.

 

Of course, Nokia and other handset manufacturers would hate the idea. Instead of selling products, they would have to depend on advertising to make money. Will this wild dream of Google become true? First of all, handsets will never really be free. They are just paid by somebody else.

 

Telecom operators were once bill payers that made handsets free through bound service contracts with consumers, who were thereby requested to pay subscriptions, which they had no way to cancel for a given period of time. With the subsidies of telecom operators and Google, it is indeed possible to further drive down the prices of handsets.

 

If the appearance of GPhone means that telecom operators would pay less subsidy, that's absolutely good news for them. The problem is it will have to be paid, either by telecom operators, or by Google, because handset manufacturers such as Nokia will not sell handsets at prices below costs.

 

If Google pays the subsidy to make handsets free, it will have to earn the money back from follow-on handset-based ads. To spend the money before there's an income, is this a good deal? Google will have a huge amount of cash to give away as subsidy. It seems exactly what powerful telecom operators did in the previous years.

 

Compared with those of Yahoo! and Nokia, Google's wireless Internet plan seems more like a big bet. ( 2008/03/23 - By Digitalwall.com - Way to China Internet/Telecom )

---

- Read More

Prev : Great Changes in Wireless Internet Industry (2) Yahoo!'s Strategy
Next : Great Changes in Wireless Internet Industry (4) Apple's Strategy

---

- Today in History

Great Changes in Wireless Internet Industry (3) Nokia's Strategy - 2008/03/23

Predictions on China Internet Market (5) Search Engines - 2006/03/26

Media, Community, and Blog (4) Production-Marketing Relations - 2005/03/27

Media, Community, and Blog (3) Deconstruct Blog - 2005/03/20

Stop Internet Marketing (3) All Determination; No Distribution - 2004/03/21

3G Time Comes (3) SMS, Email and MMS - 2003/03/23

Why the user churn rate of Web 2.0 websites is so high?

---

 

[+] Users' typical Web 2.0 experience

 

Mr. X is an ordinary white-collar worker. He uses the Internet to search information and contact customers at work, and after work he may spend some time on the Internet for leisure. The Internet is a medium he uses frequently in his daily life, but it is not particularly important in his life. At least he is not a person who hangs on the Internet everyday.

 

Recently though he has been getting emails with subjects like "you have been added to somebody's friend list" and the like. Clicking the hyperlink he found that it's by a friend on MSN. How could you decline a friend's invitation? So he signed up that social networking service.

 

By this way, Mr. X has joined Facebook, MySpace, Friendster, LinkedIn and a bunch of local Chinese language websites. Registering at these websites is a lot of pains. Every website asked him to fill in his profile, upload photos and even contribute his MSN contact list.

 

At first he was worried that if these friends would visit his personal blog, and it would be impolite if he didn't call at theirs in return. Such relationship pressure was such that he spent two hours after work to reply these messages online for a period of time.

 

(Interestingly, he didn't know that his friends were tied up on the Internet for the same reason.)

 

First it was acquaintances, then a bunch of strangers, who added him to their friends list. In the beginning it was fun and nice to socialize with these people online, checking out their newly updated blogs and photos and leaving messages to each other.

 

After about three months, Mr. X started to get bored socializing with these people online. As the number of friends kept growing, he could not but spend more time on the Internet visiting these websites. At the end two hours a day was not even enough.

 

He finally decided to quit such Internet services that he had been addicted to when he had almost reached the verge of breakdown. What was the meaning to spend so much time on this stuff? Life should not be like this, and he had to get things back under control.

 

[+] Typical experience of Web 2.0 website operators

 

All Web 2.0 websites operators are asking why the user churn rate is so high, and there is seemingly no way to remedy this problem as if it is inherent in Web 2.0 websites. New businesses planning to ride on the force of social networking, which continues to wane, are declining.

 

These Web 2.0 websites are like a big sieve, trying to capture a large number of users at a time; yet after three months, it always turns out that only half of them remain as effective users, and the rest simply disappear. The size of users may seem big but it is not substantial at all.

 

For a Web 2.0 website to enjoy growth, its social networking expansion needs to be faster than its user churn, so that, overall, its scale would be increasing. Yet what about when the growth of user numbers slow down?

 

Social networking websites MySpace and Facebook have shown strong performance and they are yet to hit the growth ceiling with the whole world as their market. (MySpace should reach its growth limit sooner than Facebook as the former has more users.) Therefore, seeking to expand foreign markets seems to be a solution to sustain growth.

 

Nevertheless, an inherent problem remains unsolved.

 

Another amazing effect of Web 2.0 websites is that, heavy users are very committed. They are very active and they remain so for a very long period. They visit the websites and stay there everyday.

 

From registered users to effective users to active users, the number of users continues to get smaller. Is it normal? I would say yes. In terms of online community, it's just the way it is. Just as I mentioned years ago, online communities are where "people of similar attributes gather to warm each other. And these people are the so-called "heavy users," such as active bloggers.

 

The characteristic of Web 2.0 is high interactivity, which means highly demanding for users. Those who are willing to interact with others and write blog articles are not normal people. They have stronger achievement motive and desire to express themselves, and they find their stage at some community website and feel a sense of belonging.

 

The question is, while these heavy users are having fun, what are the ordinary netizens doing?

 

[+] People can get sick of Web 2.0

 

As to those who quit some Web 2.0 website, do they turn to similar services of competing websites? Some of them (well, the heavy users) do, but for most people who leave, they just won't touch such kind of services and they leave forever.

 

Only a few people who, after quitting Facebook, would turn to MySpace. Most people would just quit social networking services (SNS) for good. It's the same for blogging. Only a limited number of people would migrate from one blog service provider to another and continue writing. Most would simply stop blogging.

 

Quitting a website is totally different from quitting a kind of service. For example, we know very clearly the difference between "turning to sohu.com from sina.com because of getting tired of the latter" and "quitting new websites for good."

 

Woops! It turns out that people can lose interest in Web 2.0 services.

 

Woops! So what's next when all netizens have become users of my Web 2.0 website?

 

If market development is like a chess game, then Web 2.0 websites that have been so popular for the past couple of years are entering the endgame phase. These websites operators may appear successful, but in fact they are getting uneasy. How to get away from the doomed path of Web 2.0 websites is an inevitable challenge.

 

Surprisingly, you may find the solution in Web 1.0. ( 2007/12/23 - By Digitalwall.com - Way to China Internet/Telecom )

---

- Read More

Prev : Mobile TV Market (3) Terminal Manufacturers & Content Providers
Next : Web 2.0 Finale (2) Websites With a Specific Culture Can't Grow Big

---

- Today in History

Web 2.0 Finale (1) An Inherent Problem Unsolved - 2007/12/23

The Fourth Generation of Internet Marketing (2) RSS Tracking - 2006/12/24

Dream of "Digital Furniture" Store - 2003/12/28

If so, telecom operators would be shut out of the mobile TV market.

---

 

[+] The past experience of cell phone manufacturers

 

From the tide of WAP-based Internet accessing in 2000 to the crazy bid for 3G licenses, and then to the bet on MMS for promoting sales of camera phones and music phones that enable music downloading, and finally to 3G phones with audio/video services, cell phone manufacturers have had thrilling experiences over the years.

 

The world cell phone market started to show signs of saturation in 2000. To maintain their growth, manufacturers had to motivate consumers to replace their phones with newer products. All of the thrilling experiences in the past 7 years seem to be a quest for what really are the selling points. Fortunately, the result so far has been satisfactory.

 

In summary, there are a few observations:

 

1)Mobile Internet is a hard-to-handle concept. The key is consumers tend to compare their expectation for mobile Internet with their PC-based Internet experience, which, in most cases, ends up in disappointment, as cell phones are not so easy to handle as PCs. Mobile Internet has been successful in Japan, only because of the low PC penetration rate there.

 

2)Telecom operators wish that new cell phones be bound with particular services, so that they could benefit from their sales, instead of being un-paid sales reps of the manufacturers. However, it turns out that consumers buy camera phone only because they can use it to take pictures, and anyone seldom uses MMS service.

 

3) There's no concern for the shortage of content accessing channels. Despite the hot sale of music phones bound with download service offered by telecom operators, most users choose to transmit music from their computers to cell phones, instead of downloading them from the WAP portal provided by telecom operators. Although it is more troublesome, but it is free.

 

4)3G audio/video services, including IP-based audio/video streaming and video phone, have not brought satisfactory user experience. It is a very simple concept to allow both parties of a phone call to see each other. However, due to privacy concerns, it has not been able to become a killer application.

 

[+] Telecom operators might be ignored

 

With the above experience, cell phone manufacturers finally realized that their business is to make and sell handsets. The simpler their products are the better. There's nothing simpler than the concept of mobile TV.

 

Consumers no longer have to bother whether the TV programs are downloaded from the Internet, nor cell phone manufacturers to care about whether their phones are bound with particular services offered by telecom operators, so long as they free themselves from the troublesome 3G audio/video experience.

 

In fact, a hi-tech company in mainland China has developed a sort of chip, which can be built in cell phones to receive traditional analog TV signals. In other words, with such a chip, you will be able to watch wireless channel with your cell phone, regardless of its specification or standard.

 

The only shortcomings are the mobility and fidelity. As analog TV signals are not intended for mobile environments, the fidelity cannot be compared with that of digital programs of mobile TV. However, it would be good for some people, if the programs are played on small-screen cell phones.

 

In most cases, however, people watch mobile TV on static environments, e.g., bus or subway stations, or in offices. It explains a fact that cell phone manufacturers will be able to sell their products without binding themselves with telecom operators.

 

The only thing that those manufacturers have to worry about is where programs would be, once new standard-based mobile TV is launched? Will telecom operators become content aggregators as we discussed in the previous section? If not, they'd better establish connections with content providers right away.

 

[+] Charging or not, it's a matter about the structure of the industry

 

The high production costs of movie/TV programs turn out to be a big obstacle for traditional value-added service providers to produce contents themselves. Imaginably, a big part of contents for mobile TV will come from traditional TV stations.

 

An interesting cooperation mode is that after consumers buy a mobile TV-enabling cell phone, they will get a set of passwords from TV program providers. Upon activation, the cell phone will be bound with the passwords to enable watching programs. The fee is charged each month through the phone bill from telecom operators.

 

That mode is designed for charging fees. If mobile TV programs are offered for free, and program providers depend on ads for their incomes, the passwords and the additional lines in the phone bills of telecom operators would be unnecessary. If so, telecom operators would be shut out of the mobile TV market.

 

With regard to the mobile TV services, the only way for telecom operators to gain the favor of cell phone manufacturers is to persuade content providers to charge fees, in which case, they would become the largest content aggregators and channels for charging fees. Otherwise, they would be easily abandoned in the game.

 

In addition to traditional TV stations, will website operators (e.g. Yahoo! and Google), which are gaining influence in the mobile Internet sector be able to get a share in the market? Those players do not have program-producing ability themselves. However, through audio/video content sharing, they will have some opportunities.

 

Audio/video content sharing sites, such as YouTube, has a lot of interesting programs. In spite of the low fidelity (as most programs are produced by non-professionals, after all), such programs might be good enough for cell phone-sized screens.

 

Currently, the mobile TV market is still a virgin land for a lot of players, including telecom operators, cell phone manufacturers, traditional TV media and emerging Internet media. The future will be interesting and full of expectations. Eventually the biggest winner will be consumers. The distribution of audio/video contents will be fast and convenient as never seen before. ( 2007/12/02 - By Digitalwall.com - Way to China Internet/Telecom )

---

- Read More

Prev : Mobile TV Market (2) the Subtle Role of Telecom Operators
Next : Web 2.0 Finale (1) An Inherent Problem Unsolved

---

- Today in History

Mobile TV Market (3) Terminal Manufacturers & Content Providers - 2007/12/02

Great Future of Wireless Broadband (4) WiMax, 3G and 4G - 2006/12/03

Internet and Books (1) Dilemma of Online Publishing - 2005/12/04

VoIP (2) Who Depends on Whom - 2004/12/05

VoIP Gives out the First Cry - 2003/12/07