Michael Geist on Rogers' iPhone Plans

I'm travelling this week, but want to blog this story. I have specific thoughts about the real threat that wireless pricing and Bill C-61 have for Canadian industry, but for now, Michael Geist has written a great piece on Rogers' plans...

Michael Geist - Canadians Face Triple Lock on Apple iPhone

Mathew Ingram on The Symbian Unification

Globe & Mail Technology writer Mathew Ingram blogged this morning on Nokia's announcement yesterday that they intend to acquire the outstanding shares of Symbian that they don't already own, and together with a whole host of other mobile providers and vendors, will create an open source, unified and standard Mobile OS. From Nokia's press release:

"Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola and NTT DOCOMO announced today their intent to unite Symbian OS(TM), S60, UIQ and MOAP(S) to create one open mobile software platform. Together with AT&T, LG Electronics, Samsung Electronics, STMicroelectronics, Texas Instruments and Vodafone they plan to establish the Symbian Foundation to extend the appeal of this unified software platform."

Where Mr. Ingram focused on the implications to Google and Apple, I wonder if there isn't something more at play here.

The big deal here is that with all of the talk of Web 2.0 and SaaS, most in the know tend to think of these as relatively closed systems that are for the most part, Web only, with limited inputs and outputs to other devices and network points. This is certainly for good reason: The examples we're often given for successful implementations of SaaS, namely Salesforce.com, Google Apps, and even Amazon's AWS 'computing cloud' are all, at their first glance, Web-based.

Nokia, et al, recognize that if any revolutions are going to happen, they're going to be mobile. And just like the browser wars of the late '90's, there is tremendous reason to think that the battleground will be the mobile handset.

Just as Salesforce.com beat entrenched CRM application providers by using the platform to extend the value of their services with third-party apps and widgets, and Facebook surpassed social networking leaders MySpace and Friendster in part by extending the value of the interaction with mini-applications that plug into people's social networks and enable other forms of non-linear interactions (oh what would the world be without Scrabulous?).

But the iPhone has started to change our concept of Web 2.0 as a web only proposition. This is not because thinking is changing in the technology space, but rather because consumers have awoken to the power of these devices, largely due to the homebrew community that first hacked the iPhone last year. Indeed, once Apple saw the power (and the desire) they needed to open up the platform, and thus the tightly controlling SDK. Now, people realize that mobile phones are powerful input and output devices, and are the Conduit for generating and consuming Content and Commerce anytime, any place. The network provides access to the platform which, in turn provides the appropriate distribution to any device, including IPTV, Web, Digital Signage & Kiosks, and yes, Mobile devices.

Nokia and the rest of the gang are eying the other giants, Apple, Google, RIM, and yes Microsoft with wary eyes, and are firmly aware that the next big thing in mobile won't be the handset, and it won't be the content per se... It's the platform and the network.

Mathew Ingram on the buyout

The Big .Mac Mystery

On the heels of the WWDC next week, comes news of a possible, ever-so-slight shift in strategy on the part of Apple. From the New York Times Bits Blog:

...there is a flurry of speculation about improvements to a minor icon an the Apple Pantheon: the .Mac online service. For six years, .Mac has been a $100 a year bundle of handy Internet services, now including e-mail, online hosting, backup, photo sharing, and tools to synchronize calendars and address books. Industry reports say Apple has between 1 million and 2 million subscribers."

"Now is certainly a great time to expand and rename .Mac. Much of the energy in software development is around online applications, which would be a logical evolution for Apple’s iLife and iWork software. Moreover, the iPhone and iPod Touch are particularly suited to services that blend small local applications with storage and other processing handled on an Internet server.

I find this analysis much more consistent with my own than with Forrester Research's speculation about Apple's shift towards home entertainment services. The gorgeously designed, yet deceptively useful devices that are entering the marketplace courtesy of Jobs et al are all but useless without some hefty services to make them sustainably unique.

As an example, I was aghast to discover that I couldn't directly subscribe to a podcast on my iPhone, with Apple preferring me to sync through iTunes on the desktop. There is a third-party app that will let me download and listen to podcasts over my data or WiFi connection, but Apple does not natively support it... This is due, I believe, to Apple wanting to maintain control over what content enters its media player. A .ME service suite (with a web-service-based iTunes) will take us a long way towards the ubiquity of service that Mr. Hansell is speaking about.

Will Steve Jobs Set Me Free? - NY Times Bits

Michael Geist on Canada's Wireless Crisis

Michael Geist's most excellent blog elucidates a point I made in a previous posting here; Namely, that the state of the wireless industry in Canada is a sad one, and that the lack of competition in the country is hurting our ability to innovate and compete on the world stage.

"In many ways, the iPhone saga merely confirmed what many Canadian consumers and businesses have known for some time. Mobile data pricing in Canada is among the highest in the world, creating a significant barrier to the introduction of new mobile services and causing many consumers to carefully ration their mobile use for fear of being hit with a hefty bill at the end of the month."

I was VERY surprised (and disappointed) to learn the following:

"The impact of uncompetitive pricing is felt beyond the consumer market. Last month, the World Economic Forum pointed to problems in the wireless market as a key reason for Canada's slipping global ranking for "network readiness" (Canada has moved from 6th worldwide in 2005 to 13th today). Canada ranked 75th in the number of mobile subscribers, trailing countries such as El Salvador, Kazahkstan, and Libya. It also lagged behind countries such as the United Kingdom, Singapore, Italy, Sweden, and Norway on mobile pricing."

Link

It's Official: Rogers bringing iPhone to Canada

The Globe and Mail are reporting this morning that, as expected, Rogers is indeed going to carry the iPhone in Canada sometime "later this year." No word yet on whether or not there will be any movement on flat-rate data and voice plans (a hallmark of the Apple deal with AT&T and other carriers).

"'We're thrilled to announce that we have a deal with Apple to bring the iPhone to Canada later this year,' Rogers chief executive officer Ted Rogers said on Tuesday in a statement. 'We can't tell you any more about it right now, but stay tuned.'”

Taken in line with the recent commentary from Rogers Wireless Prez. Rob Bruce, I'm not sure that this deal has been fully fleshed out. It wouldn't be the first time that Rogers jumped the gun on this announcement tho...

Link to G&M Article

iPhone 3G coming to Canada?

The Toronto Star is now reporting that the 3G iPhone will be not only coming out this summer, but that Rogers will carry it. My favourite parts of the article had nothing to do with the iPhone per se, but rather with data pricing in Canada:

"It has been widely speculated that the stumbling block was Rogers' wireless data plans, which typically cost more than those offered by carriers in Europe and the United States – a disparity that critics blame on a lack of Canadian wireless competition.

As well, most of Rogers' wireless data plans have usage caps, with users charged by the megabyte if they go over their allotment.

"We're not fans of unlimited plans," Rob Bruce, president of Rogers' wireless division, told analysts during a February conference call."

I'm not one to tell a business that they shouldn't take whatever they can get. If they're in a position to charge that, and get it, then they should: It's what the market will bear. If I don't like it, my choice as a consumer should be to go elsewhere.

My lack of consumer choice in this matter, and this is the big one, these sky-high prices are actually hurting the wireless telcos! Why, do you ask? Well, first, they're not going to own this game forever, and people in Canada have long memories. Second, and more importantly, wireless data represents some of the biggest opportunities for innovation since Web 1.0, and these guys are the gate-keepers. I think that rather than squeezing the network for cash, they need to get as many people ON the network. It's only through tremendous girth that they will have value to big-boy wireless app (and I don't mean game) developers.

This means that it's also hurting Canada. Why? Not because we're funneling huge sums of cash to Rogers, rather, because a cottage industry of innovation around wireless application development SHOULD be happening here, in the great white northern home of RIM. Such an industry could pay off BIG for wireless providers - Consider, they control the network, they could demand a cut of all mobile commerce transactions for eBay sales - Snipe from your Samsung!

Instead, we're stuck with companies that would rather gouge us than encourage a fledgling industry that could help them make a lot of money in the future.

Link to Toronto Star Article