WAP and dotmobi were destined to fail

October 8, 2010 · by Espen André Øverdahl

Our co-founder Jon S. von Tetzchner was on the cover of the CTIA Wireless Week Show Daily magazine. In the article Jon explains his vision of One Web and why technologies like WAP and dotmobi were destined to fail. Most people want to have the same access to Web content on their phone as they have on a computer, even though it may be rendered differently, Jon says in the interview.

Want the full story and all the details? Look no further, you can download the article (pdf).

Readers' comments 22

Left under the original article, as archived.

Artur „Jurgi” JurgawkaFriday, October 8, 2010 10:30:50 AM
I rather think, that it was the technology progress, what made WAP useless. It was designed for simple devices, but before WAP could gain real popularity the mobile devices became enough powerfull to handle real HTML.
On the other side making another version of every site in WAP was too expensive for many.
Dark FurieFriday, October 8, 2010 11:03:25 AM
Guy knows what he's talking about. That's incredibly rare when people discuss sideloaded mobile applications in relation to network operators. Then again, most of the people who discuss such things are American "analysts" who haven't a clue about a healthy mobile ecosystem because they believe America is in front of everybody with their shitty networks.
Vance Hedderel, Director of PR, dotMobiFriday, October 8, 2010 4:30:24 PM
More than four years later, and Opera still doesn't seem to "get" the .mobi domain or the work of the dotMobi company, and that it is highly complementary to the work that Opera does. von Tetzchner's statement that "Most people want to have the same access to Web content on their phone as they have on a computer ..." is contrary to all research that dotMobi has done. But since that is what Opera does as a business, it's evident that von Tetzchner has to take such a stance.

In fact, the past year has been a strong one for .mobi and the mobile Web. Among the reasons for that are:

The overall growth of the mobile Web. Earlier this year, mobile analytics firm Bango reported a 600% growth in traffic to mobile websites, based on a study of 50 million phone users worldwide. Despite what you may hear about “apps,” according to Bango CEO Ray Anderson, “The single most important app on any mobile device is the browser” to visit mobile websites. And despite what you may think from the many Apple ads you likely see, the best selling phone manufacturers globally are Nokia, Blackberry and then Apple, proving again that mobile websites are the most valuable and efficient way for businesses to reach customers via the mobile Web. (See how dotMobi and Opera are ultimately making the same point?)

The overall growth of the .mobi domain. We’re closing in on one million .mobi domains registered with that number continuing to grow. We’re now at our highest-ever number in the name base and we’re poised to be only the sixth gTLD to reach one million domains under management. Further, many brands are now riding on the .mobi bandwagon, including AT&T, Blackberry, Five Guys restaurants, JCPenney, Simon and Schuster, even the city of London with its special mylomo.mobi initiative.
Charles SchlossFriday, October 8, 2010 4:43:40 PM
Yep the person who knows little about tech wants the same experience on their phone as they do on their computer
АндрійFriday, October 8, 2010 4:49:17 PM
WAP it's cool! WML forever!http://files.myopera.com/Tamil/Smilies/Hit.gif -
d4rkn1ghtFriday, October 8, 2010 6:21:56 PM
Dark FurieFriday, October 8, 2010 7:43:18 PM
Originally posted by VanceHedderel:

Earlier this year, mobile analytics firm Bango reported a 600% growth in traffic to mobile websites, based on a study of 50 million phone users worldwide.
The problem with a study like that is that it's based on visits to a mobile site, not how many people want one. So many sites automatically redirect their users which skews the study results as those people were after the full experience. Studies like this make sites and businesses believe they need a mobile site and the cycle continues with more people getting angry at being redirected than those who're grateful. I can't tell you the amount of times I've been redirected to a less functional mobile version of a site against my will and been unable to do what I attempted to visit the parent site for in the first place.
Originally posted by VanceHedderel:

Despite what you may hear about “apps,” according to Bango CEO Ray Anderson, “The single most important app on any mobile device is the browser” to visit mobile websites.
I couldn't agree more about the browser being the most important application on a phone. However you're adding your own opinion to the quote by saying it's there to visit mobile websites. A good browser should be able to visit both without the user being forced one way or another. A better browser will get rid of the need to visit the lite versions altogether with a wealth of options that can cut down a heavy site into a managable and enjoyable environment to browse.
Originally posted by VanceHedderel:

And despite what you may think from the many Apple ads you likely see, the best selling phone manufacturers globally are Nokia, Blackberry and then Apple, proving again that mobile websites are the most valuable and efficient way for businesses to reach customers via the mobile Web.
The majority of people here are in Europe and fully aware that Apple barely has 13% of the global market and that's mainly to existing fans and those people who're easily swayed by marketing. We're mostly well aware it's a bag of shite that they're selling at premium prices too. What none of us are aware of is why you think Nokia and RIM (the company that makes Blackberry devices) being ahead means that mobile websites are the most valuable and effecient way for businesses to reach customers via the mobile web? Are you insinuating that these companies don't build full web browsers into their phones perhaps, because I'd do some research if that were your view.
TamilFriday, October 8, 2010 11:32:31 PM
Cutting SpoonFriday, October 8, 2010 11:37:04 PM
RIM is huge due to extensive corporate ala-carte offerings and excellent workgroup management, only more recently has their browser received feature improvements. Nokia sells a lot of cheap, simple phones. By my own experience, many Nokia phones can't browse effectively without the intervention of something like opera. Even for dotmobi sites. This is due in large part to the many low-specced feature phones produced by Nokia.

DotMobi is also a fearsome enemy of smartphones, as an 800x480 screen purely slaughters websites "optimized" for phones with a maximum of 320 pixels in either dimension. A suboptimal experience at best. More sites will find that their full versions function adequately on more phones, with a reduced cost of administration and a simplified branding process. Proper detection of screen size and browser features should be a standard part of any good online business.

One last rimshot against .mobi: In measures of small electronics internet traffic, Opera leads on volume. Both the stock Android browser and mobile Safari browser are loosely based on Webkit/KHTML sources, and if combined their share is a touch larger than Opera's. These three browsers together represent about 60% of mobile browsing volume, depending whose stats you read. All three are capable of adequately displaying the full (or near-full) versions of most sites. You may have reached 1M subdomain registrations, but how many of them are among the top 1000 most-visited URLs online? And how many of those top 1000 NORMAL sites can be visited by a smartphone's stock browser? How many can be visited with a proxified browser like Bolt or Mini on feature phones?

...and why are you even here, Vance? You may speak of the growth of the "mobile web", but the selling point of every smartphone out there is the "full web" experience. Nobody spends $500 USD on a phone, then settles for some 90's-esque .mobi domain that hasn't been upgraded in three years.
Dark FurieSaturday, October 9, 2010 9:51:30 AM
I think I'm in love with you, Spoon.
prd3Saturday, October 9, 2010 5:07:03 PM
Originally posted by Jurgi:

I rather think, that it was the technology progress, what made WAP useless.

No, what made WAP useless is what makes .mobi useless. It didn't give you the full content.
prd3Saturday, October 9, 2010 5:17:08 PM
Originally posted by VanceHedderel:

More than four years later, and Opera still doesn't seem to "get" the .mobi domain or the work of the dotMobi company

I disagree. He gets it perfectly. It is you who don't get him. He is saying that people want access to the full web from their phones, not some watered down/separate WAP or .mobi nonsense.

von Tetzchner's statement that "Most people want to have the same access to Web content on their phone as they have on a computer ..." is contrary to all research that dotMobi has done. But since that is what Opera does as a business, it's evident that von Tetzchner has to take such a stance.

So what you are saying is that people do not want access to the full web from their phones? The facts clearly show that you are wrong!

Furthermore, it doesn't REALLY matter to Jon if .mobi is a success or not. Opera will work whether it's on a proper site, or a watered-down .mobi site. Even if all sites on the entire web started using .mobi sites, Opera would still happily be doing business.

And despite what you may think from the many Apple ads you likely see, the best selling phone manufacturers globally are Nokia, Blackberry and then Apple, proving again that mobile websites are the most valuable and efficient way for businesses to reach customers via the mobile Web.

In case you didn't notice:

1) Opera is the dominant mobile browser, by far
2) Opera reports on the mobile market every single month
3) The report reveals that people are visiting normal pages, and not WAP portals or .mobi sites

So .mobi is a failure according to the most popular mobile browser.

(See how dotMobi and Opera are ultimately making the same point?)

On the contrary. .mobi leads to a worse experience for mobile users. It sets out to create a separate mobile web. Opera has always talked about bringing the web to everyone. .mobi wants to fragment the web into "desktop" and "mobile."

The overall growth of the .mobi domain. We’re closing in on one million .mobi domains registered with that number continuing to grow.

And yet you have failed to reach the users. Opera's monthly State of the Mobile Web clearly shows that .mobi is DOA.

Further, many brands are now riding on the .mobi bandwagon, including AT&T, Blackberry, Five Guys restaurants, JCPenney, Simon and Schuster, even the city of London with its special mylomo.mobi initiative.

Just because some companies do stupid things doesn't mean that it's right to do those stupid things.

And silliest thing of all: a MOBILE TLD is one of the LONGEST TLDs! That's how thought-out the whole .mobi nonsense is. It clearly shows that you. Do. Not. Get. It.

Of course, you will continue to peddle your useless crap to gullible executives who fall for your marketing speak. But make no mistake about it, as soon as you come across someone who knows what he's talking about, he will expose you in a second.

Jon just owned you. Again. That's gotta hurt.
prd3Saturday, October 9, 2010 5:20:10 PM
BTW, I notice that Vance is copying&pasting his nonsensical drivel all over the web. He commented here as well:

http://www.wirelessweek.com/News/2010/10/Mobile-Content-Web-Future-Complicated-Browsers/
prd3Saturday, October 9, 2010 5:21:34 PM
Another thing Vance failed to address:

"What if you're using another device? Should we have .gameconsole? .car? .fridge? .plane?"
Richard priceSaturday, October 9, 2010 5:56:55 PM
Hi
Cutting SpoonSaturday, October 9, 2010 9:26:32 PM
Originally posted by prd3:

Even if all sites on the entire web started using .mobi sites, Opera would still happily be doing business.

^^This is one of the best things you've ever written.

The "small cup" comment on Dvice was also a nice counter to the .mobi strategy.
selurusTuesday, October 12, 2010 9:44:29 PM
Who wants wap when you can get the web on your mobile?
Cutting SpoonTuesday, October 12, 2010 9:48:47 PM
WAP is an abstraction of the sound made when you realize the mobile site for a new movie won't let you view the film trailer. (As the phone screen impacts your forehead)
Chathuranga LiyanagamaTuesday, October 26, 2010 7:48:42 PM
Wap and dotmobi domains are not entirelly useless.It will be useful for mobile users to identify sites with mobile compatible content.Sometimes we like to visit mobile site even we have the capability to visit full site with our mobile device.
There may be several reasons,
*loading time is less than desktop site(Espcially if your data connection very slow)
*Less complexity(people may not want to be confounded " various links,blank spaces where flash content have to be and not-compatible content even with most recent high-end smartphones" with the downloading link they want to click on.)
*If you are using a social networking site,especially when you are chatting,you may like to use mobile version of the site(it may be dotmobi ,wap domain or not, but just the mobile version.)because you may like to eleminate the myriad of links and countless images(because if you are continueslly updating the same page you may like to a less loading time with less details when you are using a mobile phone.)
*Remember Opera is not doing the same thing as dotmobi domain(contarary to director of(.mobi)domain).Opera compresses the web pages and delivers them to client,but it can't seperate mobile phone compatible links and content from other web links,it just gives scaled down(I mean details here,not the resolution) version of desktop web on your mobile phone.So When users want specialized, categorized and simplified content for their mobile phone they normally use mobile version of the site.
In simple terms,when user want short and sweet content they use mobike version of a web site.

Also present is very different than a decade ago.It might be necessory to intoduce a dotmobi domain then.But today with the dawn of the new smart and feature phone era and with the introduction of the mobile web browsers like Opera mini,Opera mobile full web browsing enabled for cell phone users.So there not a huge need for mobile version of web sites as a decade ago.It is not necessory of having dotmobi or wap domain names furthermore.
And it must be mentioned that Opera browser popularity doesn't depend on the lack of mobile version of web sites.As "prd3" say Even if every web site in the internet has a mobile version of its own opera will still doing their job happilly and succesfully because sometimes cellphone users will want to view full site when they will like to use features mobile site lacks.
And finally it is not easy to maintain two seperate sites(costly) as mobile and desktop.So future of the dotmobi and wap domains are not a clear one.
Q:Will dotmobi and wap domain survive?
A:It will be according to future user's taste(In my opinion).
prd3Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:41:33 PM
Originally posted by smartrocker:

Wap and dotmobi domains are not entirelly useless.

They are. There are better ways to do all of that on regular sites.

Sometimes we like to visit mobile site even we have the capability to visit full site with our mobile device.

Nothing is preventing sites from adding formatting for mobile browsers on their regular sites.

There may be several reasons,

None of these apply to WAP or crapMobi exclusively. You can easily do it with a normal mobile site.

In simple terms,when user want short and sweet content they use mobike version of a web site.

No one is arguing against formatting pages to suit mobile phones. People are arguing that dotMobi and WAP are FAILURES and the wrong answer. It can easily be done without resorting to such stupid things.
Cutting SpoonWednesday, October 27, 2010 7:06:25 PM
Pretty much. If a site uses modern HTML and a little capability detection, it will function fine for more than 90% of all visitors. Not worth the extortive bidding on a .mobi domain, followed by the maintenance demands of a second full site with content only similar to the desktop version.
KamaleshThursday, October 28, 2010 3:35:35 PM
@Vance:
I realize the position you're in, given the shifting mobile browser landscape...especially with Opera Mini/Mobile only zooming up, and actually, < .mobi > sites may be useful on old, tiny-display, slow feature phones.

Unfortunately, with Opera on phones, it's going to be a tough sell. Opera Mini/Mobile load < .mobi > site very quickly, but the content is so diluted, almost making it unusable.

Also, site designers not adding a full-site link or non-mobi link on those watered-down sites is really maddening.

There's a place for <.mobi>, but as Opera Mini and other mobile browsers continue to gain share, it's going to end. I think search engines should be able to offer <.mobi> search results on really old phones maybe, but I don't see any other use case (or may expensive tiered 3G data plans).

Originally posted by prd3:

Another thing Vance failed to address:

"What if you're using another device? Should we have .gameconsole? .car? .fridge? .plane?"

HAHAHAHAHAHA! Game over.