« What's Wrong With This Picture? |
Main
| Death To All Panel Sessions »
May 22, 2005
Jeff Axup on Mobile Communities
Posted by Stowe Boyd
Jeff Axup, who is working on his PhD in Australia, researching gossip patterns among backpackers -- a very interesting mobile community -- has some observations on the design of mobile devices:
[from his
FAQ]
In order for us to build communication devices that enable mobile communities, we need to start applying our knowledge of reputation systems, identity management, social networks, interface design, psychology and other fields, to our design of devices. The resulting products could support democratic politics, democratization of information, egalitarian societies, uncensored communication, collective action campaigns or nearly any other trait we can dream up. Technology greatly influences how people act -- simply by making it possible. We as the designers and researchers of these technologies hold the power (and the corresponding responsibility) to decide what people are able to do. It's time we started acting like a mobile design community and discussing what it is we're building.
[pointer from Howard Rheingold]
Comments (1)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Technology
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Reminder -- /Message
- › /Message - A New Blog
- › The Individual Is The New Group -- Part 1
- › 1000 Tags: Tag Advertising
- › Social Ethics And Technology Design
- › Nancy Hass on In Your Facebook.com
- › Black and White and Dead All Over: Is Newsprint Dead?
- › Anonymous Trolls, Beware: You Are Breaking Federal Laws
1. mobile jones on May 25, 2005 06:54 AM writes...
Stowe, all the development in the world on devices, and/or software will not change the mobile industry. Mobile operators/carriers focus on margin versus volume in their business models. They have control over the distribution point, and they behave just like all over companies that control distribution. Just like record labels, film studios, cable companies mobile operators run a closed business. Nokia tried to ignore the requirements from operators to customize devices, to sacrifice interoperability to differentiation. Look through Verizon Wireless' device offerings and notice the obvious absence of Nokia phones. Further, Verizon Wireless has been sued for requiring a phone manufacturer disable the phone's bluetooth radio. They didn't want users to be able to ship applications to the phone over bluetooth connections as that would cut into the downloading of files over their network.
With all due respect to Howard Rheingold, and the young man doing this research, better devices will not be deployed by operators unless they are locked down to that operator's specs. Interoperability is a rare event that operators only support when it results in profits. The best example being SMS which was not interoperable in the US for quite a long time.
Mobile value chain illustrates the problem:
....device makers\
.........................\
..........................\
...infrastructure --operators/carriers ------users
........................../
........................./
...apps & content/
The pinned up demand that operators are creating for users is a huge opportunity for non-cellular network providers. The reality is that mobile operators have networks that are too slow to support the demand for bi-directional multimedia and only have plans to service uni-directional multimedia.
As a blogger and podcaster, I'm sure that you understand your own desire and need for creating while on the go, as well as, the desire to consume the independent content that is available on the net. But look at VCAST. Fox is the only provider allowed to deliver original mobile content to your phone. Or you might decide to download a song. Record labels are trying to pass along their revenue share with operators on to consumers, so they require an additional $2 per tune that is delivered to a mobile phone. The content is identical to what you'd get for 99 cents on iTunes. There's the run on the iTunes phone that recently suffered from distributor ownership veto.
I could go on and on, but I think you and your readers get the picture.
Permalink to Comment