However there are many challenges facing software developers wishing to target smartphone users. Despite the enterprise success of BlackBerry, the cool presence of the iPhone, and the businesslike familiarity of Windows Mobile, these are not the only platform options for developers. Recent entrants such as Google’s Android, the return of Palm and old stalwarts like Symbian or Java plus other mobile platforms underlines the multiplicity of options. Even Linux is waiting in the wings, with handsets from the likes of ELSE almost ready to hit the markets.
Coupling this with the difficulty of developing compelling applications on tiny screens with varied input options, low battery life, limited processor power and memory, means it is critical to get an application that blends the right criteria for success: technical, commercial and those tricky to quantify user demands that will drive real adoption. According to recent Quocirca research into mobile developer thinking, despite around two thirds of them saying they are driven by ‘technical challenge’ and learning new skills, many are (unsurprisingly) also still focussed on making money from their efforts.
So how can they build mobile revenue generating momentum?
Quocirca uses a set of six criteria based on user needs to assess the potential value of the market for various different mobile applications. These are applied on an application-by-application basis to assess the value and see if it possesses the right mix of attributes to retain momentum in a competitive market; we call it the Quocirca Mobile Assessment (Q-Mass). The six criteria, listed below, are designed to assess the application beyond its raw technical merit and towards appeal, adoption and traction. These raise many questions, selections for each criteria are highlighted below:
Usability – is the application simple to use? Does it fit established application norms; style, layout of options, and the use of device specific interfaces (such as touch screens or scroll wheels)? Does it recognise the limits of the device and the constraints of the environment the user will find themselves in while using it?
Cost – is the basic application price point acceptable? Is it clear where and when costs are or will be incurred? If free, are the reasons for this and the commercial aspects e.g. ad funded etc still apparent? Is its use dependent upon other charges, such as airtime or data tariffs? Is it likely to be too expensive to use while roaming?
Value – Do the costs charged match the perceived value for that individual user or target demographic group? Does the commercial model constrain or encourage use? Are there clear incremental options e.g. upgrade from free to pay as you go and upgrade again to all-you-can-eat ‘pro’ versions?
Mobile enhancement – does the application take advantage of uniquely mobile criteria? Are location, movement, or orientation taken into account? Does it extend or replace a desktop service or application? Is it simplified to only make sense while mobile or does it display too much functionality? Does it understand the limitations of the network connection?
Social connection – how does the application allow the user to connect to other people? Do they already have to be users too or can the application be promoted virally? Does it make use of existing mobile communication paths such as SMS, IM, email or voice? Does it have the means to provide feedback, or for links and comments to be shared with the user’s social groups to provide recommendations and aid discoverability?
Substitution – what activity or resource does the application replace? Potential users are time constrained already and only have finite budgets – what will they stop doing or stop spending on to spend time and money on this application? This may not be a clear or direct competitor, for example early teenage growth of text messaging had a negative impact on confectionary sales as pocket money was diverted to SMS.
The odd application will fail on all of these points and enjoy some sudden success, but probably also disappear just as quickly: that’s just a quirk of the market. Fine for the lucky sole developer in a bedroom churning out iTat, but not for those larger developers groups planning a more significant software investment. How well any mobile application, or market segment for that matter, meets these criteria will have an effect on the length and breadth of adoption. Achieving mobile market momentum and longer-term success requires sufficient mass (or Q-Mass in this case), and despite the diversity in the market, the right approach to applications will take them down the right path for success.
However, alongside mass, the other element to momentum is velocity, which in this context comes from the route to market, and that too plays a vital role in mobile application success. Mobile app stores have become a ‘must have’ for operators as well as device companies, as a result the impact of the Apple app store, but there are challenges and pitfalls in the mobile route to market which will be explored in a later article.
