App is Crap (why Apple is bad for your health)

Absolute Power Corrupts, AbsolutelyiStock_000009523140XSmall

I was living in Europe in 2000 when the first WAP phones (Wireless Access Protocol) were introduced.  These phones were so over hyped.  They were going to bring the Internet to your mobile phones ushering in the era of “m-commerce.”  Gag.

I had just returned from living in Japan where I witnessed the hugely successful launch of i-mode by NTT DoCoMo so I knew the potential that the mobile web would ultimately bring, but I saw so many flaws in the launch of WAP.  But like lemmings, every company in the market rushed to proclaim they were launching WAP versions of their products.

I was attending a major industry conference in Barcelona at the height of the WAP excitement.  I was on stage in front of several hundreds of conference attendees.  The moderator asked each of us panelists the asinine question, “tell us what you’re doing about WAP!”  (you know,  as in “tell us what you’re doing about China?” or “tell us what you’re doing about location-based services?”).  The panelists went down the line and like lemmings announced their plans with glee.

It came to me.  With 5 years’ of British sarcasm under my belt I said, “WAP is CRAP.  We’re doing nothing.”  And I refused to say more.

Within a year WAP became the laughing stock of the mobile industry.  It was slow.  It was hard to use.  It required content sites to develop totally new content.  There was no engagement.  In Chris Dixon’s words, it wasn’t designed for normals.

Fast forward a nearly a decade.  I’m now a VC.  Everybody and their mothers are coming into my offices proclaiming that their developing the latest iPhone App.  Kleiner Perkins launches an iFund.  The new manta is “what are you doing about the iPhone.”  I have the same gag reflexes.  The model is all wrong.

So I attended a Red Herring conference in Laguna Niguel hanging out with Dharmesh Shah, James Citron, Rob Theis and others.  The topic is “The Future of Mobile Applications” and I pronounce, “App is Crap.”  It is a step backward for our industry.  It is a waste for most brands.  It is a channel disguised in business clothing.

I would argue that if Apple’s app model continues to succeed it is bad for your health.  You – being members of the technology community.  I know that I’m into FanBoy territory and am ready to be attacked.  Before you let me have it let me say I am a FanBoy of Apple products.  I am typing this on my brand new 15″ MacBook Pro.  I ran this morning with my iPod in tow.  I own an iPod Touch (not an iPhone – my house in Brentwood gets literally ZERO AT&T bars).  I buy all my music through iTunes and even buy some videos there.  I can’t be more of a FanBay of their products.  But I’m with Jason Calacanis.  I think Apple has become corrupted and its dominance in mobile is not good for the industry.

1. App is one step forward, two steps back – In 1999 I launched my first company, BuildOnline, a SaaS-based (back then we were ASP’s) content management platform for large-scale engineering and construction projects.  In the same year Salesforce.com launched a SaaS CRM platform to compete with Siebel.  They pronounced “The End of Software.”  It was typical Marc Benioff marketing hyperbole but it was very effective.

Their company, my company and countless others espoused cloud-based applications.  We had all worked in the software industry for a decade and saw the problems of on-premise software.  We evangelized to customer about the problems of on premise software.

- It is expensive for software companies to build for heterogeneous environments.  They therefore have large cost bases and have to pass on those costs to you.

- You have a data problem.  Your data is trapped on a client device (a PC), leading to security risks and replication problems

- You can’t access your data easily when you’re in multiple locations

- It’s harder to share data across multiple users

- Etc., etc.

When we launched browsers weren’t very functionally rich.  Therefore if you want to change just one field of data we had to redraw the entire screen.  That meant that user experience was not as rich as it would be for a client-side app.  But the trade-off in terms of flexibility and costs were enormous.  Enter the huge innovation in AJAX (asynchronous Javascript and XML), which let us redraw individual portions of the screen and therefore mimic user behavior on on-premise applications.  Enter Flash, which gave us a multimedia development environment.  The power of the web increased dramatically and “Cloud Computing” began to take a huge leap forward.

These days no serious company thinks about building on premise software companies any more.

Enter Apple.  They have popularize iPhone Apps.  You can argue that it is a necessary innovation to enable groups of users to interact with device in a way that they never could on carrier portals.  I agree.  To an extent.

I was so frustrated working with carriers in the 1990′s.  They were frustrated that despite having the (monopoly) infrastructure that brought you the Internet, the majority of innovation and profits went to Silicon Valley startups.  These same people later ran the mobile companies that were either part of or spun out of carriers.  And they swore they’d never let the application companies do it to them again.  So we as consumers (and as a tech industry) languished for 7 years.  You either had to do “on deck / on portal” deals where your app was rolled out through the carriers sh*tty operating platform or you had to go “off deck” which meant you had no customers.  And being gateways to the customer they naturally extracted their pound of flesh from mobile application developers.  And they were slow to approve people.

So I greeted Apple’s entry into the market with great excitement.  ”Finally the hegemony is broken!  Ding dong, the wicked witch is dead!”  Apple would be the first major device sold where the carrier’s crappy software wasn’t on the phone.  We would herald in a new era of innovation.  Google would soon follow with their own phones, it was rumored.  The mobile web would finally be open!  Or would it?

So Apple has encouraged application developers to set loose building apps.  We now have a couple of hundred thousand applications developed.  The web browsers are as immature as the Internet browsers were in the late 90′s.  And “native” (those installed on the device) applications can take advantage of features that the browser can’t like the acceleramator (which detects motion), the GPS (to get your location) and the camera.

But here are the major problems if this model holds:

- Every developer now has to have an iPhone development team.

- Every application has to be submitted to Apple for approval.  They are now a bottleneck.  When you change an application it has to be resubmitted – however minor the change.

- Apple is the new “gateway” that can extract a toll from you (sound familiar?).  Apple wants to take a major share of the revenue.

- Data within the applications is locked into the device

- Flash is not supported, which means that all assets you’ve developed for the Internet that work in Flash are worthless for this device

- Apple has sent out signals such as that they might like to own location-based mobile advertising.  If you encroach on this territory they may stop you or blow you out. They may do this / they may not.  They may encroach in other “interesting” areas.  They may not.

- Approvals are a black box.

And this is just the start.  Now the real problems.

- If you assume that Apple always dominates the market for the mobile web (a bad assumption) then they have absolute power.  If Google is sometimes flawed in it’s “do no evil” mission, you gotta believe that Larry and Sergey deep down believe this mantra.  Steve Jobs?  Erm.  Not so much.  He has done much good for our industry.  But “do no evil?”  See Point 4 below.

If you assume that there are many players, you’re probably right.

- Let’s start with Google’s Android.  You’ve just hired your iPhone development team for you app.  They’re super busy developing a new version of your product because, guess what, Apple changed it’s terms of service to allow in-app purchasing.  So you rush to develop a new monetization strategy which means rebuilding your app.  It’s taking time to finish the product because you’re super expensive iPhone developers (they’re in high demand) are not as good as you like (they’re super high in demand).  Should you now hire Android developers? Can your iPhone developers be good at both?  Do you have enough resource to cover both?

- And that Palm Pre.  I heard it’s pretty slick and Sprint seems to be pushing it really hard. I heard they have an App Store.  Let’s look into it. Maybe we could ship our app and see how it does?

- Oh, wait.  There’s that RIM company with the Blackberry.  Should we have an app for that?  They have a super relevant and high-end installed base including people like Mark Suster who never gave up his Blackberry since Apple only offers itself on a super sucky network for which their is ZERO bars of coverage at his house in Brentwood.  But their browser sucks, their app environment sucks, the developer community isn’t strong.  But we need device coverage, right?

- Oh, wait.  I need some Microsoft OS coverage.  I know Windows CE is dead despite having like a 100-year head start on Google.  But Windows is now making a push with Windows 7 Mobile.  Maybe we could get an application out early for that before everybody else does?

- And how about Symbian?  We’re going to want to develop for all those Europeans, right?  And Nokia has the Ovi Store thing, right?

Let’s see.  We’ve got two guys developing on the iPhone, two on Android, one on Palm Pre, one on Blackberry, o.5 on Windows 7 Mobile, 0.5 on Symbian and 4 doing QA on all these freaking iterations.   Man, I sure hope there is no more innovation in this field or we are Fawked!  Oh, frack.  There is this iPad thing is coming out.  Better set aside some budget for that.

I know that there is a period of time where apps need to reign.  But I for one am betting that the future is “the mobile web” not the “the mobile app.”  There will always be some apps that have reasons to be native on devices but I am betting that serious innovation will happen on mobile browsers and that the future will so most apps folded into the cloud.  We’ve already seen it once in the PC era.  It’s the best thing for our health.  We can build for one primary browser (like we do for Firefox on the desktop today) and then figure out how to get the rest working with whatever Microsoft builds.

It will be 3-5 years before this transition takes place.  Much money will be gained and lost in this period.  And somebody will win in the transition.  Wise companies will plan for this “great porting” to take place.  Unfortunately it won’t be in the next 3 years so we have to live through this temporary era.

2. Most companies are wasting their money on apps – In addition to believing that the app movement is bad for our industry I also believe that most brands should not have apps.  I have been pitched by too many companies that want to help every brand discover their inner iPhone self.  They have kits to help the The Gap, Banana Republic, McDonalds, Kmart, Kraft or whatever other brand develop iPhone apps (I made these brands up – I have no idea whether they specifically have apps).  But I don’t believe consumers are going to want to have 500 apps on their phones.

I don’t believe there is any compelling reason for The Gap, Bananan Republic and Abercrombie & Fitch to have apps on my phone.  What they need is simple.  Websites!  And I can visit them on my mobile browser when I want to.  So in this iPhone Goldrush many companies will make bucks selling picks and axes to iPhone gold prospectors but most will be fool’s gold.

3. Apple is a channel, not a business model – I see too many companies that are building iPhone App companies.  iPhone is not a business model unless you’re Apple.  It’s a channel.  It’s a way to reach your customers.  And single channel businesses are vulnerable to the vagrancies of the market place.  If you’re a “pure mobile” company that’s fine.  There is a strategy for that.  But you need to think in terms of broader distribution.

4. Absolute Power Corrupts, Absolutely.   Finally, to pick up on Jason Calacanis’s point – I’m worried that Apple’s success might be going to its head.  Lord Acton in the UK once famously said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”  Apple now has absolute power.  Not 100% but they have HUGE power.  They broke the hegemony in the on-deck carrier model only to emerge with temporary monopolist tendencies.  Now Google is going to try and keep them in check.

Apples actions speak for themselves:

- They don’t allow Flash on their devices.  Very knowledgeable and cynical people I’ve spoken with have given me a flavor of why.  There are so many free Flash games now where the owners of the handset and OS wouldn’t be able to have a cut in the revenue if they were widely distributed on iPhones.  In stead, you have to go through the Apple gatekeeper and pay an Apple toll to develop applications for their phones.  This isn’t open innovation.  This is a return to the carrier mindset.  People like Fred Wilson have written about this topic (and gotten attacked – so I’m prepared for it!)

- They control the approval process for new apps.  Anything they don’t like – they have absolute veto power.  Full stop.

- Example – the Google Voice kerfuffle.  We’ll never really know why Apple has blocked Google Voice.

- Want an iPhone but live in Brentwood like Mark Suster does?  Well you’ll have ZERO bars.  So you don’t have an option.  Why does iPhone only come on the AT&T network?  Because AT&T has given Apple the most lucrative deal of all the operators and pays handsomely to maintain this exclusivity.  In an open and free world this shouldn’t happen.  It’s total bollocks.

I’m willing to fund companies in the interim.  I hope to soon announce an investment that relies on the mobile application infrastructure in the short-to-mid term.  But I said to the CEO that I would only invest if he believes that they long-term is The Mobile Web and that our plan is to build something that can be successful in the intervening period but with the objective or porting as the mobile web browsers become more capable.

Guys, if Cloud Computing made sense for our desktop applications it’s certainly going to make sense for our mobile lives, too.  All the same rationale holds.

UPDATE: I guess the timing on my post was pretty prescient.  One day later Apple announced that any applications with “sexy” materials (including swimsuits, lingerie) was to be pulled from the App Store as outlined in this TechCrunch article.

Posted in Uncategorized
  • http://bothsidesofthetable.com msuster

    But I'm not arguing there's a bubble. I'm also not arguing that apps shouldn't exist for some people. I just don't think that this is where the market will end up ultimately. And for the industry the app movement has its downside. Specifically for software companies that will need to build multi platform apps. That's all.

  • http://bothsidesofthetable.com msuster

    I'm not arguing in defense of Adobe. I believe in open web standards and am pro HTML5. But Flash is a reality and people will want to protect their existing investments. Not allowing this causes much industry consternation.

  • http://bothsidesofthetable.com msuster

    Thanks for pointing out. When I wrote this I was thinking more about the ongoing maintenance issues of multi-OS support (from a technical perspective) than the initial development. I didn't make that clear and you did. Thank you.

  • http://bothsidesofthetable.com msuster

    Agreed, Jim. Today's mobile web doesn't cut it. I hope we'll make progress and hope that the App Web doesn't retard this growth.

  • tjvilot

    I find it absolutely amazing that you go on and on about “open-ness” and yet you include Flash in your discussion.

    Flash is not open. It is a proprietary technology. And it is a technology plenty of people don't give a &^%$# about anymore. It has been relegated to being a video player or the technology of choice for clueless web designers.

    Please. Pick a better complaint.

  • Pingback:   links for 2010-02-20 — contentious.com

  • http://www.briox.com Itamar Rogel

    Great post. By and large, this is such a natural process that it seems awkward to think of things turning out any other way.

    Some things will have to happen as enablers for this, though… One of them is getting the technical hurdles out of the way – e.g. enabling mobile web apps to behave as nicely and naturally as native mobile apps can today. One way this can pan out is via some evolution of non-standard web API extensions.

    AJAX is a great example for something which started out as a non-standard extension of web standards and evolved to what it is today, creative a myriad of disruptive business changes on the way.
    We need something like that for some things that matter on mobile apps (such as GPS, accelerometer, etc.).

    [ IIRC Apple itself has introduced stuff like getting location via Javascript (in iPhone OS 3.0). While early standardization is probably the best thing we could've hoped for in a perfect world, in the real world an AJAX-like path of such nonstandard extensions developed by the trio (MS, Google, Apple) and somehow coalescing into something which can be used semi-transparently by abstracting over, is the more likely eventual enabler of these changes... ]

  • z981845

    Great post, Mark. We (http://www.itanyplace.com) are trying to solve the exact problem you have mentioned in a unique way. Would love to get some feedback and advice from you.

    We have a cloud based platform through which user can set up a basic app in the cloud in minutes. At this point, user can either point her mobile domain to the app url for browser based access or generate code for native app (semi-connected or connected). For both access modes, code can be previewed in our browser based simulator and edited/customized in the browser based editor.

    Browser based app works across all device browsers and performs content adaptation. Native app runs across all major device OS like iPhone, Android, Palm WebOS, BB etc. For native access, the code is in html/js and runs on our client. The client talks to the device APIs (eg, gps, camera etc) by using whatever programming language is available on the device – but that is transparent to the end user. The user can download the code with our client and submit the app to the app stores or get us to submit it. The platform can be used for any B2E or B2C scenario.

    What do you think about this approach?

  • Pranav

    The only take-away I got from this article is – dont' build a business based on the appstore. But wasn't that quite obvious already?
    On the other hand, ask yourself – HOW would opening the ecosystem benefit apple in ANY way?! Even a nincompoop heading the iphone business will protect their turf (through appstore) till whenever it is economically possible.
    Now the onus is on android (or windows mobile) to go forward from where apple has left off. Unfortunately from what I see no one has been able to take the fight to apple.

    And I am tired of people crying hoarse about how 'unfair' life is. Smell the coffee even if you are asleep. Apple does NOT need to do anything to help anyone else make any more money. Ask nokia or microsoft or google – they'll agree when it comes to protecting their turf.
    The reason why MS didn't stonewall apps (software) on their OS was because it was a lot more open, it developed in a completely different way – flexibility was an advantage. With mobiles, flexibility is NOT an advantage.

    I would really like to know what the author feels about google insisting that people log in with their google accounts into android to access complete features of the OS? Doesn't that stink of a company wanting to block competitors offering similar services?

  • stevenorth

    I love this because it creates fantastic barriers to entry against start-ups who can't afford to develop on all the platforms. As you point out apps will largely be the doorway to the mobile ecosystem for the foreseeable future so incumbents with a good web product and great apps have (at least for a good few years) a massive advantage. Welcome to the real world, with barriers.

  • trashbat

    Another way of looking at this is, is if it generates more revenue than cost over the estimated lifetime, why not?
    Ocado's App is a superb example, that exceeds an already excellent online site.

    In most cases, the answer, of course, is 'No' – deciding to have an App then looking for what it could do is definitely the wrong way round. And to be honest, the same applies to most of the commercial apps on the App store too – classic software goldrush like the early 80s – bedroom coders seeing riches.

    On the other hand, I do see three big problems with targeting the mobile web, or web generally.

    1) You're largely stuck moving at the pace of the slowest player, aiming at the lowest common denominator. You may be able to offer a few visual niceties which safely fall-back, but you can't do anything fundamentally different. This is probably fine for most line-of-business apps, which aren't really much different from how they were in VT100 days, and your competition is the same.

    2) The question I ask back to anyone talking about cross-platform development (from Java to the web) is 'Why did your customer choose X?' – whether it's a computer, games console or smartphone. Are you respecting their reasons?
    Did I purchase a MacBook purely to use web apps, for instance? Are you making a plain financial decision (it makes no sense to develop software that won't pay off) or are you making one based on politics (proprietary systems are wrong)?

    3) I still question whether Cloud Computing does make sense for our desktop applications. I prefer solutions like Dropbox to pure Cloud storage, and most normal people I know use USB sticks to achieve portability, rather than logging into online office suites.

    I still question the motives of many of the people behind the push to the Cloud, and I think people need to be beware. Desktop software from dead companies still runs, dead Internet firms have gone, taking their customers data with them – and data locked on closed servers is far more insidious than data locked in proprietary file formats. It's good for business, but a step backwards for users.

    Anyway, all of this is meant more as points to think on – the reality is that we're developing a mobile web app, rather than iPhone one, for pretty much the reasons outlined.

    As for lack of Flash – my take on it is that the revenue from the apps is irrelevant to Apple. What's important is that they are iPhone only. Flash or any other x-platform tool undermines that exclusivity. If I can buy an Android and use the same programs, it purely becomes a hardware battle.

    Your free Flash games, on the other hand, are largely subsidised by models that won't work if they're running full screen on a mobile – and of course, unlike the App Store, there is no opportunity for the developer to sell their game at pocket money prices. We can criticise Apple, but they have also provided a good sales channel for developers, whereas Adobe's focus is on selling Adobe CS – that's how they make money.

    And there is, of course, the fact that it's not that great a piece of technology for developing games – consider that both Palm and Android OS have introduced Native development kits for games is an indication of this. We might wish it was better, as it would make a lot of development problems go away, but it isn't, and I think a lot of people are peddling snake oil with the idea of Flash as a Universal software runtime.

    And more to the point, you're just handing control from Apple to Adobe – one of the things that has pushed us over to mobile-web development using standards-based technologies has been Adobe's failure to deliver Flash 9/10 on mobile until now – too late.

  • isabellegenest

    I absolutely loooove this post. Thank you, I'll share it!
    Isabelle Genest

  • Pingback: If it’s good enough for the desktop, is it good enough for mobile? | Bestel uit china

  • http://www.rickoldroyd.co.uk/ Rick Oldroyd

    I could not agree with you more. I boot up my PC, start Firefox and Tweet Deck… thats it!
    All my apps are in the cloud, all my files are in the cloud. If my broadband goes down im screwed but if my PC goes down I just log on another one.

    Talking of my mobile I spend so much time searching my apps for the one I want. All a mobile needs other than the phone software IMO is Gravity and a good browser, I am over the moon the hear that Firefox plan to come to mobile platforms this year, bets the standar S60 3rd FP2 browser I have in my Nokia N96 here in the UK.

  • wilmark

    Wow, that was a great read. I am glad to see that there is still someone in the USofA willing to criticize the “great one” who is not an M$ freak. For the record, i'm a Linux freak! But i don't believe Google is going to prove any better in the long run. 500 apps might be annoying, but having important information floating about out “there” on someone else's servers could be potentially far more dangerous.
    Perhaps now that Symbian has gone completely open-source, not the fake open-source of Android, but real 100% open-source, its importance in the USA might begin to grow. What do you think?

  • Pingback: Mark Suster on Flash for iPhone -> TamsIJungle

  • Pingback: Lesenswert: Farmville, Online-Werbung, Online-Musikverkauf, Yahoo, Microsoft, Apps :: deutsche-startups.de

  • Sander van der Wal

    I don't agree with your post, and I think that the main reason is the time you have been working in the industry. You said a decade. That means you've seen the internet and the PC. That's it. Not the mainframe era, not the mini era, maybe a bit of the client-server era. Now, consider why the mainframe had trouble competing against the mini, why the mini had trouble competing against PC's in an client-server situation.

  • Pingback: Some interesting links post MWC « Mobile Dev Camp Helsinki

  • Pingback: Some interesting links post MWC « Mobile Dev Camp Helsinki

  • RadicalDog

    Flash CS5 will have tools to publish to the App store. Apple wants Flash games, on the condition it gets paid. Your friend is safer than he thinks. (Unless restrictions on actual performance is sub-par – pray, it will not need much recoding.)

  • http://www.altgate.com/ fnazeeri

    I think the venom (sarcasm?) is misplaced. In my view, Verizon, Sprint, et al are crap…or at least used to be. I've watched companies try to get their apps onto these closed networks. Most fail and the cost is so high that thousands, ne, hundreds of thousands of apps never make it to end users. Apple came along (and lured AT&T into) and made the process of getting an app on a mobile phone several orders of magnitude easier and cheaper. Google is trying to one-up them and make it even easier (by luring Verizon). Do you think that would have happened without Apple? I bet no. Verizon would still be charging $1MM+ to get an app “on the deck”. Indeed Apple may end up getting leapfrogged themselves (haven't we seen that before!), but there is no doubt that Apple transformed the mobile industry with the iPhone and for that I will be forever grateful (although maybe not forever a customer).

  • http://timetogetstarted.wordpress.com/ brett1211

    excellent post. “the future of the mobile internet” would have been a more apt, if less effective name.

    I agree with you about virtually everything but would you agree with me that timing is the greatest risk to your thesis? It could be 3-5 years but it could also be 10 yrs, especially given the current app craziness. I would love to see a more technical analysis/forecast of the evolution of mobile browsing. has anyone seen one?

  • RadicalDog

    Flash CS5 will have tools to publish to the App store. Apple wants Flash games, on the condition it gets paid. Your friend is safer than he thinks. (Unless restrictions on actual performance is sub-par – pray, it will not need much recoding.)

  • fjorge

    My 2 cents,
    First of all, I’m a mobile developer and never took the web 2.0 wagon. So my approach to mobile is different from the Web PC. The mobile is so linked with our life and personal that I tend to see as new body member :) . Never try to port literally a Web site to the mobile phone, or you will not get the advantages of mobile over desktop. You have to give the social, ubiquitous, different inputs, integrated billing, easy to use, properties to mobile. See a service like Google Goggles, that turns a search into a click (take a photo), rather than a “type and click” style from web pc (can´t get much easier than that, except Google read our thoughts). If you try to imitate this approach to desktop, you will see that is stupid.
    Where I disagree with you is the Web on the browser should be the primary target to apps. To deliver “mobile” value to the user we have to access various inputs (voice, photo, video, GPS, accelerometer, etc). The browsers/web technologies/standards can´t keep it up with a tight integration with the mobile phone (maybe in the future –not soon – it will be as we establish in the mobile OSs war). On the design side we have the small screen drama. The HTML technology relies on the “Holly scroll” to deliver the content and actualy is not have the creative flexivility to create an easy to use app. Besides in a no-touch phone you only get a slight improvement from 2000 wap technology (added color). On “always connected” side we will see soon how “mobile data” will be expensive (MNOs can handle the exponential data demands).

  • http://stevecheney.posterous.com/ steve cheney

    thanks for the clarification – we are both in agreement then. here are some additional thoughts on the app ecosystem as it relates to Flash and how Apple's stance to keep Flash out may impact developers working on HTML-5 and the standards stuff. Plenty of secondary effects…

    http://stevecheney.posterous.com/the-real-reaso

  • http://stevecheney.posterous.com/ steve cheney

    thanks for the clarification – we are both in agreement then. here are some additional thoughts on the app ecosystem as it relates to Flash and how Apple’s stance to keep Flash out may impact developers working on HTML-5 and the standards stuff. Plenty of secondary effects…

    http://stevecheney.posterous.com/the-real-reason-apple-hates-flash-part-ii

  • test

    test

  • http://www.roadtofailure.com lusciouspear

    I agree with you — our startup (Drawn to Scale) is very focused fact that more and more verticals (especially “Mobile”, whatever that means) will be in “the cloud”, and that companies are going to take a more “Cloudy” approach to their data.

    The one key benefit of “Apps” is that you can fully utilize the sensors of your environment. If you're a true “webapp with mobile version”, then you can only code for the least common denominator handset.

    Maybe some future framework/ HTML5.5 will address this. Although I'm not sure how — I'm not a front-end engineer :)

  • test

    test

  • http://www.roadtofailure.com lusciouspear

    I agree with you — our startup (Drawn to Scale) is very focused fact that more and more verticals (especially “Mobile”, whatever that means) will be in “the cloud”, and that companies are going to take a more “Cloudy” approach to their data.

    The one key benefit of “Apps” is that you can fully utilize the sensors of your environment. If you're a true “webapp with mobile version”, then you can only code for the least common denominator handset.

    Maybe some future framework/ HTML5.5 will address this. Although I'm not sure how — I'm not a front-end engineer :)

  • http://www.jacobspaulsen.com/ Jacob Paulsen

    Thank you for saying it. I couldn't agree more and I hope that companies will wise up and move past this phase as quickly as possible.

  • http://www.jacobspaulsen.com/ Jacob Paulsen

    Thank you for saying it. I couldn't agree more and I hope that companies will wise up and move past this phase as quickly as possible.

  • @ErnsTweets

    Agreem in general. The future of mobile is the web. But a couple apps are better 'app' based than on the “web.”

  • Pingback: The history and future of the mobile web. | Open attitude.

  • @ErnsTweets

    Agreem in general. The future of mobile is the web. But a couple apps are better 'app' based than on the “web.”

  • Pingback: Entrepreneurship, Reminders and Legal Aid - The Advisor

  • http://www.mocospace.com/ Jamie Hall

    Couldn't agree more, and this has been our strategy building MocoSpace, our mobile social network with over 10 million members, the vast majority of which use us on the mobile Web (and from the US). So it's definitely possible to build a viable, successful product on the mobile Web, even today.

  • http://www.mocospace.com/ Jamie Hall

    Couldn't agree more, and this has been our strategy building MocoSpace, our mobile social network with over 10 million members, the vast majority of which use us on the mobile Web (and from the US). So it's definitely possible to build a viable, successful product on the mobile Web, even today.

  • Pingback: Red Giant Consulting: High Tech Marketing Consultant

  • Pingback: McGuire’s Law » Blog Archive » Observations: Applications - March 10, 2010

  • Julius

    This was an excellent article. Thanks.

  • Julius

    This was an excellent article. Thanks.

  • Julius

    This was an excellent article. Thanks.

  • http://www.hotelcomentarios.com Hoteles

    With the exception of A, all of things you mention should concern a “regular” website as well and will more and more as time goes by. For example — a mapping website should be able to know where I am regardless of whether I am accessing it via a phone. And I would hope that hardware vendors and browser vendors will collaborate to make this happen. Some devices will not have some capabilities (e.g. motion) but that should be the exception rather than the rule in the future.

  • http://alquilerdegoletas.net Goletas en Ibiza

    The problem with “mobile web” is that it's currently not good enough. It's mostly read-only, with some keyboard data entry.

    The sensor part of mobile phones will be very important: location, compass, video-camera, audio microphone, photo (barcode scanners), other devices like heart-rate monitors, credit-card readers, chemical sensors, temperature, rfid, etc. The mobile phone will be your mobile data entry device, digitizing the outside world.

    For the “mobile web” to succeed we need good javascript access to all the sensors on a mobile phone. Some progress is being made in this area (location eg), but a lot more is needed.


Mark Suster is a 2x entrepreneur who has gone to the Dark Side of VC. He joined GRP Partners in 2007 as a General Partner after selling his company to Salesforce.com. He focuses on early-stage technology companies. Read more about Mark.

subscribe to both sides of the table

Subscribe to my RSS Feed