| | |||||
| ||||||||
| Dot MOBI Discussion of the .MOBI TLD |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
| | THREAD STARTER #1 (permalink) |
| .Pro Regular Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,346
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | Serving Mobile Content .com Vs .mobi One of the arguments used to market .mobi's is that it's simpler for users to remember and type facebook.mobi than mobile.facebook.com, wap.facebook.com, m.facebook.com etc. There are many different ways to serve mobile content straight from a .com without confusing subdomains or alternative extensions. Opera currently suggests 4 options for developers; 1) Browser sniffing (detect browser, serve mobile or desktop content). 2) Create 2 separate sites (note the comment "2 versions of a site means 2 copies of the same content to maintain, which can be a nightmare, and forcing the user to remember 2 URLs can be painful"). 3) Media Types (CSS). 4) Media Queries (CSS with if...else type rules). Here's the full article; http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/h...ent-to-mobile/ The counterargument to this is to say .mobi can still be used to brand context, ie that sites will be geared to people on the move. Brian Fling wrote an excellent article about context and mobile device specific code. http://blueflavor.com/blog/2007/oct/...ise-of-mobile/ I'm still not convinced by this context argument though. What do people want to do on the Internet when they connect via their mobile phone that they don't want to do on their desktop. Find a toilet? Download a song? Find their nearest restaurant? Book a last minute ticket? People would probably still do most of those before leaving home. I can see that there are things you might want to do but in the context of all the services provided on the Internet and where the money is, there isn't much for the mobile web to claim as its own. I can understand the need for mobile device specific code for presentation and layout purposes and agree with Brian that it will be years before technologies like Opera's small screen rendering remove the need for it but I think mobile content willl be served on .coms and not .mobi sites in the long run.
__________________ Total.pro August 2011 registry stats added 4 December 2011 |
| |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,295
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | }}}}}}}I'm scared now{{{{{{{ ????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/dot-mobi/478815-serving-mobile-content-com-vs-mobi.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ OK. To recap the last 20 months of this nonsense. All of mobi-land knows that you can see a .com website on a mobile phone. We know you can find .com websites that have mobile-friendly device detection or m.site.com sections. What all those things do not have is the "branding" of mobi - the sign that they were - from the start - built for mobile use. You can run a motorcycle with auto tires (Br = tyres) but you would not be happy with the result. You can jam an ordinary website onto a mobile, but it was not made for it and things will not work very well. Only .mobi says mobile to the user. Plus all the good names are taken in .com. The mobile web will spawn a vast number of new, different uses for the internet. Those uses will want to be branded as mobile-specific sites. .Mobi will do that. |
| |
| | THREAD STARTER #5 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
| .Pro Regular Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,346
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=478815 I can accept there will be new types of site related to your physical whereabouts (eg. nearest restaurant, toilet, directions etc) but I don't see where the vast number of new mobile uses of the Internet will come from. I think there will be a massive increase in desktop Internet usage but I can't think of that many things people will want to do on their mobile that they can't do on their desktop.
__________________ Total.pro August 2011 registry stats added 4 December 2011 | ||||||||||||
| |
| | #6 (permalink) | ||||
| NamePros Regular Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 312
![]() ![]() |
History Lesson: Amazon.com - Circa 1995 They went with .com in their official name to alert consumers they were internet "pure plays"... Meaning they could only be found on the web. That was a big deal back then because most companies who wanted any shred of crediblity "shunned" using .com in their official brand name. Fastforward to 2008. If you are trying to market a mobile product or service you CERTAINLY could use a .com address. I've proven that. However in using a .com, you do have to make it clear it's a mobile product or service you are selling. Whereas if you use a .mobi. You don't have to educate the consumer very much. If I see, Gotcha.mobi vs Gotcha.com in a magazine (I've never heard of the company before) I know instantly with Gotcha.mobi I can punch it up on my mobile...which I probably will do. ????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=478815 I have no idea with Gotcha.com what product or service they are selling until I do so further reading. The owners of Gotcha.com are really going to have to educate the consumer they are a mobile "pure play". Even if it were a PC website, I still don't know what Gotcha.com is since the brand of .com is so broad. They are going to have to market by radio, TV, and the internet to raise awareness of their brand. Yeah, it's not pretty that four letter extension, but it's going to get the job done... which is to educate the consumer with the least amount of time and energy (time+enegry=money)
Last edited by izo-pod; 06-10-2008 at 11:47 PM.
| ||||
| |
| | #8 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sunnyvale Trailer Park
Posts: 1,122
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=478815 We've all been down this road so many times. Typical domainer mentality will just not see it a "need" for it because it will not benefit them. I'd suggest visiting Why.mobi? for more in-depth answers. | ||||||||||||
| |