.mobi .Mobi optimized for Iphone

[binaryman]

Collected some links with relevance to the Iphone/.Mobi controversy. I think the two will complement each other.

Free Iphone websites.
http://idude.mobi/
http://ikidz.mobi/

Some interesting viewpoints:
http://blog.rafaelsosa.com/2007/06/08/apple-iphone-could-hurt-the-mobi-extension/

http://www.thewhir.com/blogs/Isabel-Wang/index.cfm/2007/1/10/Safari-is-the-new-dot-mobi


James Pearce from .Mobi on the Iphone:
http://pc.dev.mobi/node/147

This site's got it right
http://www.pr-inside.com/excitement-over-iphone-debut-draws-attention-r155470.htm


Excitement over iPhone Debut Draws Attention to .MOBI Domains
http://www.sanepr.com/Excitement-over-iPhone-Debut-Draws-Attention-to-MOBI-Domains_18370.cfm

My reply to a doomsday prophet.
http://www.blackhatdomainer.com/why-the-iphone-killed-the-mobi-domains-dream/#comment-44

 

[ezinaz]

Thanks binary. Excellent information. Thanks for collecting.

I like this quote by James Pearce:

But here's the thing. I believe .mobi is about so much more than just small, compliant markup that will reliably work on all handsets. It's also about the context of mobility: it's about a web user inferring that the provider of the site has thought through what he or she, on the move, wants to do on that site.

Or to put it another way, with an acid test: if I was on the move, was running Internet Explorer 7 or Firefox 2 on my phone, and I knew that the site I want has both .com and .mobi addresses, which would I choose?

It's easy: device and browser regardless, I still want to go to the site that targets my particular context (a human on the move). And that would be the .mobi address.

What he's suggesting here it seems is that .mobi might could become a indication to the user of the intent of the site, that it is meant for those on the go (not just for those with tiny screens). I like this thought, and think that it is important for us to market our .mobi's with this in mind.

I'm thinking of slogans like: ".mobi, it's not your parents .com..." or "Let your mom go to .com."

.mobi could indicate cutting edge, for those on the go, those who embrace the mobile web. New, exciting web sites, with new abilities for those on the go.

If .mobi can fill this space, then it will be successful beyond our dreams.

 

[garrett200]

I certainly don't think the iPhone is the death of .mobi, but mTLD better get moving getting these so called "backers" to start promoting .mobi pretty soon, or I think it probably will die on the vine, and as you know I'm a big .mobi supporter.

There are major problems with viewing regular .com's on your phone, the most inherent being the size issue and download speed. If these issues are resolved before the "backers" start "backing", I don't think it's going to fly.

There are big time arguments that can be made in favor of .mobi at this point. Key words "at this point". If things don't get rolling soon, I'm afraid we might run out of hope to cling to.

Time to get in the game mTLD!!!!

Get those RFP's released and get Nokia/Samsung, Google, et al to start promoting it! Even I am starting to get impatient and wonder about mTLD's intentions at this point. I thought supporters were there to support? What's going on, why haven't they done anything? Why is Google not promoting .mobi? That would be an ace in the hole as far as I'm concerned.

As I've already said, and everyone here knows, I'm a big .mobi supporter. But, come on, the time has come for them to start showing us results because technology and competitors are right on their heels.

I'm not complaining. I took the risk and invested in some names. Whatever happens happpens. I would just like to know if this whole thing has just been one big money grab, or not. The clock is ticking......

P.S. - I'm not regging or buying any more names until something substantial from mTLD starts happening. I'm done for now.

 

[-REECE-]

I certainly don't think the iPhone is the death of .mobi, but mTLD better get moving getting these so called "backers" to start promoting .mobi pretty soon, or I think it probably will die on the vine, and as you know I'm a big .mobi supporter.

There are major problems with viewing regular .com's on your phone, the most inherent being the size issue and download speed. If these issues are resolved before the "backers" start "backing", I don't think it's going to fly.

Agreed. I'm developing my favorite name (and best one IMO). I've always believed that a generic in any extension could be successful if properly developed + marketed. Will be putting that to the test in a few months! I really do hope the backers start "backing big time" and everything is fine and dandy but I'm not going to wait on them or mtld... We can make quite the impact ourselves if we all put our best efforts forward

 

[PVFARKAS]

Jobs shoots himself in the foot

i have been working out the concepts of the internet, the mobile internet and the watered-down internet for some time. Here are my thoughts on why Jobs shoots himself in the foot.

He sticks to the internet as the way it was and has been. He brags that his device brings that to you and tries to negate or minimize competition by saying others will only bring the "mobile" and "watered-down" internet. But it is not a forward concept, nor necessarily what a large share of the public wants.

He attacks the very word mobile and insists the PC style experience is what you're after. Go to any site zoom in, scroll down. Thouh unaware if the experience is smooth and likeable (I'll assume it is), a faction of the populus will have the desire for short and sweet as they are on the go, without leisure time, like other nice phones coming out and/or will not have the ability, be it financial, contract plans or other business phones. Some may want to sift through the "old" internet sites for what they want. many will not.

He attacks .mobi with mobile and watered-down perhaps. But watered-down is what some users want. (I think it will be more than some, but trying to stay minimalist).

Jobs does what us attorneys do all of the time. either argue the law or argue the facts. He can't say we're the internet, you're not. He can only differentiate the facts by saying we're good, you're not us, you're watered-down. You're mobile (I don't get that one). But, conversely, it also means we have too much stuff, we're too verbose, you have bullet-points, an outline, more structured, more meat, less potatoes. He tries to infer that he is the only one with surfacing technology. He infers that .mobi is inferior and has to be that way without the cool technology. On the flip side, anyone can surface, it will be more apparent when the surface comes out. (And it is cool) But .mobi has utility, it may be less cool, but how offen are things that provide quick, reliable function cool? They are useful. .mobi is thin to be useful.

I say .mobi its the mobile internet without the fluff. Its the meat without the potatoes. Its geared torward utility.

you bring the full site and we're watered down? it's no fluff
you are the internet and we're mobile internet? it's the new internet

who's cool now, Jobs?

 

[garrett200]

This iPhone thing is really a turning point for .mobi. Not because the thing is exceptional, but just because of the sheer promotion of the thing. I don't watch much TV, but when I do I invariably see one of their commercial spots.

They WILL sell tens of thousands, if not millions, of these things.

The real test is whether the public accepts their version of the 'regular, non-watered down' internet on a cell phone type device.

We all know the disadvantages to viewing regular .com's on small devices. But in the end, it's going to be the consumer who decides whether they prefer mobile compliant, or 'regular'.

It's not up to Steve Jobs, mTLD, .mobi supporters, .mobi bashers, or anyone else. It's up to the consumer. The market will give the consumer what they want, it's that simple. If they want fast content that fits the screen properly, .mobi is going to be successful. If they are content with 'zooming and scrolling' and the longer wait time for .com's to pull up, then .mobi will most likely not make it.

If Job's gets a report a couple months from now that says that his customers prefer mobile compliant sites, guess what, that's what he will give them.

That's the situation as I see it right now. The market will provide what the consumer demands. That simple. Now we just need to see what the consumer will demand.

 

[scandiman]

Increasingly the iPhone user experience reminds me of how early websites would publish print content, scan a page and post the jpeg. The content was not redesigned for the new medium. Mobile devices are a new medium. Using tech to view a part of the page via mobile is like reading the newspaper with a magnifying glass. It may work but it is hardly the experience intended by the original design.

For mobile web use to flourish, content needs to be appropriately presented for the medium.

 

[garrett200]

For mobile web use to flourish, content needs to be appropriately presented for the medium.

It depends on what your definition of "appropriately presented" is. If consumers love regular browsing on the iPhone, then that will be the trend for others to follow, and it will be deemed 'appropriately presented'.

On the other hand, if the user hates the experience of the regular web on this thing, then mobile compliant sites will carry that title.

It doesn't matter how we feel about it, the user will be the one to make the decision. I am inclined to think that they won't like the initial experience, and that's where .mobi comes to the rescue. We won't know for a while what the public really wants.

 

[ezinaz]

Increasingly the iPhone user experience reminds me of how early websites would publish print content, scan a page and post the jpeg. The content was not redesigned for the new medium. Mobile devices are a new medium. Using tech to view a part of the page via mobile is like reading the newspaper with a magnifying glass. It may work but it is hardly the experience intended by the original design.

For mobile web use to flourish, content needs to be appropriately presented for the medium.

It reminds me of when I set my Windows screen resolution larger than what my monitor can support, and when you get to the edge of the monitor there is more content off the screen. I could only stand that setup for a couple minutes before I get flustered.

What I don't get is... .mobi detractors are saying how it's all "one Internet" and we can just use browser detection to customize the view depending on the device. But in this case, they are saying screw the device, we'll just present it one way and you can zoom in/zoom out. I don't believe this is going to work and content providers will end up creating "iphone" specific views anyways. Of course, the .mobi camp will have handled this all along anyways.

 

[DomainMayhem.com]

I agree garrett, the public will be used to using their mobile devices, but will not like the slowness and difficult navigation of the other tlds. Then the word will spread, "No, you're using the wrong extension, you gotta use .mobi for it to work right!" Word of mouth will do the trick, but first they have got to start really using the internet on their mobile devices. After that .mobi's time will come.

 

[garrett200]

After that .mobi's time will come.

There is still a risk that it's time will never come if:

1. People don't mind the hassle with viewing regular .com's, zoom/scroll.
2. The 'auto detection' technology spreads faster than .mobi is promoted and it never catches on.
3. The "backers" never start "backing".
4. We're all just being hosed by mTLD, and they were only out to make a quick buck.

If one or two, or more of these things happen, .mobi is at risk. Again, I hope none of these things ever happen.

 

[Badger]

There is still a risk that it's time will never come if:

1. People don't mind the hassle with viewing regular .com's, zoom/scroll.
2. The 'auto detection' technology spreads faster than .mobi is promoted and it never catches on.
3. The "backers" never start "backing".
4. We're all just being hosed by mTLD, and they were only out to make a quick buck.

If one or two, or more of these things happen, .mobi is at risk. Again, I hope none of these things ever happen.

I guess that these points would be the main negative (and might i say well thought out objective) points to the potential pitfalls of the extension.

However, if we can all agree that these are perhaps the main reasons for .mobis potential failure, it almost makes the potential gain multiples a worthwhile risk.. Does for me anyway.

nice thread all....

 

[garrett200]

I guess that these points would be the main negative (and might i say well thought out objective) points to the potential pitfalls of the extension.

However, if we can all agree that these are perhaps the main reasons for .mobis potential failure, it almost makes the potential gain multiples a worthwhile risk.. Does for me anyway.

nice thread all....

I agree that the benefits outweight the risks, that's why I invested in this in the first place.

We have a good shot at .mobi being a success, but we need to keep in mind these pitfalls too.

See, there's the difference between objectively pointing out the pitfalls of .mobi, and creating a thread entitled "iphone annihilates .mobi" just to start a fight.

 

[Badger]

See, there's the difference between objectively pointing out the pitfalls of .mobi, and creating a thread entitled "iphone annihilates .mobi" just to start a fight.

:bingo: rep added...