Comments on: Mobile2.0 needs flat rate billing http://www.m-trends.org/2006/10/mobile20-needs-flat-rate-billing.html About mobile media lifestyle trends. Mon, 07 Jun 2010 11:36:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Shawn McCollum http://www.m-trends.org/2006/10/mobile20-needs-flat-rate-billing.html/comment-page-1#comment-20505 Shawn McCollum Mon, 09 Oct 2006 20:08:09 +0000 http://www.m-trends.org/2006/10/mobile20-needs-flat-rate-billing.html#comment-20505 A flat rate data plan does a great deal to remvoe the fiscal issues for mobile web adoption but there are other issues. I'd like there to be some standardization on authentication schemes that can be incorporated into mobile web browsers. That way I can configure my mobile browser to auto log me into one or more mobile web sites. A lot of passwords for web banking systems are 6+ alpha-numeric characters, joe user is going to get frustrated entering that to see a balance. Actually all the other issues really revolve around the mobile browser. Anyone want to start a topic on mobile web browsers 2.0? A flat rate data plan does a great deal to remvoe the fiscal issues for mobile web adoption but there are other issues. I’d like there to be some standardization on authentication schemes that can be incorporated into mobile web browsers. That way I can configure my mobile browser to auto log me into one or more mobile web sites. A lot of passwords for web banking systems are 6+ alpha-numeric characters, joe user is going to get frustrated entering that to see a balance. Actually all the other issues really revolve around the mobile browser. Anyone want to start a topic on mobile web browsers 2.0?

]]> By: Rudy De Waele http://www.m-trends.org/2006/10/mobile20-needs-flat-rate-billing.html/comment-page-1#comment-20217 Rudy De Waele Sun, 08 Oct 2006 11:43:29 +0000 http://www.m-trends.org/2006/10/mobile20-needs-flat-rate-billing.html#comment-20217 Mike, Thanks for your comment, unfortunately I cannot attend (I'm informing readers, friends and business contacts of course), I think it's great initiative with a perfect timing :-) A good question, why US offer flat rates while it has been slower to implement 3G services then European operators/carriers; maybe because of Google's local Wi-Fi plans and T-Mobile's market opening in that area? US natural new business opportunity sense towards anything Internet? Web2.0 hype? Probably a combination of all, but there is more I guess... Wi-Fi capable phones (802.11) are just coming to market here in Europe and they're expensive so it's going to take some time before users will discover the potential and benefits of its' use. Meanwhile operators are also keeping their wallets as closed as possible and as expensive as possible for mobile web surfers to browse off portal. IT costs me a couple of hundreds Euros extra per month, only using the mobile web... Let's say a couple of high-end phones or nice weekend trips I could afford with this monthly expense ;-) As for Europe's advantage in mobile technology in general, I feel we're loosing it due to the stiffness and un-willingness of the operators to move away from their preferred wallet garden. I think indeed new opportunities lie in the cross-segment mix for them and other mobile value chain players but I cannot see a lot of movement just right now, though internal European markets might differ in flat-rate offering to consumers. Luckily Nokia has understood this and is starting to play it’s own game; starting with giving the user the choice to choose what connection they want to use. For me it's easy from a user perspective: I use Wi-Fi on my mobile phone where I can access it (and that's quite a lot here in the city due to public wi-fi hotspots and the <a href="http://www.fon.com" rel="nofollow">FON</a>-project - FYI -> 80 % of my mobile2.0 use, I'm not on the move (!) and any web service that becomes available on my mobile phone is a new opportunity to become one of my new favourite services, most of these new mobile2.0 opportunities are coming from the US which brings an interesting paradox to the discussion between European operators and US-based start-ups. I'm sure the mobile2.0 event will bring some spice to the discussion; I’m looking forward to read/hear all about it. Hope to see you here during 3GSM! Rudy Mike,

Thanks for your comment, unfortunately I cannot attend (I’m informing readers, friends and business contacts of course), I think it’s great initiative with a perfect timing :-)

A good question, why US offer flat rates while it has been slower to implement 3G services then European operators/carriers; maybe because of Google’s local Wi-Fi plans and T-Mobile’s market opening in that area? US natural new business opportunity sense towards anything Internet? Web2.0 hype? Probably a combination of all, but there is more I guess…

Wi-Fi capable phones (802.11) are just coming to market here in Europe and they’re expensive so it’s going to take some time before users will discover the potential and benefits of its’ use. Meanwhile operators are also keeping their wallets as closed as possible and as expensive as possible for mobile web surfers to browse off portal. IT costs me a couple of hundreds Euros extra per month, only using the mobile web… Let’s say a couple of high-end phones or nice weekend trips I could afford with this monthly expense ;-)

As for Europe’s advantage in mobile technology in general, I feel we’re loosing it due to the stiffness and un-willingness of the operators to move away from their preferred wallet garden. I think indeed new opportunities lie in the cross-segment mix for them and other mobile value chain players but I cannot see a lot of movement just right now, though internal European markets might differ in flat-rate offering to consumers. Luckily Nokia has understood this and is starting to play it’s own game; starting with giving the user the choice to choose what connection they want to use.

For me it’s easy from a user perspective: I use Wi-Fi on my mobile phone where I can access it (and that’s quite a lot here in the city due to public wi-fi hotspots and the FON-project – FYI -> 80 % of my mobile2.0 use, I’m not on the move (!) and any web service that becomes available on my mobile phone is a new opportunity to become one of my new favourite services, most of these new mobile2.0 opportunities are coming from the US which brings an interesting paradox to the discussion between European operators and US-based start-ups. I’m sure the mobile2.0 event will bring some spice to the discussion; I’m looking forward to read/hear all about it.

Hope to see you here during 3GSM!

Rudy

]]> By: Mike Rowehl http://www.m-trends.org/2006/10/mobile20-needs-flat-rate-billing.html/comment-page-1#comment-20159 Mike Rowehl Sun, 08 Oct 2006 04:13:26 +0000 http://www.m-trends.org/2006/10/mobile20-needs-flat-rate-billing.html#comment-20159 Fantastic to hear you're going to be at the conference Rudy, I've been looking forward to meeting you and getting your take on the Barcelona MoMo scene. I hear it's going great. We actually have pretty decent flat rate data plans for mobile here in the US, I've been on one for the last few years and I can say it absolutely changes the way I use my mobile. I had a per-KB plan before that and I would limit my mobile usage frequently because I saw everything I did through the lens of that cost structure. I COULD check my email, but did I NEED to given that I knew it was going to cost me. And I would almost never use the mobile web before the flat rate billing, which was both a function of the limited number of sites I would want to visit anyway and the associated fee. So my question is what breaks down that cost model? I was hoping that the intrusion of 802.11 (in the form of UMA) would drive the carriers to actually compete cross-segment rather than strictly with each other. I had also assumed that the presence of 802.11 in the US was what ended up getting us flat rate data when many other places don't seem to have it yet. Not that I expect the average mobile user to have an 802.11 capable phone, but the availability of the capability I was hoping would at least introduce a little fear. I'm not sure that's the case however. Is wifi why we have flat rate here in the US? The first really publicized flat rate (and reasonably priced) data plans here seem to have happened with the Sidekick. Was it simply a blunder on the part of T-Mo, and once the door was opened a crack everyone was forced to provide the same option? Fantastic to hear you’re going to be at the conference Rudy, I’ve been looking forward to meeting you and getting your take on the Barcelona MoMo scene. I hear it’s going great. We actually have pretty decent flat rate data plans for mobile here in the US, I’ve been on one for the last few years and I can say it absolutely changes the way I use my mobile. I had a per-KB plan before that and I would limit my mobile usage frequently because I saw everything I did through the lens of that cost structure. I COULD check my email, but did I NEED to given that I knew it was going to cost me. And I would almost never use the mobile web before the flat rate billing, which was both a function of the limited number of sites I would want to visit anyway and the associated fee.

So my question is what breaks down that cost model? I was hoping that the intrusion of 802.11 (in the form of UMA) would drive the carriers to actually compete cross-segment rather than strictly with each other. I had also assumed that the presence of 802.11 in the US was what ended up getting us flat rate data when many other places don’t seem to have it yet. Not that I expect the average mobile user to have an 802.11 capable phone, but the availability of the capability I was hoping would at least introduce a little fear. I’m not sure that’s the case however. Is wifi why we have flat rate here in the US? The first really publicized flat rate (and reasonably priced) data plans here seem to have happened with the Sidekick. Was it simply a blunder on the part of T-Mo, and once the door was opened a crack everyone was forced to provide the same option?

]]>