I don't know about that. I wonder if anyone would miss all the descriptions of fast networks, speeds, etc. if they disappeared tomorrow from consumer marketing.
I think consumers would be satisfied if you tell them the price, tell them what they're getting for the price, and tell them why you're a better company than the other guys.
Consumers spend no time at all thinking about the network (until, that is, it stops working). So why remind them in marketing and advertising pitches when you're trying to sell them fun, connectivity, and a new experience?
Phone companies are well phone companies. They build, operate and market networks. That is what they are at the core. I am being a bit simplistic here but it is one of the reason the app is really outside their domain. They just don't have the connection to what the consumer/business user wants and does. Especially the younger consumer.
Let me throw this out to illustrate what I mean: How many Telco (and add in Cable) executives play on-line games or use Twitter in any meaningful way?
This site (and rightly so) used to laugh at Tellabs about the Echo Boomer campaign. But are the Telco guys any less crusted over than Tellabs?
Great point Phil -- I think you see the carriers now struggling to explain exactly why 4G is any better. I mean, lightning bolts are great but when you add that do the data caps you get... lightning fast usage of your monthly totals.
Seems like there needs to be a full revamp of market-think; people understand generally how phones work and calling it something different doesn't make it different. Everyone gets that the iPhone is a great device. Everyone quickly understood the app store. None of that, by the way, was born in telco marketing land.
Great point Phil -- I think you see the carriers now struggling to explain exactly why 4G is any better. I mean, lightning bolts are great but when you add that do the data caps you get... lightning fast usage of your monthly totals.
Seems like there needs to be a full revamp of market-think; people understand generally how phones work and calling it something different doesn't make it different. Everyone gets that the iPhone is a great device. Everyone quickly understood the app store. None of that, by the way, was born in telco marketing land.
To add to your point on the developers. They really want to be able to sold to everyone. If you build your app to work only on Verizon, then it limits your market right out of the gate. So, the APIs the carriers make have to provide functionality that the app developer can sell for more than if they don't use it. Otherwise it makes NO sense for an app developer to focus on a carrier.
Great points, seven. The disconnect is especially evident when it comes to app developers, who are probably playing games 24x7 when they're not writing code. Carriers have no idea how to connect with developers, as you can tell by their historic stumblings and now their attempts to cobble together their own versions of Apple's app store and developer outreach programs.
Maybe that historic network-mind thing is what begat the whole 2G/3G/4G mentality. In their minds, 4G is demonstrably better -- better for them, anyway, when it comes to hauling data. And theoretically it performs better so why shouldn't the users flock to it?
I think what has happened is that because there is no compelling "4G only" app -- something that absolutely will not work at a slower speed -- there is no reason for people to swarm to 4G now. And if there were, the data caps would prevent it from being a Farmville-type avalanche of users. When even the Wall Street Journal is catching up and now reporting what you've read here for a long time -- that caps will keep people from developing and using new types of apps -- you know it's mainstream and that the carriers have a real problem. Charging the app developers for the access isn't going to solve the problem either.
Great points, seven. The disconnect is especially evident when it comes to app developers, who are probably playing games 24x7 when they're not writing code. Carriers have no idea how to connect with developers, as you can tell by their historic stumblings and now their attempts to cobble together their own versions of Apple's app store and developer outreach programs.
Maybe that historic network-mind thing is what begat the whole 2G/3G/4G mentality. In their minds, 4G is demonstrably better -- better for them, anyway, when it comes to hauling data. And theoretically it performs better so why shouldn't the users flock to it?
I think what has happened is that because there is no compelling "4G only" app -- something that absolutely will not work at a slower speed -- there is no reason for people to swarm to 4G now. And if there were, the data caps would prevent it from being a Farmville-type avalanche of users. When even the Wall Street Journal is catching up and now reporting what you've read here for a long time -- that caps will keep people from developing and using new types of apps -- you know it's mainstream and that the carriers have a real problem. Charging the app developers for the access isn't going to solve the problem either.
I agree that telcos have a different mindset than app developers. And it is true that there is no "killer app" for 4G.
It is a bit ironic that one of the most appreciated features of 4G/LTE so far is the short response times, which is truly a life saver for the gamers which you discuss.
Personally, I dont think 4G needs a killer app. It's the Internet, just really fast and everywhere. What else can you ask for? The killer app for 3G was supposed to be video calling, which was a complete disaster but 3G was still a success. Carriers don't need too connect with the app developers - this is the beauty if the Internet architecture.
Plus, and this is important: It's addictive. Remember that awful feeling when you first got used to DSL, and had to go back to modem for some reason? That's the feeling 4G users will get if they go back to 3G.
This whole discussion sounds so familiar. With every new generation of access, fixed or wireless, people have argued that there is no need for these speeds, that it's too expensive, etc. But networks improve, terminals develop, prices fall. Data caps will also rise.
I think operators are quite confused with this whole discussion. They have so many users and so much traffic, despite hefty prices, that they have to introduce data caps and rush their network buildouts.
That's exactly the point jepovic was making - we don't need killer apps - they are already there, or as you put it, the apps are way ahead of the network. So when there is a wireless network that can support those apps, it will be used (eventually) because we already are familiar with (addicted to) them.
History also teaches us that the early adopters pay for the service, and right when everyone is getting comfortable moving to a mobile internet world (with 3G) isn't exactly the best time to introduce the Next Big Thing. Sometimes you have to give the customer a break and let her catch her breath.
jepovic your history points are well taken but I am not so sure that this time technology will bail everyone out. The devices and apps are so far ahead of the network at this point I am not convinced that somehow it will all be taken care of as the technology matures.
As the networks are built today they don't have the spectrum depth necessary to allow everyone to stream video all the time. And that is where we are headed, from an addictive want-to-do standpoint. We're going to need a lot more spectrum to be freed up to handle the demands. It's not going to be a simple fix.
I don't know about that. I wonder if anyone would miss all the descriptions of fast networks, speeds, etc. if they disappeared tomorrow from consumer marketing.
I think consumers would be satisfied if you tell them the price, tell them what they're getting for the price, and tell them why you're a better company than the other guys.
Consumers spend no time at all thinking about the network (until, that is, it stops working). So why remind them in marketing and advertising pitches when you're trying to sell them fun, connectivity, and a new experience?