Mobile 2.0 – A conceptual diagram ..

When I spoke at the keynote at Web 2.0 expo , I ended up speaking about Mobile 2.0.

I have traditionally defined the term Mobile Web 2.0 as opposed to Mobile 2.0 (which is the title of the book Mobile Web 2.0 written by me and Tony Fish ).

In our book Mobile Web 2.0, we define the term Mobile Web 2.0 as extending the idea of Web 2.0 to Mobile devices. A more complete definition and the approach behind it can be seen in the blog Of Web 2.0, Mobile Web 2.0 , Blue chairs, Blind men and Elephants – but essentially, it is technology agnostic because we can view the root principle of Web 2.0 as ‘harnessing collective intelligence’ and then extend Mobile Web 2.0 as ‘harnessing collective intelligence using mobile devices’.

Thus, the definition of Mobile Web 2.0, as we define in our book, is

a) Technology agnostic(i.e. any mobile technology can be used to capture intelligence from a mobile device)

b) Capturing intelligence at point of inspiration. The mobile device lends itself very well to this purpose because it is available at the point of inspiration

c) Adding metadata to the harnessed information (for instance location metadata)

d) And in future, we will define ‘Intelligence’ more broadly: For instance through Mobile communities, Identity, Location based tagging and mashups between the Web and the Telco world. Hence, see blogs like Bothered 2.0 from Tony ..

However, coming back to Mobile 2.0 (as opposed to Mobile Web 2.0)

Mobile 2.0 is a term first used by Daniel Appelquist and then also elaborated by Rudy De Waele .

For my O Reilly Web 2.0 expo keynote, I referred to some work by both Dan and Rudy and came up with the diagram as below.

mobile%2020%20conceptual%20diagram1.jpg

Its self explanatory and it also follows from my work with IMS at Oxford university , talk about IMS in Monaco and my work with Frauenhofer fokus .

Essentially, we talked of abstracting the network at an API level. The first step in evolution is IMS – the ultimate stage is a ‘mashup’ for the lack of a better word between the Web and the Telco world.

To come from the world today to the world of Mobile 2.0, we need a few other things to happen – for instance Open Standards, Devices accessing multiple networks and so on

Seek your thoughts on this

Feel free to use the diagram referring back to this blog. Download a high res version here: Mobile 2.0 conceptual diagram

Comments

  1. Thanks for this! Very helpful. I started trying to track and define some characteristics of what I called (for want of a better name) Voice 2.0 Applications. See my slides here (especially last few):
    http://www.slideshare.net/sos100/voice-20-talk-at-barcampdublin-april-07/1
    Anyway – will incorporate your diagram in to this presentation if that’s ok, and try and onward-develop the characteristics of Voice 2.0 apps and cycle that back to you.
    Totally agree on the open standards theme, and web-meets-telco: from our side, we just want the whole telephony system(s) to be presented as a set of APIs (a la Parlay, except for reall app development). This is why SIP in particular is used in a LOT of these new Voice 2.0 apps (easy, simple API, web compatible, yada yada).
    Cheers,Sean

  2. Ajit Jaokar says:

    thanks sean. feel free to use the slides. Shall have a look at your work. Your app is quite interesting. contact me by email and happy to blog about it (ajit.jaokar at futuretext.com) rgds Ajit

  3. James Pearce says:

    You know, I do try to follow your tenacious attempts to pin a label on the way that mobile is evolving.
    But I’m struggling now. “Technology agnostic” and then your slide is a list of technologies?
    I can see that a lot of effort goes into shuffling all this year’s buzzwords and solutions to industry issues into one place.
    However this diagram leaves me a wholly unenlightened. (No doubt it requires spoken elaboration!)
    Sorry.
    The evolution of today’s on-line world (i.e. its mobilisation) is inevitable. Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide are working hard to try to make it a reality, perhaps some even unwittingly.
    But do we really need to expend so much energy deciding what to call it? JFDI I say ;-)

  4. Ajit Jaokar says:

    thanks James. actually .. the best way is to follow the links from Dan and Rudy .. I will try and offer an explanation but I did not since the links should be fine (I think) .. rgds Ajit