• On TV.com: BATTLESTAR Galactica Maxim Photoshoot
April 3, 2009 4:00 AM PDT

The once and future app store

by Tom Krazit

LAS VEGAS--It seems there are going to be as many ways to run a mobile application store as there are stores themselves.

RIM's BlackBerry App World is a model of how mobile OS vendors are trying to balance consumer needs and carrier needs.

(Credit: Maggie Reardon/CNET)

One of the big topics this week at CTIA 2009 has been mobile applications, as Research in Motion unveiled BlackBerry App World and Microsoft talked about its forthcoming Windows Marketplace for Mobile. The dam has truly broken with mobile applications; for years, most consumers seemed indifferent to third-party applications, but now they are viewed as an essential part of any smartphone, just like they are on a PC or Mac.

Most of the credit for that trend has been prompted by the success of Apple's App Store, as both Apple's friends and enemies in the mobile world will readily admit. But few competitors are attempting to pull off Apple's my-way-or-the-highway approach, preferring to integrate the wireless carriers in a nod to the entrenched power those companies have in the mobile world.

Some might argue that's because they don't have devices with the consumer cachet of the iPhone. But it's clear after talking to several companies on the sidelines at CTIA that they think there's a way to make sure they offer quality software to their customers without cutting the carrier almost completely out of the equation, as Apple has done with AT&T.

Still, the burning question is whether the carriers and handset makers will permit software companies to do what they do best, or whether they will continue to try to put their stamp on mobile application development in order to avoid their possible fates as "dumb pipes" or widget makers.

"There's a big measure of trust there," said Morgan Gillis, executive director of the LiMo Foundation, which was created by a foundation of carriers and handset makers to develop software that provides a common underpinning for developers to write mobile applications. "We have to trust that the companies that build the devices and the operators that package this know what they are doing."

The idea of mobile application stores is not new, but the faster networks and more sophisticated devices available these days have created a way for users to download applications directly to their device, bypassing the PC altogether. There are various ways that mobile companies are approaching this new reality.

Apple's approach has been covered exhaustively. But Apple has a unique advantage compared with its competitors: its applications only have to support two devices that are essentially identical (the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G), and for the most part Apple works only with a single wireless carrier per country. Therefore, it can have a central application store and guarantee that those applications will work on any iPhone, and at the same time not have to worry as much about ensuring its carrier partners have unique ways to sell the same phone.

Billing strategies
But while RIM, for example, is launching BlackBerry App World with the money flowing outside of the carrier's control through an exclusive relationship with PayPal, co-CEO Jim Balsillie made it clear that he would find a way to make sure the carriers have a chance to participate in the billing for those applications. "Different carriers have different billing strategies, so it's quite frankly a bunch of work," he told The Wall Street Journal.

Microsoft is likewise steering a middle ground, with plans to let carriers offer their own "store within a store" inside Windows Marketplace for Mobile and giving users the option to choose how they want to be billed: directly via credit card or through their monthly wireless bill.

The idea that the carrier owns the billing relationship with the end user for almost all of the mobile experience is virtually sacrosanct for everyone but Apple and AT&T. But there is a concern among some in the mobile industry that carriers will extend that relationship to demand a role in creating software and services for end users marked with their own brand.

Verizon did nothing to assuage those fears by announcing plans to join the Joint Innovation Lab (JIL) this week, essentially signaling that it plans to make sure Verizon-stamped software appears on future handsets regardless of what operating system is running underneath the layer presented to a phone's user.

To be fair, there are valid reasons why carriers are so concerned about the types of applications that run on their networks. Modern wireless networks are more fragile than one might think, as demonstrated by the problems AT&T encountered when iPhone-bearing geeks descended on Austin, Texas, for SXSW 2009 and brought local AT&T data service to a crawl.

Still, Aaron Woodman, a director in Microsoft's mobile communications business, thinks carriers fundamentally understand the shift that has taken place in the mobile industry over the last several years.

Form vs. functionality
For years, the business of selling mobile phones was about making sure you had phones that looked good and ensuring distribution ran like a clock, Woodman said. But over the last decade, business phone users started to demand features in addition to style, and that trend has exploded with the consumer demand sparked by the iPhone.

"People all of the sudden were walking in and asking for core level of functionality, and that started to change the conversation from about sourcing devices to functionality," Woodman said. "That functionality is going to be very difficult for operators to provide with significant help from others. Expertise and experience (in one area) doesn't yield expertise and experience in another area."

Organizations like Symbian, which controls the world's leading smartphone operating system, believe the balanced answer is to create an "app mall" rather than an "app store," according to David Wood, executive vice president for research at the Symbian Foundation.

For example, Symbian will do the dirty work of processing, certifying, and hosting the applications, but will give its various partners their own storefronts within that mall to sell Symbian-certified applications as they see fit. Microsoft's approach is somewhat similar. This way, carriers can feel they still have the opportunity to sell their software and services to end users without operating system vendors having to cede control of the user experience on a modern smartphone.

As has been often stated, the beauty of the modern mobile computing market is that established business models and philosophies from the PC market or older cellular phone market aren't necessarily relevant: several executives will (privately) admit they are essentially making this up as they go along.

There's little doubt that Apple's iPhone has shaken up this market the way Apple's Macintosh shook up the personal computing market 25 years ago. But unlike the past, several companies--not just two--are going to dictate the future of the truly personal computer.

And since different people want different things from their mobile phones, there's room for more than one approach to selling smartphones and mobile applications. There is not, however, room for seven approaches, which means operating system vendors, handset makers, and carriers will have to be extremely vigilant about evolving customer perferences in a world where consumer tastes can change virtually overnight.

Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom.

Recent posts from CTIA show
Jabra Halo makes its debut
Wi-Ex shows new cell phone signal boosters
On Call: Lessons from CTIA
CTIA 2009 wrap-up
Brief look at the LG Wine
Samsung to launch two Android devices in U.S.
LG Banter also available from U.S. Cellular
BlueAnt announces the BlueAnt S1
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (23 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by mobilemavy April 3, 2009 5:56 AM PDT
SO FAR, THE CARRIERS HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES TO BE JUST LIKE MICROSOFT: CLUELESS EMPTY SUITS WHO KNOW NOTHING. IF IT WASN'T FOR APPLE, RIM WOULD STILL
BE MAKING TINY LITTLE CHANCES TO TINY LITTLE KEYS AND CALLING THAT INNOVATION.
Reply to this comment
by dean.collins April 3, 2009 6:13 AM PDT
When is someone going to open up a multiplatform mobile appstore?



Ex.

http://iphone.mobileappstore.com

and

http://windows.mobileappstore.com



If a particular manufacturer wanted something they could set up http://samsung.mobileappstore.com





what do you think?



Cheers,

Dean
Reply to this comment
by halsue2 April 3, 2009 6:26 AM PDT
I think you are wasting space with double and triple lines
by inachu1 April 3, 2009 6:40 AM PDT
I agree 100% its a device like a pc is a device.
To act like Apple then Windows computers should only have applications made by Microsoft on it.

For Apple telling me what is and isn't allowed on a mobile device is pretty insane.
That would be like underwear makers saying that only skinny people are allowed to wear their products.
by BogusBasin April 3, 2009 7:07 AM PDT
That's right. Only buy phones that the vendor packs with "features" like flash. Only buy phones from vendors that allow any and all applications to run on them. Oh wait, you can get that right now! Hurry, run out and buy a Windows Mobile based phone before they are all gone! You are gonna absolutely love it! Soooo much better than that "closed" iPhone that nobody likes. Amen
by Seaspray0 April 3, 2009 7:08 AM PDT
@Tom Krazit. <applause>. Excellent article! All your recent articles have been very good. Keep it up.
Reply to this comment
by cbazza April 3, 2009 7:13 AM PDT
The underwear comment is pretty creative and definitively true and like you I was totally enraged by Apple's policy too. The only good side effect of it for everyone is that it did create a large marketplace for iPhone apps in one place that benefits users and application developers. Hopefully iPhone app developers are making more money with their apps than when using Handango, PalmGear, etc, web stores.
Reply to this comment
by joritian April 3, 2009 7:34 AM PDT
Having 10 years of experience in wireless and mobile software apps, I have had to deal with the telco's for years in attempting to get applications running on their platforms and devices. As long as they continue the "telco" legacy mentality, I don't believe they can pull off creation of another ecosystem that will benefit the consumers or enterprise customers. Its always been about the hardware and the network. They still cannot even get basic web browsing and internet access to work. The barriers and bureaucracy to make progress are huge. For the most part all of the new hype is just a reaction to the delima of "what do we do about apple". I hope I'm wrong, but I dont think there is a goal of opening up to the masses as apple has done, but rather how do control the industry and insure we are all getting a cut. This stifles much of the creativity required to move the industry forward.
Reply to this comment
by professionaladventurer April 3, 2009 7:34 AM PDT
Most of the people who read these CNet blogs are geeks and I am sure you types know all kind of cool stuff. But as I keep posting, it needs to be as easy as possible to get apps on your phone. That means prices AND location. I don't want to search Google every time I need a new App.You get so many false hits of pages filled with spam and spyware. I am happy with the Apple app store. I go there, find the app and buy, I don't have to worry about downloading a virus (yet) from a company and website I have never heard of.
Reply to this comment
by ctbcctbc April 3, 2009 8:27 AM PDT
professionaladventurer nailed it on the head. People trust in Apple's app store; they trust the apps in there. It's not just that there's a central place for downloading apps, it's that Apple instills a sense of quality/value in the apps themselves.

That said, people should be aware that Apple can't test every feature of an app. For example, I'm concerned about apps that access my address book. Such apps could also send this information to a third-party server, without my knowledge.
by catch23 April 3, 2009 8:36 AM PDT
That is just a BS, Apple apologist excuse. There is no reason that you can't do both; Offer a store with vetted software, and still allow your users to load software directly from third parties.
Those 2 ideas are not in conflict.
Apple tells you how to use the equipment you paid for, plain and simple.
by Seaspray0 April 3, 2009 9:28 AM PDT
I agree, professionaladventurer. Having apps in a centralized location is convenient. The consumer benefits. But restricting it to a single location places alot of control over who operates that location. There's no competition. I'd like to see free market applied to that where an application programmer has the choice to put it on a store or distribute from the web. Then we'd see competition and again, the consumer would benefit.
by stigmattaman April 3, 2009 8:24 AM PDT
Nice article Tom - I couldn't find one thing to b*tch about, and I'm a jerk!
Reply to this comment
by awaybbl April 3, 2009 8:36 AM PDT
One important aspect that is missing from the "stores" is the wares. The success of Apple's App Store isn't the process, or the ease of billing. It's the content and variety of available software.

RIM and MicroSoft have had their devices in the market for much longer times, and their numbers are much higher than Apple, but because of the ease for DEVLOPERS to build and publish their apps in Apple's app store it's not surprising that Apple has nearly 30,000 apps in it's store. Compare that to less than 600 in RIM's store. As a developer, I am writting apps for iPhone/iPod, and will look at RIM too, but nothing compares to Apple's SDK and tools.
Reply to this comment
by justinrez April 3, 2009 8:50 AM PDT
This author needs to PROOF-READ articles! SERIOUSLY!!
Reply to this comment
by Dr_Wright April 3, 2009 8:53 AM PDT
Clearly RIMM had to do something big enough to match Apple's App Store or risk losing market share to the iphone. Though the recent numbers show that BlackBerry sales are stronge and RIMM's market share is still incresasing anyways. What will really be interesting is the net affect the App World has on RIMM's stock price. Though right now their stock is shooting through the roof on their financial news. If anyone is interested, we are running a prediction market on RIMM's stock. You can check it out by googling eLab eXchange.
Reply to this comment
by cbishopTMS April 3, 2009 9:15 AM PDT
I just checked out the Blackberry App World last night. Seems pretty easy to use and fast. Found some cool apps on there.

Chris
http://www.pain-free-it.com
Reply to this comment
by iPhoneUser April 3, 2009 11:06 AM PDT
What's the best fart app for the BBerry? If your phone can't fart, it's not truly a smartphone.
by iPhoneUser April 3, 2009 11:03 AM PDT
Great article Tom.

It upsets me that telcoms are not treated differently than other businesses. They provide services that are essential to the functioning world, and you arguably cannot go without them even for one day. Because of this fact, their businesses should face far more scrutiny than say a doughnut shop. Their mentality of controlling devices, limiting network bandwidth, and incremental connection speed upgrades does nothing but stifle development and progress.

Tom eluded to the fragility of these wireless networks with the AT&T/SXSW example. Why are these telcoms not forced into building their infrastructures to be incredibly stable? How useful is LTE or WiMax going to be when you can't download files larger than 10MB, can't get on iTunes or your media store of choice, etc unless you are on WiFi? (this is Apple's/AT&T's policy with the iPhone for those that don't know)

Verizon may be signing its own death warrant if it thinks customers like using their Verizon-Bloatware OS and will plan to implement that in future models. I can't wait to see that go up against all the open source OSs out there now. Guess we can all stop holding our collective breaths for a Verizon iPhone...not going to happen.
Reply to this comment
by Mary7Lynn April 3, 2009 11:55 AM PDT
It?s pretty comparable with iPhone App Store while they only have very small portion of BB apps on it.

One thing it?s better than iPhone Store ? GPS Navigation App. However they got a lousy $99.99 nav app there which no one will buy. They have another so call free one while it costs $99.99 to activate.

For some reason, the free an most popular BB GPS/Navigation app LifeInPocket is missing. (http://LifeInPocket.com) Probably because it?s free?
Reply to this comment
by Renegade Knight April 3, 2009 12:27 PM PDT
It's all about money for them. For me it's all about the app doing the job I need. The harder they make it for me to do the job I want to do, the less money for someone out there to make.

A lot of my apps are written by hobbiests. They don't "make the grade" for the big league and the developer who's giving away his producth as to jump through hoops and pay money to be in an app store so they can give away their app. Thus the app stores overlook and discourage these free but valuable gems that make my life easier. Later I overlook the platforms that don't do the job and stick with the ones that do.
Reply to this comment
by rouse51 April 4, 2009 10:06 AM PDT
I think everyone misses the point here. Apple tells you what apps can go on its store the same as verizon tells you what phone you can use with the service, the same as cable tells you what station belongs on there cable. When you buy a device you buy a service and the company tells you what service you will get based on there market strategy and the promise they make to there stockholders to be profitable. And yes there are underwear makers that only make underwear for skinny people. When have you seen fat people in Victoria Secret? The real question is this, if you have Verizon and you want the apps are you willing to pay the .99 per mb charge to download it on top of buying the app. I will take restrictive apps and and free downloads over garbage apps with a fee and a .99 per MB download any day. For people that hate apples model don't buy there products. For people that want stable virus free software apple is your company. If you want to have the instability that has come with windows and other companies without quality control go with RIM. I really don't see why all of these geeks are complaining. Heck if you want freedom jailbreak your ipod but don't complain when it doesn't work the same as the rest of apples products.
Reply to this comment
by undacovabrotha April 6, 2009 1:52 PM PDT
RIM, iTunes app store [Apple seems to be reporting a strangely high number and I think there store is including music downloads and not separating apps], samsung app store, window app store, android apps store and the list goes on.

Only one problem and that is you can find all of this stuff at www.getjar.com and apparently they are already beating the pants off all of these other app stores combined.
Reply to this comment
(23 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

About CTIA show

The CTIA show highlights the latest in hot cell phones, accessories, and services. CNET brings you the top wireless news from the conference.

Add this feed to your online news reader

CTIA show topics