Changing The Meaning Of Mobile

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.bandddesigns.com/mobile.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.bandddesigns.com/mobile.htm</a><br /><br /></div>Since we've been talking about the future of Pocket PCs and Palms the last two days, this essay on "the meaning of mobile" by PPCT reader Danmanmayer might serve as an illustrative point.<br /><br />"Mobile computers serve a different purpose, so why is the software and hardware being designed as if they are used like desktops? Mobile devices are mobile and used on the go, and their design needs to consider this more. Mobile computers have applications developed for them that are emulating their desktop counterparts. Mobile computers have been built as stand alone devices that rely on synchronization to keep the data up to date with the data on a desktop computer. Mobile devices have really been designed as another peripheral for the desktop PC. Until mobile computers are designed and programmed for as a truly separate and superior entity users will never truly see the benefits of mobile computing. The design approach needs to change in several ways."<br /><br />I think we've talked about these points in separate Thoughts, but it's something worth mentioning again - handheld devices need to be more than just counterparts to our desktops. What do you think?

[Paragon]

I absolutely disagree with the idea that a mobile device doesn't need to do what my desktop does. Sorry, Dan I don't mean that to sound like you are wrong, and I'm right. I just see it different, or maybe we see things the same in the end but in a different light. When I'm away I want to be able to write orders, post cheques, and make deposits all in Quickbooks so that when I come home I don't have to reenter it all again. I can think of many applications like this. Isn't that one of the benifits of being mobile....being able to do what you can do at our desks, but do it, say, at the beach.

Dan, makes some good points on the way a mobile device interacts with our desktops. I do think they need to interact much better. To be honest, I see mobile devices within a few years being nothing more than a connection appliance. As 3G networks come on line, and we see improvements in speed, cost, security, and coverage I think our desktops will do everything and our mobile device will be used to view, and control them oppose to processing the information and transfering it. This way processing, and memory needs aren't near as high, and resources can be used for things he mentions like GPS, and the likes.

Mobile devices do have other uses that we can put them to but I don't think it needs to be at the expense of commonly used desktop applications.

Dave

[adamz]

I totally agree with the article, Dan. GPS, Voice, and internet in one device! I'm always using Pocket Streets to find restaurants or whatever. It would be great if that type if mapping application had more functionality like you suggest. For example, hyperlinked phone numbers in the restaurant's info bubble... link to the menu online, etc.

[BarryB]

I think there are reasons to have both powerful, independent devices that do not rely on desktops and less powerful, dependent devices that do rely on desktops.

The latter involves a philosophy that Apple is taking with the notion of a digital hub. The information is kept in a central location and distributed among and coordinated with a number of different devices. This has a number of implications for what information is to be kept on the devices.

The former is a philosophy of networked peers. Rather than the devices being subordinate to the hub, the devices become equals. There is no hub. The devices coordinate information with the desktop(s) as well as the other devices owned by a person. This is a more complex situation and, I suspect, lead to the greatest rewards.

But IMO, there is room in the marketplace for both kinds of devices.

[MikeUnwired]

In Mobilize Yourself, mobility is defined as "being productive away from your desk." So, the tools that meet that criteria may or may not be exact copies of what you have on your desk, but, I would think that the mobile tool would need to offer direct support of whatever happens on the desk.

So, synchronization or direct access -- whatever means necessary.

Direct access needs to be reliable and available -- both of which are questionable with many mobile tools depending on job and location. Direct access also tends to be more time consuming -- connection speeds, access protocols, etc...

Synchronization is less timely as it is periodic and not real-time. However, it speeds task execution in most cases and is easier to build into a reliable system.

Mobility is like an Ogre -- it has layers -- like and onion (Shrek). It depends on what layer you're focused on whether a mobile tool enhances your productivity.

[danmanmayer]

In responce to a few of Paragon's comments...

Paragon:"When I'm away I want to be able to write orders, post cheques, and make deposits all in Quickbooks so that when I come home I don't have to reenter it all again. I can think of many applications like this."

I agree there is many many applications where you want to edit some of the data and have it all updated on both systems. I was discussing this in the idea that one day active synch wouldn't just be synching software but also a intellegent server of sorts. So that if you change any file it would be updated quickly, and could be updated as soon as you were done with editing it. The other point i tried to make was that files like in quickbook you don't sit down for a couple hours and create the entire file. Your probably just doing a quick edit or addition to an exisiting quick books file. Some software should be optimized to allow quick access and little changes, over the option of overall creation of your entire money database.

Paragon:"Mobile devices do have other uses that we can put them to but I don't think it needs to be at the expense of commonly used desktop applications."

I just want to elaborate that working with the new design concepts doesn't sacrafice any of the existing uses. All the hardware would be just as capable for current uses as in the past. All programs that we use now would still run on the newer devices. All of the software made just wouldn't be trying to emulate desktop software instead only some of it would be. While other software developers could try to innovate beyond the desktop.

[Paragon]

Hey Dan,

Your original post that Janak put up emphasized quite clearly that mobile devices should be stand alone and not necessarily do what our desktop machines do. You do make some very good points on how they should interact, and overall do much more,which was why I said that I think in the end we probably see things the same but in a different light.

If I may......I think you are saying that mobile devices can do much more than emulate our desktops. They can do this, but they can do so much more?!

I think we will see devices come out in the next year that have built in GPS, and with the coming 911 regulations in the future every cellular device will have to have GPS capabilities. Being a moderator on Dale Coffing's site I see a lot of people using GPS now. We have a GPS forum. I think the idea of having your device automatically tell you things like a theatre is in the area can be good , and bad. I don't look forward to the day when my connected PPC alerts me to a message like "Stop, look to your left. As you can see by the sign on our door we are having a huge one day blowout sale on mens underwear. Come on in!".....Won't happen eh! It wasn't that many years ago that Spam was only a canned luncheon meat. :) I do think there are a lot of very useful purposes for these types of technology though, and you are right developers need to focus on them.

Dave

[danmanmayer]

Paragon:"If I may......I think you are saying that mobile devices can do much more than emulate our desktops. They can do this, but they can do so much more?! "

This is the basic main idea i was getting at. I just think the design of both hardware and software doesn't enfisize doing more than just emulating the desktop. If the hardware design did focus more on mobility, it may have a great effect of inspiring more creative thought and design of applications.

Paragon:"Your original post that Janak put up emphasized quite clearly that mobile devices should be stand alone and not necessarily do what our desktop machines do. "

If this is the case i definately need to go make some revisions to some of the paragraphs. I don't want to say that they shouldn't do what our desktops can. They should be able to help edit and update any files. They just should be made more to handle quick use than full creation. So i still think they should do it a little differently. I am not trying to limit the software from what is currently available. Just to argue that mobile software is currently narrowly focused only on emulating a desktop. I will try to make that more clear.