A Blackberry by any other name

Philippe Winthrop today follows up on an Information Weekly post, stating that Blackberry is 'winning the mind share game' - that is, that its brand has become a generic term for any smart phone, or even just a feature phone with a keyboard. At issue: do consumers even care about the mobile OS? Is it about hardware (the newest, sexiest handheld), or the software? I think technology providers (hardware, software, services) need to get over it: it's actually not about them. The question is, what will it do?

It's true that the mobile hardware industry has exploded. The pace of innovation has been breathtaking, and with each innovation that creates a radically new customer experience, consumers haven't been able to wait to finish contracts before upgrading to the new experience. I expect this will continue, until the device limitations bring the user experience to a screeching halt.

Users ultimately want the mobile device to be a digital extension of themselves, for entertainment, shopping, research, communication, news, information -- everything we currently expect from PCs, laptops, and PDAs. Businesses want to be able to equip employees with a single device that enables them to run business apps in the field, stay in touch, and provide GPS capabilities that provide direction as well as keep breadcrumb trails of the employees' movements. Expect a continuing swell of hardware and software upgrades to open new frontiers for consumers and businesses -- who will not care an iota for the brand they're toting. Consumers may call it whatever brand got there first (remember when PDAs were called 'palm pilots' -- even when they weren't made by Palm?), but they'll buy whatever brand has the features they most want at the price point they want to spend. I don't know I'd call that 'winning' - Puffs tissues certainly gained market share even when consumers buying them called them 'Kleenex.'

Eventually, we'll discover that there is a physical limitation we can't get beyond, which is circumscribed by the sensing and manipulation systems of the human body. One of the reasons consumers are so eager to trade up to the latest handheld is that they easily tire of the trade-offs they have to make with their current device. As long as there's a hope that the latest technology will take away a dissatisfier, we'll continue to do that -- at least until we realize that there are only so many characters, in a font size my eyes can read, that will fit on a screen that is portable enough to slip into a pocket. Perhaps that's one reason why the manufacturers are marketing so heavily the use of mobiles for music and messaging: the screen size isn't a limitation for audio applications or short messages, so they can easily make the consumer completely happy. But, as Winthrop notes, this is only a small part of the opportunity, and it is quickly becoming commoditized.

Cloud computing, and SaaS apps built for mobiles, will no doubt continue to attract attention and build markets with consumers and businesses, since they extend the functionality of the device itself. But in the end, until these applications overcome the physical limitations of the device, so that the user interfaces with the device by hearing and speech rather than sight and touch, the extension of mobility into the more exciting frontiers ahead will be stalled.