A MobileBurn reader wrote to me in regards to my post about Cingular introducing mobile email and instant messaging applications (here) asking whether I think that this is a move towards a “walled garden” strategy.
I think this is quite the opposite actually, as the mobile applications are specifically designed to work with third-party services. Admittedly, the apps don’t work with ALL services, but Hotmail, AIM, and Yahoo! Mail are hardly Cingular services.
If Cingular released mobile email and IM applications that only allow you to access Cingular services, then I would say it is heading toward the ‘walled garden’, I think this announcement is a step in the right direction for Cingular though - a small step, but a step none the less.
Hey Brad! Thank you for your reply. I am specifically referring to the applications layer itself. This is where the carrier is ultimately trying to add some controls. In other words they want to provide you the hardware, mobile service and software applications.
I have a choice on hardware, and mobile service providers, but the majority of people will also want a choice as to the applications they run on their phone. A direct example, is http:www.movamail.com which is a java-based mobile mail application, that in my opinion is better then the OZ solution. As a Cingluar client I want to make sure that I am able to use this application over OZ, if I so choose to do so.
Of course this extends beyond applications, and the same concern is with content, games etc. A “walled garden” essentially prevents me from downloading anything outside the garden. In other words, only those applications, games and content that the carrier approves, and most importantly that we purchase from them.
I can not help but compare this to the efforts made by companies like AOL, who tried to keep AOL subscribers within the content realm (walled garden) of Time Warner. For those not in the know… they were surfing Time Warner content, and thought this was the web!! How times have changed. I hope the carriers dont try to force the same situation on consumers in the mobile world.
Thanks again for the reply… keep up the good work!
That is a very good point there. In this respect, I completely agree with you, and it is something that a lot of carriers are guilty of. I think that only being able to download carrier sanctioned content is overall terrible for the consumer, although it does come with good points as well - such as quality control and scam protection.
In Australia (where I live), it is only Vodafone that locks their handsets to only accept applications downloaded from their Vodafone Live! content network, and it completely turns me off their handsets.