Mobile Websites Top Mobile Apps in Battle for mCommerce Supremacy

By Michael Essany, Daily Deal MediaMarch 13, 2012

inShare9

If singer Pat Benatar thought love was a battlefield, she could fill one album after the next with tales of the eCommcerce battlefield – an arena in which retailers large and small are perpetually striving to obtain a bigger share of this increasingly lucrative market.

As any battle-tested digital retailer would tell you, your success often depends on how well you use the tools of contemporary eCommerce. And, today, there are no weapons in the arsenal of digital retail more valuable than mobile websites and mobile apps.

But a raging argument regarding which is more conducive to mCommerce has already sparked another contentious battle. Fortunately, on Monday, Nielsen looked to cool the heated debate by settling the matter with the findings from its latest report.

For the time being, Nielsen’s analysis of smartphone usage reveals that retailer mobile websites are more popular than retailer mobile apps.

The Mobile Website Reins Supreme

“The majority of smartphone owners used their devices for shopping this past holiday season,” says John Burbank, President of Strategic Initiatives at Nielsen. “Mobile shopping has reached scale and is only going to grow as smartphone penetration continues to rise.”

The study’s data was derived from the participation of 5,000 smartphone users (Android and iOS devices) who consented to the survey in late 2011.

Burbank says Nielsen’s data finds that smartphone owners of both genders prefer retailers’ mobile websites over mobile apps, with men slightly more likely to try retailers’ mobile apps than women.

“However,” the report reads, “consumers who use retailers’ mobile apps tend to spend more time on them.” But during the height of the holiday shopping season, all five of the top mobile retail websites – Amazon, Best Buy, eBay, Target and Walmart – experienced a traffic and session length “bump” that helped narrow the gap between mobile app and mobile website loyalists.

During the 2011 holiday season, the preeminent five online retailers listed above reached nearly 60 percent of smartphone owners.

Two Platforms Are Better Than One

No shortage of mobile app developers and retail industry analysts believe that, in the long term, mobile apps will be a better friend to mobile shoppers than a retailer’s mobile website. For now, the fact remains that a quality app is more difficult – and more expensive – to build than a website optimized for mobile. While Nielsen didn’t speak to any disparity in quality between mobile apps and mobile websites, there remains a clear difference. But as retailer-made mobile apps improve in functionality and utility, mobile websites might eventually see some stiffer competition.

So although the relative value of mobile apps and mobile websites will continue to be debated in the retail space, the resounding popularity of each (regardless of which is preferential to most smartphone owners) illustrates why retailers are wise to deploy both a mobile app and a mobile website as part of their strategy today.

“Retailers need to think of their business as a multi-channel environment that can potentially include mobile, online, and bricks and mortar stores,” Burbank concludes. “Winning with shoppers requires a consistent experience across channels that reinforces the values you represent as a retail brand, whether it be price, service, reviews, selection, style, or other key attributes.”

Source: Nielsen Wire

Windows 8 first impressions: It's a game changer

By David Goldman @CNNMoneyTech March 16, 2012: 5:31 AM ET

• 
  

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The PC needs saving. With Windows 8, Microsoft believes it has the magic cure.

It just might. I've been testing a consumer preview version of Windows 8 for the past week, and it's unlike anything I've ever seen in a PC operating system.

The stunning "Metro" interface just begs you to touch and interact with it. Beautifully designed apps, ultra-simple navigation, and instinctive commands make it hard to believe Metro came from the same company that brought us Windows Vista. Interactive, "live" tiles and an intuitive app store simplify the PC. Windows 8 is as easy to use as the iPad.

That's exactly what Microsoft intended. As PC sales slump amid a surge in tablets (okay, iPads), Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) is creating an operating system that lets hardware makers reimagine the PC for a tablet world. The software is slated to go on sale later this year.

But let's be clear: Under the veneer of its redesign, Windows 8 is still very much a PC operating system. It features the familiar desktop and taskbar you've learned to love -- or hate -- over the years, and it works just as well with a keyboard and mouse as it does with a touchscreen.

That's the key difference between Apple's (AAPL, Fortune 500) iPad strategy and Microsoft's Windows 8 approach. Apple made a complementary gadget, while Microsoft's software is designed for a catch-all device.

The iPad is the simplest entry point to what Apple calls the "post-PC" world, but PCs haven't outlived their usefulness just yet. Most people still go to their PCs for tools like Microsoft Office and more complex content creation tasks

That's where Microsoft sees uncharted territory. It wants Windows 8 to power each user's primary device, which can be as portable and intuitive as the iPad but also be able to perform all the intricate tasks that today's tablet users flock to their PCs for.

Microsoft does that by making the desktop itself into an app. The PC boots to the Metro interface, which serves as the "start screen" and main backdrop for Windows 8.

Metro is ideal for everyday tasks like Web browsing, e-mail, photo sharing, social networking, and casual gaming. But when you need to manage files, edit a document, or do anything else you wouldn't typically try on an iPad, a tap or click on the desktop app launches what looks and feels like the Windows 7 interface.

Is Windows 8 a perfect solution? Not quite, but it's getting closer.

What I liked: Windows 8 meets Microsoft's goal of producing a "fast and fluid" operating system. It's so lightweight, in fact, that even on a five-year-old, battered Dell laptop with a puny Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) Centrino processor, Windows 8 booted up in 16 seconds. By contrast, my iPhone 4S takes 27 seconds to start up.

The app store is well designed, and the Metro apps are of the same quality you'd expect from the iPad.

There were some bugs, as you'd anticipate from a preview version of the software, but getting out of a stalled program has never been easier. Just tap the Windows key, and you're back to the start screen.

My favorite feature was the built-in search mechanism, which allows you to just type to find and launch a program or file. Adios, Ctrl-R!

What I didn't like: My main gripe is a design oddity: The word "Start" is permanently displayed in the upper left hand corner.

It wouldn't be as irksome if "Start" did anything, but you can't click on it, tap it, swipe it or interact with in in any way. It just sits there, staring at you.

To actually launch the Start menu options, you have to swipe from the right of the screen or hit Windows Key-C. That's the only way to bring up the clock, Wi-Fi status or battery life. Maybe those things could be displayed at the top of the screen instead of "Start."

But if that's my biggest quibble so far, Microsoft might be onto something big.

Bottom line: Windows 8 won't kill the iPad. It's not trying to. It's trying to save the PC.

Anyone 25 or older probably remembers the way Windows 95 reimagined what a PC could do. Windows 8 does that again, to a much greater degree.

It's not hard to envision waking up to your alarm in the morning, reading a book on the train, creating spreadsheets at work, playing Angry Birds on your ride home, and watching Netflix in bed -- all on the same Windows 8 device.

AT&T Restricts Unlimited Data Usage

This Article was on the front cover of today's WSJ. I think it relates to what we are talking about with networks and data communication.  It also deals with the business side of operating high-traffic networks.

Customers Howl Over AT&T Data-Use Curbs

By ANTON TROIANOVSKI And GREG BENSINGER

Joe Philipson had such a bad customer-service experience with Sprint about six years ago that he distributed flyers bashing the wireless carrier and started a blog called "I Hate Sprint."
On Friday, the 27-year-old freelance photographer in Rochester, N.Y., was considering becoming a Sprint Nextel Corp. customer again.
"I might have to go make a deal with the devil," he said.

The reason: AT&T Inc.'s new policy limiting high-speed wireless data usage for its 17 million customers who still subscribe to unlimited data plans. The change has drawn a furious response from some AT&T customers who say the carrier is changing the rules for some of its most loyal customers.
It could also be a boost for Sprint, the nation's third-largest carrier, which is trying to compete with larger rivals AT&T and Verizon Wireless by being the only national carrier still selling an unlimited data plan. Sprint struggled for years with a reputation for poor service, but has won much better reviews recently, evidenced by a sharp drop in the percentage of customers leaving the carrier each quarter.
Mr. Philipson's comments echoed those of many disgruntled consumers who criticized AT&T on Facebook and Twitter on Friday. Some, however, were more conciliatory, arguing that customers in the smartphone age should no longer expect to be able to get as much wireless data as they want without paying for it.
Some commentators saw AT&T's new policy as more generous than its previous policy, under which it slowed Internet use for the top 5% of unlimited data users in individual markets. That vague limit sometimes resulted in users seeing their Web-surfing slowed after they had only used around 2 gigabytes of data.
"We're hearing from customers that they appreciate the clarity that only those who use 3GB or more of data—less than 5% of smartphone customers—are impacted," AT&T spokesman Brad Burns said.
Three gigabytes is well more than typical smartphone users consume – enough to stream about 10 hours of high-definition video or about 100 hours of music. AT&T says the limit will only affect a small percentage of its unlimited-plan subscribers. Technology analysts, however, expect mobile data use to continue growing quickly, meaning the cap could eventually start to feel more restrictive.
AT&T says it needs to limit the data use of its most voracious customers, because the popularity of data-guzzling smartphones is straining the No. 2 U.S. carrier's network. In January, AT&T Chief Executive Randall Stephenson suggested that the government's successful effort to block AT&T from buying smaller rival T-Mobile USA, a $39 billion deal that AT&T said would have helped it address its network congestion, would hurt consumers.
"In a capacity-constrained environment, usage-based data plans, increased pricing, managing the speeds of the highest volume users—these are all logical and necessary steps to manage utilization," Mr. Stephenson said in a January conference call with analysts.
Jordan Hackworth, who switched to AT&T from Sprint in 2010 to get the iPhone and an unlimited data plan that costs him $30 a month, learned those unlimited days were coming to an end via text message on Thursday evening.
"Your data usage has reached 3GB this month," the message from AT&T said. "Using more than 3GB in future billing cycles will result in reduced speeds."
The 24-year-old school computer technician in Salem, Ore., streams music from Pandora and Spotify on his drive to work and uploads photos to Facebook and Instagram. Mr. Hackworth now says he, too, wants to switch back.
"I pay for unlimited usage, and I'm not getting it," Mr. Hackworth said. "Why would I stay with a carrier that doesn't respect that?"
Mr. Hackworth's data usage hit 4.7 gigabytes in December and stayed above 3 gigabytes the last two months. To be able to use that much data at full speeds now, Mr. Hackworth will need to move from his unlimited plan to a 5-gigabyte plan that costs at least an extra $20 a month.