Consumers Still Prefer to Shop in Stores

According to a new report from The NPD Group, many U.S. consumers remain reluctant to purchase certain consumer electronics products online, even after using the Web to find out more about them. For some products, that makes sense. In other cases the reluctance is harder to figure out.

While 52 percent of consumers would seek out information about smartphones on the Web, just 23 percent could imagine themselves going online to purchase one. That might makes a great deal of sense to you. A smart phone is a highly personal item.

In some other cases, the findings are more puzzling. The research suggests that televisions are the fourth most-likely item that consumers research online prior to purchasing (56 percent); however, it's the least likely electronics product that consumers would actually purchase online (19 percent). TVs aren't personal. On the other hand, it's a bigger-ticket item than many other products, so that could explain the hesitance.

In contrast more people (66 percent) do both their research (66 percent) and expect to make an actual purchase (34 percent) online for PCs then for any other CE device.

Top consumer electronics products consumers were "extremely" or "very likely" to purchase online, included the following:

• Computer software | 34%
• Computer | 34%
• eReader | 32%
• Digital Camera | 30%
• Computer accessories/peripherals | 30%
• Tablet computer | 29%
• Printer | 24%
• Smartphone/mobile phone | 23%
• Camcorder | 21%
• Blu-ray player | 21%
• Home audio | 20%
• Television | 19%

People still prefer to buy at retail locations

Another Reason Why Handset Suppliers Have Gained Value in the Mobile Ecosystem

The mobile user experience keeps getting more complex as mobile operators add spectrum bands, even though most users do not directly encounter any of the particular issues. The reason is that it is harder to maintain connections moving from cell to cell and network to network as new frequencies must be added.

Voice and Internet connectivity issues also become marginally harder as hanset antennae have to accomodate more signals at different frequencies. Also, mobile Internet handsets have to conduct all sorts of signaling operations to support social networking, email and other applications. And then there is the simple matter of different air interfaces.

New fourth-generation Long Term Evolution networks will make the problem worse, especially for "world phones" that are supposed to work in many regions of the world.

When GSM, the first "digital" air interface was firs used in Europe, there was only a single frequency band at 900 MHz band. Than an 1800 MHz band was added, then 2100 MHz.

In the United States, the 850 and 1900 MHz, 1700 and 2100 MHz bands are used. That has lead to "quad band" and "tri-band" devices. And now LTE frequencies will have to be added.

In Europe LTE will likely start on 2600 MHz and potentially also be used on 1800 MHz and 2100 MHz bands, with some use at 800 MHz.

In Japan, LTE will be used on 2100 MHz with an additional band likely to follow. In the United States, the situation is even more divergent. Verizon uses a 10 MHz block in the 700 MHz range.

Some other operators might launch LTE in the 1700 and 2100 MHz bands. Finally, there are rumors of Clearwire jumping from WiMAX to LTE in the 2600 MHz band but with TD-LTE.

So global roaming capabilities of devices will be challenging. So how does this all work out on the consumer end user front? First, cost becomes an issue. Battery life is affected. In some cases, there are form factor issues and reception issues, as the physical placement of the antenna makes a difference.

The potential band and technology combinations for GSM, CDMA, UMTS and LTE are huge, as air interfaces also are different between operators in the U.S. market. All of that means there also are volume manufacturing issues, as devices have to be customized to a certain extent, by operator and by intended region of operation.

All of that means some devices will work better, quite apart from the obvious user interface issues, because of hidden requirements such as the networks each device is intended to work with, signaling operations and even the physical placement of elements within each device.

More-efficient producers will have an advantage as well, as the complexity of these decisions will mean there is an advantage for manufacturers and designers that can leverage the customizing process.

source

Droid Does?

I'm not so sure the really important thing about the upcoming Motorola "Droid," which will be available on the Verizon network, is whether it is an "Apple iPhone killer."

Certainly Motorola and Verizon hope the device does attract users who otherwise might be attracted to an iPhone. There are clear commercial reasons for both of those firms to hope the device is a wild success.

But I'm not convinced what the world needs is a better iPhone. What it might need is more devices that do different things than the iPhone, that appeal to new user segments and lead applications.

It makes a better headline to focus on the "iPhone versus Droid" angle, but I don't think that's the main thing. Give users something different. Just as important, give users more reasons to do things with a smartphone that really aren't as easy, or preferable, on an iPhone.

Quick Messaging Phones Gain Favor Fast

While smartphones like Apple’s iPhone, the BlackBerry Storm, and T-Mobile’s Android-based MyTouch get all the attention, another category of mobile phones has quietly been accelerating its market share, says Forrester Research.

The quick messaging device offers a keyboard and, or touchscreen, providing much of the functionality of a smartphone but lacking the high-level operating system. Where a smartphone user likely is interested in email or mobile Web, a quick messaging user is text message centric.

At the start of 2008, seven percent of U.S. adult mobile subscribers owned a smartphone, while just one in 20 subscribers used a quick messaging device. A year later, more than one in 10 adult subscribers was using a smartphone, an impressive growth rate of 57 percent, but quick messaging devices grew nearly twice as fast and almost doubled their market share to nine percent.

In other words, quick messaging devices have nearly reached the level of smartphone penetration.

With all major operators expanding their quick messaging lineup and prices declining, these numbers are likely to continue in 2009, Forrester Research predicts.

For example, AT&T today offers more than 10 phones in this category, beginning at just $9.99
for the Motorola Karma when purchased online with a two-year contract. Verizon Wireless goes even further with the Samsung Intensity. Iit’s free with a two-year commitment, says Charles S. Golvin, Forrester Research analyst.

As you might guess, mobile subscribers ages 18 to 24 are nearly 50 percent more likely to own a quick messaging device than a smartphone.

Smartphones are most prevalent among subscribers ages 25 to 34, yet quick messaging devices are nearly as popular in this segment, and more than doubled their share in this group last year, says Golvin.

Quick messaging devices also appeal to a more mainstream audience. In terms of demographics and psychographics, quick messaging device users more closely resemble other mainstream mobile subscribers than do smartphone users.

While smartphone owners are overwhelmingly the male, well educated technology optimists that personify the early adopter, quick messaging device owners earn slightly less than the average subscriber and are more likely to be female.

More importantly for mobile operators, the quick messaging device owners spend a much higher percentage of their monthly income on mobile services than does the average subscriber.

Ttext messaging (SMS) is the driver. Some 70 percent of quick messaging device owners say they use SMS daily.

From a mobile operator's point of view, quick messaging customers are important because they are "mobile centric." Their traffic is much more likely to remain on the mobile network than to terminate on a landline and their communication is more likely to end up on another phone than on a PC.

More than 60 percent of quick messaging device owners use multimedia messaging (MMS), which most often exploits the phone’s camera and terminates on another mobile phone. For large operators like Verizon Wireless and AT&T in particular, this traffic is more likely to be “on-net,” which reduces their fees from interconnections with other operators.

Users with a quick messaging device are more likely to be primarily motivated by entertainment than the average mobile subscriber. Therefore, it’s no surprise that these subscribers are among the most avid purchasers of content for their mobile phone, says Golvin.

Nearly half of quick messaging device owners say they bought at least one form of content in the past six months, versus only one quarter of all subscribers.

"Heavy Texters" are a fast-growing mobile end user segment.

Will Femtocells Change Behavior?

According to iLocus, Nokia has found in its most-recent smart phone survey that 35 percent of packet data was consumed on the move, at-home use was 44 percent and in-office use was 21 percent of total.

Overall usage also increased from 6 megabytes a month to 14 megabytes a month.

What will be interesting is to see what happens when appreciable numbers of mobile users have access to femtocells--local transmitters that allow them to use a standard handset with better signal coverage in an indoors setting.

Aside from greater usage because signal quality is better, one wonders if the exposure to high-quality data bandwidth indoors might somehow lead to sustained and permanent changes in use of packet data outside the femtocell or indoors setting.

The other issue is whether users start to rely on mobile handset access in a setting where PCs also have broadband access. What applications or use modes start to become more attractive, even when there is the possibility of using a PC to conduct the same operations?

Of course, the same sort of questions can be asked of dual-mode devices able to switch to Wi-Fi access indoors.

O2 Says iPhone is Share Changer

Three out of four buyers of the iPhone in Britain will be new O2 customers won from rival mobile networks, according to the new head of O2, which has an exclusive deal to sell the iPhone in the U.K. market.

"Over time, three out of four customers of the iPhone will be new O2 customers, because you can only get the iPhone by becoming a customer of O2," says Matthew Key, incoming O2 chief executive.

"Steve Jobs Was Right"

"Steve Jobs was right," says at&t VP Ralph de la Vega. Right about slashing the price of the iPhone sooner than att&t would typically have done. AT&T Inc., owner of the biggest U.S. mobile phone service, said the increase in sales of the iPhone has been "significant" since maker Apple Inc. cut the price by a third. How much?

at&t appears also to have been at least partly right about the iPhone's impact. Sprint and Verizon executives both acknowdledge at least a temporary increase in churn immediately after iPhone hit the market, and again after the recent price reduction.

Perhaps of more lasting significance is the ability of iPhone users to use Wi-Fi for connectivity in place of the EDGE network. Though it is doubtful many users will settle for a single "do everything device" that primarily connects only when within range of Wi-Fi networks, it will be interesting to watch whether there is a developing market for devices used primarily as media players.

The reason is simply that if the primary use mode is media, not voice, users might be able to live with sideloading and "spot" access of connectivity at home, at work and at public hotspots. And if there is a market for that, there could be a market for other Web-based devices that have value even when they are not "always connected."

That in turn is significant because it could offer some new options for providers of services and devices optimized for Web applications rather than voice. The analogy is notebook computers, that are highly useful even though they are not always connected. It might be possible to create significant new business models for devices that are "mobile" but not "always connected."

That, in turn, is highly significant for application or service providers that do not want to depend on the legacy mobile connectivity providers for access and transport.