It's Really Hard to Stand Out in a Market

A study of the customer experience of mobile apps and websites of 17 major financial services companies shows little differentiation, Foresee Results says. That shouldn't really be too surprising. It is hard, in any market, to truly create exceptional, unusual, unique products and experiences. 

Only credit unions, measured in aggregate, meet the threshold for excellence with a score 80 on the 100-point scale of the ForeSee Mobile Satisfaction Index. Of course, in fairness, it is arguably fairly hard to differentiate a banking app. 


ForeSee’s research shows that apps provide a superior experience to mobile websites and may be the key to competitive differentiation and growth. However, all companies measured have a ways to go to provide a compelling mobile experience: traditional websites (as experienced on personal computers) still provide the best customer experience for financial services companies.

Thus far, there is little differentiation between competitors, since satisfaction with all measured companies’ mobile experiences range between 73 and 79. A full set of scores is below:

Cable's "Mobile" Strategy is Mostly "Untethered"

Time Warner Cable is a partner with Comcast, Cablevision, Cox Communications and Bright House Networks in a public hotspot network of about 50,000 locations, and now is adding WeFi service as well. Time Warner invested in WeFi early in 2012. 

Though cable operators have not been able to really figure out how to create a big mobile communications business, the current effort aims to extend use of fixed connections inside and outside the Time Warner network footprint. 

Untethered communications, inside or outside the network footprint, is part of the strategy. In fact, in many cases a mobile phone uses a Wi-Fi connection more than the mobile network.

Big Data Should be About "People"

Big data can be an important tool for understanding and changing the world. 

How Are People Using Tablets?

"Post-PC" is Only Partly About "Devices"

Most would credit Steve Jobs, former Apple CEO, for popularizing the phrase "post-PC." Precisely what that means will continue to be debated for at least a while. But most would probably agree that the phrase suggests a growing use of computing appliances other than a PC, and reliance on cloud-based apps and services more than locally-resident software. 

On the other hand, post-PC also can mean that many different appliances might converge on a common operating system core and end user look and feel. Consider Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8. 

Microsoft wants to unify Windows Phone devices, Windows 8 tablets and PCs, and its Xbox game console,  PCWorld argues. 

Some of us would argue it is nearly impossible to separate mobility (with the key location awareness) from cloud computing, though. Others might that is part of a growing shift to "ubiquitous" computing as well, where computing is not a "destination" activity tied to a desk.

Part of the post-PC reality is that the cloud increasingly provides storage and processing for a wide range of appliances that can be highly distributed and much cheaper than PC appliances have been in the past. 

It also is true that what people want to do with computers has changed. In October 2012 about 55 percent of U.S. mobile subscribers used  downloaded apps,  while 53 percent used a browser. About 39 percent used social networking apps, 34 percent played games and 29 percent listened to music, according to comScore .

None of that would surprise much of anybody. What might be more unexpected is that consumption profiles of PC and mobile applications is so similar.

In 2011, the majority of all mobile phone owners consumed mobile media on their smart phones and tablet devices, marking an important milestone in the evolution of mobile from primarily a communication device to a content consumption tool.

In December 2011, 8.2 percent of all web page views occurred on devices other than PCs, for example, with mobile devices accounting for 5.2 percent of traffic, tablets driving 2.5 percent, according to the latest Nielsen Cross-Platform Report.

One of Google’s studies of tablet use over a two-week period, which had users recording every occasion that they used their tablet, shows that tablets really are not PCs, any more than smart phones are used in the same way that PCs are used.

Most consumers use their tablets for fun, entertainment and relaxation while they use their desktop computer or laptop for work, Google User Experience Researchers Jenny Gove and John Webb say. About 91 percent of the time that people spend on their tablet devices is for personal rather than work related activities.

And, as it turns out, when a consumer gets a tablet,  they quickly migrate many of their entertainment activities from laptops and smart phones to this new device.

The most frequent tablet activities are checking email, playing games and social networking. The study also found that people are doing more activities in shorter bursts on weekdays (social networking, email) while engaging in longer usage sessions on weekends (watching videos/TV/movies).

Tablets are multi-tasking devices with at least 42 percent of activities occurring while doing another task or engaging with another entertainment medium. Tablets aren’t PCs

As it turns out, lots of things people can do on PCs don’t “need” to be done on PCs. Content consumption, email and other communications actually represent most of what many business users really “have to do” on a PC.

So one reason we are in a "post-PC" era is that content consumption now has become perhaps the most salient activity people want to engage in, on a computing appliance. Diverse screen form factors are important. Cloud platforms are critical. Mobile Internet access is key. 

But what people want to do on a "computer" is the foundation. In an era where content consumption is paramount, a PC is not always the "right" or "preferred" or "only" appliance.

Why Governments Should Not Control the Internet

How hard is it to disconnect a country from the Internet, really? Not so hard, in many countries, says Renesys. 

"In some countries, international access to data and telecommunications services is heavily regulated" and "there may be only one or two companies who hold official licenses to carry voice and Internet traffic to and from the outside world, and they are required by law to mediate access for everyone else," Renesys says.

"Under those circumstances, it's almost trivial for a government to issue an order that would take down the Internet,' Renesys says. 

Unintended Consequences of Regulator Policy Decisions

Telecom policy makers always face tough choices when designing national communications policies. Because “for every public policy there is a corresponding private interest,” no single set of policies will universally be seen as “fair.” What helps big carriers often hurts smaller carriers. What favors mobile operators can disadvantage fixed network providers.

And, even where rules only affect a single provider, such as LightSquared or Dish Network, the affected providers might not think government rules are especially fair. And there always is a risk of unintended consequences, even when a policy is well intentioned.

Something like that, with price implications for lighter mobile data users, arguably has happened as an unintended result of an apparently unrelated decsion by the Federal Communications Commission regarding Verizon’s purchase of 700-MHz spectrum.

The FCC decided that Verizon was violating the “open access” rules of the 700 MHz spectrum licenses it purchased in 2008 by charging customers an additional $20 per month to tether their smartphones to other devices.

Verizon paid the fine and allowed tethering on all new data plans. Perhaps it is not a major issue, but one result of that ruling is that Verizon Wireless essentially has abandoned the “light user” part of the postpaid mobile broadband market, according to the Technology Policy Institute.

Basically, Verizon and T-Mobile USA offered lighter users the more-expensive data plans, before the decision. Afterwards, Verizon became the highest-priced alternative for light data users.

You might argue that the changes are completely coincidental. You might argue the changes do not reshape the market. 

But it is possible to argue that a decision ostensibly related to “open access” caused the leading mobile service provider to change its retail packaging in ways that made it the sole “high price” provider in the market where it had been within $5 to $10 a month of all the other leading providers. 

That's an unintended consequence, you might argue.