I say “mobile” is a misnomer that leads some companies down the wrong road, envisioning users on a road looking for lattes.
Most tablet usage is in the home. I use my “mobile” phone all the time in my office and even at home and certainly in boring meetings, when I’m quite sedentary.
Mobile = local = around me now. Mobile is my personal bubble. It is enhanced convenience, putting the device and the world in my hand. That’s the power of “mobile.”
Next imagine access to all this information and functionality without the device: Cue the war between Siri and Google Glass to eliminate the last mediator, the thing.
I see companies assuming that mobile requires maps and geography or apps and closed worlds. But I think what we now mistakenly call mobile will be about the opposite: getting each of us to what we want with fewer barriers and less effort because the service (often through the device or the OS: thus the war of iPhone v. Android) has gathered so many signals about us: who we are, where we are, what we like, whom we know, what we know, what we want to know, what we buy….
The power of what we now call mobile, I believe, is in signal generation and the extreme targeting and convenience that enables.
That is why commerce works (and few thought it would on the small screen): because I cut through layers of search and discovery and get what I want — a nearby pizza or a Gilt-y pleasure — so easily. This is where we need to rethink media around informing you in new ways. Advertising? I’m not sure what advertising is.
What we call “mobile” is disruptive in ways we can’t yet figure out. We call it “mobile” but we should call it “what’s next.”