Food for Thought:
I agree with Ren in that I believe the true "value" of the internet lies in
convenient, high quality, relevant information that makes our daily
proceedings more efficient and more enjoyable. Considering that most of our
daily proceedings are on the move, it is easy to understand why the true
value, and revenues, of the internet are materializing for the first time
within the mobile "walled garden".
The question is, will the "walled garden" compromise the true "beauty"
(different from value) of the internet. That is to educate and empower the
consumer. I am an M.D., and there is no question the internet has empowered
patients in the U.S. They usually know more about the management of their
chronic disease than their docs. Why?...the power to search the infinite
internet and cross reference different sources. After three months on a
healthcare project in Japan, I would argue that Japanese patients could use
some empowerment.
I propose that the walled garden model can provide the best of both worlds.
When people are within the garden, they benefit from a secure, comforting,
and organized environment. The security within the "walls" is something most
people desire in their lives. Chaos is frightening for most, especially in a
systematic society like Japan. If they are feeling adventurous, they can
leave those walls and explore the wild unknown, which statistics are showing
they are doing. The wild unknown outside the walls will grow to have all the
benefits and depth of the fixed internet.
I think it is in the best interest of everyone to maintain the organized,
comforting, and efficient society within the walls. Keep the jungle on the
outside. That way the consumer can choose. ClubMed, or Trekking in Nepal.
However, the freedom to escape those walls must be maintained. Because it is
in the jungle that people learn to survive, and evolve.
DM
- I think we need to think about the mobile Internet not just from a short
term perspective where
- simple and interesting contents are important but also from a long term
perspective. In the long run, the value of the mobile internet will be a
function of the number of linkages between sites just as the linkages
between sites on the fixed-line internet are critical. Mobile phone screens
will become bigger and the growing use of other types of handsets (PDAs,
e-mail handsets) to access the mobile Internet will make these linkages
indispensable. If Docomo continues to restrict the linkages between official
and non-official sites, I-mode will never become the truly valuable system
that it has the potential to become.
-
- (Jeff Funk)
Ren Kuroda wrote:
I don't actually think this holds true for wireless. I honestly think the
value
of a wireless network is in the quality of contents, not the quantity.
Which is why a limited walled garden of only 650 quality sites is much
better on
a cellphone than thousands of random sites...
Then again your point of networking people to each other (vs people to
information) is relevant -- email on i-mode is successful partially b/c
it's
connected to ALL email networks by default (note for example J-Phone can
only
SEND to any email address; to receive from a non-J-Phone email address you
need
to sign up and pay extra).
r en
Zimran Ahmed wrote:
> The problem with walled gardens is when they fragment a network into
> several smaller networks. Just as Metcalf's law states that the value of
> a network grows by the square of the size of the network, as you make
the
> size of the networks smaller the value of the network FALLS by the
square
> of the size.
--
ascii: r e n f i e l d
octal: \162 \145 \156 \146 \151 \145 \154 \144
hex: \x72 \x65 \x6e \x66 \x69 \x65 \x6c \x64
morgan stanley dean witter japan
e-business technologies | engineering and strategy
-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Listar --
-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
-- File: smime.p7s
-- Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Listar --
-- Type: application/ms-tnef
Received on Thu Oct 19 05:59:06 2000