Why change one technical solution (WAP) for another technological solution
(I-Mode) and give up all those great features of WAP, of which one is for
example the distinction between presentation logic and data which is
incorported in the XML based WML?
It is like changing the motor of car for a less powerful, hoping that the
car will sell better then. Concentrate on the real problem and transfer
some of the business concepts that I-Mode is all about s (where possible)
to Europe and the US, not the technology. These concepts include, for
instance, the market focus on the young, the official/non official
distinction, the billing concept, etc.
Ask yourself the question: what will I-Mode technology has to offer outside
of the I-Mode concept? Instead, it will meet several bumps of which you
have already defined one (a few handsets available in Europe). Another
question is whether bringing I-Mode to Europe will solve the problems that
WAP faces right now because of the 'WAP backlash' caused by not meeting the
expectations that were raised by network operators and phone manufacturers.
In this regard the recent press releases of KPN that they will introduce
I-Mode in Europe should be regarded as pure 'talking the stock price up'
(they will have another offering within several weeks). Actually, I am busy
on an article about this. I will be happy to share it with the list as soon
it is ready.
Paul Eijkemans
We currently have several customers, operators, and especially virtual
operators, in the western world thatwants to deploy cHTML over GPRS now.
We are also working with Access in Japan to implement and adapt the
original i-mode browser to western conditions and platforms.
How many of you work with actual implementation of i-mode/cHTML outside
Japan, and in what way?
/gustaf (currently in Tokyo, normally in Stockholm)
[ Did you check the archives? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]
Received on Wed Nov 8 17:25:23 2000