Google’s mobile jihad: Support the web, but live with the app

Google AndroidOver the last year, it’s become clear that Google has a bigger mobile war on its hands than it had anticipated. Its principal antagonist is Apple’s sexy Apple iPhone, which has seriously disrupted Google’s ambitions to turn the mobile industry into a Web-based world.

With its iPhone and the App Store, Apple has suddenly made it easy for people to download and install mobile apps. Now other big players are scrambling to follow Apple’s lead: Nokia, Samsung, Microsoft and Research In Motion among them. In the meantime, Google has fired back, with a surprising set of new web technologies that seek to make the Web even more compelling for mobile: By transplanting the richness of the PC browsing experience onto mobile devices, Google may yet have the winning hand. For now, the war wages on.

In some ways, oddly, Google and Apple are fighting together. Even Apple’s rich native applications will need to draw from the Web. Google, meanwhile, says it supports the rush to build rich mobile applications (and its delivering ads within iPhone apps (see top ad in image below). But by tying its apps into a deep integration within its device and operating system, Apple makes it harder for publishers to simply transfer their existing Web content to mobile — and that’s the conundrum for Google.

google ads iphone

Web dominance?

Google’s past — as well as its present and future — lies on the Web. It has been beating rival Microsoft because it bet big on the Web, while Microsoft has remained tied to high-cost software downloaded to the computer. Google embarked four years ago to start building Android, a new open mobile operating system for phones. Google makes billions by serving ads to the web pages served to your PC Web. Android was designed to help Web sites serve up web versions tailored to mobile phones, so that Google could make money from Web ads there too.

Just a year ago, it looked like Google’s vision would win. But since, users and developers have fallen in love with the iPhone in a bigger way than expected and shifted their resources accordingly. Google can’t as easily dominate advertising there.

Mobile is especially hot right now. Everywhere people are suddenly embracing smartphones, Amazon’s Kindle book-reading device, and other intelligent phones or devices with more intimacy than ever before. Hell, I even tuck my phone into bed with me some nights. It follows that mobile advertising is booming. U.S. advertisers will spend at least $200 million on mobile advertising this year, or 43 percent more than last year, according to studies. Add to that the hundreds of millions more in search ads, subscriptions revenue, virtual goods revenue and other mobile services. True, while ad growth has slowed somewhat in the downturn, it’s expected to resume next year, according to a report by Magna, a unit of IDG — citing the expected addition of Google’s Android phones to the market, which will join the wildly popular Apple iPhone,

However, if you own an iPhone, you may be doing some surfing on the Safari mobile Web browser to check out web sites, but there’s actually a better chance you’ve fallen for some applications built especially for it. Take Facebook’s iPhone app, for example. Launched a year ago, it has 7.5 million users. While that’s a lot fewer than the 30 million users of the mobile web version across all other phones, it’s a huge number considering how small a market share the iPhone still has.

For CBS, a major developer of mobile sports and other content (TV.com, GameSpot.com, etc), there’s just no comparison. The company officially has a “neutral” policy in the Web vs. app debate, says CBS Executive Vice President and General Manager Jeff Sellinger. But it’s the iPhone applications that are winning hands down in terms of user interaction. IPhone apps are seeing anywhere from “five to ten times” the level of engagement by users, he said. And so the iPhone has become a large focus for CBS’ development efforts, even though the number of iPhone users is still relatively small compared to some other platforms such as Nokia or BlackBerry. “That’s where you can push forward in innovation,” Sellinger said. Specifically, he raved about CBS’ March Madness app for the iPhone, which provides live stats at the top of the screen while you watch the game (you simply tap on the screen, and a stats box comes up).

Whose dominance?

Still, the battle is far from over. Google’s latest move with Android is impressive. Using standard open web technologies, developers can create mobile sites that look and feel almost identical to applications. Google demonstrated that when it launched a new Gmail site for the iPhone and Android using HTML5 and Gears, and aggressive caching. All of this makes the browser experience so much more powerful than the typical mobile sites you’re used to. Impressively, it can be used offline too — you can compose, open and read emails when offline. Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said last month he expected Android to have a “very, very strong year,” saying a number of wireless carriers and hardware makers will be announcing new Android phones by the end of the year. For some, this all means that the battle between Web and App is over. “Both won,” writes Olof Schybergson, chief executive of Fjord, a leading mobile design agency. The distinction is indeed getting lost. For example, music company Imeem built a native application for Android, but that app fetches some web pages. So developers are making decisions on a case-by-case basis: Imeem poured its resources into Android perhaps because competitor Pandora had moved quickly to dominate the iPhone. But the question now is, how quickly can Google get publishers to reform their offerings to work within Android’s browser experience, which requires deeper integration (and thus more work) with the mobile device than traditional mobile Web pages have needed? Google also can’t expect advertisers to be content with the existing state of affairs. Ads on mobile versions of PC web sites just aren’t performing very well. Advertisers require the rich information that comes from user engagement in the apps of the new iPhone and Android devices.

This all still creates significant fragmentation for mobile developers. They have to decide where to pour resources, and those decisions will help or hurt Google. Even Google’s HTML5 hasn’t been accepted by most mobile browsers. Existing browsers such as Java J2ME, Symbian, Windows Mobile don’t support it yet. Gears, too, will have to fight for acceptance. There may be less at stake for Apple. It doesn’t lose if mobile becomes more of a Web world. It just wins more if mobile remains application-centric. Apple is making big money on license fees. This subsidizes other things. And Apple lost the first historical battle, when its closed proprietary system on the Mac was vanquished by Microsoft’s more open and extensible Windows — and software developers flocked to Windows. Could this happen again, as Google offers a more open platform on mobile?

In another twist, Apple and Microsoft are almost allies in some ways: Chris Capossella, senior vice president of Microsoft’s Information Worker Product Management Group (which includes Office) points to the popularity of the Facebook iPhone app as evidence that downloaded applications still provide a better experience than the Web. He’s biased, of course, because that’s been Microsoft’s argument all along when it comes to software on your PC.

Dimitry Ioffe, founder of The Visionaire Group, a creative agency in LA that advises companies where to develop ads for phones, says he’s advising mobile content companies to first make sure they target mobile web (namely, the WAP protocol, which allows a Web page to be reformatted easily to adjust to a mobile screen), because it can reach any phone with a browser. After that, he says, mobile publishers should design a site to run on the Web browsers for specific smartphones (Safari for iPhone for example, and Webkit/Android for Google phones, for example). Only then should companies pour resources into building an application specifically for the iPhone, in part because of the extra cost. And while the iPhone has greater interaction per user, the existing ways to monetize (through Web ads) the mobile web still outweigh that of the iPhone, he says. Still, even after this advice, his customers are “finding it hard to resist,” the iPhone, given its superior levels of engagement, he says.

Mr T ipityMeanwhile, mobile ad serving companies such as Admob are tilting toward apps, after once having downplayed their significance. Admob chief executive Omar Hamoui was previously quite vocal about how the Web would win. Now Jason Spero, vice president and general manager at Admob, says his company is investing where the users are. And those users are “in apps on the iPhone and they are consuming everything from movie reviews to games to Mr T. soundbites [iPity – check it out],” he wrote me in an email. “Add to this that the app environment enables rich functionality and tight integration with maps, commerce, etc. and ads perform terrifically in apps.” Still, that doesn’t mean apps on Android isn’t changing the game. Admob put its initial development efforts into iPhone apps and is just now turning to Android.

Admob’s Spero says the struggle will play out over the next 3-5 years. “What’s exciting,” he says, “is that the user benefits from the competition, as both offer great mobile-specific data experiences.”

VentureBeat writer Matthäus Krzykowski contributed to this article. Image credit: The iPhone Blog.

[Note: All of this will be debated fiercely at the upcoming MobileBeat 2009, our mobile conference for industry leaders. Are you an entrepreneur or executive active in mobile? Come participate and network with industry players at Sign up by May 23, and save $145. Sign up fast, as we only have 400 tickets.]

Next Story: OneRiot lets you search for Spock in realtime
Previous Story: Mobile crunch time: Marketing company Velti acquires Ad Infuse

Bookmark and Share

Tags:

Photo of Matt Marshall

About the Author, Matt Marshall

Matt Marshall is editor and CEO of VentureBeat. Follow him on Twitter at @mmarshall, and follow VentureBeat on Twitter at @venturebeat.

  • Ryan
    Apple's short term success will benefit Android in the long term.

    More mobile users are being trained that browsing the web on phones is a good experience. Apple is leading other manufacturers to develop phones that are suitable for web browsing. This is all good news for Google. More mobile web browsers consuming Google ads.

    Android's eventual wide-spread adoption will only push this along.
  • I'm not entirely convinced of that.
  • JT
    Money and time spent on apps actually lock consumer in a platform. This is one of the major reasons Windows users stich with it. Apple is aware of that - I think.
    iPhone is a great Google phone (google search in safari, youtube, maps...) no reasons why both companies would not coexist.
  • Great article! Thanks for the link to our review of iPity, keep up the great work.

    -AppCraver
  • Saqeeb
    what is a jihad?

    can you explain where the term comes from, the history and meaning of the word, and where it is predominantly found?
  • Matt Marshall
    Good question, Saqeeb. Even the neutrality of this entry is being disputed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad
  • Kent
    This article misrepresents the nature of Android and the web experience (and that of the iPhone as well). The purpose of Android it to give developers access to the hardware features of the mobile device. Period. It has the same capacities of any desktop OS. Like any personal computing platform, implementation of the web is a piece; but not the point.

    But even within a flawed premise, you miss the implication of Android. It's not Google vs. Apple. Google makes an OS, Apple makes devices. Ultimately the benefit of Google's model is that many different devices ... all trying to compete with the iPhone ... will share it's DNA and application base. Google doesn't need an "iPhone killer" - just a growing stable of solid offerings by a diverse range of handset manufacturers. Apple will always be limited by the number of devices they can sell. This limitation does not apply to Google in the same way.

    The Android drive isn't based on a desire to push web technologies - LiMO, J2Me, WebOS, WinMo, etc. etc. all serve this purpose without the need for Google to take on the overhead. Android is Google's attempt to pull an inverse Microsoft. Microsoft took their dominance of physical hardware space and tried to use it to achieve dominance in web space. Google is trying to use it's domination of web space combined with Android to establish a serious presence in the physical domain. Look at what's happening on netbooks - it's shaking out as a choice between XP and Android. Google is ultimately challenging MS, not Apple.
  • Justin Bailey
    And while people speculate about who will win an imaginary war over mobile phone supremacy Google and the Open Handset Alliance faithfully continue to mind their own business and carry out there single mission; build a better mobile phone (http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/)

    That's really all that it boils down to. A few companies took it upon themselves to grace the world with a ubiquitous *mobile operating system* (not just a single device) to make life easier for hardware developers, software developers, and the people who keep them in business (the customers).

    I, for one, am grateful that a handful of companies were willing to do away with silly games and proprietary formats in order to make life easier for everybody in the long run. Here's to hoping that we see plenty more uses for Android in the near future ^_^
  • matthaus
    @kent @justin bailey
    You both have a point. Both Apple and Google are driving a major technology push in mobile, mostly together. Yet this article is not about what you rightly describe as largely an "imaginary" war between these two. The article is about some implications for other players in the mobile eco system like advertisers and developers who want to advertise for the monetisation of their apps -- where these players need to make costly choices between these two. That's also particularly true for bigger mobile content players like CBS -- they can change their development strategy only once in a while.
  • iPity reminds me of the "Hello Governor" app from Flatcracker Software
    http://www.flatcracker.com
  • Matt Marshall
    Good points.
    Still, I'm hearing the Google-Apple relationship has soured. Another thing: Apple let Google become the default search on the iphone. Apple is kind of ticked off, having given Google potentially millions of dollars of search revenue, and thus letting Google reinvest that into Android -- which directly rivals the iPhone. With these guys having the two most innovative smartphones out there, fighting for market share, it's kind of hard to see them as best buds.
  • I'm surprised that there's no mention of PhoneGap, http://phonegap.com/ , a nice open-source project which makes it extremely easy for web app developers to wrap their web apps inside an installable app for the iPhone, Android, and other platforms.
  • John Davis
    Hey, theres an app for that! LOL

    RT
    www.privacy-resources.us.tc
  • jonny smith
    you're an absolute retard for using the word Jihad without having any idea what it means.
  • " Even Google’s HTML5 hasn’t been accepted by most mobile browsers."

    Except it's not Google's. And it has not been 'accepted' by any browser yet - it's still a working draft.

    Mozilla, Microsoft and even Apple itself are contributors so I fail to see how you can line up HTML5-based apps as Google's answer to the AppStore. Android is Google's platform. HTML5 will run on anything, and will soon run on everything.

    If you want to compare HTML5 with anything, it's main competitors are Silverlight, Flash & javaFX.