Skip to content


What Smartphones Should Libraries Support?

Libraries are challenged with figuring our which of the many smartphone platforms and standards out there to align with their strategies. It seems to change daily but I think it depends on what your user market is.

Right now I think that this is what is predictable, barring any big changes:

1. For the special library market I’d build Blackberry apps first for intranets and special library user needs and then I’d build Apple iPhone apps. Some sectors of the special library marketplace will be quite different given the security needs of some companies, R&D institutions and the military.

2. For the academic, college and public library markets, I’d build Apple iPhone apps first and then invest in clones of those apps to work on Google Android enabled phones.

It’s anyone’s guess how this will all shake out and this is all very experimental right now but you can easliy try a few different apps ahead of time.

Google makes biggest gain in smartphone market share
from Ars Technica

“US mobile users are increasingly getting into text messaging, Internet browsing, and social networks as they continue to shift to more capable devices. Additionally, Apple’s and Google’s share of the smartphone market is inching up while other leaders—namely RIM—are slowly being chipped away, at least according to the latest data from comScore.”

For my money, I think that most library apps need to be free to the end user. There are already a few to play with for OPACs and AccessMyLibrary kind of stuff. It’s anyone’s guess what this field will look like in a couple of years when the clones of the iTunes store will support Droids and BB’s.

You can play with a few free ones right now for libraries and I just downloaded the cowbell iPhone app for the Olympics. It’s fun in that silly season kind of way.

I wonder what will happen.

Stephen

0 Shares

Posted on: February 16, 2010, 10:35 pm Category: Uncategorized

7 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Why even make an app anymore if so many browsers on mobile devices are capable of HTML5? iPhones, Android phones, Palm Web OS based phones, and in the near future Blackberries – all capable of HTML5 rendering. For a library with limited resources, wouldn’t it make sense to create mobile sites that take advantage of HTML5?

  2. Firstly – why platform apps? A well-designed web app with a root-level icon works just as well and is multi-platform out of the box.

    Secondly – market share does not accurately reflect either web or app demand. Even though there are more blackberries out there, I’ve consistently heard webmasters say their analytics point to more iPhone/iPod Touch users hitting their sites than any other platform.

  3. Brad, just to play devil’s advocate, maybe there are more iPhone users hitting sites because the sites work better on iPhones? I know that my Blackberry browser does not have a great track record for working with a lot of websites, especially library websites. Because the browser isn’t great, I hardly even try to go to a lot of sites. Perhaps others do the same?

  4. As for the BB vs iPhone debate, it’s truly one of the market you are targeting. If you’re listening to special librariansn and their inranets, then BB is more common. iPhones seem to be more popular in PLs and education.

  5. RIM Unveils WebKit Internet Browser to Compete with iPhone – literally yesterday’s news.

    Blackberry users have been conditioned to believe surfing the web on a smartphone is an inconsistent and unpleasurable experience. iPhone OS and Android have creatively destroyed RIM’s monopoly of the smartphone market, and it’s hurting their bottom line. I’m surprised they hadn’t released a better browser sooner (though it isn’t even out yet).

    Internet Explorer 6 was and is still with us (now in the sub-10% range) after 8 grueling years. With mobile browsers, hit percentages are already fairly low, and turnover lies somewhere around a 2-year contract term. It would be a painful waste to develop proprietary apps and sites when all major smartphone platforms will soon be using the same browser engine.

    Since they are full-featured browsers, a mobile presence must either be additive and optional, or express the full feature set of a site. Otherwise, users would probably be more satisfied with the non-mobile version, which is both familiar in layout and has all the expected features and content.

    Platform apps should only be used when features from device APIs not expressed in the browser are needed. Creating three or more platform apps in three different languages/environments is likely not worth the marketing effort, since one web app would usually suffice. The common contract player in the Enterprise will soon be on board with this.

  6. Supporting Iphone and android seems to be a safe bet. Not sure about BBs. But instead of guessing why not just do a quick survey, or just have a quick count everyday by looking at the people approaching you at a desk?

    I make a game of it, taking noticing the number of times, patrons whip out a phone to show me some call no.

    So far, Iphone is leading

  7. I agree with doing a survey but asking just people you meet in the library isn’t sufficient. My own research shows that virtual users have quite a different profile than on-site users. You can determine who is using your site by tracking browser types, etc. but that’s only useful if you’ve promoted your site as mobile friendly to your key target audiences.

    I agree that HTML5 will be wonderful. It would be nice if we could always design for the future and ignore the present installed base and just expect people to upgrade. I still get pushback about killing IE6!

    SA