Re: http://www.w3.org/2008/02/MS4D_WS/papers/unicef-w3c-presentation.html

On Nov 6, 2008, at 9:15 AM, public-mw4d@w3.org wrote:

> > There are essentially two aspects that are getting mixed up here.  
> One is
> > the technical feasibility of using SMS, voice etc., while the  
> other is
> > usabiity and practicality of the solution. So, I agree with  
> Stephane that
> > SMS for browsing the web is probably not the way forward but would  
> like to
> > clarify that it is the latter reason rather than technical  
> feasibility
> > being an issue here.

one can usefully think of SMS as
just one of the possible request/response channels
for services sitting on the Web

remember that the Web is based on request/response cycles
and SMS is just one way to initiate a request (or point to a request- 
store)
and/or to receive a response (or pointer to a final response-point)

> > Completely agree here though if the 'transient phase' is more than  
> few
> > years then it might still be worthwhile to invest if the returns  
> can be
> > justified.
> agreed. but i believe this is not the case for SMS.

can you say why you hold this belief?
perhaps I am missing something here
but I'd say the emergence of SMS-only plans
in places like the PRC
are indicators of SMS's longer-term utility
for "average people" in the developing world

jeffs

--
The people who tap into
the rhythm of how this
audience uses media,
those are the ones who
are going to win. Our
audience is full of multitaskers.
They're IM-ing and talking on
the phone and doing their
homework and watching TV
all at the same time.
- Van Toffler, MTV Pres. -
============

Prof. Jeff Sonstein

http://www.it.rit.edu/~jxs/
http://chw.rit.edu/blog/
http://www.it.rit.edu/~jxs/emailDisclaimer.html

Received on Thursday, 6 November 2008 14:28:05 UTC