- From: Mark Griffith <markgriffith@rocketmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 15:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-mobile@w3.org
- Cc: markgriffith@rocketmail.com
/ / So why does Japan have a lead in WAP and i-mode? I can imagine the Japanese _do_ implement better, and I am sure the extra time on cramped trains is a major element (though Europeans make up for it hanging around at cafes, don't they?). Japan is also a rich, gadget-happy country with a quarter more people than Germany. Their homes being too cramped, and dial-up home access being too dear, for PC-Internet use from home to take off is another element in Japan's early start surely. But the one reason everyone seems to be forgetting is that you can fit more information on a mobile-phone screen if your language uses compact ideograms - as Japanese, Chinese, and often Korean, does. One or two ideograms can represent a word that may cost three or four times as many characters in any alphabetical language. I am guessing, but it might be possible to write my previous sentence in as few as twenty ideogram characters in Japanese (though they also have the option of alphabetical writing). Even at double the width of alphabetical letters, that would be forty character widths compared to the space I actually took up in the one-sentence paragraph above - over 95 characters - and that was in English, a relatively concise language by European standards. When screens get bigger and faster that difference will erode, but we may be in one of the few two-or-three-year periods in recent history when our alphabet-only languages have a clear disadvantage that matters in business. It might mainly be that mobile-phone screens right now are just fun enough and quick enough to be worth using if you have a language with ideograms, and not if you don't. Best wishes, Mark Griffith Manchester / Amsterdam / Budapest / / __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/
Received on Saturday, 16 September 2000 18:52:42 UTC