One of the greatest successes of the first decade of the millennium, without a doubt, was Google, which moved from being a ‘mere’ search engine into new fields of computing with huge innovation and power, challenging the traditional ways of thinking. The established business was mainly about the WinTel model where desktop or laptop computers were sold in packages; Windows dominating the operating system front, and Intel providing the core of the system. What Google did was to push more web-based computing to replace desktop native apps on computers. In short, this meant that with Google Mail, Google Calendar, and various web-based office applications, Google offered a better way to use these common utility services through a web browser, for free.

To transform established habits, Google needed to offer compelling benefits. With Google’s web applications, all your key apps were then device-independent – wherever you had a web browser and Internet connectivity, you could access your inbox, applications and documents. Also, all storage was in the cloud, so there was no need to invest in your own hardware or storage capacity – Google handled all that. All of a sudden you had in your possession vast processing power, distributed access, and literally free use of world-class applications, all accessed through the web browser. We have seen over the past years that Google was – if not extremely then at least moderately – successful regarding how it changed the use of the desktop computer and some of the mainstream apps, and pushed for the Internet as the delivery and usage platform.

Mobile is quickly becoming the world’s biggest mass medium. In terms of number of mobiles in use throughout the globe – some 4.5 billion – it is clearly the most popular type of consumer electronics device ever produced. And an increasing share of all phones sold are smartphones, which are powerful devices for people to access content, use social media and email, and conduct various non-communication related activities besides traditional voice communications and text messaging. Along with the increasing face time that people spend with the mobile screen, it is naturally important to also understand the characteristics of mobile use; how do people use mobiles for business? Are people using the mobile web browser or the native apps that you can use both in offline and online modes, and are optimised for the mobile screen?

Why does this matter? Well, it matters for the sake of developers (how mobile apps should be delivered to consumers or business users), advertisers (where to advertise and how), device manufacturers and in many cases operators (how to deliver a polished package of hardware and software and guarantee good user experience that matches with people’s preferences). A key question, building on the trends that we have seen in the desktop world over the past decade, is whether native applications or web browser based applications are more popular in the eyes of the mobile consumer.

Based on our findings, perhaps surprisingly, we have seen that the success of web based apps is not that significant in the mobile market. According to our research findings earlier this year, out of data applications, native apps are already capturing 50 percent of all data volume, stealing share from the web browser. In another study, it was found that web browsers capture around 10-20 percent of total smartphone face time. Even though this may sound like a lot, native data apps, like email, social media, maps, productivity and utility, are quickly passing ahead. Also other developments, like the sheer volume of apps sold and downloaded through app stores, are indicating that app stores have radically changed the way of downloading and using applications. If the desktop world showed significant transformation towards the web, in mobile it seems to be the other way round – native apps are capturing face time and engagement of users from the mobile web.

 

Hannu Verkasalo

The editorial views expressed in this article are solely those of the author(s) and will not necessarily reflect the views of the GSMA, its Members or Associate Members