Last week, we reported that
Go Daddy had
added a function to its Web site building software Website Tonight that supports the building of sites formatted according to the rules of the .mobi registry.
In Go Daddy's press release, CEO Bob Parsons said:
"With more than a billion wireless phone users estimated worldwide, there will be more and more demand for mobile content. Incorporating .mobi templates into WebSite Tonight is another example of an innovation available only from Go Daddy to help you get in on the mobile Internet revolution."
Go Daddy is one of many hosts offering this kind of tool. Hostway, for example, launched a .mobi site builder in August.
Both Go Daddy and Hostway are part of a pretty significant group of Internet companies expressing their excitement about the new domain. The distinction, in this case, is that it's a domain extension that classifies its content by audience, rather than by company type or country. And, of course, that the registry intends to enforce certain standards for mobile-formatted Web sites.
I'll admit I'm a mobile browsing novice. I use my cell phone for phone calls and the occasional text message, but never to browse the Web. That may be because I'm rarely more than an hour or two away from sitting down at a computer. I have once or twice used the cell phone to call somebody I knew was by a computer and asked them to look something up for me.
I'm interested, however, in the execution of mobile sites. So I asked a friend to recommend a couple. He came up with kicker.mobi, BMW.mobi and weather.mobi. All are very well put together sites, but they fail to answer a pretty basic question I have about the .mobi domain.
That is: what's the point?
Bear with me. I'm not condemning the .mobi domain. I'm actually asking the question.
I type "google.mobi" (a site that strikes me as a potentially useful addition to a mobile phone) into my PC's Web browser, and I am redirected to www.google.com/mobile/, a site that explains, among other things, that I can access Google's mobile search by keying "google.com" into my phone.
Google, by most accounts a pretty forward thinking Web company, doesn't seem to have invested a tremendous amount of energy into employing its .mobi domain extension.
Of course, Google built its mobile-formatted site before the .mobi domain ever existed. But it appears to have solved the matter of having the mobile site happily coexist with Google proper on the .com domain via a fairly simple redirect. I could be wrong, but I'm assuming that recognizing the mobile OS/browser and redirecting those users to the mobile-formatted site is within the means of a modestly sophisticated developer.
So yes, it makes sense for a company with a large, complex Web site, basically impossible to browse from a cell phone - let's say Cisco - to create a mobile version of that site, formatted for viewing on mobile devices and containing a limited selection of information (it has).
And it makes sense for that company to register the .mobi extension of its regular Web address (it has) and point that .mobi address at its mobile-formatted site (it has).
But given the development that has already taken place, and the relative simplicity (I'm assuming) of adding that redirect for mobile devices to the .com site, it seems to me that the company would point mobile users arriving at its .com site to the mobile formatted site (and, once again, it has).
So since keying either cisco.com or cisco.mobi into my phone's browser brings me to the same site (it does; I checked), that would make the .mobi extension, in this case, redundant.
While I have no trouble believing that companies like Go Daddy and Hostway are genuinely enthusiastic about new browsing technologies and the development of the mobile Web, I also have little trouble believing that those companies, both registrars offering .mobi domains, are equally enthusiastic about the opportunity to take $14.99 per year and $35 per year, respectively, for every .mobi domain registered.
Back, then, to my question. Is there a circumstance under which only a .mobi domain will do?
Maybe there is a service of particular use to mobile users with no pc-based equivalent. But wouldn't a .com do in that case, too?
I'm asking. If anybody can offer an example of a site that would be better off on a .mobi domain (hypothetical is fine; real-world example with link is even better), then please, by all means, avail yourself of the "post comment" link.
Tags: domains, dot-mobi, mobile web
So maybe we shouldn't think of .mobi as a TLD? Instead, maybe it's more of a badge - a declaration of the website owner's commitment to mobile accessibility? For instance, if you saw a .mobi URL on a billboard or at a train station, you can be reasonably confident that the site will be viewable on your phone?
The funny thing about these mobile sites is that, with the exception of services that can generaate tiny numerical bits of information like sports scores or a weather reports, hardware and connection limitations are going to keep most mobile sites to being the kind of boring little brochure sites you were mentioning have such small business benefit in your post about the app builders (and I agree).
I mean, bmw.mobi is a pretty neat little excercise in design, but are train rides really THAT boring? I usually have a book with me.
Aside from the cross-country trip, I do use my phone to access the web almost daily. News, events, directions, and even just reading blogs.
But then I found the need for a email address to rediretc to my blackberry (carrier's blackberry emails are usually very long) .. and all of suddent .mobi became handy .. my new mobile email is somehting like first@lastname.mobi .. so there is a use for it after all :)
I guess flowers.mobi isn't stepping on anybody's toes trademark-wise, and the purpose of the site is pretty straightforward.
I can even envision a situation in which I would need to order some emergency flowers using my phone. My only question is couldn't I just use the phone as a phone, and actually dial the number of a flower service? You know, like in the olden days?