Java ME (much like Flash Lite) is a horizontal approach to deploying applications across different mobile ‘technology islands’ – and Sun’s JCP approach failed to achieve consistency of implementation. So it’s not directly comparable to the likes of Google+Android, Qualcomm+BREW, Apple+OSX, etc – only to Adobe+Flash Lite.

Now you might ask why is Adobe on the list.. well, it’s because it has achieved unprecedented penetration with the same runtime (rather than a runtime spec like Java ME) to the tune of over 500M devices shipped per year. As such it qualifies as one of the major forces influencing how services and applications will be delivered on mobile phones.

Andreas

I think it’s still a way to get an application out to the user. Even though it’s less hip than Flash or iPhone-apps.

Mark – yes, Adobe have taken the route of an application execution environment rather than an OS – probably a smarter strategy, with its pros and cons; the pros is the impressive installed base, the cons is the inconsistent integration with the underlying OS and device API.

Andreas

Great post, with the Open Screen Project partners we will definitely move towards a single platform. At MAX 2008 we demonstrated the work under way showing desktop Flash 10 running on Windows Mobile, Symbian and Android platforms.

What’s interesting in your gravity slide is that Adobe are the only company not offering an Operating System. Not only that but Flash is available on five of the other centres of gravity.

There’s a glaring exception with Apple but Flash does run on the iPhone.. it just has to be approved

Mark Doherty
Adobe – Mobile and Devices
http://www.flashmobileblog.com

Great article!

When I recently returned to the US I was surprised at how many definitely non ‘enterprise’ people used a blackberry. That’s probably because if you walk into an ATT etc. store, you can either find low end phones (by European standards) or Blackberries. To me that looks like they are expanding to the consumer market as well, at least in the U.S.

All the best,
Martin

Good point about RIM. I would consider RIM partially a vertical play (devices, enterprise sync) and partially a horizontal (via licensing agreements with OEMs). It is also a credible platform provider with 16+ million subs for its enterprise sync.

However, I would still not compare it side-by-side with the other 7 centres, in terms of magnitude, i.e. gravity pull. The 7 centres are playing in mostly consumer phones and therefore mass-market volumes, not just enterprise.

One noteworty absentee from the list is DoCoMo – and for a good reason. Since dropping market share to below 50%, and realising the high cost and long time-to-market of its customisation efforts, DoCoMo has taken a back-seat approach with OEMs and is now letting them make the decisions – in that context DoCoMo is now less of a gravity centre and market maker.

Andreas

Just curious as to how RIM fits into this framework as they are a contender too given their niche. think that would have made your framework complete. Was there a specific reason for leaving them out ?

Vishy

eye on which will emerge as the preferred environment. The speakers on this second panel cover many of the key mobile runtime environments:Andreas Constantinou, Research Director, VisionMobile – who has recently written the thought-provoking article “The 7 centres of gravity in mobile”Jürgen Scheible, Author of the book “Mobile Python: Rapid prototyping of applications on the mobile platform”Pete Barr-Watson, Senior Business Development/Deployment Manager, Microsoft SilverlightSimon Nicholson