WAP 2.0

What will the next generation of WAP mean for your network and applications, and will it finally end the WAP bashing?

If the ultimate goal is to create applications — wired or wireless — once, using one markup language and for any device, then the next generation of WAP may bring us one step closer to the prize.

WAP 2.0, set to be released this summer, will consist of a markup-language migration from HTML/WML to extensible hyper text markup language (XHTML), which is supposed to bring together the WAP and fixed-Internet worlds and enable developers to build applications one time for rendering on multiple devices.

Both WML and XHTML are based on XML technology, the next generation of Internet markup language. WAP 2.0 will be 100% backward-compatible, allowing users to interact with the more than 10,000 applications from 95 countries already available in the WML format.

The introduction of XHTML in WAP 2.0 will allow carriers to deploy new services in multiple channels (Web, WAP, PDA) while reducing the cost of maintaining those services, said John Yuzdepski, SprintPCS.com (wireless and wired) vice president and general manager, and WAP Forum (www.wapforum.org) board of directors member. Also, for carriers, WAP 2.0 will include higher degrees of security.

WAP 2.0 embraces TCP as protocol and adds compelling features for developers and users, including an advanced-user interface and support for pop-up menus, color, graphics, animation and large-file downloading. Consumer and business WAP applications include graphic applications for wireless-chat products, a performance-management tool that predicts scaleability and mapping applications. Bluetooth-enabled products and WAP-enabled remote-control devices for information residing on PCs are other applications.

“WAP 2.0 gets us closer to the ubiquitous Internet markup language,” said Yuzdepski. “It's still difficult to think in terms of two different markup languages.”

WAP 2.0 will make task switching between big screens and little screens easier for developers. Although it's still far away, Yuzdepski said the goal is to have a 1-application and 1-markup-language environment for any screen size.

The WAP Forum still promises a summer release for WAP 2.0 but won't provide a specific date, or even month. According to Scott Goldman, WAP Forum CEO, the group is approaching things differently with WAP 2.0.

“We have a set of features and specifications that will be in WAP 2.0, or we won't release it,” he said. “This is much more of a feature-driven, as opposed to a date-driven, release.”

Goldman said WAP 2.0 will bring features that will make WAP a richer user experience and enable features consumers will want to use, but carriers won't notice a difference in their networks when moving from WAP 1.x to 2.0.

An End to WAP Bashing?

To some, WAP is a big zero. Will 2.0 change their minds?

As of January 2000, there were 25,000 WAP pages, and as of January 2001, they increased to 7.8 million. As of December 2000, there were 14 million WAP subscribers worldwide and 10,000 WAP sites in 95 countries.

BT Cellnet's (www.btcellnet.net) Genie wireless Internet service received more than 88 million WAP hits in January 2001, with 800% growth since September. Wireless entertainment publisher Digital Bridges (www.digitalbridges.com) reported that it has more than 90,000 regular users and has received more than 23 million WAP hits in less than 6 months.

Yet WAP critics abound, arguing that WAP is not a valuable or viable standard for accessing the wireless Internet.

“WAP stands for the wrong approach to portability,” industry researcher Jakob Nielson told the media, after releasing a 2000 report in which he found that 70% of WAP phone trial users said they wouldn't buy the technology. But he only surveyed 20 trial users.

The WAP Forum's response was that the research methodology employed was flawed, along with its subsequent findings. The WAP Forum said the authors would have received a more accurate reading on WAP's usability if they had interviewed current WAP users.

“There's been a lot of WAP bashing at the initial stages, largely because people's expectations were raised to an unrealistic level,” Goldman said. “When WAP was first built, nobody ever expected people to do their Ph.D. research on a WAP phone. That's not what it's for.”

Another criticism leveled at WAP is that it delivers too slowly. But slow access speeds are the result of the network infrastructure, not a reflection of WAP as a technology or specification. WAP will work at the same maximum speed as the network allows, and its architecture allows it to expand into whatever speed is available on the network.

Other WAP naysayers point out that the overall user experience leaves a lot to be desired because of small screens and only three or four text lines. WAP 2.0 may not help on that front, said Adam de Boor, Geoworks (www.geoworks.com) CTO.

“Just because you're switching from WML to XHTML doesn't mean you're changing fundamentally how things are going to be displayed. You're just changing the language from which you're expressing how you want things displayed,” he said. “Services are still going to be limited by the form factor of the device.”

Goldman said the WAP Forum has hired a company to track media perception. According to its data, much of the criticism has subsided.

“You can bash all you want, but when you've got 15 million customers around the world that are paying to use this on a daily basis, who's right? The guys writing about it or the people voting with their wallets?” he said.

Is WAP in I-Mode's Future?

WAP also has been slighted for its inferiority to NTT DoCoMo's i-mode (www.nttdocomo.com). But i-mode is a service or business model, and WAP is a protocol or technology.

According to Goldman, i-mode's proprietary standard, compact HTML (CHTML), won't be competing with WAP any time soon. In fact, it's just the opposite: i-mode has plans to join the WAP camp.

“DoCoMo has already clearly stated that they plan to migrate to WAP 2.0 as their standard and their specification for creating i-mode services as soon as WAP 2.0 is ratified,” he said. “A lot of people make the mistake of comparing i-mode to WAP, and what you're really comparing there is an Intel processor to a Dell computer.”

And as for whispers that CHTML will soon replace XHTML, Goldman said they couldn't be more wrong.

“CHTML is not sufficiently robust to capitalize on the additional spectrum availability of 3G and to deliver the types of advanced applications and security that carriers are going to want,” Goldman said.

XHTML Excitement

Wireless carriers, handset manufacturers and content providers have announced their support for XHTML as the format for future wireless services. XHTML is the language that will be used to create all content, both for the fixed Internet and the wireless world. By narrowing the gap between wired and wireless content, XHTML will accelerate the creation of services and improve the usability of services for users.

“With XHTML, we now have a unique opportunity to start creating and implementing visually appealing, yet backward WAP-compatible services that will satisfy the requirements of the future, as well as ensure a smooth evolution path for current services,” said Anssi Vanjoki, Nokia (www.nokia.com) executive vice president.

Most observers say that XHTML and WAP 2.0 together means developers only have to write applications once because it's easy to migrate between a handset and a PC screen.

But De Boor said XHTML may confuse the current situation.

“There's this idea that we'll start writing in XHTML, and then everything will be wonderful because we'll be able to write one application that will work everywhere,” he said. “It's really not going to be that way. There are still different devices, form factors and input methods.”

The problems people had with rolling out services in the WAP 1.x space have not been due to the unfamiliarity of the language, but to different interpretations of how things should be and different characteristics in the wireless-devices space, he said.

And it may get more complex. De Boor said WAP 2.0 will be interesting from a device perspective because you're now asking the devices not only to deal with compiled WML but also with XHTML with style sheets, among other things. You can't just throw everything into one standard and expect it to work.

WAP Forum's Future

The U.S. wireless industry continues to study i-mode's success, especially since NTT DoCoMo purchased 16% of AT&T Wireless (www.attws.com). The alliance may have huge implications for WAP.

AT&T Wireless and DoCoMo plan to implement dual-mode browsers (WAP and i-mode) and are adopting a global standard, said Tom Trinneer, AT&T Wireless vice president of portal development, at a recent conference. The short-term plan calls for WAP 2.0 and i-mode to converge into a global standard by the end of 2002.

With today's most successful wireless service migrating toward XHTML and WAP 2.0, you might assume that the WAP Forum's job will become much easier. But maybe not. After WAP 2.0 is released this summer, the Forum's captain and the protocol's biggest cheerleader will step down.

Goldman officially resigned as CEO in March but said he would stay until after the WAP 2.0 specification is published. Goldman's successor has yet to be named, but the search was in full swing at press time.

Yuzdepski said Goldman has done well what has to be one of the toughest jobs in the industry.

“He shepherded us through a very tough time, a lot of criticism,” he said. “He's built the processes and methodologies to go forward.”

Although Goldman isn't sure what he'll do next, he said he's certain that WAP will be a key player in the 3G world of the future. But it needs compelling applications.

“It was really the P in the WAP that was important in the first year,” he said. “We're approaching about 15 million WAP users, so we know that the architecture works. Now we're looking for the A in WAP, the applications, because that's what, in the final analysis, is going to drive people to the wireless devices, to prompt them to use that technology. Nobody buys technology; people buy what technology can do for them.”