WAP II Drive-In Special

Why bash WAP when it's been done so well by others in the past? Well, partly because mistakes WAP promoters made can teach proponents of new wireless-data technologies a few lessons. Java 2 Micro Edition (J2ME) and Qualcomm's Binary Runtime Environment for Wireless (BREW) have been blitzing the industry with propaganda lately.

I know BREW and J2ME are not the same as WAP. WAP affects the browser, the software, the server and many other parts of a wireless-data technology solution. BREW and J2ME, on the other hand, don't affect these same parts all of the time, or in the same way as WAP.

But there are similarities — both positive and negative. The positive is that all of these solutions are innovative and attempt to improve the wireless-data experience. That goal is commendable. But all three technologies have stumbled along the way. The most obvious mistake has been marketing. Don't believe the hype.

BREW and J2ME promoters would have us believe their solutions are cure-alls for the industry's ills. In truth, neither is likely to achieve industry-wide support — a necessity for platform-dependent models.

BREW is inextricably linked to Qualcomm and therefore to CDMA. With many J2ME apps, the processor and battery are over-taxed. There are other serious technology issues giving carriers pause. I talked to a number of industry leaders over the past six months about BREW and J2ME and the future of wireless data. These conversations helped me realize this: Apps rule. Not platforms, chips, batteries, markup languages, color screens or GUIs.

A lot of money has been spent to convince the wireless industry that platforms are the basis for all successful apps. This may be true to some degree. But it clouds the greater goal of providing users with simple tools (otherwise known as apps).

Consider these anecdotal contributing factors:

• Europeans ask us Americans not to bash SMS as wireless Internet access until we admit WAP is less than perfect. They have a point.

• A new gateway excludes WAP support. It can be added as an option but is not standard.

• A very small percentage of the millions of WAP browsers currently deployed actually get used more than once — if ever — by subscribers.

• Developers are reluctant to re-code apps in any new language (or platform) especially when a new language is released weekly. Doing so is like placing your bet without the racing form.

These jabs at WAP also could be thrown at BREW or J2ME. A number of industry executives have told me developers don't want to work with BREW because it doesn't support all air interfaces. Shortly after hearing these comments, I received a press release from Qualcomm detailing the company's efforts toward supporting non-CDMA air interfaces. It may be too little, too late.

J2ME's computationally intense apps and unproven development, distribution and revenue models are fighting an uphill battle, too. Some industry leaders nostalgically view J2ME as a throwback to the days when computer enthusiasts could write their own programs at home. There's only one Bill Gates. He was the geek that won. A few others have a couple billion dollars. Big deal.

The one, big truth is that not everybody gets to win. BREW, WAP, J2ME, SMS and other wireless-data technologies are going to be with us for a while. One will rise above the rest. The others will fade away.

My advice to carriers and vendors is to pick sides now. It will be a tough decision.

But consider this analogy: There are a few cars on the road today that offer the combination of an automatic and stick-shift driving experience. They cost a hell of a lot of money. It's cheaper to choose one.

Comments? Write to cgoldman@primediabusiness.com.