study on mobile search future prospects - ipts - jrc -...

UNED

Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia

Spain

Study on Mobile Search Future Prospects

MINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP HELD AT IPTS

16‐17 April 2009

Madrid, 24th April 2009

Contact Details: Dr. José Luis Gómez‐Barroso

UNED

Email: [email protected]

[email protected]

Telephone: +34 91 398 8115

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Minutes of the Mobile Search Workshop: 16‐17 April 2009, IPTS, Seville

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PARTICIPANTS IN THE WORKSHOP........................................................................ 3

Participants: Project Team...................................................................................... 3

Participants: External Experts ................................................................................. 3

Participants: IPTS..................................................................................................... 4

AGENDA OF THE WORKSHOP .............................................................................. 5

1. OBJECTIVES OF THE WORKSHOP AND OVERVIEW OF THE BACKGROUND

RESEARCH............................................................................................ 9

2. PROSPECTIVE SCENARIOS AND EXPERT SURVEY........................................... 12

3. TIME HORIZONS OF TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT AND MARKET TAKE‐UP ............ 16

4. MAJOR BOTTLENECKS HINDERING THE FULL DEPLOYMENT OF MOBILE SEARCH

SCENARIOS......................................................................................... 18

5. TECHNOLOGICAL ASPECTS...................................................................... 19

6. BUSINESS MODELS............................................................................... 21

7. THE DEMAND SIDE............................................................................... 24

8. THE DARK SIDE OF MOBILE SEARCH .......................................................... 27

9. PROJECTING INTO THE FUTURE................................................................ 28

10. IDENTIFICATION OF AREAS OF POSSIBLE POLICY INTERVENTION ....................... 34

ANNEX I. SWOT ANALYSIS: LIST OF INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS.............................. 37

Strengths ............................................................................................................... 37

Weaknesses........................................................................................................... 38

Opportunities ........................................................................................................ 40

Threats ................................................................................................................ 40

i


ii

ANNEX II. QUESTIONNAIRE.............................................................................. 42

Invitation Letter .................................................................................................... 42

Prospective Scenarios Description........................................................................ 43

1 – Serendipity Search.......................................................................................43

2 – Searching for a Recipe .................................................................................43

3 – Wellness Mode ............................................................................................44

4 – Truman Show Mode ....................................................................................44

5 – Tourist Mode ...............................................................................................45

6 – Playground mates Mode .............................................................................46

7 – Professional Appointments – Dating Agency ..............................................46

Questionnaire........................................................................................................ 47

Data on expertise ..............................................................................................47

Questions Common to all Scenarios .................................................................48

Scenario‐Specific Questions ..............................................................................52


PARTICIPANTS IN THE WORKSHOP

PARTICIPANTS: PROJECT TEAM

Name Organisation Location

José Luis Gómez‐Barroso (Project coordinator)

UNED Madrid, Spain

Rudy de Waele mTrends Brussels, Belgium

Ajit Jaokar Futuretext London, UK

Oscar Westlund Goteborg University Goteborg, Sweden

PARTICIPANTS: EXTERNAL EXPERTS


SMIT ‐ Studies on Media, Information and Telecommunication

Pieter Ballon Belgium

Ana Bernardos UPM Spain

Mark Bole ShoZu United Kingdom

Alvin Wang Graylin mInfo China/United States

Juha Kaario Nokia Finland

Google Sweden ‐Public Policy and Government Affairs

Nicklas Lundblad Sweden

Claudio Moderini DOMUS ACADEMY Master in Interaction Italy

Wandrille Pruvot BuzzCity France

REDTEL – Spanish Association of Telecommunications Network Operators

Sergio Ramos Spain

3


4

Pierre Scokaert AB Phone France

Hendrik Speck University of Applied Sciences Kaiserslautern

Germany

PARTICIPANTS: IPTS


David Broster (Head of Information Society Unit) IPTS Seville

Ioannis Maghiros IPTS Seville

Ramón Compaño IPTS Seville

Claudio Feijóo IPTS Seville

Margherita Bacigalupo IPTS Seville

Anssi Hoikkanen IPTS Seville

Gianluca Misuraca IPTS Seville


AGENDA OF THE WORKSHOP

Participants received beforehand a summary of the draft results of the research.

Thursday 16th April

09h00 Registration

Introduction

09h15 Welcome (D. Broster, IPTS)

09h20 Project Objectives (R. Compañó, IPTS)

09h30 Roundtable Presentation (all participants)

Main Project Findings and Scenarios

09h45 Overview of Project Findings (J.L. Gómez‐Barroso, UNED)

10h00 Scenario Overview (C. Feijóo, IPTS)

10h20 Comments to Scenarios (all)

Part 1&2: Time Frame and Technological Aspects

11h00 Survey Results (C. Feijóo, IPTS)

11h10 Discussion (all)

Part 3: Business Models

11h45 Landscape of Mobile search players (Rudy de Waele, MTrends)

12h00 Survey Results (R. Compañó, IPTS)


Part 4: Demand Side

14h00 Users’ vision on mobile search (Oscar Westlund, Univ. Gothenburg)

14h20 Survey Results (M. Bacigalupo, IPTS)


5


6

Part 5: The dark side of mobile search

16h00 Survey results (I. Maghiros, IPTS)


Friday 17th April

Summary of first day

8h45 Presentation of findings (C. Feijóo, IPTS & J.L Gómez‐Barroso, UNED)


Part 6: SWOT for Europe

09h30 Projecting into the future (Ajit Jaokar, Future Text)


Part 7: Policy Options

11h00 Survey results (C. Feijóo, IPTS)


12h15 Prioritization of Policy Options

Close

13h15 Wrap‐Up (R. Compañó, IPTS)

13h45 Close (D. Broster, IPTS)


Notes to the minutes

1. The notes are organised by session and, within session, by topics of discussion.

2. Great care has been taken to respect the flow of the argument, which required, in some instances, changing the order of some contributions.

3. Policy notes and research notes boxes highlight consensus during the discussions

7


1. OBJECTIVES OF THE WORKSHOP AND OVERVIEW OF THE

BACKGROUND RESEARCH

The workshop started with an introduction to the research of the Information Society Unit of the IPTS given by the Head of Unit, David Broster.

The two objectives of the workshop were than introduced by Ramón Compañó:

1. To validate the “Mobile Search Future Prospects Report” circulated to the participants one week prior to the workshop.

2. To lever on participants’ expertise to envision future prospects for the mobile search sector, its role for EU competitiveness and growth, so as to identify the main challenges for EU policy makers.

After a round‐table presentation of participants, José Luis Gómez Barroso (UNED – project coordinator) gave an overview of the structure of the research:

• A categorisation of mobile search

• Dynamics of mobile search

o Market overview

o Demand and social acceptance

o Business models

o A map of mobile search players

• Influencing trends

o Technology

o User’s vision

o Baseline scenario

• Projecting into the future

• Implication of mobile search for Europe

Referring to the Report, José Luis Gómez Barroso summarised how the evolving field of mobile search can be categorised according to different criteria:

• Based on the reach of the search

9


o On device search

o On portal search

o Off portal search

o Social network based search

• Based on the method used to perform to the search

o Web based mobile engines

o Use of legacy services for offering remote search

o Voice‐based search engines

• Based in the futures added to the search

o Conventional text search

o Multimedia search

o Semantic search

o Context‐aware search

José Luis Gómez Barroso pointed out that the mobile phone is with television the most widely diffused Information and Communication Technology (ICTs) in the world. Adopted as devices to be used for voice/text communication, for the past 15 years mobiles has been evolving into multimedia devices becoming a gateway to content and services designed to enhance the day‐to‐day life of consumers in a practical or entertaining way, with services such as mobile internet, location based applications, TV and video, games and music. Even though the variety of services within the mobile services market is ever increasing, the study carried by the UNED‐lead team shows that the current use of mobile internet is limited1 and in particular that most usage takes the form of browsing, not mobile search, that users of mobile search mostly conform to being early adopters (mostly men, using business subscription plans).

The research further shows that mobile search users are not browsing only users (having a broad approach to search input and scope), that they make shorter queries and, although their queries are intended to interaction, click trough is little.

1 The number of mobile internet users worldwide reached 638 millions in 2008, which represents 19% of total mobile users. From a regional perspective, main concentration is identified in China and India, accounting more than 50% of users worldwide (from the Mobile Search Future Prospects Interim Report).

10


11

The audience was also presented with the main findings with respect to current mobile search business models (the main still being advertising based, followed by transaction based and info‐mediary services). It was pointed out that the business data are missing in this field and most of them come from the consultancy, lacking consolidation and homogeneity.

Finally José Luis Gómez Barroso presented the audience with the technology‐related trends identified as having a likely impact on the prospects of mobile search, namely:

• Search engines:

o Semantic/natural language search

o Multimedia search

o User and environment content search

• Context‐aware enablers:

o RFID and WSN evolution as critical factors

• Platforms:

o Standardisation processes toward open platforms

o Multi‐stakeholders platforms (Symbian&Co) vs Industry leader platforms (Google Android). Openness as the critical feature

• Devices:

o Broadband connectivity and multimedia features, tactile screens, enhanced web navigation, GPS receiver embedded…

• Networks:

o 3G, 3.5G, 4G… Mobile broadband access capacity converging to fixed commercial offers

o Ultra broadband everywhere becoming real


2. PROSPECTIVE SCENARIOS AND EXPERT SURVEY

Prior to the workshop, participants had been invited to fill in an online questionnaire. Results were presented by Claudio Feijóo with an overview of the scope and objective of such a research tool.

The survey was based on a number of prospective scenarios generated by the IPTS‐UNED research team aiming to sketch possible evolutions of mobile search domain, by staging the combination of different technological evolutions and social applications.

Scenarios were designed to simulate different applications in order to:

1. Ease forward thinking and reflection on current trends and developments

2. Harness experts’ opinion along the key dimensions of the study (technological evolution, emergence of innovative business models and user acceptance) so as to cover key issues that affect mobile search future development, its understanding and its drivers and barriers

3. Stimulate debate during the present workshop.

Table 1 summarises the dimension on which scenarios were designed, while Figure 1 positions them with respect to the intensity of use of personal data and embedded technological complexity.

As a general feedback participants found the scenarios to offer a broad picture of possible evolution of mobile search fitting the envisioning purpose they were designed for.

Though scenarios were evaluated as prospective enough to set the scene for a joint discussion on the evolution of mobile search, some of them were found to need adjustments to become more realistic, like hint to business model or to social acceptance (e.g. recipe). Some were considered as proposing outdated concepts (e.g. more push than pull, repeating the failures of information brokers). It was also raised that they scenarios propose a desk‐top based approach to search and are not mobile‐centric enough, i.e. they do not emphasise the specificity of mobile experience (bridging vs bonding).

It was also mentioned that the picture would have benefited from a scenario focussing on entertainment (search).

The description of the scenarios is offered in Annex I.

12


13

1

Serendipity

2Recipe

3Wellness

4Truman

5Tourist

6Playground

7Dating

Technological complexity

+

+

-

Use o

f per

sona

l dat

a

Figure 1. Mapping scenarios on two relevant axes: technical complexity and use of personal data


STEPS IN THE EVOLUTION TRADITIONAL SEARCH CONTEXT–AWARE

INTERNET OF THINGS OF MOBILE SEARCH

ADAPTED TO MOBILE (PULL / PUSH) COGNITIVE TECHNOLOGIES

Data types Web (virtual) + Personal profile + Sensors in objects (advanced + Bio–parameters + Location environment) + Cognitive information + Social + Audiovisual queries + Environment (basic)

Critical Usability of mobile browsing in + Tools for user in control + NFC infrastructures and + Bio–sensors technologies the handset + Mobile social computing sensors + Cognitive technologies

Availability and affordability of + Audiovisual search + Context–awareness mobile broadband connectivity + Context–awareness (basic) (advanced)

Additional Improvements in search + Availability of geo–located content + Internet of the future + Research in artificial intelligence enablers technologies (semantic web, …) + Availability of context–aware content

+ Wearable computing and communications

Business model Advertising Undefined Undefined Undefined

Critical Use of personal profile + Privacy ++ Privacy ++ Trust elements from + Management of mobile e–ID + Trust user’s + Usefulness perspective + Perceived value

Narrative 7. E – Dating agency (trusted third 1 B – Serendipity mode (discovery, 2. I – Recipe search (accurate 3. – Wellness model (diversity of scenarios party) push, privacy control) information role of standards interests of stakeholders, health

6. D – Playground mates model (social and interoperability) information) limits, location) 5. K – Tourist mode (infrastruct., 4. H – Truman Show (the limits of sensors, tagged content) privacy and commercialization)

Table 1. Prospective scenarios: relevant dimensions.

14


The questionnaire is summarised in Annex II. It was distributed to a network of approximately 240 international experts in the mobile field, including workshop participants. Two days before the workshop was held, 50 responses had been collected. All results discussed below are based on this number (#50).

After the cut‐off date, 11 additional questionnaires have been received, raising the number of the total respondents to 61.

The profiles of the respondents are summarised in Figure 2 (affiliation, years of experience in the mobile search field and specific background). They show a good balance between the industry and the academia and between the different backgrounds (business/market development, user experience, technology, and legal). Respondents from Public Administration and those having a legal background were slightly less numerous compared to the others

5

Public Administration 8

Industry 24

Academia 26

> 10 years 11

5 to 10 years 16

< 5 years 19

Legal 10

Technological 22

User Experience 32

Business and Market development 33

10 15 20 25 35305

Public Administration 8Public Administration 8

Industry 24Industry 24

Academia 26Academia 26

> 10 years 11> 10 years 11

5 to 10 years 165 to 10 years 16

< 5 years 19< 5 years 19

Legal 10Legal 10

Technological 22Technological 22

User Experience 32User Experience 32

Business and Market development 33Business and Market development 33

10 15 20 25 3530

Figure 2. Respondent profiles

15


3. TIME HORIZONS OF TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT AND MARKET TAKE‐UP

Figure 3 shows the distribution of answers to the following two questions:

• When will the underlying technology be available?

• When might this application reach the mass market?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Techno

logy

Market

Techno

logy

Market

Techno

logy

Market

Techno

logy

Market

Techno

logy

Market

Techno

logy

Market

Techno

logy

Market

7. Dating Agency 1. Serendipity 3. Wellness 5. Tourist 6. Playground 2. Recipe 4. Truman Show

2009 2011 2015 2020 Never

Figure 3. Expert opinion on technology and market time horizons concerning the seven scenarios

The graph firstly shows the timeline along which the different scenarios are expected to be feasible from a technological point of view. This reading is not intended to define a roadmap, but rather to gather expert forecast about the development of the mobile search environment as depicted in the seven scenarios.

As the graph shows, most of the technology is either available (2009) or will be available soon (2011 to 2015) except for effective audiovisual search (“tourist”), integration with other services (“wellness”), semantic search and deployment of sensors (“recipe”), and cognitive technologies (“Truman Show”).

Figure 3 also shows that in all cases technology is never the barrier to the deployment of a prospective scenario. A lag is expected between the actual possibility of having a scenario enabled from a technological perspective and its reach to the mass market.

Experts confirmed that technology is expected to come ahead of the market even in the domain of mobile search. In particular expectations about the time to market see a first take up of conventional search adapted to the mobile environment in niche markets (scenario 7), followed by application making a more intensive use of personal and social data to improve

16


17

user experience (Scenarios 1, 3, and 5) in increasingly wider markets with technology mostly constrained to the device and applications.

It was common opinion that scenarios staged complex services (like scenario 2) which require:

1. integration of technologies

2. interoperability of content and applications

3. advanced interconnected services

Scenario 7 was the last one in the results, as it was considered to represent too dark a future.

Experts claimed that though in many cases the technology is already there, the level of integration required by the scenario may have a different timeline. Further, there was consensus about the lack of value proposition in the mobile search market. According to the workshop participants, one of the main barriers to the development of this sector is the lack of valuable concepts that foster mobile search take up by matching users demand and their desires, rather than their needs (for example, experts highlighted the lack of pure mobile search applications: such as timetable search, “get me home”).

.


4. MAJOR BOTTLENECKS HINDERING THE FULL DEPLOYMENT OF

MOBILE SEARCH SCENARIOS

Figure 4 illustrates expert’ opinion on the relative importance of different types of bottlenecks across scenarios.

The graph suggests that scenarios can be grouped in three different clusters

1. The first where technology is not important or relatively important, economics are important, but behavioural aspects are extremely important (“wellness”, “playground”, “dating”, “Truman show”). They make intensive use of very personal data.

2. Those where both the economic and the behavioural aspects are important with regard to relatively unimportant technology aspects (“serendipity”). They require a balance between use of personal data and business model.

3. Those where economics are more important than the relatively less important technological and behavioural aspects (“recipe”, “tourist”). They require a business model to be successfully deployed.

‐40

‐30

‐20

‐10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Techno

logical

Econ

omical

Behaviou

ral

Techno

logical

Econ

omical

Behaviou

ral

Techno

logical

Econ

omical

Behaviou

ral

Techno

logical

Econ

omical

Behaviou

ral

Techno

logical

Econ

omical

Behaviou

ral

Techno

logical

Econ

omical

Behaviou

ral

Techno

logical

Econ

omical

Behaviou

ral

3. Wellness mode 6. Playground mates 7. Professional Appointments – Dating

Agency

4. The Truman Show 1. Serendipity search 2. Searching for a recipe 5. Tourist mode

extremely important very important important not important irrelevant

Figure 4. The distribution of technological, economical and behavioural bottlenecks for the seven scenarios

18


5. TECHNOLOGICAL ASPECTS

The technologies proposed in the scenarios where the followings:

1. Interfaces to location‐based services

2. Technologies regarding user profiling

3. Privacy control on the user side

4. Usability/interfaces

5. Cognitive technologies (behavioural patterns, artificial intelligence, etc)

6. General search (better indexing, matching algorithms, ranking, etc)

7. Semantic web/search

8. Interfaces to mobile social networking

9. Wireless sensors (smart environment, RFID, NFC, etc)

10. Including augmented reality features (i.e., information embedded in physical objects)

11. Audio/image search

12. Bio‐sensors technologies

Figure 5. Highest rated Technologies per scenario

19


20

2Figure 5 and Figure 6 show how experts rated them according to their relevance for the seven scenarios

Figure 6. Least rated technologies per scenario

The less‐mentioned technologies for advanced mobile search resulted to be: I) improvement of general search (indexing, algorithms, etc); II) semantic web/search; III) audio‐video search; IV) cognitive technologies (behavioural patterns, artificial intelligence, etc).

During the discussion participants explained that the low ranking of these aforementioned technological aspects does not mean that they are not considered important. Rather that they were not considered as the pivot technologies for the scenarios at stake (e.g. no scenario was really focused on audio‐visual search, not implying that such is not a crucial area for the evolution of the search domain).

In particular it was stressed that cognitive technologies are a crucial area for mobile experience, but that the terms encompasses a variety of faces that are hard to reconcile: from the good old fashion artificial intelligence to more challenging approaches to the detection of patterns in human activities so as to foresee the intentions of the individual according to the context the user is and what she is doing.

The discussion also focused on the importance of interconnection and interoperability of technologies. This issue could be more relevant than the “hard‐core” search technologies themselves.

Finally, it was appointed that mobile search coexist with popular dual usages PC/mobile, but it is not a seamless experience across media.

2 Per each scenario the following question was posed: “The most relevant developments in technology for this

scenario to happen are: (tick up to four options)”.


21

6. BUSINESS MODELS

The session dedicated to business models was introduced by a presentation by Rudy de Waele, who gave his very personal overview of different players in the field of mobile search by mapping their search applications on the following dimensions:

Players User scenarios Goo

gle

Spotlight

ChaCha

kooaba

Nokia point &fin

d

Taptu

Youtub

e

Twitter

Zven

ts

Urban

Spo

on

Train Co

mmuting

Car commuting

A dinne

r for a friend

Inspiration on

a bus ride

Discovering

a city

Textual X X X X X X X X X X X

Voice / Audio X X X X X

Visual X X X X X X

Interface

Gestural X X X X

Navigational X X

Universal X X X X X

Vertical X X X X X X Reach

Local X X X X X X X

None X X X X X X

Sharing X X X X X X X X X

Community X X X X X

Socialne

ss

Live X X X X X

The dimensions and categories presented above correspond to the presenter’ personal view. This view is not uniformly shared by the rest of the project team. Indeed, in the process of elaboration of the report, the project team considered, after some inner discussion, more accurate the categorisation finally presented in the report.

Following the presentation on mobile search players the survey results were presented and discussed. The questionnaire had proposed 14 different business models per scenario:

1. Advertising in general (i.e. like in today Internet search)


1. Pay‐as‐you‐go (impulse purchase)

2. Merchandising (i.e., as a way to sell some other product or service) or affiliation (i.e., to create opportunities of business for some other site)

3. Premium services (i.e., the basic functionality is free, but the advanced options not)

4. Advertising but based on some product placement (i.e., linked with another product: a tv show, a cinema premiere...)

5. Value‐added services (i.e., a contract for a pack of services on top of usual ones)

6. Subscription (monthly/annual fee, etc)

7. Packaged with some other product or service not related with ICTs (a flight ticket, a hotel accommodation, a tourist pack, an insurance...)

8. Business model to be defined at a very late stage when a critical mass of users is achieved (like Twitter today, for example)

9. User community maintained by user contributions (like Wikipedia, for example)

10. User profiling (i.e., selling the user profiles for commercial purposes)

11. Packaged with the (voice, data) services of the mobile operator

12. Packaged with the mobile handset

13. Not a commercial service (i.e., a public service)

Figure 7Expert rated them as shown in . The results derived by the aggregation of the answers provided scenario by scenario show no major surprises, the leading business models being: premium services, advertising, subscription, pay‐as‐you‐go (impulse purchase).

Figure 7. The aggregated answers on the importance of different business models

22


23

The survey seems to point at a limited role for mobile operators, public services, user’s communities, user profiling and handset suppliers.

However, the discussion highlighted the role of MNO is not going to loose importance on the short term because they both own subscribers’ data and the infrastructure.

The expert panel shared the opinion that the ownership of data (and in particular the context‐related data) is making up a pivotal issue for the evolution of mobile search and the relative business models.

The way in which costs will be shared among users, advertisers and service provider is largely depending on who owns users data (and on the related possibility to transact users’ data in compliance with legislation).

It was also pointed out that at present there is a policy asymmetry between mobile carriers and application providers. As an example, it was pointed out that mobile operators have to comply with obligations relating to data retention while application providers are not bound by that regulation.

With respect to the role of mobile operators, public services, user’s communities, user profiling and handset suppliers, experts focused on the importance of focusing on their different role as “gate‐keepers” (payment/billing, navigation/screen, application development, identity/profile management).

Further, they stressed that depending on the way the markets get shaped, if a dominating incumbent platforms emerges requiring application providers to commoditise their products, a barrier to innovation may rise.

It was also claimed that there is room for being a new “Google on mobile” as well as for a virtuous circle of mobile search and long‐tail applications.

No consensus was reached on the scalability of advertising as a main business model in the mobile search domain.

The discussion also touched upon the controversy between push and pull models. It was argued that the juxtaposition of the two paradigms as if they were opposing alternatives makes up a simplistic vision: people are continuously shifting modes throughout their activities and their daily lives. Push and pull model can and should coexist to generate value in users’ lives. The key to success in mobile and context‐aware search is the capability to capture these transition modes so as to retrieve and display useful search results.


7. THE DEMAND SIDE

The session dedicated to user experience and the demand side of the mobile search market was introduced by a presentation by Oscar Westland who gave an overview of the study he conducted in Sweden3.

He presented the main findings, emphasising that:

1. User demand for mobile search is limited and strongly associated to PC internet use

2. Mobiles are still used predominantly as interpersonal communication devices and are not substituting other devices for connecting to the internet

3. Search represents small part of usage of mobile internet

4. “Common” with bad mobile search experiences, if any…

5. Seldom users: solve information problems on the go, when absolutely necessary (navigational, informational and logistical searches)

6. Frequent users: on the go and at work/home (all types of searches, including transactional and diversion)

The focus groups also indicated that the small demand and use of mobile search seems to be related to the poor user‐friendliness of the interfaces and possibly to the high costs of mobile internet. Westlund believes that there are more similarities than differences between users in different countries, at least within Europe, even though for practical reasons the focus group interviews were limited to Sweden.

Further, Westlund pointed out that adoption takes time, visibility and habits are likely to play an important role in pacing the take up of innovative mobile services based on search applications. According to him, the main two factors affecting service adoption are the use context of the individual, i.e. the environments and situations in which the services are or may be used, and the pricing of the services.

Following the presentation by Westlund, discussion on the demand side was triggered by the presentation of the survey results.

The aggregate answer to the question about the challenges to be faced in order to enable a satisfactory user experience in the seven scenarios is presented in Figure 8.

3 Details about the research can be found in the Mobile Search Future Prospect (Interim) Report.

24


Figure 8. Major challenges for a satisfactory user experience in relation to the seven scenarios

The image is followed by the list of options that could be ticked.

1. Perceived usefulness /quality of the services and content offered

2. Trust in third‐parties that manage and use personal data

3. Well‐defined privacy (i.which data are private and which not)

4. Trust in application providers

5. Specific cultural values and lifestyle particularities

6. Perceived ease of use

7. Security against all types of malware

8. Tools to conveniently manage digital identity

9. Availability of detailed user profile

10. Pricing

11. Overall interest in technology

12. Established market for economy of identity (i.e., knowledge on the value identity and rules for making commerce with it)

13. Having a choice to same or similar experience (i.e. use of a PC connected to the internet)

The aggregated results show ensuring value to the user (perceived usefulness /quality of the services and content offered) and a pleasurable/suitable user experience (perceived ease of use) are considered the primary challenge. Users demand for value and integration

25


(applications, platforms, services), but disruptive mobile‐centric concepts seem not have appeared yet.

Though these statements may seem obvious, the discussion made it clear that poor user experience and lack of disruptive pure mobile search applications currently represent the biggest barriers to the take up and the evolution of this area, causing a lack of demand from the user side.

While the Swedish focus groups indicate that at present the mobile internet experience complements on the move the desktop access to the internet, according to experts and in relation to forward looking scenarios the PC experience is not a substitute anymore. E.g., the mobile is not expected to foster social networking in a bridging mode by simply allowing the same possibilities of the internet accessed via PC; rather, it is expected to find its success by providing innovative ways to promote and enhance the bonding within existing network of close relationships.

The debate highlighted that user will more and more demand for full (mobility tailored) information, and not to summarised content reduced to fit the mobile screen. Further, blended models (push + pull, time + space, activity + intentions, asynchronous + synchronous, local + global… e.g. “remote control of the city) are expected to rise in future mobile experience. Especially the further development of smart phones is expected to create new possibilities for the development of new mobile services.

The survey also highlighted how experts assess as critical the role of:

I) trusted third‐parties

II) well‐defined privacy

III) culture and lifestyles

During the debate the management of personal mobile data was mentioned as crucial and the concept of granularity in privacy settings and user consent were proposed as cornerstone to both grant user control and set the scene for a the deployment of mobile applications including mobile search.

26


27

8. THE DARK SIDE OF MOBILE SEARCH

The discussion was kicked off by stating that mobile service best work if designed on top of a fine grained profiling. However, mobile profiling can lead to reduced user autonomy (both in terms of the user being tracked and the user being proposed with such restricted number of search results that his/her choice is profoundly reduced). On the other hand, mobile devices by being very personal can represent the ideal device for the management of privacy preferences, becoming a sort of activators of different control layers adapting to the situation.

Experts stressed once more the crucial issue of personal data management, ownership and transactability, mentioning again that at present the mobile internet field is characterised by regulatory asymmetry (different status of mobile operators with respect to other mobile internet actors).


9. PROJECTING INTO THE FUTURE

Upon their arrival on the morning of the second day of the workshop participants were asked to fill in a sheet of paper providing a template for listing Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats for the EU mobile search sector.

Their contribution were collected and elaborated while the morning discussion started.

Ajit Jaokar presented his insights into relevant trends and actual barriers to feed in the SWOT:

His presentation touched upon a number of topics:

• Market dynamics of mobile search

• Mobile search business models

• Elements of mobile context

• Emerging trends in mobile search market

• Mobile search: drivers, barriers and disruptive factors

As for the market dynamics, Jaokar presented market indicators driving mobile search, by emphasising the importance of metadata enabled content, the increasing quantity of information indexed, the likely emergence of social, real‐time (search for content which is yet not indexed) and enterprise search, the growing share of user generated content (the rise of appstores and long tail content – which increase the ability to monetise consumption intent) even in the mobile sector, the relevance of reputation based dynamics and the potential of the mobile as a unique device that can automatically add semantic data to content captured on the phone (metadata enabled content captured from mobile devices at the point of inspiration).

Business drivers were also presented, by emphasising the growing relevance of privacy related issues (and the privacy backlash affecting personalization, i.e. in order to have personalised services, you have to give out a significant amount of personal information), the progressive leaning away of advertising from mass media, the emergence of different forms of content discovery (platform and service specific search forms), the increasing recognition of the key role of recommendation engines, the awareness that in general, openness drives better search since more content is accessible and that content has better links (i.e. is referenced better), the recognition of the need of deeper integration between devices, networks and services, the emergence of new search models like reverse search (where the source is found from the content – ex: Shazam for music, and Tineye for images)

28


or discovery based models which tend to “searchless” search and reverts the concept of search to an “agent” which fetches information based on a set of parameters.

The above mentioned issues indicate the way the mobile sector will evolve. This evolution has to be matched with the dynamics affecting the mobile device (such as emergence of new devices, the appearance of new interfaces like touch screens, 3D, and the capability of devices to capture) and the range of factors which are leading innovation and evolution in the mobile ecosystem. The list of these factors includes open source ecosystems, Google Gears/offline browsing, widgets, javascript enhancements (Chrome, JS libraries), location (including cell ID databases), SIM/smart card web servers, APIs (GSMA, OpenAjax, Bondi, Gears, RCS), browser plugins (MS Silverlight, Mozilla,W3C), social network APIs, local web, near field communications.

Additional factors presented as affecting the mobile search value chain were:

• Evolution of the networks: Bluetooth, WiFi, WiMAX & Mesh, HSUPA and HSDPA, and, in particular, IMS and LTE. Some specific features:

o Network operator application portals are declining

o Enablers are not tied to the network

o Networks are evolving to an IP ecosystem

o Chipset level changes

o LTE, IMS and services which are tightly coupled to the network

• Emerging technologies

o Cloud computing

o Sensor based interaction

o Rich presence

o Asynchronous activation, background processing

o The rise of browser and web standards

o The role of emerging markets

• Evolution of advertising formats:

o Growing more personalised and context‐aware ads, especially driven by mobile devices

o Early winners, like Admob, may not necessarily be winners in the new ecosystem where targeted – more granular advertising is needed which. Advertising may be platform specific, as opposed to platform agnostic

29


o New players are likely to take up mobile advertising especially in more richer platforms like the iPhone

o Advertising is likely to emerge along globally harmonised platforms like Nokia ad service, Android or the iPhone

These indicators and trends suggest that new forms of search will appear. Therefore, the tentative comprehensive list of possible types of search becomes longer:

1. Vertical search

2. Mobile search

3. Context aware search

4. Real time search

5. Local search

6. Social search

7. Semantic search

8. Build your own search engine (Google custom search engine)

9. Reverse search (Shazam, Tineye)

10. Multimedia search engines (Blinkx)

11. On device search

12. P2P search

13. Cloud search

14. The internet of things (search for)

15. Perspective‐based search

16. Human‐powered search (Mahalo)

17. Swarm intelligence search engines (logical patterns)

18. Visual search (Nokia Point and Find)

19. The mobile address book

20. Conventional web search

30


Table 2 below illustrated the key disruptive trends, the most important drivers and relevant barriers suggested as an initial approach.

TRENDS DRIVERS BARRIES

Discovery rather than search

De‐coupling network and services

Walled gardens

Recommendation engines Reputation DRM

Internet of things and search engines based on IOT

Internet of things

Search engines based on the increasing use of context

Location

Social search and real‐time search

Regulation Regulation

Privacy and management of privacy

Table 2. Disruptive trends, drivers and barriers

Jaokar’s presentation was followed by a discussion triggered by a question on the consequences of cloud computing and the role of peer‐to‐peer search.

Experts mentioned that the concept of cloud can represent a driver for the search engine world. Though, a barrier is made up by the lack of standards and interoperability, implying that data portability will be the great challenge for searching in the cloud (ex., portability of geo‐coded information).

Public procurement was mentioned as a possible lever to foster data portability and the promotion of standards. Further, data portability was identified as a guarantee for user autonomy and freedom from lock‐in effects.

Experts promoted the idea of fostering discussion among interested actors (industry, governments and users).

With respect to P2P, the panel agreed that the current regulatory framework for DRM is representing a barrier for the exploration of the potential of P2P search.

The freeing of the spectrum allocation was also proposed as a way to promote experimentation on P2P search (including mash network and mesh network search). In

31


relation to a dynamic spectrum allocation experts mentioned a case for public intervention, comparable to that of cell phone number portability.

Some experts supported the idea of fostering lateral thinking on the potential of P2P beyond the current use.

Following this discussion, the results of the elaboration of SWOT tables filled in by participants were discussed resulting in the following table which was built with the consensus of all participants:

Strengths Opportunities

• Technological puzzle pieces in place • Improving integration between web/mobile/pc platform for a richer user experience

• Good research standards • Content of higher quality for mobile use(geo, cadastre, …) • Niche markets/services

• Industrial landscape strong • Local content (multicultural) • Public funded broadcasting • New regulatory framework needed for

API’s, privacy, … • Multicultural background • Data portability • Very strong culture of mobile • Liberation of public data • Strong history of co‐operation andcollaboration – ex GSM

• Disruptions (cloud computing)

• Privacy(our laws) ‐ regulation • Internet of things debate. • Liberate data allowing European companies to create new services

• Make it easier for existing players(Telecoms Operators) to share and use data within statutory frameworks (current discussion is aimed at new entrants)

• Mobiles only access to Internet for developing/less‐developed countries

• Mobile is a replacement market for Internet search

• Empower the user / user in control / granular privacy control

(In red, Jaokar’s list) (In Italic the opportunities that had been agreed on day one)

32


33

Weaknesses

• Fragmentation (roaming, regulation,cultural)

• Need for better / understandable / moresecure pricing models

• Roaming charges • Strategic decisions on innovation andinvestments are outside EU

• Venture capital / Entrepreneurship • Lack of interoperability and (open)standards

• Web Search mostly dominated by Globalcompanies

Threats

• Lack of technology development • Fragmented market (silos, platforms) • Privacy issues, data protection • Companies outside EU will control the developments in mobile search

• Asymmetry of regulation • Regulatory lag (spectrum management)

• A closed ecosystem (since search needs links and references to make it valuable)

Table 3. SWOT filled‐charts results

The full list of contributions is reported in the Annex I.

This SWOT table adds to the consensus reached on the following items:

Enablers:

• reducing charges for data roaming, better fixed tariff or complete abolishing

• smartphones

• flat‐rate (or at least low enough)

• innovation related with a more open ecosystem

Challenges:

• data portability

• right to change platform, cost of switching

• relevance of cultural differences and multilingualism


10. IDENTIFICATION OF AREAS OF POSSIBLE POLICY INTERVENTION

The last part of the workshop was used to search for a minimum consensus on the possible intervention areas following the prioritisation of mobile search evolution issues.

The discussion was started by an overview of the survey results in relation to the seven scenarios and with respect to the following possible type of policy intervention, which was enriched by the additional policy options emerged during the discussion (nos. 15‐18):

1. Enhance user‐awareness on opportunities and risks

2. Creating tools for user‐empowerment (e.g. privacy or eID management)

3. Supporting innovators and entrepreneurs

4. Promoting living labs

5. Reforming the regulatory framework (electronic communications, e‐commerce, privacy, consumer rights)

6. Development of a public service for this type of mobile search

7. Research projects (7th FP) for the required technologies

8. Promoting self‐regulation of the industry

9. No policy support required

10. Promoting standards and interoperability

11. Developing (or subsidizing) content production

12. Supporting some European champion

13. Public procurement (administrations are the first buyers and users of this mobile application)

14. Promoting the internal EU market for economies of scale

15. Set a multi‐stakeholder discussion platform

16. Mandate data portability in mesh‐type networks

17. Help accelerate LTE roll‐out

18. Promoting independent third‐party body (watchdog mobile data)

34


The discussion was lead to prioritise potential policy intervention areas in function of their importance for the promotion of the EU mobile search position and their feasibility.

Importance and feasibility were rated as shows Figure 9. Those policies which lie above the line are considered candidates to be implemented.

Figure 9. Public intervention: importance / feasibility rates

Finally, a foresight exercise on disruptive trends likely to affect the sector was conducted. Table 4 presents a ranking of such trends in terms of disruptiveness and timeframe. Obviously, some of these factors are likely to develop (are already developing) along the years. There was an agreement to consider as the time relevant for this analysis the moment when they are mature enough to impact mobile search.

DISRUPTIVENESS TIMEFRAME

1. Location awareness of presence 1. LTE

2. Cloud computing 2. Cognitive technologies

3. LTE 3. Artificial intelligence

4. Cognitive technologies 4. Internet of things

5. Semantic structured knowledge 5. New user interfaces

6. Artificial intelligence 6. Location awareness of presence

7. New user interfaces 7. Semantic structured knowledge

8. Internet of things 8. Cloud computing

9. Mesh networks 9. Augmented reality – 3D

35


36

10. P2P 10. Augmented reality – 3D

11. Mesh networks 11. P2P

Table 4. Disruptive factors and timeframe

ANNEX I. SWOT ANALYSIS: LIST OF INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS.

STRENGTHS

• Wide range of available technology, new technology options

• “Swiss army knife” of communication

• Technological puzzle pieces in place

• Strong position of some mobile vendors and operators

• Tradition of R&D in mobile series

• Good quality & stability of mobile systems

• Good research standards

• Multicultural & ‐lingual environment

• Strong mobile industry, good connections

• User adoption rate of mobile devices is very high

• Mobile broadband is a reality in Europe

• Mobile ecosystem & players ready and operating

• Lots of good content for mobile use

• Internal market provides a coherent information space

• High ICT adoption

• High income levels

• High income levels

• High media & ICT literacy

• New devices with touch interfaces. Early adopters

37


• Research experience in context awareness

• Better data tariffs and wireless infrastructure

• Young people use new mobile services extensively, and have strong virtual community feelings

• Open platforms for developers

• Local content

• Accessibility

• Vodafone scale

• Nokia market share

• Strong gov’t support

• Sizable subscriber base

WEAKNESSES

• Lack of critical mass in search players/technologies

• Fragmented telecom space

• GPS (?) mostly dominated by global companies

• Fragmentation (language, culture/behaviour, data charges, carriers, services…)

• We do not have a developed internal market

• Roaming fees

• Venture capital ecosystem

• Innovation/marketing

• Need for better / understandable / more secure pricing models

• Roaming charges

• Lack of consideration of user value

• Seamless user experience

38


• Management of personal data, regulation

• Weak support for start‐up companies

• Different cultural perceptions of privacy/identity

• Big players in web search are outside EU

• Lack of perceived value from mass markets

• Lack of usable services highly adapted to the particularities of each device

• Lack of penetration of ‘advanced’ devices

• Some of the technologies are not reaching the market (e.g. NFC)

• Interconnection / interoperability

• Misinformation about mobile costs

• Not a real internal market (roaming, etc.)

• High ICT adoption (also a strength) equals little consumer need in mobile search

• Low usability of devices & services

• PSI‐regime for content (for mobile) still weak

• Linguistically fragmented market – search quality

• Legislative framework for mobile needs to be examined

• Lack of smartphone adoption for mass market

• Context aware technologies not fully developed

• Closed markets for technology and business development

• Market development slower than US/Asia

• VC funding, entrepreneurship

• Asymmetrical regulation operators – search providers

• Weak innovation track record of mobile operators

• Lack of interoperability

39


• Unclear business models

• Social‐technological imbalance

OPPORTUNITIES

• Help mobile become a good complement to the PC

• Technology development

• Privacy dialogues shaping ethics

• Improving information policies on personal data management to foster adoption

• Creation of open standards; interoperability

• New ways of advertising (non intrusive, highly targeted)

• Finding European champions

• Strong EU telco landscape

• Addressing different cultural & language groups

• Leap frog evolution from online Internet thinking to Mobile services thinking

• Nokia, Vodafone

THREATS

• Slow pace of progress/execution

• A closed ecosystem

• Silicon valley one size fits all

• Pace of innovation in USA / Asia

• Pricing, roaming charges

• Lack of regulation

• Lack of means to enforce any law ‐> how do you expect people to respect privacy when Microsoft will be in court for the next 5 years

40


• Fragmented market

• Digital divide (intergenerational)

• Privacy issues, data protection

• Operators’ control?

• Incumbent desktop search engines transforming their market power to mobile search

• Not finding attractive business models

• People will use “mobile search” only from laptops etc

• Companies outside EU will control the developments in mobile search

• Silo market (no data portability, no open networks, no data transparency)

• Data theft

• Idea/brainflow, i.e. European innovations realised in other markets

• Lack of user media literacy

• Data ownership/data portability issues

• Google’s reach and brand

• iPhone design and brand

• No critical mass of users reached for different platforms

• Data aggregation

41


ANNEX II. QUESTIONNAIRE

INVITATION LETTER

Dear Expert,

I am writing to you as the Coordinator of a team that is conducting a study on the impact of mobile search for the European economy and society for the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS ‐ DG Joint Research Centre ‐ European Commission). The purpose of the study is to identify techno‐economic trends and social aspects of mobile search and their future implications with the aim to identify recommendations for policy makers.

Given your expertise in the field, we and IPTS would be delighted if you would accept our invitation to complete a questionnaire. You will find it at:

http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ipm/forms/dispatch?form=MSearchSurvey&lang=en

Respondent profile is asked in the first page of the questionnaire. Please note that personal data collected through this questionnaire will be only used to avoid duplications and they will be immediately discarded. Results will be only processed and presented in an aggregate manner.

Then, different prospective scenarios with the aim of identifying inner‐‐logics and leading indicators and signposts that define possible paths of mobile search evolution are presented. The final objective is to use these scenarios to ease forward thinking and reflection on current trends and developments, and stimulate an ongoing strategic dialogue about the future of mobile search.

It would require about 30 minutes filling the whole questionnaire and you have to go through all of it for the answers to be saved. Please, fill it only once and don’t disconnect during the process.

I thank you in advance for your willingness to help us. In consideration of your kindness, we will send you a copy of the study next autumn, when it will be completed.

Yours sincerely,

José Luis Gómez‐Barroso

42

http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ipm/forms/dispatch?form=MSearchSurvey&lang=en


UNED ‐ Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (Spain)

Coordinator of the project

PROSPECTIVE SCENARIOS DESCRIPTION

1 – SERENDIPITY SEARCH

Baiba recently joined Baltic Wings as air hostess, enjoying her new life travelling around the world as she always dreamt of. Now she earns some money, but has little time to spend during their stop‐overs. She likes fashion and vegetarian food, is always at the hunt of special deals and interested in foreign culture. As a curiosity‐driven person she is always open to explore new experiences. Luckily, her new mobile handset can be switched on a “discovery” mode that includes a “surprise factor” when searching amongst her preferences. She configured her preferences quickly on the web page of the supplier. This operation needs to be introduced only once; then her profile is automatically updated based on her choices, including the reactions to the unexpected responses proposed.

Whenever Baiba feels like wandering around a city, she sets the discovery mode on her handset and starts receiving appealing information regarding her preferences, including also some nice surprises. She does not feel disturbed by publicity, and the information gets increasingly better suited to her tastes. Last time in London she learned about Latvians in exile and was told about a nearby Armani jeans bargain just her size, all in the same afternoon. But she was truly amazed when the “discovery mode” suggested her to go to a gig to her favourite Latvian rock band that very same evening. She never filled any information about music, nor did she know that they were playing in London.

2 – SEARCHING FOR A RECIPE

“Guess who was on the phone?” said Inese to her husband. “Your father just announced himself for dinner. He will be here in less than one hour”. Under normal circumstances, stress would now begin. Inese’s ticky‐picky father‐in‐law is not an easy visitor and he always had to suffer his hidden criticism for being a bad cook. But things have change thanks to state‐of‐the‐art technology. Inese picks her mobile device which has a RFID reader embedded. With this device, she scans the barcodes of the food in

43


the fridge and in the cupboard. The systems detects jam, steak, tomatoes and cucumber from Murcia, French red onion, olives, salt, black pepper, oregano, basil, olive oil, …

Now Inese presses the “recipe search” button. Some seconds later, the system proposes an Andalusian‐style Gazpacho (cold vegetables soup) as a side dish to a plain steak. Furthermore, it proposes to buy some cheddar and feta cheese in the night shop 500m down the street to prepare an exquisite Cordon‐Bleu with a Greek salad. Inese sends her husband to the shop, while she prepares the dishes, and all three have a pleasant evening.

3 – WELLNESS MODE

As an intensive runner wishing to break her already impressive personal records, Gitta needs to control training sessions, food, hours sleeping, etc. She might follow one of the standard programs but her work as consultant for one of the “Big 3” leaves no room for ordinary routine; she needs something completely adapted to her personal lifestyle and she found it! Gitta is crazy about her new Runfit‐kit. This is an add‐on device embedded into a running bra and a daywear bra that monitors essential body signals (blood pressure, pulse, breath, temperature, etc) and a software application to run on her smart mobile she can wear with an arm belt (to record distance and speed). The kit guides her on how to keep an appropriate rhythm depending on the type of training similar to a standard cardio‐kit. As a bonus, after training it advises her also on nutrition (amount of food and drink to take) or habits. For instance, it keeps track of how long you stand on your feet –one of the worst positions for a running addict– or it calculates additional exercises to be carried out, such as recommending walking from or to work while optimizing the travel time. It is really great. It has also an optional security system warning in case of an excess of exercise or any health problem; which in case a dangerous pattern or accident calls automatically the emergency service indicating the patient location and transmits vital data to the hospital. “I do not really need that”, she thinks.

4 – TRUMAN SHOW MODE

Many youngsters are in search for fame. So was Lavinia, when she applied to become one of the protagonists for the brand‐new “Big Brother XL” series. Contrary to previous editions in closed environments and cameras everywhere to be watched in TV, this time people would be observed in an open space and “voyeurs” could monitor them on the internet. She gladly gave out her privacy rights and allowed being traced 24

44


hours a day and 7 days per week, in exchange of a prospective carrier in the show business. Lavinia’s got an ultra‐broadband mobile communications system; a hell of a device: this mobile included camera that could be remotely switched on by the TV producer, conversations were recorded, her mood could be identified observing her bio parameters (heartbeat rate, blood pressure…),… Processing these data, the TV producer knew about her love affairs, when she was saying the truth or lying, if she was happy or angry, …

At the beginning, success was beyond expectations. Lavinia became a rising star on the internet: she was subject of discussion in social network sites, people approached her on the street (given that they knew where she was) and she got some smaller contracts for making advertisements. Slowly, however, things started to change and turned into a personal nightmare …

5 – TOURIST MODE

Karmele is a PhD student at the University College London, where she is involved in an EU‐funded project on the Future of the Internet. Thanks to the project she has the opportunity to travel across Europe, though she regrets she never has the time to prepare her travels as much as she would like. Usually during her journey to a new destination Karmele spends some time browsing pictures of the city she is heading to that people have uploaded on FlickrMobile. She adds to her favorites the pictures she likes and then asks her journey planner application to define itineraries for her. The planner, considering the location of the places she has highlighted by selecting pictures, their opening hours, her agenda and knowing that she prefers walking than using public transport presents her with an set of tours through the city. Karmele has just arrived in Seville where she’ll have the afternoon free. She drops her suitcase at the Hotel, wears her Augmented Reality sunglasses and presses the “Let’s go” button on her mobile. She is proposed with two options. A walk along the river, a photo exhibition entitled Flamenco and Photography at the Centro Andaluz de Arte Contemporáneo, and a drink at the Embarcadero ‐ a charming “chiringuito” on the famous calle Betis ‐ facing the Cathedral and the Torre de Oro. The second option consists of a walk in the narrow streets of Santa Cruz, a visit at the Museo del Baile Flamenco and a tinto de verano on the roof‐terrace of the Hotel Doña Maria, just under the Giralda Tower. Without any doubt and just with a glimpse Karmeles selects the first option. A small pointing arrow on her lens guides her around. While walking she can choose to view the pictures she saved on Flickr. When she arrives at the Museum she receives an Mp3 flamenco soundtrack to accompany her during the exhibition. She enjoys it so much than she buys it. Later, at the Embarcadero she takes

45


some time to annotate her diary. Karmele puts her mobile on the table and projects a map of City where her path is highlighted. She uses a smart pen to note down her memories along her walk and then saves them. The phone rings, it’s Pekka, a Finnish researcher working on the same project. He has just arrived at the Hotel. Karmele invites him to reach her and sends him her location so that his mobile AR navigator can lead him to the Embarcadero.

6 – PLAYGROUND MATES MODE

Dace is mother of a 6‐year old boy, George. They have recently moved to a new city, where they have few social connections for the time being. Dace enjoys bringing her son to the park where there is a nice playground full of children of his age. It is a nice opportunity to get to know people. The playground area provides a local social networking application aimed at facilitating interactions among parents and enhancing children’s safety. Parents fill in a their own and their children’s profile introducing information about the area they live, the activities their children like doing, the school their children attend, birthday parties they plan to go and alike. The service provider matches user’s profiles and proposes / alerts parents of possible companions.

It is Saturday afternoon and the playground is crowded. Dace activates the service. She knows that her information is used only locally at the park and no sensitive details are disclosed. Few seconds later, the device visualizes two families on the playground with compatible patterns: first, the mother of two girls attending the same school as her son and second the father of a body who is already playing with George. Apparently he is crazy about the zoo, just like George. Dace is planning a trip to the zoo the next day. She approaches the young man, if he seems all right she might propose that the two families go together.

7 – PROFESSIONAL APPOINTMENTS – DATING AGENCY

Elita is visiting CeBIT in Hannover for the first time. As a newcomer she is excited about the huge exhibition in front of her: operators, manufacturers, software providers, augmented reality, artificial intelligence demos, robots, etc. Sounds great if you are a curious engineer but is it also for making business for a small Riga‐based advertising agency? As newly appointed Director, she is looking for options to improve data mining management at her company, and decrease time–to–market by re–using as much as possible from their inventory of past campaigns. Where to start? Elita did send an email to a selection of LinkedIn contacts but she did not receive any response. While queuing for her badge, she fulfills a thorough mobile questionnaire with her

46


company data and her specific objectives for CeBIT. Minutes later she receives a complete list of marketing representatives from data mining specialized companies on her mobile, including details of their location at the fair (in real time!), their pictures (easier to recognize them) and even the languages they speak (there are two Latvians!). There is even a red–yellow–green light to indicate if the person is around and available for some business talk.

QUESTIONNAIRE

DATA ON EXPERTISE

Experts need to complete a number of background questions before entering into the scenarios questionnaire. This will have two purposes: to ensure that the questionnaire is not filled twice by the same persona and to correlate some of the responses with the expert’s profiles. Personal data will be immediately discarded after the processing of the responses (only grouped statistics will be provided) and will not be further used.

The experts will be kindly asked to provide:

• Name

• An email address

• Main background (tick as many as apply):

o Academia

o Industry

o Public Administration

o Other (specify, please)

• Number of years of expertise in Mobile ICTs

o 5 or less

o From 5 to 10

o More than 10

• Main areas of expertise in connection to mobile search (tick as many as apply)

o Technologies

o Business and market development

47


o User experience

o Legal

o Other (specify, please)

QUESTIONS COMMON TO ALL SCENARIOS

1. Time Horizon.

When do you expect this scenario to happen?

o already available (in 2009)

o by 2011

o by 2015

o by 2020

o any other, please specify

o Never (in this case, please explain briefly why)

2. Bottlenecks. Which are the most important bottlenecks for this scenario to happen? (Rank each the following categories using a scale from 5‐extremely important to 0‐irrelevant.

• The major challenges of for the scenario to happen are …

o of technological nature

o of economical nature

o of behavioral, related to user experience or of ethical nature

o legal / regulatory nature


3. Technology

The most relevant developments in technology for this scenario to happen are … (tick up to four options)

o “traditional” search technology: indexing, matching algorithms, page ranking, etc

o semantic web/search

o audio/audiovisual search

o location‐based services

48


o mobile social networking

o augmented reality technologies (i.e., information embedded in physical objects)

o wireless sensors (smart environment, RFID, NFC, etc)

o cognitive technologies (behavioural patterns, artificial intelligence, etc)

o bio‐sensors technologies

o usability/interfaces

o technologies regarding user profiling / privacy control on the user side


4. Business Model

The most likely business model for this scenario to happen might be … (tick up to three options)

o pay‐as‐you‐go (impulse purchase)

o premium services (i.e., the basic functionality is free, but the advanced options not)

o value‐added services (i.e., a contract for a pack of services on top of usual ones)

o subscription (monthly/annual fee, etc)

o packaged with the mobile handset

o packaged with the (voice, data) services of the mobile operator

o packaged with some other product or service not related with ICTs (a flight ticket, a hotel accommodation, a tourist pack, an insurance, …)

o advertising in general (i.e. like in today Internet search)

o advertising but based on some product placement (i.e., linked with another product: a TV show, a cinema premiere, …)

o merchandising (i.e., as a way to sell some other product or service) or affiliation (i.e., to create opportunities of business for some other site)

o user profiling (i.e., selling the user profiles for commercial purposes)

o user community maintained by user contributions (like Wikipedia, for example)

o business model to be defined at a very late stage when a critical mass of users is achieved (like Twitter today, for example)

o not a commercial service (i.e., a public service)


49


5. User experience

The biggest challenges to enable a satisfactory user experience for this scenario to happen are … (Tick up to four options)

• availability of detailed user profile

o well‐defined privacy (i.e., which data are private and which not)

o tools to conveniently manage eID (digital identity)

o to have a developed economy of identity (i.e., with which personal data is possible to commerce and which is the value of each of these data)

o security against all types of malware

o trust in application providers

o trust in third‐parties that manage and use personal data

o specific cultural values and lifestyle particularities

o overall interest in technology

o perceived ease of use

o perceived usefulness / quality of the services and content offered

o existence of alternative means to access the same (or as close as possible) experience (for instance, use of a pc connected to Internet)

o pricing


6. Privacy

You subscribe to which view (tick as many as you think can apply) …

o Privacy has already been irrevocably eroded

o Profiling of individuals is indispensable to generate customized services

o Users are willing to exchange personal data for customized services

o Privacy by design (e.g. privacy‐enhancing, transparency‐enhancing technologies) is not viable (e.g. hacking, costs, etc) in mobile search

o Privacy by law will be absolutely require to avoid abuses

o User’s privacy in mobile search will be best guaranteed by (tick up to two options) ...

o ... technological solutions (anonymisation, encryption techniques, etc.)

o … by industry self‐regulation (e.g. codes of conduct)

50


o … by the market (e.g. privacy has a fair price; privacy‐enabling services will emerge)

o … by legislation (e.g. criminal law, data protection, data retention directives, etc.) (optional)

o … by the internet community (e.g. hacktivism, provision of P2P search, etc.)

o … by the users themselves (e.g. controlling own profiles in social networks, etc.)


7. Policy support

The most successful supporting policies for this scenario to happen are … (please, tick up to three options)

o conventional research and development programmes (like the 7th FP) for the required emerging technologies

o promoting (open) standards and interoperability

o promoting living labs for these advanced mobile applications

o helping innovators and entrepreneurs in this area

o pushing some European “champion” (i.e. a European mobile operator or a European mobile handset supplier, for instance) into this domain

o reforming the legal framework (electronic communications, ecommerce, privacy, consumers’ rights, …)

o promoting the internal market in the EU, eliminating barriers to economies of scale for this type of applications

o increasing user‐awareness (i.e., so users know about the advantages, opportunities and risks of these mobile applications)

o creating tools for user‐empowerment in this area (control of privacy, managing of eID, …)

o promoting education and skills in this area

o use competition law to watch out for monopolistic behaviours

o reforming the institutional framework (availability of venture capital, labour market reforms, …)

o promoting self‐regulation of the industry

o developing (or subsidizing the development of) content to be searchable in this scenario

51


o public procurement, i.e., the public administrations are the first buyers and users of this mobile application

o development of a public service for this type of mobile search

o no policy support is required in this scenario, market developments will suffice


SCENARIO‐SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

1. Serendipity

Please, rank the following views in a scale from 5‐completely agree/extremely important to 0‐completely disagree/irrelevant.

o serendipity search ‐i.e. finding relevant information by an unexpected, curiosity‐driven path‐ will be a major determinant in the success of mobile search

o the market –through price, different players, different segments‐ will distinguish between search in the push mode and search in the pull mode

o users will never trust application providers to let them view their complete personal profile, unless they have extremely usable and powerful tools to control their privacy

o add any other comment you think it will be interesting about this scenario

2. Searching for a recipe

Please, rank the following views from 5‐completely agree/extremely important to 0‐completely disagree/irrelevant.

o information will be never accurate enough for this scenario to become real ‐i.e. RFID tags should provide the right information, every ingredient should have its tag and this should be matched with missing ingredients and its availability in nearby supermarkets‐

o the level of standards and interoperability needed to comply with satisfy user expectations about advanced applications like these is beyond willingness of stakeholders to cooperate

o this scenario will only happen if open standards and loose interoperability (web 2.0 style) is in place

52



3. Wellness Mode


o information about health status, even for leisure purposes only, belongs exclusively to the personal sphere and should never be exchanged over a commercial network

o personal health systems will increase dramatically the sense of self‐control of consumers and, therefore, applications related with them will be, in general, a market success

o the success any application requiring the agreement of many stakeholders –with distinct (and often opposing) interests‐ (in this example: suppliers of running gear, emergency services, city planners, clothes manufacturers, mobile operators, mobile device suppliers, insurance companies, etc), is unlikely


4. Truman Show Mode


o the use of informed consent should be limited by law, for particular cases. Some decisions about privacy should not be left to individuals, i.e., there should be an absolute limit to the use of personal data and it should be impossible to go beyond it

o the exploitation of personal data for commercial purposes should be limited, subject to a strict scrutiny by regulators. It shall be allowed only where there are not signs of potential conflicts including a future perspective on the individual

o the ubiquitous nature of mobile technologies will cause our social perception of privacy to change (reducing the traditional concept of “personal sphere”) and few can be done about it


53


5. Tourist Mode

Please, rank the following views from 5‐completely agree/extremely important to 0‐completely disagree/irrelevant

o there are so many barriers for the deployment of augmented reality infrastructures (wireless sensors and the networks that link them to mobile devices) that only the public administrations (i.e. a city council) will be able to do it

o the risks associated with wireless sensors technologies (lack of privacy, irresponsible use of them, …) outweighs potential benefits

o user‐generated content will be enough to create an augmented‐reality‐wikipedia able to provide users will all the relevant information in an scenario like this


6. Playground Mates Mode


o mobile search will not be just an extension internet search of practices to the mobile domain. The mobile dimension will add new added‐value possibilities to Internet search. As a consequence new players will appear different from those existing today

o exchanging socially sensitive information through mobile technologies will soon become common practice

o personal privacy is not at risk in controlled environments –i.e., linked to a particular location and only to some partial data about the persons‐


7. Professional Appointment – Dating Agency


o the establishment trusted‐third‐parties will be necessary pre‐requisite for the emergence of applications –and businesses– linked with the use of very personal data

54


55

o applications as the one described in this scenario will be highly profitable. They will be amongst the first to appear in the market segment of “advanced mobile search” combining elements of many other different technologies and solutions

o “adult” content and applications were amongst the first and most profitable businesses over internet. This is likely to happen on the mobile sphere


study on mobile search future prospects - ipts - jrc -...

Documents