<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>alexkinch.com - Latest Comments in More dotMobi domains up for grabs</title><link>http://alexkinchcom.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://alexkinchcom.disqus.com/more_dotmobi_domains_up_for_grabs/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:07:22 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: More dotMobi domains up for grabs</title><link>http://www.alexkinch.com/mobile-news/more_dotmobi_domains_up_for_grabs/#comment-8342016</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I've never thought this was really the right solution to the problem. The problem is not the TLD, it's that you have to type the URL on a numeric keypad.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In Japan (by far the most successful market for mobile internet) most adverts now feature a 2-d bar code ("QR-Code"). This encodes the URL, so all you have to do is take a photo of it with your camera phone and you're on the website. The URL can be fairly long, and the TLD used doesn't matter. As for enforced standards, you'd hope any service that cares about their mobile presence would do some serious compatibility testing anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I was quite pleased to see my N95 came with an application for reading these codes, but it's not much use until it becomes a standard feature on other phones. I'm surprised nobody is really pushing QR-Codes here - they make casual mobile internet use much less hassle.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;John&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John Campbell</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:07:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: More dotMobi domains up for grabs</title><link>http://www.alexkinch.com/mobile-news/more_dotmobi_domains_up_for_grabs/#comment-8342020</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Vance,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Going on what you are saying... " In short, .mobi is designed to indicate a trustworthy mobile experience. (Not the only experience, of course, but a trustworthy one.)"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;What has a .mobi extension got to do with being trustworthy? I think that’s not a valid argument for added expense to the developer (by that I mean company).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I just don’t see the point in having yet another layer of complication for the user to remember. Everyone remembers .Com but people struggle with .Net and .Org.&lt;br&gt;I think that the mobile web should be inclusive and not put barriers in front of people just for the sake of it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;With processes like WURFL it’s really unnecessary for a .mobi extension at all.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I honestly believe that this is a money making exercise for those who run it and not a lot else and what frustrates me is that in the end the man on the street knows nothing about .mobi&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Regards&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mark&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 07:08:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: More dotMobi domains up for grabs</title><link>http://www.alexkinch.com/mobile-news/more_dotmobi_domains_up_for_grabs/#comment-8342015</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"And by the way, it turns out that it’s the same number of keypresses to enter &lt;a href="http://m.domain.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="m.domain.com"&gt;m.domain.com&lt;/a&gt; as it is to enter &lt;a href="http://domain.mobi" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="domain.mobi"&gt;domain.mobi&lt;/a&gt;."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Then why should people bother to shell out for a .mobi domain?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Because "Unlike &lt;a href="http://m.site.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="m.site.com"&gt;m.site.com&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href="http://site.com/m" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="site.com/m"&gt;site.com/m&lt;/a&gt;, etc., enforceable standards ensure a .mobi site works on a mobile and represents a brand as it wants to be seen."?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Enforceable standards... like those enforced on &lt;a href="http://flowers.mobi?" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="flowers.mobi?"&gt;flowers.mobi?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Carlo Longino</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:46:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: More dotMobi domains up for grabs</title><link>http://www.alexkinch.com/mobile-news/more_dotmobi_domains_up_for_grabs/#comment-8342019</link><description>&lt;p&gt;There are more than 80,000,000 .com / .net / .org sites but only 0.03% are mobile friendly. Since a complete lack of URL convention has hurt mobile web discovery, we need a convention ... but not all conventions are created equal. Unlike &lt;a href="http://m.site.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="m.site.com"&gt;m.site.com&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href="http://site.com/m" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="site.com/m"&gt;site.com/m&lt;/a&gt;, etc., enforceable standards ensure a .mobi site works on a mobile and represents a brand as it wants to be seen. In short, .mobi is designed to indicate a trustworthy mobile experience. (Not the only experience, of course, but a trustworthy one.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;And by the way, it turns out that it's the same number of keypresses to enter &lt;a href="http://m.domain.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="m.domain.com"&gt;m.domain.com&lt;/a&gt; as it is to enter &lt;a href="http://domain.mobi" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="domain.mobi"&gt;domain.mobi&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As for "$850,000 raised, well done to them for not a lot of work done ..." I think the users of &lt;a href="http://ready.mobi" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://ready.mobi"&gt;http://ready.mobi&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://site.mobi" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://site.mobi"&gt;http://site.mobi&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://dev.mobi" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://dev.mobi"&gt;http://dev.mobi&lt;/a&gt; would disagree. These resources are made free to the mobile developer community ... and we've been able to do so by using auction proceeds like these.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Vance Hedderel, Director of PR</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:20:48 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: More dotMobi domains up for grabs</title><link>http://www.alexkinch.com/mobile-news/more_dotmobi_domains_up_for_grabs/#comment-8342018</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I still think this is all just a money making exercise thats totally pointless. Just another thing thats forced down peoples necks to remember and developers pay for.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;$850,000 raised, well done to them for not a lot of work done....&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 08:08:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: More dotMobi domains up for grabs</title><link>http://www.alexkinch.com/mobile-news/more_dotmobi_domains_up_for_grabs/#comment-8342017</link><description>&lt;p&gt;What about?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"I'&lt;a href="http://d-rather-use-m.mobi" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="d-rather-use-m.mobi"&gt;d-rather-use-m.mobi&lt;/a&gt;"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;See: m.jaiku, &lt;a href="http://m.youtube" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="m.youtube"&gt;m.youtube&lt;/a&gt;, m.facebook&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;*sigh*&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">James Whatley</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 07:53:50 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>