Twenty-four mobile carriers from across the world including AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon Wireless have joined forces to create a
The thinking behind WAC is clear: if developers have only one approval process to go through, then they need to only one application for a potential customer base of three billion people using a variety of different devices across different networks around the world.
Pick Your Device
A common complaint among smartphone users is that one particular device will have a mobile application that another handset won’t. Google Voice, for example, is not available as a downloadable app on the iPhone, but can be tightly integrated with the Android-based Nexus One. If you have an iPhone, but are an avid Google Voice user then you lose out.
Under WAC, however, you would be able to pick from a wider range of devices, without worrying about whether or not Google Voice would work. If it’s in the app store, it’s supposed to work, period.
One Standard, One Choice
The flip side of having more devices to choose from under this model is the fact that your choice of apps may be restricted. WAC hasn’t made it clear yet what its approval process will be, but presumably the group will moni
Of course, this already happens with the iPhone, and Apple has been heavily criticized for the company’s rigorous, and sometimes ridiculous, app approval policy. Android apps, on the other hand, have virtually no oversight to police the quality and safety of apps for Android devices.
So will WAC follow the Apple or Android model or something in between? Your best bet is to make sure you understand how WAC will police its applications before getting a compatible device. That way you’ll know what to expect in terms of your device’s risks and possible limitations.
Consolidate or Fragment Further?
That may seem like a silly question, but since specifics are scarce about how WAC
It could be a nightmare for you if the carrier gets to decide app pricing, since one network may have ridiculously overpriced apps, while another carrier won’t. One carrier could say you have to have a particular service plan to access its app store, while its competitor doesn’t.
Another problem could be if WAC members get to decide which apps will run in their individual app stores. That seems probable, since I doubt that a carrier doing business under a communist regime would be able to offer the same applications an American carrier would. So if AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon each have their own app stores based on the same standard, will one have a better selection than the others or will they all be the same?
Then again, as I mentioned above, the problem of restricted selection already exists to a certain extent when you choose between an iPhone and an Android device.
Software for Hardware or Hardware for Software?
The problem with open standards or any one-size-fits-all software solution is that the software and hardware don’t always work as elegantly together as they do on closed devices. Apple products are a perfect e
That’s not the case with Android, and WAC will be the same. So a Facebook application that works beautifully on a Samsung device with a 3.7-inch screen may be dreadful to use on a Sony Ericsson device with a smaller screen. Just because an application will work on a variety of devices doesn’t necessarily mean it should.
It’s an interesting idea to have an open set of standards specifically for applications that are independent of the underlying operating system. But I’m not convinced it will work, and I have to wonder if WAC really will deliver on its promise to consolidate the app market or whether it will just fragment the smartphone market even further.
Connect with Ian on Twitter (@ianpaul) or on Google Buzz.