Proceed to WirelessDevNet Home Page
Publications, e-books, and more! Community Tutorials Store Downloads, tools, & Freebies! IT Career Center News Home

EMail Address:

  - Articles
  - Columns
  - Training
  - Library
  - Glossary
   Career Center
  - Career Center Home
  - View Jobs
  - Post A Job
  - Resumes/CVs
  - Resource Center
  - Marketplace Home
  - Software Products
  - Wireless Market Data
  - Technical Books
  - Daily News
  - Submit News
  - Events Calendar
  - Unsubscribe
  - Delivery Options
  - Discussion Boards
  - Mailing List
  - Mailing List Archives
   About Us
  - About WirelessDevNet
  - Wireless Source Disks
  - Partners
  - About MindSites Group
  - Advertising Information
Wireless Developer Network Mailing List
Mailing List Archives

Subject: Re: MobileLBSList: WAP/WML interoperable?
Date:  09/08/2000 05:28:22 AM
From:  Alistair Edwardes

Just my two pence worth -

I'd be cautious about aggregating patterns of maturity for different
technologies into a single model. It seems that taking a view at such a high
level limits what you can say about the influences on uptake for individual
technologies and hence the likelihood of a technology actually reaching
maturation. The use of terminology such as 'hype' also implies that the sole
factor involved in the success of a technology is it's coverage in the
media, which sort of makes secondary the degree to which a technology
satisfies particular market and industry resource needs at a given point in
time. Wouldn't the shear investment in a technology be a better indicator?
Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what hype means - how is hype measured? It
also seems you're in danger of comparing apples and pears. Can you really
compare horizontal and vertical technologies in the same analysis ? For
instance, isn't the uptake of GML and WML inter-related to the uptake of
I'd suggest that there also seems to be a final stage missing from the model
which is the point when a technology becomes 'legacy'. Since the rate of the
life cycle for different technologies will differ wildly according to
changes in market needs. It seems that the argument you posit in your
conclusion that
"When considering a technology for GI interoperability, one should be sure
to carefully evaluate its maturity." would be equally true if basing on a
technology on a components that are too close to stagnation. So for
instance even if WAP does ride the wave to the 'plateau of productivity' it
may still rapidly become a legacy standard with new innovations and market

Cheers Alistair

Alistair J Edwardes
Department of Geography
University of Edinburgh
Drummond Street
Scotland, U.K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Gould Carlson Michael <>
To: <>
Date: 07 September 2000 19:27
Subject: MobileLBSList: WAP/WML interoperable?

>Hello mobilelbslist.
>I represent a European Community-funded project looking to build A
>Networked Virtual Interoperability Laboratory (ANVIL) and it turns out
>that wireless (location based) technologies play a potentially big role
>in our plans.
>The project publishes "position papers" to get discussion started, and
>the latest (5th) is on the maturity of interop technologies.
>Itīs interesting to see that in our strawman "hype cycle" model,
>WAP/WML falls in the "trough of disillusionment" (as defined by Gartner
>Check it out and give us your opinion!
>Mike Gould
>preANVIL project coordinator
>To unsubscribe, write to
>The MobileLBSList is brought to you by The GeoCommunity and The

To unsubscribe, write to
The MobileLBSList is brought to you by The GeoCommunity and The WirelessDeveloperNetwork



Eliminate irrelevant hits with our industry-specific search engine!

Wireless Developer Network - A MindSites Group Trade Community
Copyright© 2000-2010 MindSites Group / Privacy Policy
Send Comments to: