Archive for the ‘Devices’ Category

introduction to location based services (and not just GPS)

Monday, April 26th, 2010

Entirely aside from my tactical land navigation and GPS training efforts, I have been working on or with location based services for mobiles since around 1999. I have this pretty well baked into my brain, but not everyone does, and so it's a topic I had to expound about with some of the new guys lately.

Being complex enough (and changing over time) that I actually messed up part of it off the top of my head the other day, it's certainly too much for everyone to just listen to, so I decided it was a good thing to sit and write in some detail. I'll also be posting it to the D4M mobile design wiki when done, and will presumably remember to update it periodically.

Edit: This has been modified and posted to the wiki at this location. So, if you disagree (for example, because you are reading this years later) go there and edit the page to make it more accurate and up to date.

The most important thing is to never, ever, ever conflate "GPS" with "location." After that, it's best to dive straight into the individual technologies. I like to break down location services by (approximately) least to most precise:

Cell

Mobile telephony is based on communications and handoff between cells, each of which is (generally) controlled by a single tower with multiple antennas. The tower location is well-known, and its ID is attached to the CDR, so it can be detected.

This is a fallback, when other things are not available. Better technologies are generally not available when roaming, and the data is not or cannot (technology or politics) shared at more precision with your home network or because you are from another operator.

Precision will vary widely by the size of the cell, and there is no (good, universally-accepted) method to determine and communicate precision and accuracy. My rule of thumb – and something similar is generally used by devices  – is a circle 3000 yds (m) across.

Sector

Recall that each tower has multiple antennas. Those three (or four, rarely anything else, depends on the carrier)  antennas point different directions. Each of those is an independent mobile radio sector; just like signals are handed off between cells, they are handed off between sectors, and the data is generally known to the handset and can sometimes be shared with services or providers. However, since the direction the sector faces is really only known to the company that installed it, and the network operator, they are the only ones that can use the data well.

Precision will vary widely by the size of the cell, and by the antennas used, the number on the cell, the down-angle, and so on. There are some semi-useful ways of determining precision and accuracy for a single read, but they are not univerally implemented and there is no way to send the data to the information providers (e.g. the map program). My rule of thumb – and something similar is generally used by devices  – is a circle 1200 yds (m) across, co-located with the radio centroid of the sector. Yes, sectors are not circles, but it's also hard to communicate shape and orientation, so this works.

Triangulation

Generally, triangulation is the practice of determining the location of a point by measuring the angle and/or distance from several known locations. More points give more precision. It can get more complex when you try to find points in 3D space, but all mobile triangulation systems I have known assume the earth is locally perfectly flat, and simply find the location on the geoid. Methods of triangulating get really complex and vary by network type and equipment available; multilateration and signal interpolation are some of those. The math can get pretty harrowing.

Precision varies mostly by the number of sectors being used, the distance between them and so on. Though I cannot recall what it is, I believe there is a method of communicating to services employing it an approximation of the precision available. In any remotely built-up area, where it most often has enough sectors to work, a circle 50 yds (m) across is typical. I have seen 12 yd precision, with good accuracy.

GPS Telemetry

The Global Positioning System consists of a ground based control system, a series of satellites and any number of anonymous receivers. So, reading that alone dismisses many misconceptions; its one-way, it's a system, and the signal is from satellites and has nothing to do with mobile networks.

Telemetry means data sent from a remote (usually mobile) site like a rocket, back to base. Here, it means the device figures out where it is by listening to the satellites, then tells the network or website or whatever where it is.

Ignoring SA GPS can give precision to... well, fractions of an inch at least. But those are big, car-expensive devices used for special surveying and so on. Portable, hand-held receivers like those in mobile handsets can generally be assumed to give precision of 20-50 ft.

There are other systems, like GalileoGLONASS, and COMPASS but none of these are really fully-active, and there are few or no receivers in mobiles as yet. In theory, eventually, using multiple unrelated systems will give better accuracy yet, and give better coverage when in touchy situations like in dense cities.

WAAS

GPS uses radios, and the atmosphere and earth are imperfect and mess with them. WAAS is a satellite based augmentation system based in North America (others exist in the rest of the world, but are less well-established) that sends additional signals via another set of satellites to allow GPS receivers to adjust for those inaccuracies. I know of no mobile phones that have a WAAS receiver, but it's there.

AGPS

Assisted GPS requires the use of mobile networks, so only works when in data communication range. The cell tower has its own GPS (which many use anyway to get precise time codes), probably with a WAAS receiver. This provides a bit more precision, assures it of more accuracy, but mostly helps speed up cold or warm starts. Briefly, for a GPS to work, the receiver has to download data about all the satellites before it can calculate the position. AGPS caches this info for the phone, and sends over just the relevant bits, cutting minutes to a second or two. Which helps.

This is a reason you may not see WAAS, and might see some benefits from other GNSS (say, GLONASS) before they bother getting receivers into the handsets.

These generally give precision, even in dense areas and on the move of 10 ft or better. I have seen 2 ft indicated precision and have no reason to doubt it.

AGPS is not generally selectable as a separate service; when the user chooses to turn on or off "GPS," and has a network connection (and an AGPS compliant phone, etc.) they get the advantages of AGPS.

WLANs & PANs

Local networks like WiFi and Bluetooth are not exactly more precise, but I stuck them at the bottom of this list because they are local, and can add another layer of location, so could increase precision. They can also be used instead of other technologies when there is no GPS signal, or a bad mobile signal so triangulation cannot be used.

Both of these currently use the "cell" (or network identifier) and triangulation methods described above. There are no sectors, and no universally-adopted AGPS system that I am aware of. Naturally, a handset getting good GPS data can send that telemetry to anyone over any network, including WiFi, but that's not what we're talking about here.

They are both relatively more rare, and often are supported by third party software or individual services, and are not universally implemented on the handset. I have no reliable numbers on the real-world precision, but tests of WiFi triangulation alone have gone down to inches. On the other hand, poor network identification has led to placing users on the wrong continent. There's room to improve here.

Ask

People often know where they are. If you cannot get any location, or there's a reason they might want to over-ride it (even as simple as the data is bad) let them enter a location. If you do this, allow lots of methods. Only accepting ZIP or postal code is not useful for e.g. travellers, who do not generally know the ZIP where they are.



All the above is pretty well known by network engineers, and chip-makers and various low-level handset software guys. But it is often missed a bit by various software implementations (and certainly by marketing). All too often GPS is navigation, such that turning it off kills all location services.

Happily, Android seems pretty good about this, and just gives poorer precision when you turn the GPS off, but it does allow location services to work.

Which brings up a good point. Precision vs. accuracy is often also messed up, whether its confusing the two terms or just not communicating well. A quick primer: precision is the number of decimal places you measure something to; accuracy is how correct it is. The less accurate you think your measurement is, the less precisely you should report it.

Location precision examples
This image sums up what should be happening, but for more ranting about this start with this older post on GPS.

Following straight on from precision and accuracy is appropriateness of information. I believe that the biggest problem with turn-by-turn directions is that they assume perfect location precision, and say "you have arrived" instead of "it's the big, white building on the north side of the street," because maybe it's 30 yards behind you, or 50 in front.

The other problem with driving directions is bad data. If your map might be wrong, or imprecise or inaccurate (and they all might be) then think about this when planning the interaction. Don't assume your data is perfect, and give contextually-helpful information. Let users note problems, and do something with the problem reports.

Speaking of data (though it rambles, this thing just writes itself), where does that map data come from? Well, it depends. On my handheld GPS unit, most in-car units and some handsets now, it's in the device. But too many people (including designers) are so used to mobile phone maps they think GPS is AGPS, and only works when you can get network location, network maps, etc. Wrong. And a bad assumption. Why don't people want to know where they are when coverage is spotty or non-existent? Well, if your service or app has that use case, carry through on it.

And one last hint is to not confuse location with navigation. Turn-by-turn directions is not the end-all be-all of LBS. I don't know what is, and neither do you. Location is an enabling technology (or set of them, I guess) and if there even is a killer app, we haven't seen it yet. More likely, it's going to be like simply being on the internet, and will become so baked into our mobile experiences that it will become invisible to everyday people.

While I am sure the commoditization of location service annoys operators and handset makers, it's going to be a a good thing for the end user.



So, to wrap up with a simple guide to design and development of location services, remember that:

  • Every phone is location enabled. GPS or not, working or not, there's some location available. And if you are giving something like a weather report or local news, a few thousand yards is practically pinpoint precision.
  • All the available location technologies must be addressed when designing your application or service. Don't shut off the service because the GPS is off.
  • Precision and accuracy must be understood by designers, and correctly exploited by the product. When the GPS is off, or doing badly, show that circle so it's clear that we don't know /exactly/ where you are. Say "turn right in about 1/4 mile" and so on.
  • If you work for a carrier, exploiting the network like this should be a snap. If not, your devices or software may or may not be able to be talk to the phone enough, and you might need to negotiate with the carrier or find a third party provider.
  • Consider what to store locally. Does the handset really need to be on the network, or should you give some functionality when the connection is bad or unavailable?
  • Though I didn't mention it above, look useful without acting creepy. And don't just follow the letter of the law. Be careful with your user's data, share only what is needed, and store only what you really have to. Often, these last two are answered as "nothing." If that is the decision, make sure it's implemented as such, and no one gets lazy with the development or doesn't get the memo.

Paper or Plastic? e-readers vs mobiles vs book

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010

With all the latest announcements for e-readers and book pricing, I’ve been thinking a lot about the nature of reading recently. It seems like each company’s reading experience presumes everybody and every bit of content is the same experience.

Amazon is quite proud of their $9.99 pricing for e-books. They claim that it is cheaper than paper. And it is … for one type of reading. If you read mass market hardbacks or trade paperbacks (the ones that are the same size as the hardbacks) then $9.99 is cheaper than $15.99 or $25.99.

I do that type of reading, but only for professional-related books. These books I might want to learn from, cross-reference, make notes for adoption at the office, and so forth. I will read while traveling, but not relaxing in the tub. I don’t really share these books with my friends, though I share some of the ideas with my colleagues.

In contrast, my personal reading time is spent almost exclusively with cheap paperbacks. They’ve increased in price to $7.99, which I think is too much, but I pay it anyhow. I actively share these with people I live with, and share with friends. These are the books I take into the tub, and are more likely to come to bed with me. I keep them for a long time, but if they get lost on a trip or wet in the tub, it’s okay.

Several of these books currently live on the shelves of the people I lent them to, and while I’d like to have them back it’s completely livable. You can tell which series I really enjoy, because I no longer have the first book in the series. It’s been loaned elsewhere.

Then there are newspapers and magazines. This content is temporary by its nature, and at least for me is more akin to skimming online news and blogs.

These are not the only types of reading out there. One of the key lessons in graduate school was how to read research papers. Reading for learning or book clubs might also look very different. Reading business documents, at least in my product development world, really needs a large screen and a strong social connection. The documents do not live in a vacuum, and their business context must be considered while reviewing the product requirements document. I suspect that legal reading is different again.

Each manufacturer/provider has presumed one type of reading. Kindle is targeting trade paperback/hardback reading, largely for pleasure. The Que is designed for business use. Hearst’s Skiff is targeted more at newspapers. Apple is going after content deals galore, including textbooks and newspapers. None appear to target my pleasure-reading needs.

I’m not really worried about device fragmentation in the e-reader market. We know how to design and develop for that. I’m more worried about the purpose fragmentation. Is one going to win?

Clearly the mobile phone will continue to win here. The Kindle’s ability to continue reading on the phone where you left off on the device is brilliant. But the problems with sharing and moving content to other places still plague them; I only want to purchase material I know to be temporary. This is an industry DRM problem, but Kindle appears to be extra protective. Still a no-go for me.

In the meantime, I’m still reading the occasional book on my phone, and carrying several paperbacks on trips.

designing for the new array of high-end phones

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

For a while there, designers and developers could ignore screen and pixel size, at least for "high end" devices. Let's be honest here, "high end" meant iPhone-like: touch or multi-touch screens, high end Webkit browsers, and 320 x 480 pixels.

That time is now over. To our mind, it really wasn't here in the first place.

Why is the time now over?

  1. Android has matured a bit, and manufacturers are putting it on everything. Consider this ARCHOS Internet Tablet (800 x 480 pixels, 4.8 inches), this Vega Picture Frame (1366 x 768 pixels, 15.6 inches), this 7 inch tablet, or the nook's 3.5 inch screen with what looks like a 5:2 aspect ratio
  2. Even Palm's WebOS devices will not be consistent, with Pre's pixel dimensions matching the iPhone's, but Pixi's are at 320 x 400 pixels (80 pixels shorter).
  3. Normal Android phones, such as the Motorola Droid at 480 x 854 pixels, no longer have a predictable size. Who knows what the next devices screens will be like?
  4. The Motorola Droid's pixels, like the ARCHOS pixels, are much smaller than the iPhone's; bitmaps that work well on one may not on the other.

We wrote Photoshop layout is not your friend in March; this new array of high-end devices forces a choice: design for iPhone only, or start designing for multiple screen sizes.

If you're designing Android applications, you have some tools available to you. The Android Developers' Supporting Multiple Screens gives designers and developers a way to deliver the correct layouts and graphics to the correct devices.

For now, however, Android doesn't really support the full array of screens upon which Android is found. Here is what the document's Range of Screens Supported section says about device support:

Low density (120), ldpi Medium density (160), mdpi High density (240), hdpi
Small screen
  • QVGA (240x320), 2.6"-3.0" diagonal
Normal screen
  • WQVGA (240x400), 3.2"-3.5" diagonal
  • FWQVGA (240x432), 3.5"-3.8" diagonal
  • HVGA (320x480), 3.0"-3.5" diagonal
  • WVGA (480x800), 3.3"-4.0" diagonal
  • FWVGA (480x854), 3.5"-4.0" diagonal
Large screen
  • WVGA (480x800), 4.8"-5.5" diagonal
  • FWVGA (480x854), 5.0"-5.8" diagonal

The Droid is there, as a high-density, normal screen. The iPhone (were it an Android) and early Android phones are medium-density normal screens. The ARCHOS is a medium-density large screen. The nook and the Vega are ... not in the table at all.

Android's support of screen issues is incomplete, but many steps better than previous cross-device platforms like browsers and Java ME. Despite this, many developers have simply ignored the possibility of different screen types. My favorite example is the Fuzzy Clock widget, which is supposed to take up 25% of the screen with a single line of text. Apparently they used a single-sized bitmap font because on the Droid, the "glanceable" clock has the equivalent of about 8 point font. Not at all readable.

And frankly, I don't expect Apple to keep to the current screen dimensions. I don't have any inside information, but they will make a smaller screen or a bigger screen, or a higher-density screen, or probably all three. So even those of you focusing just on the iPhone may want to look at your process in the next few months.

The hardest type of applications to design for multiple screen types are games, as many create mazes, game boards, and levels for a specific aspect ratio. If your application uses scrolling or other pagination techniques, however, you can probably design it to comfortably manage a wide variety of screen sizes. (But all bets are off for supporting the Nook's screen, which will really want to scroll laterally, not vertically). How? Go read the resources linked above in this article. Or hire us.

user review: Droid vs Garmin for bicycle navigation

Saturday, November 14th, 2009

My father is a geek like me, though has been budget-conscious for my whole life. A few months ago, he started asking me a wide variety of questions of different types of devices he could use to fill his various needs, including bicycling and genealogical research in an area with highly spotty coverage. Numerous email exchanges later, we both decided on getting a Motorola Droid. He sent over this commentary on how it works for bicycling, partially to help another person in his device decision. I find the analysis fascinating. I hope you do, too.

I’ve experimented with using the various GPS Receiver functions of my new Motorola Droid toy. In short the Droid functions about as well as my Garmin eTrex in determining location but the Droid has limited navigation functionality when it is outside 3G coverage. Additionally the battery drain rate is high.

It appears that the Droid uses GPS satellites to determine its location for navigation type functions although it uses cell tower and WiFi data in conjunction with some apps.

Satellite acquisition and initial location determination

When I first turn on my Garmin it takes a couple of minutes to acquire satellites and calculate the current location. The unit “knows” where it was when it was turned off and has a catalog of satellites that it should see but it takes time to acquire those satellites and gather enough information to calculate location.

At home when I turn on Google Maps on the Droid it first shows a location based on cell tower data (I’m away from any known WiFi hotspots). It then quickly (less than 30 sec) zeros in on my house location. The impression is that the Maps App is much quicker in getting to the initial location than the eTrex. Ed. note: This is most likely due to the cell tower assistance.

I turned on the satellite view mode on Google Maps which shows aerial photography of my area. The blue dot showing my calculated location indicated that I was in the guest/sewing room rather than at my computer in the living room.

Tracking a bicycle ride

One of the apps tracks your movements. I assume that this uses GPS data and is not dependent on being connected to the network. I used this on a short ride that I believe includes areas that are out of coverage. I had the Droid in a handlebar bag and the Garmin mounted on the handlebar. On a 20 mile ride both units calculated the same moving time, distance and differed slightly on the altitude and total climb calculations.

I put the calculated tracks into Google Earth so that I could compare them side by side. Both tracks had errors. When compared to the rectified aerial photo I was all over the road and off the road for much of my ride. The Garmin seems to do a little better but that might be because it is set in a mode to attempt to follow the road. The errors were worse when I was in the trees. During one part of the ride the Droid seemed to have a consistent bias to the north of the road.

If I really cared about the accuracy I’d do some more tests with the Garmin set to ignore map information.

Navigating

I turned the navigation mode on for a 70 mile car trip home yesterday. The trip included a significant amount of time out of 3G coverage. I didn’t observe the navigation continuously but checked a couple of times when we were out of coverage. The screen was white, showed no map data, and showed that the app was doing a rerouting.

So as I expected you can only navigate when you are in range of the towers.

When it is navigating the default is to have the screen backlight on continuously. The Droid actually feels warm after awhile.

Also yesterday I unplugged the Droid around 6:30 AM. We did a round trip through low and no signal areas, I made a couple of phone calls, I also connected to a WiFi network and viewed various web sites, for about 2 1/2 hours I had the navigation mode in use. The GPS and WiFi receivers were on for the whole day. When I got home around 6:30 PM the phone was begging for a recharge.

Conclusion

No surprises. With the current apps the Droid will not replace my stand-alone GPSR. If they offer a capability to store map data and calculate routes on the device then maybe it could replace it. Since my intended uses include camping based bicycling trips I have recharging issues that would limit how I would use the Droid. For a trip that doesn’t include back country and has regular access to a USB power source it would probably be OK.

I am going to explore various off the grid recharging options such as solar cells and a new generator that runs off of body motion.

the changing mobile data landscape, part 2

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

If you haven’t, go check out part 1 of this series, in which I argue about the increasing role of feature phones in mobile web, and possibly apps.

I think a major shift in how we pay for mobile data is coming, within a year or two. And content companies need to figure out how to conserve bits. They aren’t free.

The role of data plans

Let’s take a look at unlimited data plans for a moment. Unlimited data plans are great! They provide enormous freedom! No worrying about how much data you use! Terrific!

And it is terrific. It’s great for people who can afford to spend $70 per month for each phone in their family. That’s not terrific for everybody. And it leaves people like my father, who want smart phones and that freedom but aren’t planning on watching video or tethering, paying for heavy users.

Variable pricing is inevitable

Unlimited data plans not only reduce access to a larger number of people, they also cause congestion problems. There is no cost to using the network, and there is cost to not using the network. It’s annoying on many devices to switch to wi-fi; it’s inconvenient to change your email or web habits.

As the operators increase available bandwidth, demands will go up. Video streaming, data cards, and tethering become more popular. People enter the world of mobile data from no experience to 3G cards, possibly with the intent to replace their home connection.

As the experience degrades (think AT&T access in places like New York and San Francisco), the operators’ brands take a major hit. Vehicle traffic planners have known this for years: roads fill to capacity. The existence of the larger roads change drivers’ behavior, even to purchasing houses further from town.

Some sort of change in pricing model is inevitable. Mark Lowenstein over at FierceWireless provides a few options. You can read a deeper discussion on the problem, and the solution, over at Slate.com.

And yes, Verizon already has a tiered data plan.

Global concern

I’ve just set out the argument for why the U.S. will not have universal unlimited data. That was the tough part of the argument; the economics for unlimited data are better here than in many places. In much of the world, pre-paid plans with pay-per-kilobyte are the norm. And this includes hundreds of millions of users (over 300 million in India alone) who do not have computer access to the Internet.

Increasing role of smart phones

As we discussed last time, feature phones are becoming more capable. Further, they have cheaper data connections than do smart phones, because on average they are used less. (There’s that tiered pricing again).

On top of this, smart phones are being pushed deeper and deeper into the feature phone market. Nokia has done this for years, and customers do not even realize they own a smart phone. Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices are being used as feature phones. Android phones “for the masses” are being deployed.

As smart phones get pushed deeper into the market, they will be selected by prepaid users more and more. Many of these users will still be paying per kilobyte.

Design implications

Right now, the bulk of the mobile web industry is moving to rich web interactions. But at what cost?

In a world of pay-per-kilobyte, is that 12kb JQTouch framework worth it? Sometimes, yes. But frequently, no.

It’s what we’ve been preaching all along: keep the page size down. Okay, we’re no longer limiting you to 1300 bytes (the standard was 1492 but there was this one Sanyo device …), but let’s do our best to keep sizes down.

If you design for speed, you’ll get a long way towards designing for different types of connection.

I’m hoping that HTML5 will be able to help us out. Imagine a local cache of the entire JQuery and JQTouch libraries available for any page to use without re-downloading. Perhaps a JQuery browser plug-in?

Similarly, the content industry should be pressuring mobile operators to publish not just the type of device, but the speed and cost of connection. If we had this information, we could really optimize content and the whole experience for the current situation. If the connection is free or cheap, and the current speed is fast, we send down the enriched experience. If the connection is dear, or the congestion is bad, then send down the lightweight experience.

the changing mobile data landscape, part 1

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009

In August 2009, the Admob Metrics report for the U.S. Admob ad impressions showed a little feature phone moving to third place after months at fourth place. Yes yes, the iPhone and iPod Touch are numbers 1 and 2. But that's not important here.

A featurephone is #3 in mobile web browser use

The Samsung R450. To be more precise, the Samsung SCH-R450 for Metro PCS. Not an Android device, not a Pre, not a Blackberry. A messaging-focused feature phone with a poor camera, released in 2008. And not AT&T, not Sprint, not Verizon. Instead, Metro PCS, who says "everything we do is unlimited." Smartphone users are getting unlimited voice, text, and data for $50/month. Feature phone users max out at $45. With no contract.

This price is within the range of "normobs," or normal mobile users, especially when considered as a replacement for a wireline home phone.

And guess what? They are using the mobile web. In great numbers.

NYT website on a PSP

Look around, kids are surfing on anything
with a connection and a browser.

Some folks are holding onto their Motorla RAZR. Yes, in 2009, the RAZR is still in the top 20 handsets hitting Admob-measured sites. Actually, it's number 6. Our UK readers may be aghast, but go look at your numbers. Three Nokia devices in the top 20? And none of an E-Series? And Apple taking over 50% of Admob traffic? (I keep mentioning Admob because they are measuring a non-random subset of mobile web data.)

And while you're at it, check out the increasing share of... Sony PlayStation Portable.

Design for more than smart phones

Okay, smart phones are great. iPhones are great. We like them. We use them. But they are not the only devices out there. Design for all the devices important to you. And by "important to you" I mean important to your customers.

"Wagging the dog"

Industry pundits have talked about how the iPhone is the tail wagging the mobile industry dog. That may be true, but let's look at user behavior instead.

I've spent time in the past few months helping my parents and a similarly-aged friend decide what device to get next. They are all very interested in smart phones, especially once I showed them applications. After all, applications let them do what they want to do, not what the mobile phone manufacturer thinks 80% of people want to do. And their needs aren't outrageous, either.

So we have increased interest in mobile web and mobile applications from folks who do not want the latest gadget. And they don't necessarily know that they need a specific brand or operating system to do it. If a device delivers a good web experience, and perhaps some downloaded apps, that may be all they need. Yup, I'm talking web and Java here, folks.

Feature phones can do it

Why won't they get smart phones?

Because they have to pay more per month, every month. $20 extra each month for Verizon, as of two minutes ago. That's $480 extra plus tax over the course of the contract, and the phone most likely costs more, too.

So my father would have to pay more for the smart phone, then pay more for the data for the smart phone. He's a smart man and is budget conscious. Why would he do this? He'll avoid it if he can. He doesn't need or want to download music or videos. Why pay extra for this?

And feature phones will serve most of his needs, especially once he discovers GetJar.

I believe that feature phones are going to be far more important in mobile data in the next few years, driven by these varying price points the operators are maintaining combined with the capabilities perceived to be part of smart phones only.

And guess what? If customers make this choice now, many feature phones have better browsers than Blackberry and Windows Mobile. So which is the better choice? As better BB and IE browsers deploy, this will be less true. But stay tuned.