As far as government turf wars go, this seems to be a pretty polite one.  The recent kerfuffle concerning air traffic controllers and sequester money demonstrated that our government goes out of its way to be kind to fliers.  On the one hand, the FCC and Senator Claire McCaskill are working to improve passenger access to their mobile tech, while the FAA is reasonably skittish about doing so until all their data is in.

Most recently, however, a survey released by the Airline Passenger Experience Association and the Consumer Electronics Association revealed that as many of 30% of us forget – or rather, “forget” – to turn off our mobile devices when we’re told to at the beginning and end of every flight, and only about 5% of us actually go through the process of completely powering down (that is, holding down the power button and sliding the bar to shut down the device completely).  Many are using data from this and similar studies to argue that the FAA’s testing is superfluous at best.

Additionally, last week the FCC proposed auctioning off the rights to newly available airwaves to increase Wi-Fi speeds in flight.  This is, of course, a very welcome development.  Just as our smartphones are proving themselves to be better GPS devices than the ones that come with our cars, with better connections our tablets could obviate the need for the individual monitors embedded in everyone’s headrests.  At the moment, Wi-Fi equipped aircraft offer in-flight movie purchases, but they struggle mightily when passengers try to use video streaming services like Netflix or Hulu.  Giving the customers freedom, choice, and capability in their in-flight entertainment would be a welcome development indeed.

While the terms aren’t quite the same, it’s safe to say that mobile application development is undergoing a similarly rapid transformation, and developers who wish to remain relevant will need to keep pace.  For now, it’s enough to build an app and make sure it looks good on 4-inch phone or a 10-inch tablet.  But for the needs and the platforms of tomorrow, that just won’t cut the mustard.

Jeffrey Hammond and Julie Ask of Information Week recently posted an excellent article about the future of mobile app development.  One of the more challenging metrics to codify is context.  With the inevitable proliferation of services like Google Now, users are going to expect their mobile devices to know their habits, their schedules, their foibles, where they live, where they’re going, and how long it’s going to take to get there.  The mobile apps of the future are going to have to keep up.

We’re also going to expect better integrated voice control.  A recent exchange between Siri and Google Voice hilariously demonstrated the current limitations of voice recognition, but that is only expected to improve with time.  Users in the not-too-distant future are going to want full voice control for those apps they use while exercising or driving, and smoothly enough to where it won’t prove distracting.

And, of course, there’s the issue of device proliferation.  Users are coming to expect synchronicity across all their mobile platforms.  For now, that hasn’t caused too much of a headache, but in the next few years we’re going to see all sorts of new platforms, many of which – like wristwatches and eyeglasses, just to name two – will require  some innovative thinking when it comes to the mobile apps those devices might use.

The mobile tech industry moves at a faster pace than most, and while its future is certain to be a bright and exciting one, developers will need to keep up to be able to compete.

For example:  Twitter is a fantastic communications tool, and when used properly, it can even help topple brutal dictatorships.  But last week it proved to be dysfunctional, even counterproductive, when used as a primary news source.  “Breaking news” is clearly broken, and of course the major news networks bear the brunt of the responsibility for trying to stay ahead of an amorphous social media community that doesn’t have to fret about fact-checking and journalistic ethics.  The fact of the matter is that anyone who waited two days and picked up a print newspaper would have been better informed than those following social media.  Jumping to incorrect conclusions only led to false accusations of innocent people and trauma to already-grieving families.  One of the reasons the Boston police released the actual photos of the suspects was so that the online community would stop doing damage.

We also learned that we should spend less time talking, and more time listening and educating ourselves.  People in the Twitterverse suggesting that we “nuke Czechoslovakia” would be better served spending their time reading books than typing into their phones, where they might learn that Czechoslovakia no longer exists, and was never Chechnya.  (Thankfully the Czech ambassador to the U.S. was there to set us straight.)

Not all the failings were human.  In spite of the advances in facial recognition technology, it failed to match the suspects to photos both of them had in official databases.  Instead, it required one agent watching a segment of footage over 400 times.

No, in spite of all the magnificent advancements brought to us by mobile technology, solving this horrible crime was an analog victory.  And for all of us here at AppMuse, we’d like to thank the law enforcement community for their tireless efforts in bringing this tragedy to a close.

Several entrepreneurs brought – or rather tried to bring – similar innovation to taxi services, with varying degrees of success.  Companies like Uber, Lyft, ZimRide, and Sidecar all offer car-sharing services, but continuously ran into problems with larger municipalities who license and regulate traditional taxi services within their borders.   And while it sometimes appears as though cities like New York and San Francisco might be finally willing to come into the twenty-first century, however slowly, other challenges lie on the horizon:  for example, a proposal in fifteen cities to ban GPS metering in favor of physical metering which requires significant upgrades (and costs) to a vehicle.

Of course, we like to think that technology, innovation, and common sense will win out in the end, and it usually does.  There are also logistical problems involved for transportation regulators.  First, there’s almost nothing to stop tech-savvy commuters from using such services without a particular city’s commission, but more importantly, how far can such regulations go?  If a city tries to outlaw taxi apps, can they do the same for carpool apps?  What about apps like StearClear, whose noble goal is to provide transportation to people who aren’t sober enough to do so themselves?

The fact of the matter is that traditional, regulated, yellow-cab type services would benefit at least as much from taxi apps as consumers would.  On the average, New York Taxi drivers spend about forty percent of their time looking for fares, which could be radically reduced were they to make better use of mobile technology.

In their promotional video, Nuance creates a fictional consumer who’s trying to decide whether or not to buy his girlfriend a ring, as well as a fictional deodorant company called Alpha.  The ad service intervenes – both tastefully and playfully – to suggest that if a man is about to propose to his girlfriend, he should probably smell pretty good while he’s doing it, so why not try Alpha?

It’s an incredibly innovative idea, but its success will depend on the execution.  Much like water, marketing seeps into every single crack available to it, so the real question is whether voice ads will be useful or incredibly annoying.   Nuance made sure to inform us that voice ads won’t interrupt our mobile games or phone calls to try and sell us anything, but Voice Ads do run the risk of becoming the pop-up ad of the 21^st century.  Additionally, Voice Ads will use location and mobility to signal a user that it wants to speak to him or her, and given the number of people who feel quite reasonably uneasy when their advertisers know them better than their close family, there’s even a “Big Brother” problem that might arise if the ads are too successful.  Imagine, for example, driving by a movie theatre and having your phone suggest a particular film, and that film happens to be the one you yourself would have picked out.  It’s useful, it’s innovative, but it can also be really, really creepy.

So while it certainly doesn’t appear Facebook is going to release its own phone and operating system, something is certainly afoot.  Last week the social media giant sent out an invitation to the media for an event on April 4 that promises to showcase Facebook’s “new home on Android”.  Mike Isaac of All Things Digital suspects we won’t be getting a Facebook phone, but a “Facebook-y version of a phone,” which Facebook hopes will serve as a user’s primary mode of communication in any form, whether SMS, voice, e-mail, or video chat.

So, it looks like we’re going to get something more than a Facebook skin, but less than a Facebook phone.  According to the Wall Street Journal, that essentially means that Facebook will serve as something of a gateway for accessing communication functions.  It will be the first screen users see when they activate their devices, thus establishing a greater level of integration than is otherwise offered by a mobile app.  Facebook has been making a series of moves lately to up its mobile presence, and this is certainly in keeping with that strategy.

But will anyone care?  As several commentators noted, aren’t all phones Facebook phones already?  If we use the Facebook home screen as a contacts list, will we have to navigate out of it if we want to place a phone call or send an e-mail to someone who doesn’t have a Facebook account?  (Believe it or not, yes, such people really do exist.)  To be fair, Facebook doesn’t usually host big media events when it doesn’t have something exciting to say, so tune in to Thursday’s announcement if you want to be among the first to know what’s what.

The way it works is this:  If you have the Walmart app on your smartphone and walk into a participating location, you set the app to enter “store mode” and scan your purchases as you put them in your shopping cart.  When you’re finished, you go to the checkout line where the app activates your phone’s camera to display a QR code, after which you settle up.

There are a great many benefits to such a system:  you’ll keep a running tally of your costs, you won’t have to wait (hopefully) in a checkout line, and best of all, you won’t have to dilly-dally with the insufferable self-service checkout hardware that insists you remove your purchase from the scanning area and start again.

To be fair, the Scan & Go program will only work at Walmart, so the question of universality remains unanswered.  Still, it’s not difficult to imagine that consumers would be more inclined to use such a service at stores they frequent often.  If you’re anything like us, you’re probably carrying a grocery store loyalty card (or have one awkwardly on your keychain), in addition to a wholesaler’s card (Costco, Sam’s Club, etc.), so it’s not a great leap to expect other large chains such as these to implement similar services once Walmart has ironed out all the kinks.

As is always they case, however, the cool apps come to iOS first.  Walmart announced that an Android version will be available soon, but for now it’s only the iPhone users who get to skip through the express check-out line.

Before we get to that, however, the first thing you need to know is that if your app is poorly designed, poorly implemented, or doesn’t provide a pleasant user experience, the question of monetization models is moot.  Bad apps don’t make money, so make sure that your first priority is to develop a quality product.

That said, choosing the right revenue model can vastly improve your chances for success, depending on which one you choose:

• Paid download:  Paid downloads allow you to realize income immediately, which makes it by far the most tempting option for developers who have costs to recoup.  However, the app market is a much more crowded place than it used to be, and setting up barriers between you and your potential customers might not be the wisest choice if your app is an unknown quantity.  If you don’t have an established brand name to build on, going with the paid download model could hamper your potential for growth.
• Freemium:  The freemium model involves a free download, after which users have the option to purchase additional content.  Traditionally, this has proved to be the best money-maker of the three choices, particularly for game, entertainment, and productivity apps.
• Ad-based revenue:  This is essentially a bet on the future.  Mobile ads are slowly but surely growing more sophisticated with their targeting, and it’s only a matter of time before they’re as sophisticated as the desktop ads that have performed so well.  That said, patience is required; ad-based revenue is the slowest money maker, as it requires a significant user base before it starts to perform well.

Of course, you might want to mix it up a bit and using a combination of these revenue models.  If you consider a service like Pandora, which relies on ad revenue for its regular service but offers a freemium, ad-free upgrade, it’s clear that you can get creative with the revenue models and still make decent money.

1. Re-marketing:  Have you ever been on a browsing binge on your desktop PC and noticed that the same ads seem to follow you around?  That’s called “remarketing,” and it works by remembering your browsing and shopping habits through tools like cookies.  Such tools aren’t yet available for smartphones, and as a result it’s significantly more difficult for advertisers to target their ads effectively.
2. Conversion:  “Click-through” rates measure the number of times users click on a mobile ad.  “Conversion” rates measure the number of times those ads led to a sale.  First, click-through rates are higher on phones than they are on tablets and desktops, but this may simply be a function of screen size.  How many times have you clicked on an ad accidentally, because it popped up at precisely the moment you were about to click something else?  Or how many times have your ham-handed thumbs clicked on an ad instead of closing it, which is what you meant to do?  Accidental clicks shouldn’t really factor into the data, but they do, even though such clicks rarely lead to a sale.  Additionally, how do you measure the conversion rate when a user searches for, say, a restaurant, but then physically goes to the restaurant to make the purchase?  That won’t be counted in a conversion rate analysis, even though it certainly should.
3. Creativity:  Too many mobile ads send people to web pages that aren’t optimized for their phones.  However, other marketers are doing it right.  Starwood Hotels, for example, favors click-to-call ads and expandable maps on the off-chance that someone looking for a hotel from their phone is likely going to want to book a room in the very near future, and tailoring that process to mobile users is definitely a smart move.

Shopping for cars is the best it’s ever been. In the old days, you had to deal with going from dealership to dealership, living through the hassles of meeting with pushy salesman, boring test drives, filling forms, and horrible car dealership coffee and worthless daytime TV.  With mobile apps like the five below, that can all be a thing of the past.

The Car & Driver Buyer’s Guide

The Car and Driver Buyer’s Guide by Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S., known for the publication Car and Driver magazine, allows car shoppers to read reviews of new car models instantaneously, see car specs, and all other available pricing information. Available for iPhone, users can search for a car through a number of options, including make, model, price range, and fuel economy. On top of the interactive features, the app takes a step above most car buying apps by leading consumers toward helpful car buying articles published by the magazine. Users can also park their selected vehicles for future consideration in the “Garage” section of the app, according to Bankrate.com.

Kbb.com

Kelley Blue Book provides one of the ultimate resource apps. The KBB app lets you check car prices, ratings, search for nearby dealers, and, unlike other apps, provides actual real-time car values, Bankrate.com also reported.

Edmunds

The Edmunds app for iPhone lets you check a car manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP), and compare that price to an Edmund-designated target. With a similar app soon to be released for the Droid, the Edmunds app lets you quickly differentiate between what a car is worth off the line, and what the actual car online or at a dealership may be asking.

Auto Loan Calculator

Bankrate.com’s calculator app allows car shoppers the ability to negotiate a car loan by letting the user determine the size and type of car they can afford. The car loan calculator lets users input the interest rate and terms of the potential car loan to calculate the difference between the total price of the car when paying in cash, and paying for the car on a loan.

Auto Circle

Wouldn’t it be nice if you knew exactly how much the car insurance will cost before purchasing the vehicle? Now you can, with Auto Circle, a free app from the insurance company that was recently crowned with the ‘Forrester Research Grounds Award’ in the best mobile app category. The app helps USAA customers find, finance, and insure a new car quickly. Assistant Vice President for USAA Bob Otis claims, “on average, members will save about $4,500” when using the app effectively, according to Bankrate.com.