1. Web Portals for Mobile Devices Arcadia’s Experience

2. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006  Review specifics of web applications for mobile devices  Share our experience in development of mobile web portals  Reveal problems of development and testing of complex mobile web applications  Make conclusions about progress and future trends in this area Goals and Tasks

3. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006  Difficulty of entering long texts – poor keyboard  Problems of displaying big sets of information – small screen  Poor navigation: no mouse  Low reliability of connection – dependence on batteries charge and area of coverage  High dependence on device/browser capabilities: too many different mobile devices Mobile Applications Specifics

4. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006  Usually consists of:  Logging to the system  Configuration of self user settings: language, change password, etc. (limited abilities)  Navigation by the application functionality (links, icons)  Functionality depending on the system specifics (textboxes, checkboxes, radio buttons)  Standard functionality of many systems – reading of inner news, sending messages to inner users, etc.  Uses all abilities of mobile browsers  Should be considered as an extension of full- functional (desktop) web system  Works on audience accumulation, advertising Mobile Web Portal

5. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006  Development for mobile devices:  Palm Pilot (Web Clipping Applications)  Pocket PC  Cellular phones (both WAP and HTML browsers)  5 years ago  American customer - real estate system  WML 1.0 for cellular phones  WCA for Palm OS  Development technologies: ASP, VB, MS SQL  Present time  Norwegian customer – education system  Should work on both desktop and mobile browsers  One web portal for wide range of mobile devices, including Web-enabled cell phones, pagers, and personal digital assistants (PDAs) – WML, HTML  Development technologies: ASP.NET C# Mobile Web Forms, MySQL Arcadia’s Experience

6. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006 ASP.NET Adaptive Controls

7. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006  5 years ago  Very poor browsers – small applications  One device – one application. Any regular technologies can be used  Present time  Many different browsers – complex applications (support of old devices)  Many devices – one application. Applying special technologies is required  Additional level of presentation (ASP.NET Mobile Web controls / adapters)  Nevertheless developers should know WML1.0, WML1.1, WML2.0, XHTML, CHTML, MyPalm, Pocket IE, J-Phone, etc. in addition to the ASP.NET Mobile experience  Biggest problem – to get actual settings of mobile devices like screen size, cookies support, colors support, tables support, device model name, etc.  The only information we have is whether the browser is HTML or WAP  Different behavior of different mobile browsers  Many errors (not working breaks, unexpected messages, etc.)  There is no easy way to get the unique code of a cell phone from a web application  Specifics of mobile applications require additional knowledge in Mobile Usability area from the developers Development Specifics and Problems

8. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006  Testing on both desktop and mobile browsers  Too few simulators of phones and browsers  Necessity to buy mobile devices and pay for the traffic – expensive  Server with external IP is required (for access from the internet)  Impossible to use automatic testing systems Problems of Testing

9. © Copyright 1993-2006 Arcadia Inc., e-mail: info@arcadia.spb.ru AUGUST 2006  Growth of requirements to mobile web applications  Development of mobile portals does not become easier despite of new technologies  Mobile software (browsers) is not oriented on support of complex web application  WAP should die – the sooner the better Conclusions