The GSM Association (GSMA) of mobile network operators and handset manufacturers last month announced it was developing open standards to encourage the growth of mobile applications. The group's Mobile Services (M-Services) initiative has the backing of leading handset manufacturers, including Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, Alcatel, Samsung and Siemens.
However, some critics have said the development of standards before progress has been made with applications means that M-Services could suffer the same fate as WAP, which has not proved popular.
The M-Services initiative is following the lead of the I-mode service from Japanese carrier DoCoMo. I-mode provides common standards for mobile services, is widely supported on mobile handsets in Japan, and has been well received by customers. The GSMA hopes M-Services will enjoy similar success, with specifications for a common set of services and graphical interfaces for the next generation of mobile phones in Europe.
However, Jon Collins of analyst firm Sundial Consultancy argued that the GSMA does not understand the reason for I-mode's popularity. 'The fact there was an industry standard was not the reason why I-mode was successful in Japan. It was probably due to the fact that it could handle more lines of characters than WAP, and there was a [craze] for its animated graphics,' he said.
Collins believes applications are the key to success, not standards, so the European firms should change their emphasis. 'They are looking down the wrong end of the telescope when it comes to forging standards,' he said. 'They should have been working out applications first and standards second.' By designing the standards before the applications  and failing to ask users what they want from M-Services  the initiative could suffer the same fate as WAP, Collins argued.
Sharon Saw, senior analyst at e-business consultancy Topspot, accused the M-Services firms of arrogance. 'Standards are useful in that they can guarantee a product's durability in the market, but this market is technology-driven, and without the applications there is nothing to standardise,' she said.
Saw said the GSMA may cause the deve-lopment of technology that business users and consumers do not want. 'What is the point if Nokia or Ericsson spend millions developing mul-ticolour technology to fulfil the standard, and users don't want it? That sort of thing cannot be good for the industry.'
But vendors backing M-Services denied that the proposed standards would place undue restrictions on the applications that could be developed. They added that WAP and M-Services are designed to standardise the delivery methods for applications, not the applications themselves. Jan Wareby of Ericsson's consumer division said, 'End-user applications use barer services such as GSM and GPRS as a delivery mechanism. WAP in itself is not an application but a protocol for the delivery of applications.'
The GSMA hopes open, non-proprietary standards will encourage more applications developers to produce the mobile services and content that users want. 'Without the appropriate standards, the confusion that exists in the marketplace will continue,' warned Wareby. The GSMA said one problem with WAP has been the multiplicity of technologies, and this is why it is bringing the industry together to provide a common set of requirements for applications.
For now it remains unclear whether M-Services will lead to much wider availability of popular mobile applications, and how quickly it will be adopted.
