On both sides of the spectrum are false expectations of success.   Just because an app is created does not mean its creator will become rich and famous.  Similarly, just because an app store has been created does not mean the masses will flock to it.

There are a number of things that feed into the popularity of apps.  First, the platform has to be desirable. While there are huge markets for users of iOS and Android devices, the same cannot be said about Meego devices.

Apps must work well and look good, whether they’re games or business applications and they need to address an actual user requirment or desire.  Apps need to be marketed well by the developer, discoverable in the app store, and publicly advocated by their users.  Pricing and many other factors also come into play.

Two years ago at a Plug and Play Technology Center event targeted at venture capitalists, I heard a sobering statistic:  Of the apps developed for the Apple iStore, 99 percent are no longer used after the first 30 days and within three months, 99 percent of the one percent are not used.  So much for easy fame and fortune.

Apply the one-percent-of-one-percent statistics to the app stores that have little or no traction and the numbers look even worse.  Even when an app store is robust, there is no guarantee of success.

At the AnDevCon conference yesterday, Don Kellogg, director of Telecom Research and Insight at Nielsen said the average user of an Android smartphone is engaged with his or her handset for an average of one hour, 25 minutes, 14 seconds per day.  For simplicity, we’ll call the average user “Dave”.

This is how Dave spends his time, on average, during a one-week period:

• 40%  Facebook
• 28% games
• 12% Internet
• 9% messaging
• 7% pre-loaded apps
• 3% phone (voice calls)
• 1% [e]mail
• 1% third-party apps

Notice the third-party app statistic.  Again, the number one comes up.  But wait!  There’s more…

Analytics firm Canalys estimated that 300 million smartphones shipped in 2010, worldwide.  ABI Research stated while Android market share outpaces iOS 44% to 31%, Apple app downloads beat Android 2:1.  The firm also estimates global app downloads will grow to 29 billion by the end of 2011, compared to only 9 billion in 2010, fueled by the worldwide adoption of smartphones which is expected to grow 46% in 2011.

Nielsen also stated that Apple app downloads beat Android 2:1 and that Apple users are more willing to pay for their apps.  For every two free apps, an iStore customer will pay for one.  By comparison, Android Market and Blackberry App World customers download 3.5 free apps for everyone they buy.

It turns out free can be a great strategy depending on what you’re doing.  If you have a premium product with rich functionality, offering a free “lite” version can be an effective path to upgrades so long as the free product is good enough for users to want more (not crippleware).  Free has also proven to be a good strategy for publishers and brands who want to interact with customers through a new channel.  (However, getting customers to pay for a product that was once free is difficult unless the paid version offers more.)

Bottom line, apps are hot and they’re about to get hotter with the proliferation of tablets, smart phones, and wearable devices such as those from WIMM, but only a small percentage will make it to Killer App status.

Sadly, the technical good guys bear the burdens of our sins. While we whine and bang our fists on the desks hoping our problem will be fixed exactly one picosecond after we discover it, they quietly push their actual thoughts aside long enough to patiently explain why it is or is not possible for us to instantly  return to the state of nirvana we seek. If it is possible to get us back to The Point Before Everything Went Wrong, we should be elated, patient, and grateful but instead we tend to show our true colors the moment we utter, “So, how long will this take?”

Increasingly, I, for one, appreciate human help, especially as it is becoming a rare commodity.  Increasingly, companies are trying to reduce customer and technical support costs through videos, webinars, podcasts, and self-help forums.  The videos are great if they’re well made and address the specific issue you face; however, like webinars and podcasts they require an investment in time before their actual value can be assessed. Self-help forums may help but their quality is very inconsistent.  Some are easy to navigate and well populated with good content.  Others appear to have been designed by chaoticians.

Application-specific help also varies in its effectiveness. Most systems allow you to search for terms or step through an index. However, some systems don’t anticipate synonyms, meaning they may recognize “trash” but not “delete” or vice versa. If you know their limitations going in, you may have a better chance of finding what you seek.

Then there are the IT guys.  They know the answers to our questions better than we know how to ask the question in the first place.  Most self-help systems have no such capability.  They generally anticipate a finite set of questions worded in a particular way.

So, when you have access to human help, be gracious.  After all, the IT guys are people too.

Tom teaches Silicone Room Temperature Vulcanization (RTV) moldmaking and casting.  He has a long history of creating products ranging from toys to Klingon foreheads using silicone and other materials for himself, employers, and clients.  Over the years he has evolved from a talented artist to an Obi Wan-type creative Jedi master.

I’ve taught writing clases and have been a mentor and judge to Stanford/National University of Singapore students creating new ventures.

According to us two sages, young people often want to know how they can make a noticeable difference in the world, become rich, or both.  Our advice is the same:  Create something remarkable (which is easier said than done).

For one thing, you need The Big Idea.  And, you need a way to execute it.  Quite often people have ideas or the means to execute but not both.  TechShop and the Plug and Play Technology Center, both located in the San Francisco Bay Area, are designed for idea people who need help and guidance with execution.  There are also would-be world changers who have access to VCs, world-class mentors, and/or equipment who are waiting for lightning to strike.

And, assuming there is a solid concept and the means to execute it (funding, equipment, distribution, etc.), there are also things like timing and luck that can affect the outcome.

Unlike their older, more experienced counterparts, young minds are usually not aware of nor constrained by that which has come before, which is a blessing and a curse.  On one hand, young minds do not tend fall into the linear thinking trap that some elders do.  For example,  a person whose first computer was a Commodore 64 likely has a different historical perspective of computing than a person whose first computer was an iPad.

On the flip side, young entrepreneurs can be so enamored with their ideas they fail to do their homework.  If that is the case then then they may now know that once upon a time others spent countless hours and ideas on the same idea only to fail miserably.  As an example, mobile marketing was supposed to change the world in 2000 and here we are in 2011.  In the meantime, the concept and infrastructure have evolved greatly.  Without that knowledge, it is entirely possible to reinvent a faulty wheel.

Creation is the most powerful force on the planet…and the most fun.  As mentors it is gratifying to share experiences for whatever they’re worth because as we share ideas we too continue to learn.

Every now and then you may be cruising through Yet Another Day and everything is fine until the Black Screen of Death appears on your computer, a peripheral is seemingly non-responsive, or you can’t do anything because of service interruptions.  You get the picture.  In honor of those moments I’ve come up with a top 10 list of things I find annoying.  If you have others, please add them!

#10. Slower than advertised network speeds. There’s little excuse for dial-up performance on a high speed connection but it’s totally possible to feel caught in a time warp, albeit temporarily.  Sure, Windows computers in particular can make a network connection appear to be slow so try a link test to be sure.

#9: Smartphone soft keyboards. Some soft keyboards may be better than others but when they’re bad, they’re awful. That’s why text phones tend to have hard keyboards. Try handing an original Blackberry Storm to some poor soul and tell her to compose a text. Try not to laugh.

#8: Model-specific adapters. I have an entire box of these just in case. How about you?

#7: PC/laptop boot times. Since the dawn of computers it’s been possible to pick up a phone and get a dialtone and yet it can take several minutes for a laptop or PC to boot. Now there are tablet computers that are “instant on.”   The phones and tablets have got it right.  I’ve been advocating Instant On ever since I discovered Windows in 1989.  Seriously.

#6: Wireless dead zones: “Can you hear me now?” No. I can’t surf or update my status either. The new personal hot spots like MiFi from Verizon are greatfor networking but they are apparently not infallable. One device can provide wi-fi connections for up to five PCs via 3G and in some cases 4G…assuming you’re not in a dead zone.

#5: Overly sensitive touchpads. Make sure you love the touchpad on your laptop or netbook with all your heart before buying it. If you’ve never had trouble with a touchpad you may not perceive that any problems could possibly exist. I had that view until I picked up a Dell Inspiron as a backup travel computer (instead of a netbook). It does all kinds of wild and crazy things that seem to have no basis in logic and worse are extremely counterproductive.  At least some problems can be rectified by adjusting the touchpad settings but still, this is the first touchpad (and laptop) I love to hate.

#4: Driver woes. It happens. All of a sudden your sound card doesn’t work or you plug in your camera and nothing happens. Maybe one day you just can’t print. Quite often the problem can be solved by uninstalling and reinstalling the driver (there is probably an update on the manufacturer’s website if your computer does not automatically locate it). That’s easy enough to do and should solve the problem. “Should” is the operative word because even tech support dudes give up when the reinstall and command-line voodoo don’t work.

#3: Automatic updates. Just when you need it least, software updates happen. Sometimes you can delay the reboot for as long as you like but in some cases the software is going to force an imminent reboot. Productivity is key. Intefering with user productivity is a bad idea. Luckily, more now happens in “background mode” thanks to a mound of user complaints.  Keep ‘em coming.

#2: Viruses, spyware, and malware: The problem with computer and internet security is that the black hats (hackers) are always a step ahead of the white hats (good guys) which means security software can only protect you from known forms of attacks.

#1:  Technology changes all the time.  Change is what makes working in the high tech industry fun.  Change is also what can drive you nuts as a user.  The minute you buy the “latest and greatest” you can be sure the next generation is in the works ready to take yet another bite out of your wallet in 6 – 9 months, give or take.   Now consider just how many products we “must have.”  In a related vein, consider how many services we must have because face it:  Most modern hardware isn’t worth much without add-on software and/or services.

I can say this with confidence:  Whatever number came to mind is likely fewer than will occur to you a year or two from now.

Do you hate technology yet?  Me neither.  I love it…most of the time…until it disrupts my day.

My first introduction to “mobility” was the Apple Macintosh.  They were called “luggable” computers because they weighed about 17 pounds and were very bulky. But, if you didn’t want to go into the office on the weekend, you didn’t mind hauling the thing home.  Of course, the computer wasn’t networked to anything but that was OK because we had sneakernet (floppy drives).

I was not one of the early cell phone adopters mainly because they were the size of a lunchbox, which I thought was ridiculous and apparently so did everyone else.  It wasn’t long before cell phones became handheld devices, ala the kind of handheld device Gordon Gekko received when he checked out of jail in Wall Street 2.

I never liked pagers because like faxes they assumed priority (like IM does today).  Of course, I had one anyway.  In Silicon Valley there are just certain things one has to own.

Next came the laptops.  I was in the middle of this particular rage because I had a laptop client.  All kinds of computer manufacturers were jumping on the bandwagon, many of which failed but the choice was good for consumers.  What was bad was the technology.  The nickel cadmium (NiCad) batteries didn’t last more than a couple of hours and the screen technology wasn’t all that good.  The laptops were heavy, sub-10 pounds but still…try walking a trade show floor with one one of those!  No thanks.

In the meantime, I kept upgrading my cell phones to the newer, sleeker models.  My favorite was a Motorola flip phone which looked like a Star Trek communicator.  Later, of course, I discovered smartphones but because I was a Verizon subscriber, I chose a Blackberry Storm because Apple iPhones were not available at the time.  The upside was, I had a signal wherever I went which my AT&T iPhone friends envied.  Of course, the smart keyboard on the Blackberry Storm is so bad its impractical.  Now, thanks to Android, I have even cooler choices and Verizon offers iPhones.

I must say, although I was also in the middle of the whole netbook craze as a client was working on those and several other device types I began questioning exactly how many devices I personally needed.  Sure, the netbook was easier to travel with because it was lighter but I still preferred the fuller functionality of my laptop. 

My dreams came true when the tablets hit the market because…well, I’m a scribe.  They’re instant on, meaning you don’t have too wait for them to boot, and I can make use of all my existing skills – typing, gesturing, drawing, and my illegible scribbling which others generously refer to as handwriting.

As willing as I was to lug an Apple Macintosh, I’d much rather hug a tablet.

And what I like even more having worked in the software space from productivity applications to enterprise applications to mobile apps is the accelerating rate of  innovation that’s translating to user experience coolness.

Being a consumer and industry observer is fun.  On one hand I hear about “visions” and technology directions before they happen and then I have the benefit of watching those visions unfold into foreseen (and often) unforeseen developments.

I first heard about video phones in 1969.  It was the A&T Bell Labs Picture Phone.  Of course, many critical things have changed since then – the technology, the infrastructure, and the mainstream cultural acceptance of technology in daily life, among other things.  Bottom line, I’ve heard about many more technologies that were going to change the world than actually did because the technology was not sound, supply chain problems arose, the market timing was off, funding was a problem, the solution was created in the absence of a problem, or the expected market never materialized. 

Ever heard of a mobile Internet device (MID)?  Yeah, a lot of other people haven’t either.

Despite business training to the contrary, companies are launching initiatives without first assessing how they fit into and benefit the existing business and as a result there are a number of “lessons learned” that point back to thinking first and then executing. Over the years these have taken the form of new products and services, departments, and divisions as well as going digital, embracing mobility, and becoming fashionably “social”. The thing they often have in common is lackluster results. And because the ROI is not compelling it appears to be a “bad idea” in retrospect.

It could be that the idea was bad or that the execution was bad; however, the root cause of the problem may actually have to do with process which has a nasty habit of reappearing in different forms over time. Hence the repetition of mantras in classrooms, at conferences, and from fellow consultants: Understand what you’re trying to do, why you want to do it, and how it fits in with your business.

The counterargument to the plan-execute model is it is better to execute quickly and iterate. This is the newer agile model. The thinking behind this is it is better to have a few quicker and smaller successes or failures and learn from them than to invest more in other things that may or may not work out.

The agile model does not necessaily involve random ideas but rather a hypothesis of what is trying to be accomplished and why. Rather than getting set-in-stone agreement up front, the idea is to prototype or do a pilot, get feedback, and fine tune things with the goal of continuous improvement and perhaps expansion.

I spoke to a CTO yesterday who is a big fan of the agile model but then time to market is critical for his company. The cost of smaller, quicker faillures is less than larger and slower ones. Morever, some of the “radical” ideas that might otherwise be dismissed in the plan-execute model turn out to be valuable and sometimes lucrative innovations.

Is there a happy medium? Yes. It is possible to be more agile and still remain true to the traditional plan-execute model. That takes the form of shorter, more iterative planning cycles that keep better pace with the dizzying pace of change.

To be fair, the plan-execute model is an oversimplification of what really occurs. The idea is to plan and execute but the results are evaluated and if necessary, objectives, strategies, and tactics are adjusted. However, the time frame of years and months has collapsed into much shorter cycles. Companies are measuring success electronically in real time or near real time vs. manually reviewing and reporting on what occurred during a month, quarter, or year. How does the agile model differ? Heavy-weight upfront planning, debates, and meetings ad nauseum are considered bloat: Do a pencil sketch and then modify or embellish it based on feedback vs. trying to get everything right the first time as things have a nasty habit of changing anyway.

Which model works best depends on a number of factors such as industry, culture, and outside constraints but regardless, strategic value ultimately matters.

1. Understand as much as you can about the awards process.

Winning an award or becoming a finalist requires a commitment on your part. That means meeting deadlines and honoring commitments. Although the organization hosting the awards may extend deadlines to accommodate stragglers, procrastination especially coupled with excuses does little to impress a judge. Instead, demonstrate enthusiasm by following prescribed processes in a timely manner.

2. Understand as much as you can about the judging criteria.

This has two facets: forms and presentations.

If you’re filling out forms, answer the questions asked. Quite often marketers with agendas focus too much on getting their key messages across and focus too little on providing relevant information. It’s OK to answer general questions generally just make sure to answer narrow questions accordingly.

If the awards are based on presentations or demos you may not get access to the judging criteria. If the organization hosting the awards makes the judging criteria available, read it before structuring your presentation. If the criteria is not available or it is not specific to your category, ask the judges before you present what they’d like you to cover and then make sure to do it. If you don’t understand the judging criteria, your presentation will likely spend too much time on irrelevant points that can actually work against you.

Sometimes judges will start leading you in a certain direction by asking specific questions or mentioning they’d like you to address something specific. Pay attention. If they don’t get the information they need it will likely affect your score.

3. Make sure the demo works.

Sadly, precious time can be wasted on avoidable technical issues. If you will be judged on a demo of your product and the demo does not work, a verbal description will not suffice. I’ve seen companies waste 20 minutes or more out of an hour trying to get a demo working. In the worst case a nominee was dropped from the competition.

4. Show up on time.

Most nominees are good about showing up on time although sometimes when there is more than one presenter one or more will show up late with an excuse. Make sure everyone shows up on time.

5. Prepare for challenging questions.

You’ll probably be able to anticipate 90 percent of of judges’ questions if you understand the judging criteria and the judges’ backgrounds. Spend some time anticipating tough questions and have answers ready for them. Sometimes nominees can become defensive when they don’t have a good answer. In my experience, judges are not trying to attack you for sport; they’re merely trying to understand your strategy or reasoning.

6. Encourage a dialog.

Avoid a lecture unless the judges want one. Although it’s tempting to become a talking head for an hour with a canned presentation or demo, this strategy can backfire especially if you don’t understand the judging criteria.

Also, it is better for judges to be able to get answers to their questions immediately rather than waiting until the end of a presentation. First, judges often ask questions in context so an immediate answer is more valuable. Second, presentations and demos often run long when there is a fixed amount of time so the Q&A portion suffers or there’s no time for it. This is a common reason why some nominees do not become finalists.

Conclusion

When it comes to awards submissions good organization and attention to detail can go a long way. In my experience most companies submit good to great products which means that every point counts. If you follow instructions you are less likely to lose points unnecessarily.

One hurdle is engagement. If you’re going to build a community it has to be a living entity and living entities require care and feeding. Many online communities lack participation. Or, if there is participation it is limited to certain topics or threads. Even some of the most reputable publishers have this problem. If you’re going to set up a community, someone needs to oversee it and management it which brings me to my next point: Policies.

When people consider online community policies they tend to look at the problem in black and white terms: Either they’re going to sanitize user-generated content to the point where nothing but positive comments appear or they’re going to allow all posts which results in offensive material or out-of-context direct marketing messages. There is middle ground, which is where a lot of communities end up.

As for discussions, that’s what communities are all about. To have a living community, there have to be active dialogs occurring which brings me back to care and feeding. The only thing worse than no discussions or comments is perfectly valid questions and comments that have been completely neglected. It’s even worse when there are pages of questions or comments that stand alone, neglected. When that happens, people participate less or stop participating all together which can result in a downward spiral.

Some high tech companies have learned the hard way that setting up a community even if well-managed can still backfire. Engineers tend to be a very candid audience. If a product stinks they say so in very specific terms. One company set up a community to rally participation around a particular initiative but the quality of the products related to the initiative had several technical shortcomings that became all too obvious in the community. Of course, the same things were being said outside the community in the media but the point is the community was established to help propel the popularity of the initiative and exactly the opposite occurred. The story gets worse from there…

Another “gotcha” is underestimating what the task of community development really involves. Technologically speaking, it’s a snap to create an online community but what resources will be allocated to it over the long term? What resources will be allocated if it grows by X, Y or Z percent? What happens if it doesn’t grow? Failing to have a Plan A let alone a Plan B and Plan C is a big mistake. The unknown can and probably will kick your hind parts.

Financing is also an issue. What will the community cost to run and how will that be supported? If you have enough budget, great. Focus on the quality of content, care, and feeding. If you don’t, it’s a mistake to assume advertising will save you. Quite often people assume they’ll make a killing on advertising only to discover a huge disconnect between reality and their original expectations.

My last point (although this is not a comprehensive list) is viability. Why should someone join your community? How many other communities have they joined and more importantly in how many communities are they active participants? You will probably never really know but again there are a lot of assumptions made about how popular a community will become which is often followed by disappointment. Sure, there are communities that take off because they’re centered around a hot topic, a celebrity or folk hero is involved, the timing and focus hit a sweet spot, or the right amount of research, testing and effort went into it.

Bottom line, assumptions and outcomes often differ. It’s not just about money, or content, or good management; it’s about all those things and more.

Make it easy for the customer to buy. The purpose of search and site optimization is exactly this. Yet, very sophisticated marketers working for high-profile companies often overlook some of the key fundamentals. Evidence of this can be found in the disconnect between search and landing pages, poor site navigation, and questionable forms design, all of which serve as barriers to conversion. There are many reasons why marketers continue to make these mistakes. Among them are focusing on details rather than the bigger picture, siloing marketing practices within an organization, and overlooking the importance of usability. Often, usability problems that adversely affect conversions do not stem from a lack of tools.

Focus on your objectives. We marketers love shiny new toys. Among them are social media and mobile marketing. Cool, yes. Effective for all businesses? No. A common criticism arising out of yesterday’s discussions was that marketers tend to jump into things like social media or mobile marketing without understanding the logical connection between the channel/medium and the business. Asking smart questions up front may reveal one of two things: 1) the medium doesn’t make sense at all or 2) there’s a more effective way to approach the medium than just jumping in and thoughtlessly executing.

When everyone jumps in the pool, build a new pool. Over two decades ago, Regis McKenna suggested if you can’t differentiate yourself in a crowded market, create a new category. Apparently the same theory is as effective when applied to SEO. SEO-PR co-founder Greg Jarboe who either invented or practically invented SEO-optimized PR campaigns said in the early days when he started optimizing releases no one else was doing it so achieving great search rankings “was like shooting fish in a barrel”. Now that so many marketers are optimizing their releases the early advantage Jarboe had has been seriously diluted. His solution: invent keywords. It’s a lot like creating a new category as Regis McKenna suggested so long ago.

These are just a few examples and it’s interesting to hear the different reactions of marketers to the way things are evolving. One one hand, there are distinctions being made about “the old school” and “the new school” which is why we have labels like “traditional agencies” and “interactive agencies”. Some of the old schoolers feel like (or have been labeled) dinosaurs because technology has changed how we approach marketing. Yet, at the same time, amid all the innovation, many of the fundamentals or best practices remain the same regardless. As a matter of history, we tend to walk away from the fundamentals in favor of “game-changing” technologies and practices, then a handful of years later we discover “truths” our grandfathers (and marketing veterans with grey hair) have been telling us for years.

Bottom line, if you think you don’t have anything to learn, think again. Marketing technologies and practices are going to continue to change and at a faster pace, moreover in ways we cannot yet anticipate. Technologically speaking there will always be new things to play with that will help us “optimize” some aspect of what it is we’re doing.

Learning is not all about technology, however, it’s also about how emerging technologies and practices can be practically applied in an effective way. That’s where the fundamentals come in. Despite our deep desire to innovate there are some truths we will continue to “discover” again and again.

Quite often we’re writing about emerging trends and issues that affect business and technology. As part of that we’re regularly comparing and contrasting the players which is an interesting exercise, particularlly when they all sound alike online or on paper.

As marketers, we need to be very clear about what we’re promoting, including our competitive positioning. Quite often we state what differentiates our companies but we fail to address the how and why questions. The latter two matter a lot and here’s why:

If you ask most marketers what differentiates their companies or clients you’ll get answers like “best of breed products, superior customer service, and innovative technology.” Such words become meaningless when everyone is using them and the claims are not backed by verifiable and compelling proof points.

Quantifying or qualifying how and why your company is different helps prospects and customers better understand your value proposition. Some favorite examples are products based on a new technologies that were previously “proven” by a number of Ph.D’s to be physically impossible, service models that defy and are more efficient than accepted business models, and so on. Of course, being first is always a differentiator but even that can have limited value as the first to market does not always “win”.

A larger challenge looms when a product or service becomes commoditized. Everyone claims they have the best product. Later, when it becomes clear everyone offers about the same basic product then service becomes the differentiating factor, albeit temporarily, because everyone starts touting their service organizations using the same or similar language. A skeptical view of service options and levels revealed on websites and a few chats with people out in industry will help illuminate the actual differences but not all prospects get that far.

While some companies do a magnificent job of differentiating themselves, so many don’t. One problem is the people in charge of positioning don’t always take the time to discover that what they’re claiming is exactly the same as what most of their competitors are claiming. Another and even larger problem is failing to acquire deep enough knowledge to understand the actual differences when it’s the nuances that matter.

Our job is to tell stories regardless of what we’re doing. If we’re doing management consulting we’re helping to shape the story of a company from the inside out. If we’re doing marketing consulting or content development we’re helping our clients tell their stories. If we’re writing for industry it’s our job to discover some “truth” in a sea of data. In nearly all cases, were tasked with differentiating companies, products, and services, many of which have been positioned nearly identically. The fascinating challenge – I think – is illuminating their differences in some meaningful way.