It's awesome that I can now check Twitter or browse Instagram when I'm on-the-go, but that doesn't mean I want to use mobile apps when I don't have to.

I left my computer at the office last night, and I HATED only having my iPhone at home this morning. Doing anything took more time, I had to hold it up, and I couldn't do anything meaningful or productive.

*Yes, new TYPES of products will be invented because we now carry a powerful computer, equipped with sensors, in our pocket. But I don't think that means traditionally web-first products will (or should) be primarily mobile. If it requires critical thinking, I don't want to do it on my iPhone.

This is probably a naive perspective so it would be great if you could poke holes in it!

To your point, I think that mobile will replace only some things that we used to do on the desktop — its bigger impact will come from the new things that it enables.

What is important is that computing now happens at many times beyond just when you are sitting at a desk. Tablets bring computing into the living room in a meaningful way, and phones bring it everywhere. The sensors and alerts from apps like highlight which is computing who/what could be interesting to you at all times will be new. But the idea of sitting to think and process and create content will not change much at all and we will still need the right screens and situations for that. Not generally a phone size. That said, the fact that we will want to access information easily from wherever we are is what Fred is pointing out that isn't going away and any experience that doesn't have a deeply mobile interaction won't be big imo

I agree with Josh. We need to think more about how people are doing critical thinking away from the fixed space of a desk and chair. Mobile phones and Tablets allow that. Many jobs require creative and critical thinking on-site. (Architects, designers, even auditors!) Even for those that don't, I would argue critical thinking happens in a wide range of environments (even a couch!)

I think of this as the next evolution of the laptop. Think about 10 years ago vs today. Everything was at the desk, now people take laptops everywhere, including their couch. Tablets and phones are quickly replacing that.

Mobile is not the future, ubiquity is.

Mobile is popular because it is often more convenient than desktop. However, the distracting nature of phones is not ideal either.

I was asked, 'How will future technologies affect UI design?' I thought about it for a moment, and a progression of thought lead me to conclude that UI Design will be a non-topic. In the future, we will interface with things similar to how we interface with our thoughts; Siri is possibly the first mitosis of this vision.

In order for this to come into fruition, the infrastructure must be in place. Luke Wroblewski wrote, "Anything that can be connected to the Internet, will be."

However, as we make predictions about the future, our guesses often become wildly precarious.

I think you need to define "mobile". Are you talking about smartphones or other telephony based devices? Are you talking about tablets? Are you talking about in-car systems? All of the above?

Then for each of these you need to talk about the context of the user and their needs and also talk about the capabilities of the devices.

I agree with Yousef's claim of "Mobile is not the future, ubiquity is." but to add to that thought, the future is ubiquity and seamlessness. We want to have seamless experiences between these devices as we move from desktop, to mobile, to TV. While UI in the classic sense (buttons, input devices, chrome etc.) may become less important, designing seamless experiences will become more important.

Ubiquity is great and all, but it's not realistic for a pre-market/fit startup.

The point I was trying to make is this:

If I startup can build on one platform – Web or iOS – I don't think they should pick iPhone just because "mobile growth is exploding." It's exploding because it didn't exist five years ago (or less), but that doesn't mean it should be primary.

Right?

If the consumer expects ubiquity are there defined moments when mobile as a platform is needed by the user? There are many services I interact with that I have no need for a mobile app. I don't need them to be ubiquitous. I only need them on the desktop. For example, I own an Audi, Audi has a series of iPhone apps for Audi owners. I don't require ubiquity from Audi. I have no idea if there are enough Audi owners who do to warrant the cost and energy to develop an app.

I do not believe you do mobile because it's the future. You do it because you can see how it will benefit your user's. IMO I believe there is a role for a Branch mobile app.

Whatever HP claimed in 2006 was wrong. Mobile made the computer personal, for the first time.

Your phone is indicative of your personality. The brand, cover, apps, music, photos, content within your apps, background the apps sit on. All of it is innately personal. You use it both in solitude and at social events. The screen is small enough to shield, but the experiences are rich enough to share. It's an innately personal device.

If the experience you're creating needs access to the personal, then mobile should be considered. If you're creating something more ritualistic and utilitarian, like Adobe Creative Suite, then desktop is probably the place to start.

I don't have a favorite colour, it's really all about context.

@Josh — Very difficult to take a hard line here. So much is dependent on both the experience that you are trying to create and how you want to seed that experience in the market.

There are no rules, and it's just as silly to say that "Mobile is the only way to go" as it is to say that "Mobile isn't the future." For a decade the default has been to build a web app first. Fred's hyperbole is valuable because it shakes us out of that default.

Mobile computing is important and interesting because it unlocks new ways to interact with machines and with other people behind those machines. A feeling of "computing ubiquity" is new and it's neither good nor bad, it just is.

@Jake I wasn't precluding Mobile from the future. Rather, I was resetting the perspective a little, the future is about more than just Mobile. It's about creating an experience mindful of all factors, physical and cultural.

Another angle is that many of these new mobile users are mobile only. They bought a smart phone because they wanted email and basic access to websites, but these people have no need for a computer beyond what their cheap tablet/phone does. Because of this, I think most companies building online products should focus heavily on mobile.

Many (most?) people don't have a need for a full computer, so these kinds of users are going to dominate the market in the coming years. I also suspect that most people would be perfectly happy with an iPad + Bluetooth keyboard for 99% of the things they do.

If you only focus on "desktop" devices, your market will get smaller and smaller while tablet + mobile focused products grow and grow.

Agreed with Geoff. I'd love to see some data on this.

Check out Mary Meeker's 2012 Internet Trends for some info. kpcb.com

According to meeker, In India mobile data traffic has exceeded desktop Internet traffic.

RWW has a different view of the data

readwriteweb.com

In the US, mobile data exceeds desktop data on weekends.

It really depends on the use case and what you are targeting. People are "computing" at different times of day on different screens and depending on how you fit into their lives you need to decide very different things. Instagram is obviously mobile first for capture, and there is a lot of web consumption still. Things like Yammer make sense as desktop apps along with mobile apps since people are still working at their desks for long periods of time.

My favorite data piece on this is ReadItLater breaking down when people are reading long form content (from 1 year ago) getpocket.com

I don't see Fred's post as being quite so hyperbolic. He's stating that the mobile market is growing, there are a different set of revenue challenges that mobile products face, and that larger companies would be wise to pay attention and adapt. I didn't read it as another Web Is Dead piece (wired.com) suggesting that all your eggs should be put in the mobile basket no matter what.

Mobile platforms provide a rich set of tools and are ubiquitous enough that their consideration is now mandatory when making product decisions. However, the red-hot, exploding market is pushing many to think that they MUST be in the game, disregarding whether the platform fits their product needs. This is where a lot of people slip and fall.

Really great insights, everyone, thank you.

I wanted to share that, yesterday, ZURB wrote an article about this conversation and AllThingsD featured it on their homepage!

At what point do you switch from a smartphone or tablet to laptop/desktop when composing your branch contributions?

@JoshE: I think the difference between consumption and creation is key. I can read shortform on my phone, longform on my iPad or laptop. Yet even as a heavy iPhone user, I strongly prefer using a laptop for anything longer than a tweet or a very short email.

As it relates to Branch, I'd be curious what percentage of Blogger or Wordpress users compose on a desktop vs. a mobile device. If you've seen data on this, please share it.

@Geoff/Josh: Do you think (or rather, does your current data indicate) that mobile affects the quality/length of contributions?