• 05/31/2009 - 18 More Social Sites Added to SocialNetwork.in
• 05/25/2009 - Run Your Own Remix or Music Project at ArtistServer.com
• 05/22/2009 - AudioBoo.fm and YouNoodle.com Added to SocialNetwork.in
• 05/06/2009 - mp3tunes.com - no option to close your account
• 03/17/2009 - How to run a Remix Project
• 09/28/2008 - My Lovely Wife Lou is Pregnant
• 12/14/2007 - ArtistServer News and a new site: FreeMusicLicensing.com
• 09/18/2007 - AritstServer and ToneThis Serve Up Indie Ringtones
• 09/11/2007 - Running LightTPD and PHP on Windows
• 09/06/2007 - Compete.com -vs- Alexa.com - Comparing Website Rank

• 400,000+ users
• Both a free and upgrade version
• Windows only
• Most popular 'mobile' download at Download.com
  
• Download ToneThis

For an overview of ToneThis, watch this interview and demo with Raj Singh, founder of ToneThis:

http://www.podtech.net/home/3993/lunchmeet-tonethis-gets-your-media-on-your-cell-phone

When you first see the demo of the software, take note of the right side panel.

ArtistServer has partnered with ToneThis to provide music with Creative Commons licensing and currently loads as the default content provider when you launch ToneThis. The mp3 used in the demo is by an artist on ArtistServer - very cool! Check out the screenshot below:

This is a great opportunity for artists to gain more exposure and take advantage of a great marketing tool - ringtones. We are serving over 110,000 page views to more than 60,000 unique visitors per month within the ToneThis application alone!

Not all songs are available through ToneThis, only those with one of the following Creative Commons licenses:

• Attribution
• Attribution Share Alike
• Attribution Non-Commercial
• Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike
• Public Domain

"An elegant, self-detecting technical solution is not in reach of the everyday small business owner or individual." (Neil Edwards on 04/10/2006)

In an ideal world, the client-side device type would direct the type of page served, but that is not how things have evolved.

The fact is the majority of the 80 plus million sites across the web do not work well on mobile devices and do not detect device type before redirecting you. (.mobi blog on 11/07/06)

Unfortunately, the folks at .mobi continue by stating that they've solved these problems by selling you yet another domain, when in fact, the problems would still exist after you buy a .mobi domain name.

MobileWebDeveloper.com not only serves to provide you with mobile Web solutions, but also tips, and suggestions on how to best plan your mobile site. In the coming weeks, I'll add a forum for developers, marketers and executives to interact and discuss mobile Web development. The forums will also provide users of MobileRedirect and MobileLaunch to interact and share how they've advanced the products.

I'll be making these two products available under a 'dual license':

• GNU General Public License - Open source developers and projects
• Commercial Software License: No Restrictions or requirements on use or distribution of our software in derivative works.

I hope to have both products launched in the next two weeks, until then, read the descriptions below and visit the site for more information.

MobileRedirect

Add MobileRedirect to your website, and use your current Web address as your Mobile address. It's easier for people to remember, and easier for you to promote. MobileRedirect provides a simple solution for detecting and redirecting mobile devices on your website. Available in multiple programming languages, takes a minute to setup and available as shareware, give it try!

MobileLaunch

With MobileLaunch, you can get your mobile website online today. It's a mobile site template system with multiple skins to choose from. Simply add your content, set 6 settings, install our included MobileRedirect code on your current Website, and you're live.

About the subject of this post: while I do not think there is any need for .mobi, and I feel the world should simply ignore .mobi's existence, you can definately use a .mobi name with MobileRedirect and MobileLaunch. Especially when you consider that my solutions are based around your current domain name and redirecting the initial request to your mobile site. Once the initial request is redirected, the URL of the actual mobile site could be: m.mySite.com, mobile.mySite.com, or even mySite.mobi - it's up to you. Just don't believe the hype, you still need a redirection setup on your current site, as most people will still use your .com address.

In conclusion, I'm not really fighting against .mobi, and I'll look over their style guides to make sure the generated code from MobileLaunch fits with their 'rules' - chances are, it already does since I'm currently generating 100% valid xHTML-MP, and supporting multiple header/content types (not all mobile devices can accept the same DocType or ContentType). I do want to say thank you to .mobi for making me angry, which in turn caused me to proclaim that I was going to provide these solutions back in April of this year. What's funny about this, is that the same thing happened back in 1999 with mp3.com. They kept changing things on the indie artists, making the expierence there more frustrating than fun. After a few months of that, I decided to build what is not ArtistServer.com . So now you know - if you want me to build something, just piss me off. :)

Neil Edwards, the general manager from www.mtld.mobi stopped by my blog the other day, to respond to my shooting down of their solution to improve the Mobile Web. His response, and the original post can be found here: http://www.gideonmarken.com/index.cfm/a/9/blog/714/v/1#c

Since my reply to his reply ended up being fairly long, I selected to just make a new posting. So... without any further delays... let me now switch into... FULL ON RANT MODE!

Oh - and the subject was just for fun - but the idea is, .mobi is a new pain on the horizon, and, it's a pain to type in, try it, and the first thing you'll think is,

"why did they add the 'i' - why not just .mob?" OR - "why not just leave it alone and use what we have?"

Why?

>> Neil: dotMobi was created because the PC-based Internet did not work well on the Internet readily available on the mobile phone for the last several years.

But this is a problem that has a solution. People/companies that have not been developing good mobile sites or URLs is their own issue to work out. The same holds true on the Web.

Plus, it didn't work too well because:

1. phone manufactures created specification hell with the 100's of variations in phones
2. most mobile browsers have been terrible
3. here in the US, it costs too much to use the Mobile Web - so the uptake has been slow
4. mobile search hasn't solidified - which helps stimulate growth
   

>>> Neil: The industry (dotMobi's investors and several credible associations) joined forces to create an internet address based upon open standards that provided a better consumer experience.

We have standards - the Web has always had standards, but, the browsers and the developers have rarely followed the true standards. Although, today, more than ever before, a movement towards having 100% standards based xHTML is growing. Once more developers embrace 100% clompliant development, the move towards developing great mobile site's is much easier.

I just don't see selling more domain names with a set of specs in hand will create the standards world you and your team believe in.

>>> Neil: dotMobi is the first internet address that enforces the set of open source standards created by the W3C. No other internet address -- whether dotcom or your local country code -- accomplishes this objective.

There's part of the issue, you have this assumption that the mobile Web will be a better place because of this. We'll have to see, my bet, is that it is only the companies that are already developing mobile sites that are functional will make the dive, the others will simply buy the domain names out of fear that someone else may buy their variation... but they still won't have a mobile site. Some may take the step and develop one, but most will sit on their .mobi names - as they won't know what to mobilize from their site just as they do not know what to mobilize today. While your objective is enforcement, I believe you will only achieve selling more domains, and adding MORE confusion to the pool of Web names.

The speed limit is a standard, we even have reminders of those standards all over the road, yet no matter how much effort people put into enforcing those standards, people still continue to ignore them. The only way you'll achieve your objective of a consistent mobile Web, is to enforce on an extreme level, and to me, that doesn't deserve the name "Web" - it would be more akin to an AOL experience.

>>> Neil: The end result is a consistent and good experience for the consumer.

If people want to offer a mobile site, there are resources to learn how to do so - just as there are for the Web. Now unless you are going to have people who decide what 'is' or 'is not' going to be a .mobi site, you will find there will be little consistency, and the experience will vary.

>>> Neil: A more tangible result is that a consumer can always enter "myname.mobi" into their device and always get a consistent reponse.

I'm sorry, but that is a HUGE assumption. You are expecting everyone in the whole world that has or wants to have a mobile site to adopt this horrible domian extension: .mobi, and you are expecting everyone to suddenly become hip to the idea of typing in .mobi.

If you are seeking consistency... do not put the responsibility on the user to have to type one domain in their computer and one on their phone. A consistent solution is, one name - all locations.

>>> Neil: Try your five favorite, local websites and see the results for yourself. dotMobi is all about providing a consumer driven solution based upon open standards of the W3C and other noted standards bodies.

The mobile Web is about providing a platform for all forms of communication - consumerism is but one slice of the pie.

Unfortunately, If your marketing campaign is heavily funded, I'll have to buy a .mobi name too - but, mine will forward to ArtistServer.com

>>> Neil: An elegant, self-detecting technical solution is not in reach of the everyday small business owner or individual.

Did your team consider providing that as a solution - as in, providing the detection for sites? Or even giving them that technology so they didn't have to figure it out on their own?

Sounds like I'll have to open source my code that provides this solution. Next, I'll have to find others who have the similar solutions in each of the various Web scripting languages, and I'll put up a site that helps educate people on how to use the code... which is basically, cut-n-paste! I own MobileFaq.com and Mobile-Developers.com, so I'll most likely use one of those names for the site.

Or... I could develop and launch a new service that provides this type of device detecting as an included file - thus allowing everyone to have elegance.

Or... someone else on the Web will do the right thing and provide the right kind of solution.

>>> Neil: Hence, fierece industry competitors created dotMobi to solve a common problem.

I just don't see it that way. From the information I've looked over, you are adding to the problem, calling it a solution, and selling it to people with a guide book.

And really, who wants to have people defined as "fierce industry competitors," as the ones who define a solution, especially when many of them helped create the problem.

>>> Neil: The dotMobi team is always happy to address any comments directly regarding the internet address and the technologies behind the internet address. dotMobi also has an advisory group that any individual or company can join to help shape the future direction of the product.

I suggest that people pull together and unite to point out how bad this solution is. Joining your advisory group won't do anything to fix it, unless the group will entertain the idea of not launching .mobi as a TLD.

• .mobi is a bad choice for a top level domain
  
• the benefits are assumptions
• the problem is being addressed from the wrong angle
  

On the flipside, Moby (the artist) will have a cool domain: Moby.mobi :)

Last month, I announced the launching of http://www.IndieMobile.com on my blog, which is the ringtone section and mobile transfer tools from ArtistServer rebranded as it's own site.

The site is now complete with ringtone previews in Flash - which allow you to listen to each ringtone right on the page before downloading or sending to your mobile phone - for free.

Roll back to last year, and you'll find that in May of 2005, I announced that http://www.ArtistServer.com was providing a complete ringtone service for indie/unsigned artists - and quite possibly the first to do so.

Now, just a few weeks ago, MySpace and Cingular Wireless with all their millions and all their people, announced that they will have a ringtone service/program for artsits.

Cingular's Mobile Music Studio on MySpace is a free, truly original platform that lets emerging artists create and market their personalized wireless content. Australian Indie Garage Rock Darlings, Shifter, to be First Band to Benefit from Partnership

If music truly is the universal language, then millions of music hopefuls are sure to be talking about the new Cingular Mobile Music Studio available exclusively on MySpace. Announced today at CTIA Wireless IT & Entertainment 2006, Cingular's Mobile Music Studio is a first-of-its-kind platform that offers hundreds of thousands of unsigned artists and bands on MySpace the tools needed to turn their self-produced music into ringtones. forbes.com

More from MoCoNews.net:

Cingular hopes the service will boost revenue, customer loyalty and help its image among young people. Customers will be able to preview ringtones and buy them on the MySpace Web site, which will then send them to their cellphone. Cingular plans to charge about $2.50 for each 30 second ringtone and will give the bands 25 percent of the proceeds.
But hey, life is a bitch..if you are locked into a contract with some operator, you will not switch just to get ringtones from MySpace bands.

Meanwhile... ArtistServer, with no budget and a staff of one... has been enabling artists to provide uncensored ringtones to their fans for free for nearly a year now.

Cingular/MySpace plan on censoring content:

Once all licensing has been completed, the artists will then be able to upload a short track of their original song, via an audio file, at which time the music content is screened to ensure content is indeed original and appropriate.

And more on censoring from TelephonyOnline.com:

Cingular was hazy about what other criteria that panel might be using to decide whether a song makes the grade and implied there would be other subjective factors informing the decisions. "We don’t have a specific criteria yet," Garver said. "We'll take each song on a case-by-case basis and use our judgment on what’s appropriate content."

What does 'appropriate' mean?

As they pros play catch up, I'll soon be launching our next tool for promoting artists... and that will deal with Website 'widgets' - which are objects of some type that you would include on your blog or site. A demo of one is running on my blog right now - on the left site. It's a fully customizable widget that offers ringtones and is 100% controlled by the URL itself. This makes the widgets not only easy to customize, but it allows people to dynamically create them to fit their own sites.

So, as Cingular/MySpace make it difficult for people to obtain ringtones by indie/unsigned artists, I'm taking a different path, I'm making it easy for artists to take advantage of ringtones, mobile phones and connecting to more fans. Yes, our ringtones are free, and the artsits do not ear their $0.50 or less per ringtone, but really, how many artists are going to sell enough to even cash out? I haven't seen the details of the agreement with the artists, but usually with a payout system, there needs to be a minimum of $20 before they'll send you a check. That's 40 ringtones each artist would have to sell for $2.50 each - and that's to Cingular customers only if I understand their arrangement correctly.

From out in the crowd someone yells, "But Gideon, if Cingular gets behind this and promotes it, that will be HUGE!"

Yeah... well, let's look at how they plan to promote it:

Cingular executive director of high-growth segments Dave Garver said that the program could have enormous potential for Cingular even though the MySpace music site would not occupy a slot in the Cingular content deck or the ringtones promoted in its MEdia Mall download center. The power of self-promotion and viral marketing would do all of the work, he said. “Shifter is way too small for Cingular to bring on as a partner -- it’s even way too small for a record label,” Garver said. “But when you aggregate all of those bands, each with their own ringtones, you get a significant number of downloads.”

Looks to me like they are expecting all the artists to have their "friends" buy the ringtones. If that is the case... ARTISTS... don't waste your friends time or money - join ArtistServer for FREE and set your friends up with up to 3 ringtones for FREE. If they want to hand you $0.50 in exchange, tell them to bring someone to your next show instead - or ask them to pass on your band's URL, etc.

If I worked for MySpace, I'd be ranting down the halls saying, "This has NOTHING to do with artisits or bands! Forget the deal! Let's do it ourselves! Connect with the community! Empower the people!"

I may not have any budget, nor any staff, and I certainly can't afford to be at all any of the conferences, nor can I even afford to pay myself for this work I do... but you know what? I'm still a year ahead of the largest social music site on the planet when it comes to providing mobile solutions to artsits.

While that doesn't help me pay the bills, it is a good sign for things to come. Plus, when you work for free, your salary is joy you harvest from your work, and I've been very fortunate over the years, as my work with ElectronicScene and ArtistServer has always paid me well.

:)

I read a blog post over at MoCoNews about Russell Beattie announcing that he feels .mobi domains are a good idea. As you can see from the title of my post, I don't agree.  If you follow the link over MoCoNews, you can see my response. Here's a link to Russell's post.

Here's Russell's position:

But I have finally decided once and for all it's a Good Thing(TM). Here's why in a sentence: We'll finally have a standard format for initial mobile web navigation: companyname.mobi 

He seems to feel there's a navigation problem, and that adding yet another top level domain to the soup will fix tings. This is quite odd when you consider that the Web has a navigation problem too, and anyone who uses the Web a lot will tell you that more .this and .that doesn't make things better.

Let's now take a look at .mobi - this is a quoted section from their site, and to me, this is written for people who don't completely understand what a domain name is, and by people who are over generalizing their role as those in charge of a top level domain. Beware of those who state they're going to revolutionize things, and always check out who is behind such statements.

Dotmobi is unique - the first top level domain dedicated to delivering the Internet to mobile devices. Scheduled for launch in May, dotmobi will revolutionise the use of the Internet on mobile devices. Dotmobi guides mobile users to made-for-mobile Internet content and services that can be accessed with confidence.

How can we be certain that the revolution will happen? Because we are backed by the most prominent mobile and Internet players in the world – the very same companies who have delivered the promise of today's information society. http://pc.mtld.mobi/mobilenet/index.html

Great, you can sit back in confidence - a revolution will happen because a company that manages a top level domain is backed by companies with a lot of money and power. Take note... this is just a domain name - there is 'no' technology here - there is nothing that .mobi brings to the table besides requiring you to tap 9 times on your keypad to type in .mobi.

The folks at .mobi would disagree and point out that they are different, that they do provide something, and most likely point me to a page on their site which states this:

The key differentiator for the dotmobi domain is the mobile user experience. This is driven by the Switch On! Guides. The guides contain a mixture of mandatory and recommended best practices for developing mobile content and services. http://pc.mtld.mobi/mobilenet/dotmobi_guides.html

There you have it, the big revolution will be driven by these "Switch On! Guides." What an idea... standards, best practices, tips, guides... wow! That's all you need, just run out and buy another variation of your domain name, ignore the great resources that form on the Web, check out their guides, and you'll have your very own revolution.

This final section is taken from my reply over at MoCoNews:

Any company that wants a mobile site should follow these 4 steps.

1. Have your developer ’sniff’ the devices accessing your site.
2. Send mobile devices to the mobile site, send others to the Website
3. Run your mobile site as mobile.MySite.com or mob. or m.
4. Make life easy for people, promote ONLY your domain name: MySite.com

There you go - you’ve now maximized the effectiveness of your marketing, PR and even your business cards simply by embracing that which you already own - your domain name.

Who really wants to start promoting to the world that they have a Website at BlahBlah.com and a mobile site at BlahBlah.mobi? When you do this - you are demanding more of these people’s attention - and attention is a key part of our evolving economy.

I’m stating all of this from experience, as I’ve done what I’ve explained here and I can tell you that it’s just a few more hours or days of development for any good developer.

As someone who has both a mobile and a Website, I most definately prefer being able to say:

"Visit us with your computer or mobile, at http://artistserver.com "

Compare that to having to say:

"Visit our Website at artistserver.com or our mobile site at artistserver.mobi "

In an era when it’s difficult to get a piece of people’s attention, do you really want water down your message with two names?

Please… if you are going to launch a mobile site - do it the right way - do it on the server-side as I explained above, create a solution that extends your site/service/brand - not one that divides it.

.mobi, what is it about?

1. more domains being sold
2. more confusion
3. more keys pressed
4. more time wasted