Steve Jobs single-handedly restructured the mobile industry

With the introduction of the iPhone, Steve Jobs achieved something that might be unique in the history of business: he single-handedly upended the power structure of a major industry. In the US, before the iPhone, the carriers (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile) had an ironclad grip on the rest of the value chain – particularly, handset makers and app makers.

Ask anyone who ran or invested in a mobile app startup pre-iPhone (I invested in one myself). Since the carriers had all the power, getting any distribution (which usually meant getting on the handset “deck”) meant doing a business development deal with the carriers. Business development in this case meant finding the right people at those companies, sending them iPods, taking them to baseball games, and basically figuring out ways to convince them to work with you instead of the 5,000 other people sending them iPods and baseball tickets. The basis of competition was salesmanship and capital, not innovation or quality.

The carriers had so much power because consumers made their purchasing decisions by choosing a carrier first and a handset second. Post-iPhone, tens of millions of people started choosing handsets over carriers. People like me suffer through AT&T’s poor service and aggressive pricing because I love the iPhone so much.

I’ve talked to a number of mobile app startups lately who say their former contacts at the carriers are shell shocked: no one is knocking on their doors anymore. I guess they have to buy their own iPods and baseball tickets now.

Yes, Apple has rejected some apps for seemingly arbtrary or selfish reasons and imposed aggressive controls on developers. But the iPhone also paved the way for Android and a new wave of handset development. The people griping about Apple’s “closed system” are generally people who are new to the industry and didn’t realize how bad it was before.

Pingback: Tweets that mention Steve Jobs single-handedly restructured the mobile industry cdixon.org – chris dixon's blog -- Topsy.com
http://jasoncrawford.org Jason Crawford

Totally true. I worked at a mobile app company from early 2007 to late 2009, so I saw this transition firsthand, and you’re absolutely right.
http://www.altgate.com/ fnazeeri

Absolutely agree that Apple changed the industry. I too invested in mobile app company and you're 100% right: the big carriers controlled everything. I remember one VC telling me that, “a functioning carrier deal with Verizon was worth $50MM in valuation”…whaaa?

The flip side though is that it was way more than Steve Jobs that made this happen. It was everyone at Apple from the board (remember at the time it included Al Gore, Eric Schmidt and others) to super talented designers and engineers and, yes, business managers who figured out the business model and genius marketing. I don't believe Apple is an “army of one” with Jobs I think what he's done is invent a culture of performance that will survive him (let's hope!).

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

Sure, perhaps I should have said “Apple” instead. But I doubt even with all their other resources it would have happened with Jobs.

toivotuo

“The carriers had so much power because consumers made their purchasing decisions by choosing a carrier first and a handset second.”

This is very much a US-based view on the issue and doesn't hold true universally. In many markets carrier subsidized handsets are a relatively recent phenomenon. But then again powerful carriers was one of the reasons Nokia lost in the us – they just didn't want to play that game. Now, with the iPhone, they aren't even invited to play no matter how much they'd want to. Hard for us Finns.

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

Yes, I'm talking about the US here almost exclusively.

Nicholas Turner

It's no different in non-US markets – Apple changed the game. I used to ride around the GSMA, which has noble aims but stifles innovation. To introduce anything new in mobile you had to 1) convince a mobile operator it was worthwhile (biz case); 2) prove carrier interop (which involved more stakeholders than a parliament, with similar output); 3) tough commercial negotiations and unruly revenue share requirements. Add in some well-intentioned but severe telecoms-style product management = innovation stifled. I watched as their mobile instant messaging initiatives floundered through committees over the span of 7+ years, but no output. Meanwhile – FaceBook.

Apple “bracketed out” the mobile operators by and large. Apple created a compelling device and a structured environment for develops to innovate. And boy have they. Innovation isn't a function of sheer genius or product mgmt process. Innovation is about mass experimentation. Most stuff many suck, but some stuff is game-changing. Similar ingredients helped give us the Internet.

Morgan Stanley's Mobile Internet Report offers great perspectives on this – a must read (and free on their website).

http://thejo.in thejo

Consumers can pick and choose carriers and handsets in many countries outside the US, but that still doesn't mean it is easy to get applications on the phones. In India, for example, being in the mobile application business involves the same biz dev deals with operators or handset manufacturers. Consumers being able to choose an operator and handset and developers getting access to those consumers are in no way related. Apple's biggest contribution is to open up the channel and forcing others (operators and handset manufacturers) to copy the model in order to stay competitive.

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

I admit I don't have much knowledge of the non-US mobile markets.

http://www.venturevoice.com gregory

I agree it's an amazing accomplishment, but is it without precedent? Reminds me of how Microsoft licensed MS-DOS to IBM clones, thereby commoditizing hardware. It's easy to image that the company making IBM's OS would have caved and signed an exclusive agreement with IBM or sold out, but Bill Gates didn't and changed the game. It's amazing how industries can be reshaped by the decisions of just one person, but I'm sure it will vex tech pundits to tell the tale that way.

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

But that was an emerging industry. Mobile industry was well established by the time the iPhone came out.

Cody Brown

Yes. I have absolutely no idea what it's like to send iPods to biz dev people at Motorola so I can buy them drinks and pitch a partnership. But isn't this a good thing? I love my iPhone but I think we would all benefit if it behaved much more like my MacBook Pro.

It's interesting to hear 'back in my day' stories, but this isn't an argument to stop putting pressure on Apple is it?

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

“this isn't an argument to stop putting pressure on Apple is it?”
We all love openness etc, but also Jobs seems to know what he's doing and the battle isn't over yet. So my attitude is let him fully commoditize the carriers however he needs to do it and then worry about Apple.

Cody Brown

Steve Jobs seems to know what he's doing insofar as he's making wild amounts of money. As an owner of AAPL, this makes me happy but as a customer I'd rather have innovation on my iphone/ipad.

I can see the value of a closed platform *at first* (see Steven Johnson's Rainforest metaphor) but I don't see why commoditizing carriers is a necessary stepping stone to create a more transparent platform.

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

APPL making money and Verizon being forced to capitulate and accept AAPL's terms are highly correlated.

I don't understand the pundits who gripe about missing porn and a few other marginal apps when the Job blasted open a market that was once completely closed.

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

But that was an emerging industry. Mobile industry was well established by the time the iPhone came out.
http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

Yes, I'm talking about the US here almost exclusively.
http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

“this isn't an argument to stop putting pressure on Apple is it?”
We all love openness etc, but also Jobs seems to know what he's doing and the battle isn't over yet. So my attitude is let him fully commoditize the carriers however he needs to do it and then worry about Apple.
jorgeortiz85

“Shellshocked” is exactly the right word.

At a lunch recently, I found myself sitting next to a Telefónica (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telef%C3%B3nica) executive in Mexico, where iPhones and Androids haven't really taken off yet. We struck up a conversation, and I was showing him the Foursquare iPhone app (I work at Foursquare). He said the app looked cool and asked me what carriers we had deals with. When I said we didn't do deals with carriers–that we just developed for platforms and ran on any carrier–his eyes widened a bit. Then he asked me how much we had to pay each time someone used the geolocation feature. (Telefónica in Mexico provides a geolocation service on their phones, but they charge consumers for every use.) When I said we didn't have to pay, that it was provided by the platform and for free, he was visibly shocked.

It was an interesting reminder of what carriers in the US used to take for granted not too long ago, and of everything we as consumers and developers take for granted now.

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

Very interesting story- thx.
MacRumors

I have played with the iPhone 4G for days already http://bit.ly/demoiphone
It is nice but the new Android phones are catching up fast!

http://twitter.com/dkhare Dev

Agreed. In addition, I think there's another restructuring under way in mobile – this is the open app store model combined with native mobile and mobile web apps converging. I think Amazon, Google, Bing, Facebook are potentially well positioned here (as discovery/distribution mechanisms for mobile apps) as well as some of the independent app stores like Getjar, Pocketgear, etc.

In this more open world of mobile apps, carriers are again being relegated to bystanders although they are getting to promote some of their preferred apps as preloads or as special tabs in the open app stores. Unfortunately, carrier interoperability initiatives for app distribution like JIL and WAC are most probably doomed to failure. They will end up outsourcing their app stores.

The only silver lining I can see for carriers is that seamless billing integration may drive a whole lot more app and in-app purchase transaction volume through each carrier's billing rails and that may make up for lost revenue. In other words, in the new world of open app stores, wireless carriers' main differentiation might end up being their payment relationship with consumers, and their competition will be Paypal, Visa, Mastercard, Apple's iTunes payment mechanism, Amazon's payment mechanism etc. For now, the 30-40% transaction fee that carriers charge matches up with the 20-30% charged by Apple, Android etc. However, this may come under pressure as well if Paypal, Visa etc make inroads and if Boku/Zong etc transition their funding models away from carrier billing to ACH.
http://twitter.com/HadleyH Hadley

Great post. Also the reason i don't believe mobile start ups should hire “wireless” biz dev and marketing people. When someone's resume says they have 15 years experience in the wireless industry, i stop reading. They're usually good a taking people from carriers to baseball games and little else.

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

Yep, they are sales (1-1) not marketing (1-many), which is what you need now.

http://twitter.com/clintsharp Clint Sharp

As someone who's worked in the wireless industry for over 7 years now in various capacities, I can say that this is probably the most entrenched industry imaginable. Incompetence abounds, but due to the oligopoly awarded the industry by the FCC, we can continue to get by with very little innovation and pat ourselves on the back for being masters of the universe. What Apple has done has seriously upset an industry where the RAZR was originally seen as a huge leap forward, and hopefully we will continue to trend in the direction of being dumb pipes, which is truly what we are. In mean time, I think it's back to entrepreneurship for me.
http://thejo.in thejo

“The people griping about Apple’s “closed system” are generally people who are new to the industry and didn’t realize how bad it was before”

This is so true. Most people who build internet based services have no clue how closed the mobile industry is. This is not just a problem in the US, but in most places around the world. Mobile network operators have always been paranoid about becoming a dumb pipe and have fought hard to retain control, but that's exactly what's happening now.

I used to work for a startup in India which had a popular mobile portal and SMS based service. Our strategy was to be network agnostic and to build the business without signing deals with every operator. Once they saw the success of our service, the top 2-3 operators had no qualms in blocking our services and launching their own competing ones. Of course, it may have been anti-competitive to do so, but was a startup going to take them to court? It was a constant cat and mouse game to keep our service alive which distracted us from innovation we could bring to the market. Apple may have arbitrary rules when it comes to what they allow onto their platform, but they're far far better than the operators. The network operators needed a kick in the butt and Steve Jobs was just the person to give it to them.
http://twitter.com/mattgattis Matt Gattis

Steve Jobs didn't invent the smartphone. I had a 3G Palm Treo 2-3 years before the iPhone came out. They were more open than the iPhone- both PalmOS and Windows mobile allowed you to download any app you wanted.

I agree with most of this post but I would change “iPhone” to “app store” in the first line and remove “single-handedly” from the title. The app store didn't come out until the 2nd iPhone, remember, and Jobs was totally against 3rd party apps in the beginning. It did totally change the industry in the way you describe, and the concept is changing other industries as well (look at Steam / Xbox Arcade / etc in the gaming industry)

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

Who cares who invented what first. It's all about who got consumers to
think about handsets first and carriers second.

http://twitter.com/mattgattis Matt Gattis

What restructured the mobile industry if it wasn't a series of inventions? Maneuvers?

http://www.cdixon.org chris dixon

inventions plus marketing. changing the way millions of people think about their purchasing decisions.

http://twitter.com/suyogmody suyogmody

i think the marketing aspect is key. there are several countries where GSM technology is prevalent and carriers were highly decoupled from handsets. the app revolution never took off there because there wasn't an organized effort to market and support apps and the eco-system never took off. much of south-east asia is like that.

http://www.jaretmanuel.com jaretmanuel

Exactly Chris. Short and bang on to the point. Love your articles.

ken1w

Wrong. What Steve Jobs says (or hints at) publicly is not always what he believes. He did not think video on iPod was a good idea, until it was. He said Apple was not interested in tablets, when Apple was working on a tablet even before iPhone. He said Kindle was a niche product because Americans did not read anymore, until iPad with iBooks really pushed Kindle into niche status. A few days ago, he implied that the age of PC dominance was coming to end (to push iPad), comparing PCs to “trucks,” when he knows that his Mac business is strong and getting larger every year; he wants Microsoft to chase after Apple's lead in tablets and neglect Windows. He keeps calling Apple TV a “hobby,” but it's probably going to be Apple's next big push (once all of his pieces are in place). Surprise and misdirection are part of Apple's chess game.

Back to the App Store, Steve Jobs gave no indication that he wanted third-party native apps on iPhone because when iPhone 1.0 was released, the SDK was not ready for third-party developers and the OS itself was not buttoned down enough to allow non-Apple apps without security and usability issues. He did not want the competition to get a head start on something Apple was working on already.

Also, he wanted a large enough customer base to make the launch of the App Store successful and attract an army of developers. You don't create something like the iPhone SDK and App Store unless it was already in the works before the release of the first iPhone. When iPhone 2.0 happened, there were already millions of customers waiting to buy and download apps. The competition was left scrambling, not only to create their iPhone copy, but also to create their own infrastructure for creating and merchandising apps. And Apple left them all in the dust.

http://twitter.com/mattgattis Matt Gattis

You're probably right about that. He is very clever about downplaying something until it's released so he can sell you every generation. It's funny watching the people who try to agree with everything he says deal with these sudden changes.

http://redesignmobile.com rakeshlobster

there's allowing and there's allowing. yes, technically, you could do this on Windows Mobile. but randomly finding a .cab file and installing it over a tether is almost as good not offering it all. it's too complicated for most people to do it.

compare that with the iPhone's app discovery and install experience. yes, the catalog is controlled by apple and yes, they reject apps and sometimes for reasons that aren't easily understood. but for most users, they made the process so easy, that people actually bothered to install apps at all.

i would bet that in the first year of the itunes app store, more apps were installed on smartphones than all apps on all smartphone platforms until that point.
me

Native third party apps were always in the plans. The SDK took time to polish. Why don't people see this? Remember the iPhone's introduction – SJ was hyping the fact that all available frameworks on Mac OS X are available on iPhone… why else would he mention it if not to pump up developer interest?

Barry

Completely. I attempted two years back a killer start-up reliant on LBS that solved a 'real' problem for consumers. Everybody 'got it' at the elevator pitch. I needed carrier buy in but failed spectacularly despite engaging and convincing at CTO level with the major carriers. They are now at a real risk to being relegated to the role of 'dumb pipes' beholden to cutting handset deals with Apple/Android, and in the future will compete on price …just like the IP Transit market has for the major data carriers (>$50/meg five years ago, now $2/meg). And now, there'll be an app for that start-up in a couple of months tx to Jobs.
Pingback: jardenberg kommenterar – 7 Jun, 2010 | jardenberg unedited
Mark Texas

Funny are Apple products on every stateside carrier? Nothing has been “blown wide open” as at&t just pretty much kicked Steve in the gut and took away whatever “magic” iPad had going for it. Now it's pretty much a stunted media device that once outside of a WiFi network is going to cost you $$$.

People forget the $350-400 subsidy at&t is providing to make the iPhone “affordable”. It wasn't exactly lighting sales on fire when it launched $500+. So yes everyone matched the buy price but the cost is all worked into your contract so if anyone is thinking their new uber smartphone is $200 doesn't understand the industry. Google tried the same “circumvent” the carrier play and it failed. The stateside carriers as in the big two (VZW, at&t) hold a ton of spectrum and power. The only player on the fringe is Comcast. Does anyone really have faith in Sprint, TMO? They are the budget networks. WiMax is great for the couple cities that actually have it.

People still buy their devices based on network. You have a very small # that leave their prefered carrier and most regret moving. Coverage is not identical nor are costs. To be “dumb pipe” via ISP they would all have to provide the same speeds, signal type, device support etc. We'll be lucky to see that in 5 years.

I will give props to Apple for having a fantastic delivery / ecosystem. Just provide your credit card.

Ari

Mark, the world no longer revolves around the US. We are sick and tired of hearing Americans whine about AT&T. Rather than whine about it on the internet, complain loudly to the FCC and keep on complaining until they listen. Demand that they open up the existing spectrum and force Verizon to move to HSPA+ as a stepping stone to LTE. There is “no” voice standard for LTE yet so don't expect LTE handsets for several years. Bell and Telus in Canada decided to stop waiting for LTE and went head to head with Rogers on HSPA by rolling out an HSPA+ network in a couple of years and they got the iPhone 3GS last November. Verizon and Sprint could do the same thing and compete directly with AT&T for the same handsets and the same roaming contracts.

Mark Texas

No doubt and I never stated it is / was a US thing. The iPhone centric users seem to believe that. I have zero faith LTE (in the states) will make some “global standard” as for years Verizon will need CDMA backhaul for roaming not to mention the voice issue you detail.

There is still no promise we will be buying unlocked/open handsets and taking to the carrier of choice (based on plan cost, coverage etc). It's a pipedream IMO and the carriers will still find a way to offer exclusive devices.

Nicholas Turner

I don't think “circumvent the carrier” is the goal at all. It is even better – the roles/power of handset vendors and carriers flipped! Apple wields the power. It's being sought after, and it has applied that to change the rules in the industry (setting precedent in the US and replicating abroad with amazing ease). This coincides with another point I disagree with. AT&T can ascribe much of its topline and subscriber success to the iPhone – which is why other carriers followed. That is an example of people buying devices REGARDLESS of network (and “regardless” in a big way if you buy an iPhone on AT&T network with the negative press it suffers).

Funny memory – I remember 2 years back enjoying a morning coffee on a beautiful morning at Mobile World Congress (Barcelona) with a new iPhone in one hand and trade show dailies in the other. The latter was filled with industry conceits like “we own the customer relationship” and “we play a key role in the value chain and for delivering innovation”. I had just done some search and mapping on my iPhone (Google) and laughed out loud – “you had nothing to F**%ing do with it!”. What of all that mobile industry innovation? Well, every mobile operator trade show booth seemed to prominently display Facebook. I quit my telecoms/mobile-industry job soon after and bet on a new wave of mobile innovation outside the mobile operator fold.

http://mrnumber.com Jason Devitt

It's true that the industry is going through a massive re-alignment. But there's still a role for biz dev and sales.

As developers, we don't have enough marketing tools in our kit yet. The app stores are immature, mobile advertising is difficult to track, it's hard to close a viral loop when your user has a Droid and their friends have iPhones and BlackBerries etc. etc. For most developers, no amount of advertising or buzz can compare with an OEM or carrier pre-load. I just saw that Sprint has pre-loaded Qik on the HTC Evo; that's huge for them. More generally, who decides what apps are 'featured' in the Android Market? Hint: it's not an algorithm.

It's possible that this will all go the way of the web. It's also possible that we've replaced incompetent dictators with competent dictators. Instead of sending biz dev to Newark, Atlanta, Kansas City, and Seattle, we'll send them to Cupertino, Mountain View, and Waterloo instead.
http://technbiz.blogspot.com paramendra

“The basis of competition was salesmanship and capital, not innovation or quality.”

Who will upend the internet access industry and give us 10 times faster broadband?

“….their former contacts at the carriers are shell shocked: no one is knocking on their doors anymore…”

Hilarious. Capitalism works, I guess.

And Android is set to upend the iPhone grip.
http://redesignmobile.com rakeshlobster

Right on.

Jobs changed the focus from the intermediate customer (the carrier) to the real customer (the consumer). I've been working in wireless apps since 1999 and I can't tell you how much we had to deviate from good consumer experiences to satisfy channel requirements related to business model, customer care concerns and network utilization. This still exists to some extent, but not nearly as much as before iPhone came out. Google, Palm, RIM, etc. owe Steve and Apple a great deal.

App developers can design apps based on what's best for the consumer versus what is best for the carrier.

Back when the first iPhone was announced, I wrote about how this was a phone that could only come from Apple:

http://blog.agrawals.org/2007/01/09/a-phone-tha…

A big part of Apple's success has been their own retail channel. They have people who are trained and can explain the product — which is always important when you're selling something like the iPhone. (Witness Google's lack of success with a self-service model in the Nexus One store.)
vinodgopinath

I totally agree with you Chris. All these marketplaces we see today would not have cropped up if it wasn't for Jobs. That being said as much as I am a fan of Jobs, I am as upset with other OEMs for only being followers.
For example the concept of the iPad has been around for ages…but they all waited for the iPad to come out to make their “announcements”.
I remember someone I knew at Nokia once telling me ” We are waiting for the iPhone announcement and launch..”. They were expecting the iPhone to fail miserably, as all the “user research” they had, showed that users didn't want a multifunction device. Well, as they say, the rest is history.
I am still waiting for the first company to launch a credible competitor to the iPad (apple could have done better)…..I can tell you the wait has been frustrating.
I think the world needs at least one other Steve Jobs. I suspect that's going to be another long frustrating wait…
http://qtp.blogspot.com Sachin

I completely agree with you
Pingback: アメリカの携帯市場 » 経済学101
http://www.newgenapps.com Anurag

Well, the beauty of the whole thing is how it affected the level of innovation in mobile apps.

Now rather than a 'design by committee' approach, Apple democratized the process of ideation. They gave some amazing tools in the form of iPhone OS and SDK to a lot of common folks in the world, and look what the common folk and entrepreneurs have come up with.

Now the consumers have the power to decide upon and bring their app idea to life. The sames is now being replicated on the Android, and BlackBerry platform.

I believe the crowdsourcing of innovation has been the single greatest contribution of the iPhone
http://seekingalpha.com mickwe

Sounds like the way things *still* are with media buyers at the larger ad agencies – have to throw parties for them, etc. – even for the online buying guys. With perhaps the exception of niche-focused networks like Federated Media, the option of ad networks isn't attractive to publishers either. Where will the disruptive Jobsian force come from in online advertising? Still waiting for an efficient, open marketplace that could do it. In the meantime, it's jeans parties (that is, buying designer jeans for them!) for the 22 yr old ad buyers at Ogilvy.
Pingback: My daily readings 06/07/2010 « Strange Kite
http://ouriel.typepad.com OurielOhayon

i agree Apple has created the required new ecosystem for the mobile web to become mainstream and innovative. I personally don t have any problem with the closed environment that Apple has created. I actually think this is what makes it so attractive to users. But i believe that in order to scale Apple has to create a trusted relation with developers and enable a fluid approval process. It is yet too inconsistent, sometimes slow, but worse not transparent enough. It is improving.

I wrote about this extensively here http://ouriel.typepad.com/myblog/2010/06/though…
Pingback: Havas Media Lab » Disruption Landscape - 06/07/2010
YigBong

And as a result, Steve Jobs has an over inflated Ego and a big head!

http://www.anonymity.it.tc
Pingback: How the iPhone Restructured the Mobile Industry | Startups
luis

Dealing with carriers in 2001 was a very unpleasant experience and I have the battle scars to prove it!. By 2002 we where “on-deck” on all top 3 carriers. All the deals where onerous and definitely non negotiable i.e. 50% to 60% share of retail price for the carrier and in the case of TMobile like 80%. Verizon and the Brew Platform you had to target 80% of the handsets that meant that if they had 20 or 40 different models you had to have 20/40 of the same Brew apps for each handset! Plus toll fees for Qualcomm. For example if the Retail price was $2.50, after all the mouths were fed(Paid) you would end up with a total net between $.25 or $.15 per transaction.

International deals with carriers where even more onerous.

On my first trip to Japan in 2001, I got very well informed on their mobile ecosystem and revenue shares with the carrier. I realized then that there was no opportunity for any developer to make a company succeed in the US without going bankrupt. 2007 Apple opened it up for all of us.

Apple has changed the game for all of us and made the space a real opportunity where the carrier does not matter that much anymore.

New guys in the game, be really, really grateful you didn't have to deal with this crap!
http://howtogetmyexbackways.com/ Get Ex Back

The people griping about Apple's “closed system” are generally people who are new to the industry and didn't realize
Pingback: Vain Media » Blog Archive » Steve Jobs and Apple helped changed the wireless industry.
Pingback: iPhone + another carrier = telecom disruption « Jongmin Timothy Moon
http://maverickmoneymakersreview.ws/ Maverick Money Makers Review

i think it is most popular site!
Pingback: LOAD * ,8 ,1 « Rowan Simpson
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs
Pingback: ArticlesInbox » Blog Archive » Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs — NabinPradhan.Com
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs - Droid Forum - Verizon Droid & the Motorola Droid Forum
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs | PIRZADEH.se | Nima Pirzadeh
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs | Technology and Web 2.0
Pingback: The Far Edge » Blog Archive » Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs | Services For Seo
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs | Syamsurian.com
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs | The Good NET Guide
Pingback: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs « Whella – Latest News on Wireless Topics
Pingback: ArticleSave :: Uncategorized :: Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs
Pingback: Binomial Revenue » Blog Archive » Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs

Chris Dixon