The dramatic success of the iPhone platform has meant that there is an unambiguous trend of users searching less often in web search engines. While Search 1.0 website and web-search oriented economy will continue, the advent of wireless broadband, enhanced user interfaces and mobile data services has led to the rise of Smartphones: While websites continue to be accessible and accessed from Smartphones, it is clear that the website’s user experience and utility simply cannot come close to a well-built and customized native application running on the Smartphone platform: Would a user prefer to go to facebook.com if there was a Facebook application on the Smartphone? The thriving application stores of the iPhone, Android and Nokia platforms are a testimony to this truism. This means that just as in Search 1.0 users searched for information from their PCs and got directed to websites, in a yet evolving Search 2.0, an ever growing number of Smartphone users are searching for information from the Smartphones and are getting directed to websites (still) and also applications (from the application store) and relevant content formatted for the Smartphones.

The next observation is that while Search 1.0 was a network based process where users expressed intent and got directed to websites and in that process saw advertisements (or recommendations), as things stand, even in Search 2.0, the process that directs users to device-specific applications or content continues to be a separate network based process. However, instead of the traditional web search engines, it is the owner and searcher of the walled garden comprising of the applications store and the device-specific content who is the Search (and recommendations and advertisement) deity of the Search 2.0 eco-system. When this Search deity gets a query ‘Vietnamese dining’, it can produce an appropriate listings link (based on query and location) if the deity also has listings data that is integrated into the search; but importantly, it can also surface advertisements for the Yelp application or any other listings applications for the user to install. Note that currently if, say, an iPhone user wants to search ‘Vietnamese dining’ he will still launch the search in Google (via a browser or via the Google app) because the iTunes search engine may not have indexed the term ‘Vietnamese dining’ for Yelp. In this sense, there is a leakage of Search 2.0 traffic which, strictly speaking the iTunes search engine ought to own, is actually leaking into the Search 1.0 eco-system of Google. As a result, Google is getting smarter and smarter and more cognizant of consumer behavior from iPhone originating search queries, which is a problem for Apple. However, Apple seems to be taking definitive steps to plug this hole in its iTunes ecosystem.

Opportunity #1

The first opportunity is for building a compelling Search 2.0 ecosystem that goes beyond facilitating searching for apps merely using terms such as the names (eg Yelp), categories (eg yellow pages) and descriptions of the apps, but in fact enhances the search experience by allowing terms (‘Vietnamese dining’) from the corpuses pertaining to the applications themselves. As seen above plugging this hole or leak of Search 2.0 traffic into the Search 1.0 ecosystem has definitive economic value in the form of advertisement and recommendation opportunities; but more importantly also captures the source of information that can be used for understanding mobile consumer behavior!

However, as of the present moment, Search 2.0 searches are typically in a completely separate vertical silo from the most frequent and naturally occurring searches proliferating on the device: On-Device search for contacts and content such as downloaded music, downloaded apps etc. Consider what can happen if On-Device search is extended to incorporate Search 2.0 results. Not only does the user get downloaded applications or music etc., he also gets network residing applications and music (which are not yet downloaded or meant only for streaming, etc.) or perhaps gets interesting websites from the same unified universal search bar. As the user uses such a universal search system, he will discover the availability of more and more content, applications and information that are not resident on his phone. This will increase the cohesion between on-device search and the above mentioned enhanced Search 2.0 opportunity; and further reduce the probability of the user using his good old browser to go to pay obeisance to the reining Search 1.0 deity (Google etc) to search for ‘Vietnamese dining’.

Opportunity #2

A second and more important opportunity is combining on-device search and Search 2.0 into a unified user experience. By plugging more holes as well as driving more traffic into a single more holistic search engine that combines on-device search and an important subset of network-based search, one can further enhance the economic opportunities mentioned above as well as the opportunities to improve mobile consumer understanding.

This may not be very far away.