tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2613051707915991104.post6266351257720323464..comments2008-01-13T08:47:55.803-08:00Tim Kilroyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07295806477228497706noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2613051707915991104.post-79766077598110008582008-01-13T08:47:00.000-08:002008-01-13T08:47:00.000-08:00While I agree that Yahoo Go isn't revolutionary in terms of content or experience (as a matter of fact, I think it is slow and the content updating takes WAY too long, but what is revolutionary about this is that Yahoo Go has provided an easy publishing network for mobile content. Developers and content publishers can now create with the idea that they have a defined audience (Yahoo Go subscribers), a distribution mechanism (no more carrier approval, etc) and an emerging monetization strategy. While my assertion that this could evolve into a new OS, is perhaps a little overstated, I believe that it can accurately be positioned as an emerging eco-system that can be self-sustaining with a defined set of parameters and an ever evolving content population. (And, BTW, Yahoo does the hardest work in getting potential subscribers to download the application in the first place and giving the content provider the opportunity to create a thriving audience)Tim Kilroyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07295806477228497706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2613051707915991104.post-25146485968301459562008-01-08T14:02:00.000-08:002008-01-08T14:02:00.000-08:00On the other hand, Yahoo Go is quite disapointing: no more than "mini site" embeeded in Yahoo mobile browser. Far from being a widget, with a minimum of interactivity....<BR/>So what is the added value comparing to a Wap site?Tomsofthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12414380976674662486noreply@blogger.com