Unified communications isn't all about voice. It isn't even all about phones. The web, and its evolution come into play as a huge part of how we integrate all communications.

There's a news story this morning that's been getting a lot of buzz and discussion.

Is the Mobile Web Dead? Some Mobile Entrepreneurs Say Yes

Written by Marshall Kirkpatrick / April 14, 2008 5:29 PM

Former Yahoo! Mobile evangelist turned startup entrepreneur Russell Beattie announced today that he's calling it quits for his company Mowser because the market for mobile browsing is taking a fast turn for the worse. "The mobile traffic just isn't there," Beattie says, "It's not there now, and it won't be."

Beattie's announcement comes just two months after mobile blogger and consultant Michael Mace wrote a much discussed post titled Mobile Applications, RIP.

"The business of making native apps for mobile devices is dying, crushed by a fragmented market and restrictive business practices," Mace wrote.

[Read full post]

I was involved in conference call discussing this topinc this morning and found my own theory spilling out in a pretty ad hoc mode as I reacted to some of the conversation. Here are some of the thoughts that spilled out.

First, I don't think the Mobile Web was ever a viable concept. It was a window of opportunity that allowed carriers and providers a brief opportunity to give the illusion of real innovation by packaging browser content slightly differently.

The mobile web is dead because the web is mobile. Today people uses iPhones, Blackberries, smartphones, gaming consoles, and all manner of other devices to access the web.

Some folks on the call described the the iPhone browser as disruptive and a complete change to the browsing experience. I disagree. I expressed my view that the browser itself is rapidly dying.

With the rise in what we call cloud computing, and the increasing reliance on the browser to access web applications, I actually argued that Web 2.0 has been almost entirely about cosmetics. Web 2.0 sites get a new look, round the edges on the boxes, and present a facelift. But the underlying technology and capability certainly didn't change an evolutionary generation.

Web 2.0 has all been a cosmetic facelift illusion. And the browser is badly in need of a paradigm shift. (Yes I took a beating for using that phrase0.

I'd argue that the browser, still based on the old tired original browser interface, is old, tired, and dying. It's as obsolete as the ten-digit dial pad on a telephone. These are two interfaces, the two primary interfaces, into the unified communications world. We're using old user interfaces to do new things.

I think the next generation web (WebNG for the sake of argument), will bring new tools, new interfaces, new ways of itneracting with cloud computing resources. Yes, a paradigm shift in user behavior and interaction.

What form will that take? Voice recognition? Eye movement? A new way of using gestures to interact with devices? Perhaps some combination.

What do you think? Leave your thoughts in comments.