Comments on: Move to Establish a Mobile Device Internet Domain

A number of leading mobile companies have submitted a application to the Internet Corp. for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to apply for a mobile top level domain (TLD).

Read the Full Article Text Here

Article Comments

(11 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Comments Closed
This article is no longer accepting new comments.

How about .mob

ray00pal @ 3/10/2004 11:26:32 AM #

What do you think about .mob?

RE: How about .mob

cbowers @ 3/10/2004 1:47:55 PM #

Given Microsoft's participation, the shady underworld tones of .mob fits rather well.

How about dot MBL

Pariwat @ 3/10/2004 11:27:35 AM #

Pretty cool, isn't it? :-)

Why?

potter @ 3/10/2004 11:53:59 AM #

Why do we need another TLD? Would not just a new first level domain name convention serve the same purpose, e.g. moble.palminfocenter.com? Adding another TLD just opens up more opportunities for cyber-squatters. Example: After a few years of internet presents, company acme.com wants to set up a mobile version. However, they find someone else has already registered acme.mob and wants $100,000 for it. If acme is not a unique registered trade mark, they would have not recourse.

RE: Why?

ganoe @ 3/10/2004 12:57:38 PM #

How can we write ICANN to tell them to "just say no" to this?

Just another revenue-generating scam

talos4 @ 3/10/2004 12:04:59 PM #

This is just about control and adding to the wireless companies bottom line. There is no 'technology' reason for having a separate namespace for wireless devices.

Unlike E.164 (global phone numbers), the wireless companies have to pay someone else for domain names. With their own TLD, the industry controls who is perceived to be a wireless provider, and the money stays in the family. Would a non-celluar wireless data network provider (who competes with the companies listed) be eligible ? Expect to pay a premium for a 'cool' .mob moniker. I can see the commercials already.

Another TLD just adds to the confusion. Is my phone @verizon.com or @verizon.net or @vzw.net or @verizon.mob ? If my mobile device changes providers, do I keep my DN ?

Not so 'cool'.

-R

----------------------------------------
"Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
-- Richard Feynman.

RE: Just another revenue-generating scam

sremick @ 3/10/2004 1:38:15 PM #

I agree. Plus once you sign up for mydomain.??? you get pressured about also obtaining every possible TLD out there for mydomain.???. At $6-$20 a pop.

And if you own mydomain.* then what's the point? Are you going to use them all for different purposes? Is mydoman.net going to be used differently than mydomain.org and mydomain.biz and mydomain.us and such? that defeats the purpose of more TLDs because they're trying to FREE UP DOMAIN NAME ROOM. Or is it just your hoarding nature that makes you feel that once you've obtained mydomain that you must secure mydomain.* lest someone else be able to use your name? If that's the case, more TLDs are just more money-makers for the registrars, and serve no additional purpose to YOU.

Appearance means a lot. If I had to judge between bigcompany.pda and pda.bigcompany.com, having already been familiar with www.bigcompany.com, I'd trust pda.bigcompany.com more. You don't get the same assurance that bigcompany.pda has ANYTHING to do with bigcompany.com. And if they DO... why bother with the new TLD? Except to pad the registrar's pockets more.

As an owner of a few domains myself, I get REALLY irrated by this. I was happy w/ the original list (com/org/net/edu/mil/gov/countries). The only thing that might have been useful is a .xxx for adult as those have reached a point where they're worth categorizing, and both people who want adult and don't want adult stuff on the 'net can find benefits in organizing it all together somehow. The rest are just to milk us for more money, and have nothing to do with the bogus freeing-up-more-domain-names justification.

RE: Just another revenue-generating scam

talos4 @ 3/10/2004 7:40:08 PM #

ICANN should 'can' the proposal unless customer DN's are transferable between providers. Like the government mandated local number portability.

-R

RE: Just another revenue-generating scam

hotpaw4 @ 3/11/2004 4:39:56 AM #

> ICANN should 'can' the proposal unless customer DN's are transferable between providers.

Domain names are currently transferable between registrars and ISP's. I just moved one of mine a few months ago.

But there seems to be no need for this proposal. The industry just needs to settle on some defacto URL scheme: mobile.foo.com, foo.com/mob/ , or something similar.

new TLD dumb idea

HandyMan @ 3/10/2004 1:19:10 PM #

It's a stupid idea. What's wrong with just using the host name to indicate it's optimized for mobile, e.g. mob.cellco.com or wap.cellco.com?

There's been many new TLD domains in the past few years, but does the average person care? If it's not .COM nobody cares.

Who decides what mobile-friendly means?

Scott R @ 3/10/2004 8:09:39 PM #

I agree with everyone else that this is a bad idea. But in addition to the reason(s) already given, I'll throw another one out there. What defines something as being mobile-friendly/compatible? My Zodiac has a 480x320 screen. When I browse the web with it on-the-go, it's an entirely different experience than browsing with a text-based WAP phone.

Scott

http://Tapland.com
- Tapwave Zodiac News, Reviews, & Discussion -