With more smart phones now being bought than 'conventional' mobiles and Internet access via mobile devices passing 50 percent of the total usage, would rural broadband cabling ever be cost effective?
I ask this as a genuine question. Whereas I'm writing this blog post on a laptop, via a wireless connection to my BT Broadband service, you may just as easily be reading it on a mobile device with no physical connection to the Internet at all.
And if that's the shape of things to come, I could just as easily be writing this blog on an iPhone, iPad, Android or Microsoft Surface device in the very near future.
I happen to live in a town with reasonable broadband but my brother in law is just as likely to access the Internet on his Blackberry as he is on his very slow rural broadband connection. Part of the thinking behind Novanna is that farmers increasingly use similar devices when they're out and about.
Now that reaching the Novanna website from a smart phone is as easy as phoning a supplier - easier, since you can search for Novanna online - part of our thinking is that farmers will find it more convenient to buy directly from us than to arrange a purchase by phone, even when they're miles from the office or too busy to find a phone number, especially once they have an account with us.
A smart phone costs less than a laptop, Mac or PC, even if 'line charges' are higher at the moment. Tablets and hybrid devices like the new one from Microsoft could just as easily work in an office, and the Microsoft Surface might even be a game-changer.
There's a big debate going on about rural broadband, fibre optic cabling and so on, but the real issue is Internet access and there's more than one way to skin a cat.
Am I missing something here? Please feel free to agree or disagree.
(BTW, we're also happy to send you a brochure by good old fashioned snail mail!)
No comments:
Post a Comment