Advertisement

A Taxonomy for App-Enabled Devices: Mastering the Mobile Device Jungle

  • Christoph RiegerEmail author
  • Tim A. Majchrzak
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 322)

Abstract

While the term application is known for a long time, what we now refer to as mobile apps has facilitated task-oriented, interoperable software. The term was initially only used for smartphones and tablets, but desktop software now is also referred to as apps. More important than the wording, however, is the trend towards app-enablement of many further kinds of devices such as smart TVs and wearables. App-enabled devices usually share some characteristics and developing apps is often similar. However, many complexities must be mastered: Device fragmentation and cross-platform app development already are challenging when only considering smartphones. When trying to grasp the field as a whole, app-enabled devices appear as a jungle: it becomes increasingly hard to get an overview. Devices might not be easy to categorize let alone to compare. Investigating similarities and differences is not straightforward, as the outer appearance might be deceiving, and technological peculiarities are often complex in nature. This article aims at mastering the jungle. For this purpose, we propose a taxonomy for app-enabled devices. It provides clear terms and facilitates precision when discussing devices. Besides presenting the taxonomy and the rationale behind it, this article invites for discussion.

Keywords

App Mobile app Taxonomy Categorization Smart devices Wearable Smartphone Tablet 

References

  1. 1.
    Rieger, C., Majchrzak, T.A.: Conquering the mobile device jungle: towards a taxonomy for app-enabled devices. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST), pp. 332–339. SciTePress (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Statista Inc.: Global smartphone shipments forecast from 2010 to 2020 (2016). https://www.statista.com/statistics/263441/
  3. 3.
    Chuah, S.H.W., Rauschnabel, P.A., Krey, N., Nguyen, B., Ramayah, T., Lade, S.: Wearable technologies: the role of usefulness and visibility in smartwatch adoption. Comput. Hum. Behav. 65, 276–284 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coppola, R., Morisio, M.: Connected car: technologies, issues, future trends. ACM Comput. Surv. 49(3), Article No. 46 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Apple Inc.: Apple reinvents the phone with iPhone (2007). http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/01/09Apple-Reinvents-the-Phone-with-iPhone.html
  6. 6.
    Apple Inc.: iPhone app store downloads top 10 million in first weekend (2008). http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/07/14iPhone-App-Store-Downloads-Top-10-Million-in-First-Weekend.html
  7. 7.
    Biørn-Hansen, A., Majchrzak, T.A., Grønli, T.M.: Progressive web apps: the possible web-native unifier for mobile development. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST), pp. 344–351. SciTePress (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heitkötter, H., Hanschke, S., Majchrzak, T.A.: Evaluating cross-platform development approaches for mobile applications. In: Cordeiro, J., Krempels, K.-H. (eds.) WEBIST 2012. LNBIP, vol. 140, pp. 120–138. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36608-6_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    El-Kassas, W.S., Abdullah, B.A., Yousef, A.H., Wahba, A.M.: Taxonomy of cross-platform mobile applications development approaches. Ain Shams Eng. J. 8, 163–190 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weiser, M.: The computer for the 21st century. Sci. Am. 265, 94–104 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Statista Inc.: Global smart tv unit sales from 2014 to 2018 (in millions) (2017). https://www.statista.com/statistics/540675/global-smart-tv-unit-sales/
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Ibarra-Esquer, J.E., González-Navarro, F.F., Flores-Rios, B.L., Burtseva, L., Astorga-Vargas, M.A.: Tracking the evolution of the internet of things concept across different application domains. Sensors 17, 1379 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heitkötter, H., Majchrzak, T.A., Kuchen, H.: Cross-platform model-driven development of mobile applications with MD2. In: Shin, S.Y., Maldonado, J.C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), SAC 2013, pp. 526–533. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jones, C., Jia, X.: The AXIOM model framework: transforming requirements to native code for cross-platform mobile applications. In: Ferreira Pires, L. (ed.) 2nd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chauhan, J., Mahanti, A., Kaafar, M.A.: Towards the era of wearable computing? In: Proceedings of 2014 CoNEXT on Student Workshop, CoNEXT Student Workshop 2014, pp. 24–25. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Busold, C., Heuser, S., Rios, J., Sadeghi, A.-R., Asokan, N.: Smart and secure cross-device apps for the internet of advanced things. In: Böhme, R., Okamoto, T. (eds.) FC 2015. LNCS, vol. 8975, pp. 272–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47854-7_17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dageförde, J.C., Reischmann, T., Majchrzak, T.A., Ernsting, J.: Generating app product lines in a model-driven cross-platform development approach. In: 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 5803–5812 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jesdabodi, C., Maalej, W.: Understanding usage states on mobile devices. In: Proceedings of 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing, UbiComp 2015, pp. 1221–1225. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chauhan, J., Seneviratne, S., Kaafar, M.A., Mahanti, A., Seneviratne, A.: Characterization of early smartwatch apps. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on PerCom Workshops 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Google Inc.: Android wear (2016). https://android.com/wear
  22. 22.
    Apple Inc.: WatchOS (2016). https://www.apple.com/watchos/
  23. 23.
    LG Electronics: WebOS for LG Smart TVs (2016). http://www.lg.com/uk/smarttv/webos
  24. 24.
    The Linux Foundation: Tizen (2016). https://www.tizen.org
  25. 25.
    Neate, T., Jones, M., Evans, M.: Cross-device media: a review of second screening and multi-device television. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 21, 391–405 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Singh, K., Buford, J.: Developing WebRTC-based team apps with a cross-platform mobile framework. In: 13th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications and Networking Conference, CCNC 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Queirós, R., Portela, F., Machado, J.: Magni - a framework for developing context-aware mobile applications. In: Rocha, Á., Correia, A.M., Adeli, H., Reis, L.P., Costanzo, S. (eds.) WorldCIST 2017. AISC, vol. 571, pp. 417–426. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56541-5_43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Koren, I., Klamma, R.: The direwolf inside you: end user development for heterogeneous web of things appliances. In: Bozzon, A., Cudre-Maroux, P., Pautasso, C. (eds.) ICWE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9671, pp. 484–491. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38791-8_35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Humayoun, S.R., Ehrhart, S., Ebert, A.: Developing mobile apps using cross-platform frameworks: a case study. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCI 2013. LNCS, vol. 8004, pp. 371–380. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39232-0_41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sommer, A., Krusche, S.: Evaluation of cross-platform frameworks for mobile applications. Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI) P-215, pp. 363–376 (2013)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dalmasso, I., Datta, S.K., Bonnet, C., Nikaein, N.: Survey, comparison and evaluation of cross platform mobile application development tools. In: 2013 9th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC) (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rieger, C., Majchrzak, T.A.: Weighted evaluation framework for cross-platform app development approaches. In: Wrycza, S. (ed.) SIGSAND/PLAIS 2016. LNBIP, vol. 264, pp. 18–39. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46642-2_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lahiani, H., Kherallah, M., Neji, M.: Vision based hand gesture recognition for mobile devices: a review. In: Abraham, A., Haqiq, A., Alimi, A.M., Mezzour, G., Rokbani, N., Muda, A.K. (eds.) HIS 2016. AISC, vol. 552, pp. 308–318. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52941-7_31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bhowmik, A.K.: 39.2: Invited paper: natural and intuitive user interfaces: technologies and applications. In: SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers, vol. 44, pp. 544–546 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hintze, D., Hintze, P., Findling, R.D., Mayrhofer, R.: A large-scale, long-term analysis of mobile device usage characteristics. In: Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, vol. 1, pp. 1–21 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., Palaniswami, M.: Internet of Things (IoT): a vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 29, 1645–1660 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Daft, R.L., Lengel, R.H., Trevino, L.K.: Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: implications for information systems. MIS Q. 11, 355 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    ACM Computing Classification System ToC (2015). http://www.acm.org/about/class
  39. 39.
    Cassel, L.N., Palivela, S., Marepalli, S., Padyala, A., Deep, R., Terala, S.: The new ACM CCS and a computing ontology. In: Proceedings of 13th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL), pp. 427–428. ACM (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ERCISUniversity of MünsterMünsterGermany
  2. 2.ERCISUniversity of AgderKristiansandNorway

Personalised recommendations