Nouvelles et informations

Where is the mobile market now and what does it mean for Android or iOS parking management systems? Should you upgrade to a smart parking system using Android? Or should you optimize for an iOS parking enforcement solution, like ParkMobile? The remainder of this article, to be continued from last week in Part 1 of Android or Apple for Your Ticketing Software series, looks at reviews done on current smartphone and tablet market share and the factors that drive growth to help you make an informed decision between an Android or iOS parking solution. We all know what doesn’t work, as Blackberry became a working model for what not to do; but, is there a success story to be championed in this mêlée and should we be surprised at who the winner appears to be or, is this just history repeating itself? A recent article reports with a great deal of skepticism, on suggestions that Android is in its death throes. The article’s rebuttal suggests, and quite succinctly demonstrates that this is simply not the case, that Android is, in fact, taking market share from “everyone”. The piece goes on to break down market growth into  a few defining factors including Price, Existing Market Share,  Consumer Loyalty and Financials. Price Data indicates that, unshockingly, price is the primary factor for consumers when determining what type of smart device to purchase. Clearly the value for every dollar spent must match up. From a developer’s perspective, a combination of the market share and user base are key performance indicators that dictate whether or not to develop for a mobile platform. The race to woo developers has never been more fervently pursed than in Blackberry’s campaign pushing the Z10s new QNX platform, an affirmation that apps rule the roost and figure prominently in the equation for a successful smartphone or tablet maker.   Market share The tablet market is still Apple’s to claim as victor however Google’s steady market penetration is slowly closing that gap. Apple seems to have a knack for repeating history like the 1980s and 1990s Apple vs. PC wars which eventually saw its decline. Apple’s strength in product design, clairvoyance in terms of knowing what consumers desire before they even know they desire it and trendy marketing put Apple at the top of the heap. However, Apple also holds another title that seems to have become its Achilles’ heel: pricing. Apple products eventually lose luster as steep price points drive consumers to more affordable ‘good enough’ alternatives; a pattern very similar to the 1980s and 1990s that brought momentum to a crawl, threatens to repeat itself. According to Strategy Analytics Apple’s share has shrank from 64.5% to 56.7% while Android has leaped from 29.2% to 41.3% “Shipments of Android tablets surged to a new high in the third quarter of 2012, accounting for 41% of all tablets shipped. Neil Mawston, Strategy Analytics’ executive director, says that there’s no one Android tablet responsible for the surge, which is more due to a large influx of devices from a wide variety of vendors including Asus, Samsung and Nook.” Shipments of Apple’s iPad lineup, meanwhile, shrank to 57% of the market”. Apple may still hold the lion’s share of units shipped for the time-being but, increasingly consumers are hard pressed to find a reason to buy Apple. Brand loyalty can only go so far in competing with the wildly successfully Nexus 7. Even more alluring is the Nexus’ price point at $199 versus the iPad mini’s $329 price tag. The Nexus 7 is also rumored to go down to $150 and eventually, $99. Should Apple be concerned? Probably, but what is of even greater concern is the alarming rate at which Android has gained market share in the smartphone market! Having been referred to as a “sinking ship”,  Apple’s current situation on the smartphone front is less than rosy. Five years in and five and a half iOSs later, it is safe to say that the honeymoon is over and the iPhone simply does not hold the caché it once had. According to the IDC the Android OS was found on 3 out 4 smartphones being shipped in Q3 2012. “According to the International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, total Android smartphone shipments worldwide reached 136.0 million units, accounting for 75.0% of the 181.1 million smartphones shipped in 3Q12. The 91.5% year-over-year growth was nearly double the overall market growth rate of 46.4%. Consumer loyalty Being familiar with an OS’s ecosystem plays a key factor in a consumer’s decision to stick with an OS. Something that would seem to work in Apple’s favor. Apps are another significant deciding factor in sticking with an OS. Google Play is gaining fast on the iTunes store and will eventually overtake it but currently, Apple apps generate 4x more profit. Financials Google’s stock would seem expensive at $828 dollars but it is, in fact, at a healthy average in terms of PEG ratio according to the average S&P 500 stock. Profits are nice and healthy, but the earnings growth could use improvement. Net income however, is very good at $10.56 billion. Total cash is $44.62 billion compared to $7.90 billion in debt. This might make investing in a smart parking system using Android an idea worth exploring. Apple Vs Google: Mirrored opposites in stock fluctuations Google’s strategy of creating ‘good enough’ cheaper smartphones and tablets seems to be working as evidenced by its booming climb in market share and stock prices. What’s more, the quality and user experience of Android products, some would argue, is as good if not superior to that of the aging iOS. However until very recently, lest we forget, Apple has held the title of most valuable company in world. That being said, one thing we can be assured of is Apple’s ability to reinvent itself and the market as it has done time and again. No matter your choice, upgrading to a system that leverages smart parking using smartphones – iOS or Android – is a cost-effective, winning idea that is sure to keep everyone happy.   > Related parking enforcement articles: Adoption of Android™ signals a new mobile trend in parking enforcement business applications Android or Apple for your ticketing software | how to choose: Part 1

Mobile mêlée | The mobile OS wars, where are we now when considering your next electronic parking ticket system? When considering your next ticketing system or an upgrade to an electronic parking ticket system from your current parking ticket software or traffic ticket system, choices abound! More parking tickets and traffic citations are being doled out from Android and Apple devices. With the effect of digital tickets on smart phone sales, it is becoming more relevant than ever to stay ahead of the curve on the rapidly changing landscape of this competitive digital market in what can only be deemed: The Mobile OS Wars! The following headlines read like eulogies for the beleaguered mobile tech giants, some former, some dwindling some still wielding power, albeit diminished. ❝ Death of the Android  Blackberry: The Rise & Fall of an Empire Microsoft Dethroned…for Good iOS Retro, Brings Back Worst of the 80s Mobile OS wars seem to be entering a new era. Announced in October 2012, the number of smartphone users has surpassed 1 billion. In August 2012, the smartphone and tablet market share surpassed the 50% threshold in the U.S. with Android and Apple grabbing 92% of the global market share. The market is starting to saturate and these once white hot products are now becoming commoditized leaving little for stragglers. Although, what can only be viewed as a courageous (or foolhardy) move in this brave new world, surprisingly, Mozilla’s plans to launch an OS have gotten off to a strong start. One of the most notable casualties of late of course is Blackberry, who, despite the launch of BB10, can only hope to at best, stabilize a near vertical plummet. Regardless of corporate rebranding, ditching the RIM moniker for the more globally known product brand Blackberry, a phoenix-like rebirth into anything other than a small niche oriented player, is about the only positive spin one can put on Blackberry’s, frankly depressing, decline. Even Apple has not been immune to dreary forecasts, post-Steve Jobs, suggesting that its zenith has also come and gone. Mobile market on fire while other markets get burned: The future of parking For the first time since 2001 PCs are experiencing a decline in sales and even laptops are increasingly taking a back seat. Tablets are redefining mobile as they become more powerful and convenient for personal and professional use. Companies who have built an empire on flagship products like the PC home computer or PC laptop are now being forced to cannibalize their market share capitulating to the demand for more mobile devices. Apple for example, is looking at new markets to help regain ground in sliding sales of the Macbook Pro, looking at ‘smart watches’ that would perform many of the functions of a smartphone. A study by Gartner corroborates what is likely to be an inevitable steady decline of the PC, especially with recent news of the failure of Windows 8 and new ultra thin “utrabooks” to slow PC user-base churn: “PC makers began the year with hope that a new wave of lightweight laptops called ultrabooks would provide a sales lift. But the ultrabooks haven’t been compelling enough to overcome the growing popularity of smartphones and tablet computers. Those mobile devices are reducing the need for consumers and businesses to buy new PCs or replace older ones…This transformation was triggered by the availability of compelling low-cost tablets in 2012, and will continue until the installed base of PCs declines to accommodate tablets as the primary consumption device”. Where is the mobile market now? The remainder of this article, to be continued next week, looks at reviews done on current smartphone and tablet market share and the factors that drive growth. We all know what doesn’t work, as Blackberry became a working model for what not to do; but, is there a success story to be championed in this mêlée and should we be surprised at who the winner appears to be or, is this just history repeating itself? hbspt.cta.load(154767, 'b53991d9-29eb-4b71-83f9-9b0970e73de5', {}); > Related Parking Enforcement Articles: Adoption of Android™ Signals A New Mobile Trend in Parking Enforcement Business Applications Android or Apple for your traffic ticketing system | how to choose: Part 2

L'impact de la technologie de reconnaissance des plaques d'immatriculation (LPR) sur eChalking "Les performances éprouvées des systèmes de caméras LPR montés sur des véhicules montrent des statistiques de 4000 plaques d'immatriculation scannées au cours d'un quart de travail de contrôle. Il faudrait environ 20 agents à pied dans le même laps de temps pour faire respecter les zones de limitation de temps qu'un seul véhicule LPR". De nos jours, on demande à de nombreux managers de faire plus avec moins. La technologie de reconnaissance mobile des plaques d'immatriculation (LPR) a révolutionné les pratiques et les performances d'eChalking en améliorant l'efficacité, en réduisant les coûts et en augmentant les revenus. Compte tenu d'une estimation prudente de 400 minutes de travail dans une journée de contrôle et du fait qu'un agent de stationnement à pied ne se contente pas de marquer à la craie, il est raisonnable de dire qu'un agent consacrant une demi-journée au marquage électronique marquera 200 véhicules par jour, à raison d'un véhicule par minute. Le marquage à la craie numérique combiné au LPR est encore plus efficace. Les performances éprouvées des systèmes de caméras LPR montés sur les véhicules montrent des statistiques de 4000 plaques d'immatriculation scannées en une journée de travail, ce qui accélère considérablement le processus de contrôle du stationnement. Il faudrait environ 20 agents à pied dans le même laps de temps pour faire respecter les zones de limitation de temps qu'un seul véhicule LPR. En plus de la performance, il y a la valeur ajoutée des images du véhicule et de la plaque d'immatriculation capturées et stockées ainsi que les coordonnées GPS converties en adresses civiques pour marquer l'emplacement du véhicule garé. En outre, les preuves de l'infraction sont également mises à la disposition de l'automobiliste sur des portails Web, ce qui dissuade les demandes potentielles d'audience. En cas de contestation d'une contravention, les arbitres ont accès sur le Web aux données de l'événement LPR, y compris les images de chaque observation et les coordonnées GPS avec les adresses cartographiées par le SIG de l'endroit où la contravention a été émise. L'impact de la reconnaissance des plaques minéralogiques sur les ordonnances municipales Les administrateurs municipaux doivent envisager de remanier les règlements de stationnement créés à une époque antérieure à l'avènement des ordinateurs de poche et des caméras de reconnaissance des plaques d'immatriculation. Autant la technologie doit soutenir la loi, autant les législateurs doivent considérer l'efficacité d'une technologie telle qu'une combinaison de craie numérique LPR. "Autant la technologie doit soutenir la loi, autant les législateurs doivent considérer l'efficacité de la technologie". La nécessité de prouver qu'un véhicule n'a pas quitté son emplacement de stationnement remonte à la marque de craie sur le pneu. Les zones de limitation de temps étaient utilisées pour encourager la rotation du stationnement dans les espaces prévus pour les clients d'un commerçant. Le marquage à la craie du pneu, que ce soit par une image capturée ou par le dessin d'une marque de craie sur un pneu, implique la nécessité de prouver que le véhicule a pu se déplacer et revenir sur la même place de stationnement. Cependant, le besoin de traçage à la craie à ces fins a largement dépassé son utilité. À mesure que la technologie évolue et que les populations augmentent, nous assistons à un changement d'ordonnance qui ne permet pas au véhicule de se garer dans le même pâté de maisons plus longtemps que la limite de temps fixée ou de se garer à nouveau dans le même pâté de maisons, le même jour. La promotion de la circulation contribue à soutenir le commerce et l'économie locale. Le suivi par GPS et les photos numériques standard prises par les caméras de reconnaissance des plaques d'immatriculation sont les seules preuves nécessaires. Ce type d'ordonnance, l'éducation du public et le renforcement de l'application de la loi grâce à l'efficacité des caméras de reconnaissance des plaques d'immatriculation garantissent la rotation de ces places de stationnement de courte durée ainsi que la croissance et la prospérité continues qui font partie intégrante du tissu social et économique de la ville. Processus de contrôle simultané - la valeur ajoutée de la reconnaissance des plaques minéralogiques Les utilisations de la technologie RPM vont bien au-delà du marquage à la craie. La RPM est un multiplicateur de force, créant de nombreux avantages lorsqu'elle est appliquée avec des limites de temps au processus de contrôle du stationnement : Hotlist Véhicule volé Véhicules d'intérêt (ex : sécurité intérieure) Infractions (amendes impayées) Pas d'immatriculation (pourrait être envoyé à la police) Liste blanche Contrôle des permis Contrôle du paiement par plaque Contrôle du paiement par téléphone La plaque d'immatriculation est l'identifiant unique pour tous les processus de contrôle du stationnement - le code-barres du stationnement. Son utilisation efficace permet non seulement d'accroître les performances en matière de contrôle, mais aussi d'organiser toutes les données relatives au contrôle, au recouvrement des amendes et à l'adjudication. Essentiellement, le code-barres permet de garder un contrôle étroit sur l'inventaire des données liées aux numéros de plaques des véhicules. Les agences de stationnement doivent aujourd'hui sortir des sentiers battus et trouver des moyens de partager des informations avec d'autres agences, comme la sécurité intérieure et la police, par exemple en signalant secrètement les véhicules recherchés sans mettre en danger l'agent de stationnement et sans le distraire de son travail. L'investissement dans de nombreuses utilisations de la technologie LPR et de la plaque d'immatriculation en tant que code-barres dans le processus de contrôle du stationnement présente une valeur encore inexplorée, ce qui représente pour les villes l'occasion d'un nouveau départ.  

It actually started in the mid 30’s in Oklahoma. Yes, it was the creation of the parking meter. The parking meter encouraged short term parking for the customers of local store merchants. Prior to that, on-street parking spaces were being used by employees for daily parking. There was no turnover of on-street spaces for a store merchant’s paying customers. “Turnover” is the key to parking management. The term “turnover” means the number of times a parking space is used throughout the day. The more the space is turned over, the better utilization of that space. Today, turnover of on-street parking spaces is critical to the survival of merchant businesses located in a city core. The time limit zone On street parking spaces in time delimited zones are another method of encouraging turnover of parking spaces typically regulated by posted signs allowing the parker to stay within a space for a set period of time. Governmental agencies use this method as a way of controlling on-street parking. Some cities use the time limit zone in lieu of the capital expenditure of buying parking meters. Time restriction can vary from as little as a fifteen minutes for a loading zone to as high as four hours perhaps, near a movie theatre or large department store. Each agency sets up its restricted zone based on the particular need of that block in order to provide the maximum turnover for those spaces. For example, a bank will need a shorter time zone than a restaurant. Traditional chalking Overall, the effect of chalking on parking system management, and vehicle turnover, is a good one. However, many cities today still apply chalking in the same way as years past, by actually chalking the tire along the street with a piece of white chalk. The on-foot parking officer would mark a small line with white chalk on the rear tire at a particular spot. The plate number and the time of day would be recorded on paper. Once the officer completed marking his/her beat of time limit zones, that footprint is retraced to begin what is known as ‘picking up your marks’. In order to determine whether or not to issue a parking ticket, the officer would verify a list of plate numbers that were past the allocated time and check for the chalk mark to confirm that the vehicle did not leave that space. An ordinance might typically state that a car move within a given time limit. This could mean that the car only has to move an inch. A loop hole such as this means that the vehicle owner would simply have to make sure the chalk mark on the road and the tire did not match. eChalking using the handheld computer The advent of mobile computers for ticket issuance provided a new method of time limit marking. A new word appeared in the industry – eChalking or Electronic Chalking. The handheld provided an input screen to record a plate number, location (address) and possibly additional fields. The system would automatically time and user stamp the eChalk. In most cities, the need to mark a tire was eliminated. The handheld also provided a new key component – an alert! If a plate was re-entered, the handheld software would alert the officer that the vehicle was already eChalked, where, and when. The officer would make the decision based on current location if the vehicle was still within the time limit zone or whether to consider this eChalk as a new record. Some manual processes were argued to be quicker than the handheld but the benefits became evident once an digital record of electronic chalking's history was available to the parking enforcement officer and manager for reporting and, to the courts for adjudication. The officer’s word now included the availability of electronically captured information as a significant step forward in terms of adjudicative evidence and the reduction in the number of requests for adjudicative hearings.       Related articles: Parking management systems: A history of eChalking | Part 2