If the industry chatter is any indication, mobile applications may suffer the fate of dot-coms earlier in the decade: failure to live up to expectations.

While some sections of the media and the mobile industry are all aflutter with the many possibilities of apps, others rightly are concerned that hype and an emphasis on frivolity over branding or transactions may just kill their appeal in the next year or two.

It may not look that way right now.

Apple claims more than 1 billion downloads for the 65,000-plus apps in its year-old Apple App Store, while the independently-run GetJar claims more than a half-billion downloads of the 50,000 apps in its store.

Racing to catch up are Research In Motion with its newly launched BlackBerry App World store and Nokia with its Ovi store. Microsoft is not far behind with plans for its marketplace. As for Yahoo, well, who knows what Yahoo's up to?

So the interest in app stores is alive, at least from the manufacturer and software-developer side.

iCandy
However, all the players have to avoid becoming a victim of their success.

In other words, they must not confuse quantity for quality.

An examination of what went wrong in 2000, 2001 and 2002 with the Internet helps. A plethora of dot-coms was flush with venture capital but had no business models to generate revenue.

Indeed, sites of all hues, from playful to serious, vied for consumer attention. In the end, only the sites that offered value to the consumer survived. These sites won consumer trust. They won repeat visits. They won repeat business.

Those qualities -- trust, repeat visits and repeat business -- are what app developers should aspire to as they jockey to get into the most successful app store, the Apple App Store.

Perversely, the absence of easy funding for apps may yet stall a dot-com fate for apps.

Still, the dice is already loaded against the developers.

Most of the apps are free. For those that are paid, Apple gets a 30 percent cut -- way too high, but apparently in line with other app stores. Yet, where in the world would marketers tolerate such a model simply for access to a consumer base?

To top it all, the Apple App Store suffers from clutter. And it is closed.

So how will Google, Yahoo or Bing's search engines crawl the Apple App Store? Will developers and marketers have to rely on Apple search engine optimization? And at what price, when Apple decides on a fee for top positioning?

Piling on?
Marketers and retailers who develop apps must ask themselves these questions: Why the need to create apps? What is it that apps give them on mobile phones that Web sites or common short codes don't? What consumer need do apps solve? How will the apps enhance the brand's market positioning? Are apps complementary to other mobile and non-mobile channels?

Also, don't take the eye off the revenue model: How can the app be monetized or measured for branding performance?

Apple and its ilk are doing marketers no favor by not sharing information on app-download and deletion behavior. No, those top 25 listings don't cut the mustard.

Marketers simply can't rely on research houses and their small samples to extrapolate and explain app-download behavior for tens of millions of mobile customers. That data must come directly from the app store owners -- at least in the long-term interests of the industry.

Apps can meet a few obvious needs on phones: utilitarian, entertainment, informational, transactional or branding. Those apps that don't incorporate one or more of these attributes risk a short life or ignominy on the mobile device.

Smart marketers will treat the app as a precious branding tool -- an indication that consumers cared enough to raise their hands and share precious real estate on their phone. It is the ultimate badge of loyalty to sport a brand's app on a mobile phone.

The app is the bridge that connects consumer to marketer. Make sure the brand pilings are strong.