Mobile Email - Can Pull be a "Disruptive Technology"?

Came across an interesting debate titled Mobile Email: Push vs. Pull which got me to think and post as follows...

More than 2 billion mobiles world-wide, of which smart-phones account for less than 4%. 1.5 billion email accounts world-wide. And how may mobile email users do we have so far? 10M at best!!

How come no one is questioning this? As critical as email is in our life these days, why is it that only half-a-percent of email users find mobile email appealing?

My take is that mobile email, as is on offer currently... is targeted at high-end users, having high-end devices, requiring high-end email infrastructures - not to mention the ongoing high-cost of using it (data plans, license fees etc.) Many services which claim to be "mobile email for masses" require downloading and installing a client on the phone – requiring mostly a smart-phone and an entry level data-plan.

The above pretty much rules out users in emerging economies… Where internet connectivity and computers are not pervasive. Where people have mobile phones but still continue to use cyber cafe's to access email. Where "value-for-money" is paramount. Where people have browsing capabilities on the phone but data-plans are still expensive. These, accordingly to me, are people who will find great use for mobile email… provided its adoption and usage costs are attractive.

It is with this scenario in mind that our service MeOnGo was developed and launched. A comprehensive PULL mobile email service that works purely in the mobile's browser. Nothing to download, nothing to install and no complicated setups - simply go to the m.MeOnGo.com, enter your email address, password and get going.

The service is designed ground-up to work with any mobile... whether it is an old GPRS phone with only WML support or a cutting-edge smart-phone. The service, though free, provides comprehensive email functionality… there is support for multiple mailboxes, viewing of attachments, SMS alerts for new emails and much more.

In the ongoing debate of Pull vs. Push... Pull would surely fit the bill of Clayton Christensen's definition of "Disruptive Technology"...

A new, possibly lower performance, but less expensive product that addresses an existing market. The disruptive technology starts by gaining a foothold in the low-end, and less demanding, part of the market, then moves up-market through performance improvements, and finally displaces an incumbent's product.