Interaction Design Association

iPhone Keynote

Dan Saffer
January 9, 2007 11:29am

Post a Response | Jump to Most Recent (121)

Drool-worthy. Nothing we haven't seen and discussed here, but to see it all in one package and commercially available is pretty cool:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs- keynote/

Macrumors has the minute-by-minute:

http://www.macrumorslive.com/

Thoughts? Reactions? Game changing or not?

 
Jack Moffett
January 9, 2007 11:40am

There are so many things to love.

One that sticks out for me is the visual UI for accessing voicemail. I proposed this idea while doing freelance work for Ericsson over six years ago. I'm glad to see it implemented.

Let's see. it's available in June, and my current contract is up in October.

Jack

Jack L. Moffett
Interaction Designer
inmedius
412.459.0310 x219
http://www.inmedius.com

Form follows function -
that has been misunderstood.
Form and function should be one,
joined in a spiritual union.


  • Frank Lloyd Wright
  •  
    Josh Viney
    January 9, 2007 11:45am

    I'm very impressed. I'm going to switch providers to get this phone when it hits stores.

    OSX on a phone is brilliant. I'm a little curious about the "multi-tap" interface and may need to try it out in-store, but the overall UX seems pure-Apple genius. Building apps/widgets for this phone will be really fun.

    I have faith that Apple may have solved my # 1 frustration with smartphones

  • the inability to seemlessly sync.
  • Note: It does look like a fingerprint magnet.

  • Josh Viney
  • On 1/9/07, Dan Saffer <dan at odannyboy.com wrote: Drool-worthy. Nothing we haven't seen and discussed here, but to see it all in one package and commercially available is pretty cool: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs- keynote/
    Macrumors has the minute-by-minute:
    http://www.macrumorslive.com/
    Thoughts? Reactions? Game changing or not?


     
    Leisa Reichelt
    January 9, 2007 11:46am

    yup. definitely game changing.

    good riddance to buttons and keys and small screens and styluses

    the sooner the better I say.

    here's to fingers - the input device of the future

    (and devices that have proximity awareness and know and react when they're moved.)

    *drooling*

    ah. gadget lust.

    :) Leisa Reichelt
    User Experience Consultant

    leisa.reichelt at gmail.com
    www.disambiguity.com

     
    Mark Roudebush
    January 9, 2007 11:52am

    I'm a tad bit reluctant about a qwerty keyboard that is touch screen. That's going to take some getting used to.

    Mark Roudebush
    Dubberly Design Office
    2501 Harrison Street, # 7
    San Francisco, CA 94110

    415.648.9799 | 415.218.6476 mobile
    mark at dubberly.com

    On Jan 9, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Leisa Reichelt wrote:

    yup. definitely game changing.
    good riddance to buttons and keys and small screens and styluses the sooner the better I say.
    here's to fingers - the input device of the future (and devices that have proximity awareness and know and react when they're moved.)

  • drooling*
    ah. gadget lust.
    :) Leisa Reichelt
    User Experience Consultant
    leisa.reichelt at gmail.com
    www.disambiguity.com

  •  
    Nasir Barday
    January 9, 2007 11:53am

    I just plunked down for a T-Mobile Dash last October, and I gotta say, Windows Mobile is a huge dancing bear. The hardware, especially the keyboard on the Dash, is elegant (and slim).

    The Engadget summary of the keynote said the on-screen keyboard is faster than a miniature keyboard (not sure if those are Engadget's words or Jobs'), but I'm skeptical. I like not having to look at the keyboard on my Dash to type, and it seems I would have to give that up with an on-screen version.

    That said, I agree with Dan-- cool to see multi-touch (and the novel interactions that come with it) coming to a consumer device. There are good innovations here beyond marketing hype and Apple fanhood.

  • Nasir
  •  
    Kimberly Weaver
    January 9, 2007 11:59am

    I'm a little curious about the "multi-tap" interface

    While I see the benefits of multi-touch on a large screen for gestures or multi-user interaction. I'm not sure of its benefit on a small device such as the iPhone.

    I like the accelerometer which tells the iPhone whether it should display in portrait or landscape mode. I also like the freedom of interaction design due to the lack of physical buttons.

    Kim

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 9, 2007 12:07pm

    nice to see a minimal phone for a change ^_^ Yes, it has many features, but all hided if not in use. Too expansive (considering I have a functional cellphone) and not even available in my area, but still good design to comment. The main menu resembles somewhat the Nintendo Wii "channels".

    related webpages:
    http://www.apple.com/iphone/
    http://www.apple.com/appletv/
    http://www.apple.com/airportextreme/

     
    Nancy Broden
    January 9, 2007 12:08pm

    When I heard about Apple's touchscreen patent I suspected this is what the iPhone would be like Sweet, sweet vindication!

    Now that the iPhone has been announced a few of observations come to mind: 1) I think the weak link in the chain will be the operator. It doesn't matter how great the device is if you can't get reliable service where you live. My Cingular service is pretty good everywhere except my house. :-( That being the single-most frequent complaint of subscribers, it will be interesting to see if/how Apple tries to control the end-to-end experience with the iPhone.

    2) I am disappointed that no other manufacturer and/or operator has come forward to produce something like this already. None of the ideas inherent in the iPhone is all that new or different (although it appears as though Apple has executed them with its usual brilliance, of course), so why has no one in the mobile industry had the foresight/intelligence/motivation/balls to do this before now?

    3) I am a little disappointed that this is essentially a little computer (device running operating system + software applications). Yes it's also a (smart)phone with a unique interface, but I think there was an opportunity for Apple to have gone much further. Perhaps Steve doesn't want to be too radical out of the gate. Now that the iPhone is on the horizon, however, I have hopes they will push the envelope in future releases.

    -- Nancy
    nancy.broden at gmail.com

     
    dnp607
    January 9, 2007 12:14pm

    I left Apple just before this was about to become the big new thing internally, but had a chance to fiddle with a multi-touch prototype. The concept is good, but it gets astoundingly good when coupled with 3D Design programs (CAD etc.). The ability to grab objects and move them with a more natural "3D feel" was so tactile. Expect the Apple tablet to be an amazing piece of kit when coupled with this. For ID, I've been waiting for a Mac Tablet to directly input sketches for a looong time. Curious about this little device:

    http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/ModBook

    With regards to iPhone, some things that stood out to me as roadblocks to my own purchase were:

  • That is a tiny little keyboard, and I wonder what it's like to try typing on it. No doubt later models will get better, but in the short term, this will determine if blackberry is on the ropes. I've grown used to typing on my tiny keyboard, and I'll wait to see if that same analog feel translates to digital.
  • Here in the Bay Area, my experience with Cingular call quality has been less than stellar. Also, the "EDGE" data network has been behind the curve in terms of coverage and quality in comparison to other services (EVDO etc)
  • .but a nice step forward for Apple, and this should be a real kick in the pants to phone manufacturers with lackluster phone UI :-)

    -D

    Dan Peknik * Industrial/Interaction Design
    San Jose State University * NASA Ames

     
    Oliver Weidlich (Ideal Interfaces)
    January 9, 2007 12:15pm

    The new Apple iPhone redefines the mobile experience by providing such an integrated service and rich/innovative UI. The number of new stuff in this single product is impressive but the (apparent) interaction between all the service is mindboggling.

    It took Apple to do it (fanboy/shareholder disclaimer) and other companies will struggle to match it for a long time.

    The only downside is time to market. Looks like I have to wait a year to get it in Australia!

    Oliver Weidlich
    Usability Specialist
    Ideal Interfaces Pty Ltd

    mobile: 0411 551 561
    email:
    oliverw at idealinterfaces.com.au
    iChat/AOL: oliverw at mac.com
    Y!: oliver.weidlich
    Skype: oliverweidlich
    Google Talk: oliver.weidlich

    web: www.idealinterfaces.com.au
    phone: (02) 9959 4955
    fax: (02) 9959 4977

    P.O. Box 1998, North Sydney, NSW 2059

    On 10 Jan 2007, at 6:46 AM, Leisa Reichelt wrote:

    yup. definitely game changing.
    good riddance to buttons and keys and small screens and styluses the sooner the better I say.
    here's to fingers - the input device of the future (and devices that have proximity awareness and know and react when they're moved.)

  • drooling*
    ah. gadget lust.
    :) Leisa Reichelt
    User Experience Consultant
    leisa.reichelt at gmail.com
    www.disambiguity.com

  •  
    Kevin Wong
    January 9, 2007 12:17pm

    You said it. It's all in one package. Apple really focused on the end to end interactions (go figure) and had the fortunate ability to match the hardware with the software appropriately. From what I see, their closed ecosystem approach allows current Mac users incredible leverage of their existing technologies and extended it into the cellular domain.

    I'm excited about the SMS interface. Having it look like an IM conversation is great and something that I've wished for a long time.

    I'm also excited about the sensor integration. I always remember my sister thinking about cool Canon PowerShots do the same thing when you change from landscape to portrait. Applying that application to web viewing is great. Go Apple.

    Game changing for sure. More jobs for me =P

    -Kevin

    On Jan 9, 2007, at 11:29 AM, Dan Saffer wrote:

    Drool-worthy. Nothing we haven't seen and discussed here, but to see it all in one package and commercially available is pretty cool: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs- keynote/
    Macrumors has the minute-by-minute:
    http://www.macrumorslive.com/
    Thoughts? Reactions? Game changing or not?


    Kevin Wong: Student & Blogger at UW iSchool - Social Technologist contact | kevinwong at kvwong.com - 425.894.9211 | aim - kdubz313

     
    Mona Singh
    January 9, 2007 12:19pm

    A lot of companies have had the foresight. I worked on a project doing exactly the same thing (different OS) in the 1990s at Ericsson. We had a touchscreen, all the same apps, lots of patents, but it way too early for the mass market. Another problem was that phone companies think of making phones and none of the early attempts ever cared about the whole process. Apple has this figured out and they provide free email. That means the user doesn't have to sign other contracts. That in itself will be big step in the adoption of the product.

    Technologically, I am sure they are infringing on a whole bunch of Ericsson's patents (some of them are mine) and the same must be true for other manufacturers.

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From:
    discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Broden
    Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:09 PM
    To: ixd-discussion
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    When I heard about Apple's touchscreen patent I suspected this is what the iPhone would be like Sweet, sweet vindication!

    Now that the iPhone has been announced a few of observations come to mind: 1) I think the weak link in the chain will be the operator. It doesn't matter how great the device is if you can't get reliable service where you live. My Cingular service is pretty good everywhere except my house. :-( That being the single-most frequent complaint of subscribers, it will be interesting to see if/how Apple tries to control the end-to-end experience with the iPhone.

    2) I am disappointed that no other manufacturer and/or operator has come forward to produce something like this already. None of the ideas inherent in the iPhone is all that new or different (although it appears as though Apple has executed them with its usual brilliance, of course), so why has no one in the mobile industry had the foresight/intelligence/motivation/balls to do this before now?

    3) I am a little disappointed that this is essentially a little computer (device running operating system + software applications). Yes it's also a (smart)phone with a unique interface, but I think there was an opportunity for Apple to have gone much further. Perhaps Steve doesn't want to be too radical out of the gate. Now that the iPhone is on the horizon, however, I have hopes they will push the envelope in future releases.

    -- Nancy
    nancy.broden at gmail.com


     
    Ari Feldman
    January 9, 2007 12:21pm

    actually, the really cool thing is that it's running OS X or at least a mobile edition. that's pretty significant as most phones have proprietary firmware (Samsung), Symbian (Nokia), PalmOS or Windows Mobile.

    if it's a true version of OS X, this opens up many possibilities for OS X developers as the next version of OS X is resolution independent.

    On 1/9/07, Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona at gmail.com wrote: nice to see a minimal phone for a change ^_^ Yes, it has many features, but all hided if not in use. Too expansive (considering I have a functional cellphone) and not even available in my area, but still good design to comment. The main menu resembles somewhat the Nintendo Wii "channels". related webpages:
    http://www.apple.com/iphone/
    http://www.apple.com/appletv/
    http://www.apple.com/airportextreme/


    -- http://www.flyingyogi.com

     
    Nancy Broden
    January 9, 2007 12:23pm

    So the market's ready now? What's the difference in your opinion - penetration of smartphones?

    -- Nancy
    nancy.broden at gmail.com

    On 1/9/07, Mona Singh <monas at channeladvisor.com wrote: A lot of companies have had the foresight. I worked on a project doing exactly the same thing (different OS) in the 1990s at Ericsson. We had a touchscreen, all the same apps, lots of patents, but it way too early for the mass market.

     
    Josh Viney
    January 9, 2007 12:32pm

    Re: Patents, I'm curious to know if the fact that the phone is running OSX basically does away with a lot of the potential patent issues.

    I would consider the success of the TMobile Sidekick as an indicator of the market demand for a product like this. Comparing it to a Blackberry is probably premature. From a consumer standpoint, it might be an excellent replacement, but I think businesses will be slow to adopt for a few reasons. 1. It's Apple. 2. Businesses cannot afford to provide phones/devices that enable illegal media sharing 3. It has a camera and many businesses don't even allow cameras on mobile phones 4. Price.

    The more I look at it, the more I like it. My developers are already buzzing about creating applications/widgets for it, and I'm sure they're not the only ones.

  • Josh Viney
  • On 1/9/07, Mona Singh <monas at channeladvisor.com wrote: A lot of companies have had the foresight. I worked on a project doing exactly the same thing (different OS) in the 1990s at Ericsson. We had a touchscreen, all the same apps, lots of patents, but it way too early for the mass market. Another problem was that phone companies think of making phones and none of the early attempts ever cared about the whole process. Apple has this figured out and they provide free email. That means the user doesn't have to sign other contracts. That in itself will be big step in the adoption of the product.
    Technologically, I am sure they are infringing on a whole bunch of Ericsson's patents (some of them are mine) and the same must be true for other manufacturers.
    -----

    Original Message -----
    From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Broden
    Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:09 PM
    To: ixd-discussion
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    When I heard about Apple's touchscreen patent I suspected this is what the iPhone would be like Sweet, sweet vindication! Now that the iPhone has been announced a few of observations come to mind:
    1) I think the weak link in the chain will be the operator. It doesn't matter how great the device is if you can't get reliable service where you live. My Cingular service is pretty good everywhere except my house. :-( That being the single-most frequent complaint of subscribers, it will be interesting to see if/how Apple tries to control the end-to-end experience with the iPhone. 2) I am disappointed that no other manufacturer and/or operator has come forward to produce something like this already. None of the ideas inherent in the iPhone is all that new or different (although it appears as though Apple has executed them with its usual brilliance, of course), so why has no one in the mobile industry had the foresight/intelligence/motivation/balls to do this before now? 3) I am a little disappointed that this is essentially a little computer (device running operating system + software applications). Yes it's also a (smart)phone with a unique interface, but I think there was an opportunity for Apple to have gone much further. Perhaps Steve doesn't want to be too radical out of the gate. Now that the iPhone is on the horizon, however, I have hopes they will push the envelope in future releases.
    -- Nancy
    nancy.broden at gmail.com



     
    Rutter, Mike
    January 9, 2007 12:36pm

    I'm not sure how the multi-touch works for selecting links. I looked at the demo on apple's site and they showed a user zooming in on the newspaper and navigating the page with their finger, but how would you select a link from a list of links. How good is target acquisition?

    Also, it looks great with a few widgets, but what if I had 50 widgets? How does the main UI scale? Can you scroll down?

    --Mike Rutter

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From:
    discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Kimberly Weaver
    Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 1:00 PM
    To: ixd-discussion
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    I'm a little curious about the "multi-tap" interface

    While I see the benefits of multi-touch on a large screen for gestures or multi-user interaction. I'm not sure of its benefit on a small device such as the iPhone.

    I like the accelerometer which tells the iPhone whether it should display in
    portrait or landscape mode. I also like the freedom of interaction design
    due to the lack of physical buttons.

    Kim


     
    Alok Jain
    January 9, 2007 12:43pm

    I love the phone, wondering who is the target audiance. who do you think it is.

    Regards
    Alok Jain

     
    Nasir Barday
    January 9, 2007 12:53pm

    Alok, this seems like one of those products that isn't really targetted to one audience (persona?). As mentioned earlier, I'd say it's not targetted specifically to business users. But I could still see a business user picking one up, provided their company is ok with cameras and flash devices. The pricing makes it a premium-creme-de-la-creme-rich-kid-on-the-block device ($500 for a phone *after* two-year contract??), but if you look at it as an iPod+smartphone, maybe not so out-of-reach.

    Also, it looks like Engadget answered your last question, Dan: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/the-game-has-changed/

  • Nasir
  •  
    Brian Williams
    January 9, 2007 1:05pm

    Thats easy. The target audience is Mr Jobs. All Apple products are designed using one living persona. Seems to work :)

    Brian

    On Jan 9, 2007, at 12:43, Alok Jain wrote:

    I love the phone, wondering who is the target audiance. who do you think it is.
    Regards
    Alok Jain

     
    Phil Chung
    January 9, 2007 1:15pm

    Considering the iPhone is really for the consumer market, I think Apple is making a big mistake releasing it for Cingular only, particularly with the new Copyright Office ruling on unlocked phones. Can anyone explain the rationale behind this decision? I want this but am unwilling to switch carriers to get it. Also, "multitouch" is great, but I also think cell phones should make greater use of voice commands. I'm hoping some of the speech control features in OS X carry over.

    Phil Chung

    -----

    Original Message ----
    From: Alok Jain <
    alok.ajain1 at gmail.com
    To: ixd-discussion <discuss at ixdg.org
    Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2007 3:43:52 PM
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    I love the phone, wondering who is the target audiance. who do you think it is.

    Regards
    Alok Jain


    [snip]

    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

     
    Nasir Barday
    January 9, 2007 1:21pm

    Has everyone read Mark Weiser's 1994 Scientific American Article on Ubiquitous Computing? He introduces a few scenarios for bringing computing off the desktop:
    http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/SciAmDraft3.html

    Long article, but the relevant part here is his idea for display form factors: tabs (post-it-sized), pads (clipboard-sized), and boards (whiteboard-sized). His idea was that people could work at their desks on a pad-sized device, use a tab device as extra display real-estate, and when it's time to go to a meeting, work can be "minimized" to the tab and carried to a board device in the meeting room.

    Since it runs the same OS as some modern-day "pads" and "boards, " I could see the iPhone realized as a tab:

  • Minimize currently open pages, documents, etc to the phone for viewing on the train
  • Take iPhone to the conference room for presentation on the "board"
  • Since the "board" is just a large display running off the iPhone, notes, scribbles, meeting audio, etc. could be captured directly to it and carried back to the desk for archiving, etc.
  • Use the iPhone display as an auxilliary display at the desk (kind of covered already with the widgets idea)
  • Tangent: Take advantage of the unique input capabilities and create novel interactions for apps on desktops. Musicians are already using the touch surface on the Nintendo DS and the accelerometers in the Wii-mote to make their digital music environments more playable.
  • Nasir
  •  
    Robert Barlow-Busch
    January 9, 2007 1:28pm

    Lovin' a lot of things about the iPhone. But something I'm sure we'll miss is the tactile feel of buttons under our fingers. Being able to feel the buttons means we don't need to pay *quite* as much attention visually when, say, dialing a number. That will be a killer patent: a touch screen whose topography can change slightly to mimic features on the display. [Waiting hopefully for someone to point out this already exists in a lab somewhere.]

    -- Robert Barlow-Busch
    Practice Director, Interaction Design
    Quarry Integrated Communications Inc.
    rbarlowbusch at quarry.com
    (519) 570-2020

     
    Robert Barlow-Busch
    January 9, 2007 1:28pm

    Did Jobs mention anything about voice recognition or speech-to-text? If it's running OSX, the latter is already built in. So those SMS messages or emails could be read to us.

    -- Robert Barlow-Busch
    Practice Director, Interaction Design
    Quarry Integrated Communications Inc.
    rbarlowbusch at quarry.com
    (519) 570-2020

     
    Vishal Iyer
    January 9, 2007 1:30pm

    iPhone unveiled as all things to all
    users<
    http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/09/technology/apple_jobs/index.htm?cnn=yes (http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/09/technology/apple_jobs/index.htm?cnn=yes)

    And you thought targeted design works best :)

    -Vishal

    On 1/9/07, Alok Jain <alok.ajain1 at gmail.com wrote: I love the phone, wondering who is the target audiance. who do you think it is.
    Regards
    Alok Jain


     
    Michael Tuminello
    January 9, 2007 1:34pm

    What I am interested to see is how the multi-touching will interface with the standard client-side UI technologies we are used to like Javascript and Flash - onMouseDown will be insufficient - we'll need onFinger1Down and so on I imagine. Will Safari and Flash adapt to provide this by June as well?

    If all this is implemented by June it will make it a very fun platform to play around with.

    MT

    On Jan 9, 2007, at 4:28 PM, Robert Barlow-Busch wrote:

    Lovin' a lot of things about the iPhone. But something I'm sure we'll miss is the tactile feel of buttons under our fingers. Being able to feel the buttons means we don't need to pay *quite* as much attention visually when, say, dialing a number. That will be a killer patent: a touch screen whose topography can change slightly to mimic features on the display. [Waiting hopefully for someone to point out this already exists in a lab somewhere.]
    -- Robert Barlow-Busch
    Practice Director, Interaction Design
    Quarry Integrated Communications Inc.
    rbarlowbusch at quarry.com
    (519) 570-2020


     
    Robert Barlow-Busch
    January 9, 2007 1:34pm

    Completing my flurry of posts.

    Apple could pull an iPod Shuffle-like move with the iPhone. What we saw today is a fully-loaded gadget: now let's see the iPhone Mini, with a screen only big enough to accommodate the keypad and no iPod or internet. At a much reduced price. Just the basics: make and receive calls + voicemail.

    Not likely, but the Shuffle was considered a bold move at the time (and a stupid move by many).

    -- Robert Barlow-Busch
    Practice Director, Interaction Design
    Quarry Integrated Communications Inc.
    rbarlowbusch at quarry.com
    (519) 570-2020

     
    Vishal Iyer
    January 9, 2007 1:45pm

    On a different note, the market and dynamics of the cell phone industry is very different than what the mp3 player industry was. Also, Comparisons will obviously arise with the iPod (dunno if its a good or a bad thing).What do you think will be the impact of the iPhone?

    Vishal

    On 1/9/07, Michael Tuminello <mt at motiontek.com wrote: What I am interested to see is how the multi-touching will interface with the standard client-side UI technologies we are used to like Javascript and Flash - onMouseDown will be insufficient - we'll need onFinger1Down and so on I imagine. Will Safari and Flash adapt to provide this by June as well?
    If all this is implemented by June it will make it a very fun platform to play around with.
    MT On Jan 9, 2007, at 4:28 PM, Robert Barlow-Busch wrote: Lovin' a lot of things about the iPhone. But something I'm sure we'll miss is the tactile feel of buttons under our fingers. Being able to feel the buttons means we don't need to pay *quite* as much attention visually when, say, dialing a number. That will be a killer patent: a touch screen whose topography can change slightly to mimic features on the display. [Waiting hopefully for someone to point out this already exists in a lab somewhere.]
    -- Robert Barlow-Busch
    Practice Director, Interaction Design
    Quarry Integrated Communications Inc.
    rbarlowbusch at quarry.com
    (519) 570-2020



     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 9, 2007 2:05pm

    Apple has a patent related to modular touch-feedback "panels" that rest on touch-sensitive screens. it is on ArsTechnica.

    2007/1/9, Robert Barlow-Busch <rbarlowbusch en quarry.com: Lovin' a lot of things about the iPhone. But something I'm sure we'll miss is the tactile feel of buttons under our fingers. Being able to feel the buttons means we don't need to pay *quite* as much attention visually when, say, dialing a number. That will be a killer patent: a touch screen whose topography can change slightly to mimic features on the display. [Waiting hopefully for someone to point out this already exists in a lab somewhere.]
    -- Robert Barlow-Busch
    Practice Director, Interaction Design
    Quarry Integrated Communications Inc.
    rbarlowbusch en quarry.com
    (519) 570-2020


    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Mark Bardsley
    January 9, 2007 2:06pm

    IANAL but I play one on discussion lists.

    I don't think the fact that it is running a version of OS X would do away with patent issues (at least not most). If someone patents a way to display SMS text messaging it shouldn't matter what OS the design technique is coded for/on.

    People are talking about infringing patents and so forth. Who is to say that Apple didn't get permission to use some ideas or arranged a transfer of money for said privilege? That said, in cases such as these patent infringement concerns, an analysis is probably given "due diligence" then forgiveness is sought, if need be which of course is often easier than seeking permission. What's a million dollars here and there to cover a product that brings in a billion dollars?

  • Mark Bardsley
  • -----

    Original Message -----
    From:
    discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Josh Viney Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:32 PM
    To: ixd-discussion
    Subject: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    Re: Patents, I'm curious to know if the fact that the phone is running OSX basically does away with a lot of the potential patent issues.

    I would consider the success of the TMobile Sidekick as an indicator of the market demand for a product like this. Comparing it to a Blackberry is probably premature. From a consumer standpoint, it might be an excellent replacement, but I think businesses will be slow to adopt for a few reasons. 1. It's Apple. 2. Businesses cannot afford to provide phones/devices that enable illegal media sharing 3. It has a camera and many businesses don't even allow cameras on mobile phones 4. Price.

    The more I look at it, the more I like it. My developers are already buzzing about creating applications/widgets for it, and I'm sure they're not the only ones.

  • Josh Viney
  • On 1/9/07, Mona Singh <monas at channeladvisor.com wrote: A lot of companies have had the foresight. I worked on a project doing exactly the same thing (different OS) in the 1990s at Ericsson. We had a touchscreen, all the same apps, lots of patents, but it way too early for the mass market. Another problem was that phone companies think of making phones and none of the early attempts ever cared about the whole process. Apple has this figured out and they provide free email. That means the user doesn't have to sign other contracts. That in itself will be big step in the adoption of the product.
    Technologically, I am sure they are infringing on a whole bunch of Ericsson's patents (some of them are mine) and the same must be true for other manufacturers.
    -----

    Original Message -----
    From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Broden
    Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:09 PM
    To: ixd-discussion
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    When I heard about Apple's touchscreen patent I suspected this is what the iPhone would be like Sweet, sweet vindication! Now that the iPhone has been announced a few of observations come to mind:
    1) I think the weak link in the chain will be the operator. It doesn't matter how great the device is if you can't get reliable service where you live. My Cingular service is pretty good everywhere except my house. :-( That being the single-most frequent complaint of subscribers, it will be interesting to see if/how Apple tries to control the end-to-end experience with the iPhone. 2) I am disappointed that no other manufacturer and/or operator has come forward to produce something like this already. None of the ideas inherent in the iPhone is all that new or different (although it appears as though Apple has executed them with its usual brilliance, of course), so why has no one in the mobile industry had the foresight/intelligence/motivation/balls to do this before now? 3) I am a little disappointed that this is essentially a little computer (device running operating system + software applications). Yes it's also a (smart)phone with a unique interface, but I think there was an opportunity for Apple to have gone much further. Perhaps Steve doesn't want to be too radical out of the gate. Now that the iPhone is on the horizon, however, I have hopes they will push the envelope in future releases.
    -- Nancy
    nancy.broden at gmail.com





     
    Jim Drew
    January 9, 2007 2:57pm

    I wonder how much this will suffer from "the mouse with no up" syndrome? (Remember the iMac hockey pucks?) From what I can see from the Apple homepage and such, it looks like it could be easy to grab it out of your pocket and get up/down switched, trying to listen from the voice pickup.

    I gather than there are buttons on the side which may help, like when they add the divot to the hockey puck mouse, but I still expect that the clean and symmetric form factor is a small detriment there.

    (Not that a little thing like that stops be from ohh aah wanting one!)

    -- Jim
    Seattle

     
    pauric
    January 9, 2007 3:22pm

    Changing the rules of the game? hell yes, visualise the 3 markets of mp3 players, pda's & phones as a Venn diagram. They've taken a step from their turf in to the middle sweet spot with a design that is heads and shoulders above anything that can be found in the individual segments.

    Interface aside. I didn't see mention of battery life, a fairly critical checkbox for the three product types this combines. I expect this to spend a lot of its life in a dock, expect another wave of accessories too!

    I'm also concerned about this being a jack of all trades, Apple laptops have a reputation of poor 802.11 reception. That's an awful lot of tech in a slender package. A wireless communication device without a good, dedicated, aerial better better have some alien technology if its going to work where cingular is already weak on phones designed specifically for the job.

    I missed the bit about where the camera was. Can this be used as a video phone? If its on the back I'm going to invent the iPeriscope

     
    Phil Chung
    January 9, 2007 3:28pm

    Yes, I think it will be interesting to see how well this phone does with its many features, if it doesn't perform well as a basic phone (e.g., poor reception, battery life), which goes back to the issue of carrier. Apple missed a major user need by not allowing for wireless carrier preferences. Despite the fact that they have the largest network, a lot of people hate Cingular (like myself).

    Phil

    -----

    Original Message ----
    From: pauric <
    radiorental at gmail.com
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2007 6:22:06 PM
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    Changing the rules of the game? hell yes, visualise the 3 markets of mp3 players, pda's & phones as a Venn diagram. They've taken a step from their turf in to the middle sweet spot with a design that is heads and shoulders above anything that can be found in the individual segments.

    Interface aside. I didn't see mention of battery life, a fairly critical checkbox for the three product types this combines. I expect this to spend a lot of its life in a dock, expect another wave of accessories too!

    I'm also concerned about this being a jack of all trades, Apple laptops have a reputation of poor 802.11 reception. That's an awful lot of tech in a slender package. A wireless communication device without a good, dedicated, aerial better better have some alien technology if its going to work where cingular is already weak on phones designed specifically for the job.

    I missed the bit about where the camera was. Can this be used as a video phone? If its on the back I'm going to invent the iPeriscope


    [snip]

    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

     
    Sharma, Amit (SMO)(Innova)
    January 9, 2007 3:31pm

    Here's a quote from the keynote on the battery life.

    "Battery life: "A lot of these phones have low battery life. We've managed to get 5 hours of battery of talk time, video, and browsing. 16 hours of audio playback."

    Amit

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From:
    discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com]On Behalf Of pauric
    Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:22 PM
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    Changing the rules of the game? hell yes, visualise the 3 markets of mp3 players, pda's & phones as a Venn diagram. They've taken a step from their turf in to the middle sweet spot with a design that is heads and shoulders above anything that can be found in the individual segments.

    Interface aside. I didn't see mention of battery life, a fairly critical checkbox for the three product types this combines. I expect this to spend a lot of its life in a dock, expect another wave of accessories too!

    I'm also concerned about this being a jack of all trades, Apple laptops have a reputation of poor 802.11 reception. That's an awful lot of tech in a slender package. A wireless communication device without a good, dedicated, aerial better better have some alien technology if its going to work where cingular is already weak on phones designed specifically for the job.

    I missed the bit about where the camera was. Can this be used as a video phone? If its on the back I'm going to invent the iPeriscope


    Notice: All email and instant messages (including attachments) sent to or from Franklin Templeton Investments (FTI) personnel may be retained, monitored and/or reviewed by FTI and its agents, or authorized law enforcement personnel, without further notice or consent.

     
    pauric
    January 9, 2007 4:00pm

    cool!! I'll take two!

    one for each hand

    On 1/9/07, Sharma, Amit (SMO)(Innova) <ASharma4 at frk.com wrote: Here's a quote from the keynote on the battery life. "Battery life: "A lot of these phones have low battery life. We've managed to get 5 hours of battery of talk time, video, and browsing. 16 hours of audio playback."
    Amit -----

    Original Message -----
    From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com]On Behalf Of pauric
    Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:22 PM
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    Changing the rules of the game? hell yes, visualise the 3 markets of mp3 players, pda's & phones as a Venn diagram. They've taken a step from their
    turf in to the middle sweet spot with a design that is heads and shoulders above anything that can be found in the individual segments. Interface aside. I didn't see mention of battery life, a fairly critical checkbox for the three product types this combines. I expect this to spend
    a lot of its life in a dock, expect another wave of accessories too! I'm also concerned about this being a jack of all trades, Apple laptops have a reputation of poor 802.11 reception. That's an awful lot of tech in a slender package. A wireless communication device without a good, dedicated,
    aerial better better have some alien technology if its going to work where cingular is already weak on phones designed specifically for the job. I missed the bit about where the camera was. Can this be used as a video phone? If its on the back I'm going to invent the iPeriscope


    Notice: All email and instant messages (including attachments) sent to or from Franklin Templeton Investments (FTI) personnel may be retained, monitored and/or reviewed by FTI and its agents, or authorized law enforcement personnel, without further notice or consent.

    -- Jnr. designabilityhitect & interinfofaceactioneer. The more I learn, the less I seem to know.

     
    Kevin Wong
    January 9, 2007 4:28pm

    Funny you mentioned this because this is an article I read last night for class.

    Now just imagine, since the iPhone is running on OS X, then some networking capabilities like Bon Jour may enable ad hoc networking capabilities similar to the Zune and even your/friend/mom/coworker's computer to share content. Make friends, make it "social." Share music as much as you want on a network like iTunes allows on networks.

    Another thought reading over the "auxiliary display" portion: docking an iPhone with your Mac could also work like Windows "SideShow." Remote control your computer from the iPhone or display other content stored on your primary Mac from the iPhone.

    -Kevin

    On Jan 9, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Nasir Barday wrote:

    Has everyone read Mark Weiser's 1994 Scientific American Article on Ubiquitous Computing? He introduces a few scenarios for bringing computing
    off the desktop:
    http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/SciAmDraft3.html Long article, but the relevant part here is his idea for display form factors: tabs (post-it-sized), pads (clipboard-sized), and boards (whiteboard-sized). His idea was that people could work at their desks on a
    pad-sized device, use a tab device as extra display real-estate, and when
    it's time to go to a meeting, work can be "minimized" to the tab and carried
    to a board device in the meeting room.
    Since it runs the same OS as some modern-day "pads" and "boards, " I could
    see the iPhone realized as a tab:
    - Minimize currently open pages, documents, etc to the phone for viewing on
    the train
    - Take iPhone to the conference room for presentation on the "board" - Since the "board" is just a large display running off the iPhone, notes,
    scribbles, meeting audio, etc. could be captured directly to it and carried
    back to the desk for archiving, etc.
    - Use the iPhone display as an auxilliary display at the desk (kind of covered already with the widgets idea)
    - Tangent: Take advantage of the unique input capabilities and create novel
    interactions for apps on desktops. Musicians are already using the touch
    surface on the Nintendo DS and the accelerometers in the Wii-mote to make
    their digital music environments more playable.
    - Nasir


     
    Kevin Wong
    January 9, 2007 4:36pm

    That's a very good point. Empirically, Apple has a reputation to push the envelope with adopting newer technologies and techniques (sort of). To me this is just another example of just that attitude. Gesturing however may only be limited to hand held devices or short tasks since it isn't a great usability feature for extended periods of time if it was developed for people who interact with gestures on their laptop or desktop. Nonetheless, Adobe and other developers will have to start building a framework to support this before even more fun begins.

    -kvw

    On Jan 9, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Michael Tuminello wrote:

    What I am interested to see is how the multi-touching will interface with the standard client-side UI technologies we are used to like Javascript and Flash - onMouseDown will be insufficient - we'll need onFinger1Down and so on I imagine. Will Safari and Flash adapt to provide this by June as well?
    If all this is implemented by June it will make it a very fun platform to play around with.
    MT


     
    Dmitry Nekrasovski
    January 9, 2007 5:01pm

    On 1/9/07, Robert Barlow-Busch <rbarlowbusch at quarry.com wrote:

    <snip

    That will be a killer patent: a
    touch screen whose topography can change slightly to mimic features on the display. [Waiting hopefully for someone to point out this already exists in a lab somewhere.]
    It sure does, and has for a few years now. :)

    http://www.csl.sony.co.jp/person/poup/e-library/2003/uist2003_tactilesmalldisplay.pdf

    Dmitry

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 9, 2007 5:45pm

    Yes, the iPhone is a product in the middle of that Venn diagram. but that leaves many holes. Why no (international, withouth phone functionality) widescreen iPod?

    2007/1/9, pauric <radiorental en gmail.com:
    Changing the rules of the game? hell yes, visualise the 3 markets of mp3 players, pda's & phones as a Venn diagram. They've taken a step from their
    turf in to the middle sweet spot with a design that is heads and shoulders above anything that can be found in the individual segments. Interface aside. I didn't see mention of battery life, a fairly critical checkbox for the three product types this combines. I expect this to spend
    a lot of its life in a dock, expect another wave of accessories too! I'm also concerned about this being a jack of all trades, Apple laptops have a reputation of poor 802.11 reception. That's an awful lot of tech in a slender package. A wireless communication device without a good, dedicated,
    aerial better better have some alien technology if its going to work where cingular is already weak on phones designed specifically for the job. I missed the bit about where the camera was. Can this be used as a video phone? If its on the back I'm going to invent the iPeriscope


    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Jim Drew
    January 9, 2007 5:52pm

    From: Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona at gmail.com Yes, the iPhone is a product in the middle of that Venn diagram. but that leaves many holes. Why no (international, withouth phone functionality) widescreen iPod?
    Just give them time, I'm sure. All it would mean is stripping out the phone capabilities and some hardware mods off the iPhone to get to that. It was probably deemed more impressive (valuable) to put out the iPhone first.

    -- Jim

     
    pauric
    January 9, 2007 6:29pm

    My concerns are probably unfounded, to a degree. Thanks for the corrections.

    I'm completely blown away by the overall design. But, the hardware engineer in me says that in the early stages of the bell curve of new products like this, ship date is based just around the time system performance reaches an acceptable standard. I would expect that 'managed to get 5 hours of talk time' might be best case. Real world power managment might bring that figure down a little in the field with weaker signals.

    I wonder what challenges designers had balancing performance with experiences. Do they allow you to take a speaker phone call and browse the web over 802.11 at the same time? That might drain a lot of power. How much of the 8 gig is allocated to the system & apps, how much is left over for media?

    That said, Apple wouldnt announce a product with this much pride if it had a serious flaw in the experience.

    On 1/9/07, jeanpierre at gmail.com <jeanpierre at gmail.com wrote: On 1/9/07, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com wrote: I'm also concerned about this being a jack of all trades, Apple laptops have
    a reputation of poor 802.11 reception.
    had a poor reputation. now that the whole faraday cage episode is in the past (titanium powerbook past), the macbook is perhaps best-in-class for reception =)

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 9, 2007 6:39pm

    I am very impressed as well. And, I will own one - likely the second edition when:

    1) longer battery life
    2) it has removable media (db)
    3) it is available for use with a different carrier (T-mobile, Sprint, google wifi.)
    4) I understand what comes in the box and how to protect the display

    For phone, photo, audio (in and out), and video it has obvious utility. If it allows me contacts, calendar, text messaging, email and real web browsing without a laptop. it will be invaluable. Add to that word processing, spread sheet and quick sketching (the digital napkin) - I no longer need to carry a laptop. I have lightened my load considerably. Plus, I will finally be cool.

    On Jan 9, 2007, at 9:29 PM, pauric wrote:

    I'm completely blown away by the overall design.

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 9, 2007 7:49pm

    Isn't Adobe developing a hybrid Flash/pdf software? That may work as "widgets".

    2007/1/9, Kevin Wong <kevinwong en kvwong.com:
    That's a very good point. Empirically, Apple has a reputation to push the envelope with adopting newer technologies and techniques (sort of). To me this is just another example of just that attitude. Gesturing however may only be limited to hand held devices or short tasks since it isn't a great usability feature for extended periods of time if it was developed for people who interact with gestures on their laptop or desktop. Nonetheless, Adobe and other developers will have to start building a framework to support this before even more fun begins.
    -kvw On Jan 9, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Michael Tuminello wrote: What I am interested to see is how the multi-touching will interface with the standard client-side UI technologies we are used to like Javascript and Flash - onMouseDown will be insufficient - we'll need onFinger1Down and so on I imagine. Will Safari and Flash adapt to provide this by June as well?
    If all this is implemented by June it will make it a very fun platform to play around with.
    MT



    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Niklas Wolkert
    January 10, 2007 4:34am

    The most drool-worthy aspect for me is towards the lucky people who get to work with mass market products like the IPhone in cross discipline design teams of IxDers, industrial designers, graphic designers, marketing people and on top of that having the full support of one of the greatest entrepreneurs/marketing geniuses of our time.

    Get me an IClone so we can have Steve Jobs copies at more places, please!

    --Niklas

    On 1/9/07, Dan Saffer <dan at odannyboy.com wrote: Drool-worthy. Nothing we haven't seen and discussed here, but to see it all in one package and commercially available is pretty cool: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs- keynote/
    Macrumors has the minute-by-minute:
    http://www.macrumorslive.com/
    Thoughts? Reactions? Game changing or not?


     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 10, 2007 6:04am

    I was thinking, this may be a Phone. but the goal for Apple can be to make a laptop-replacement (as laptops are desktop-replacements, with almost the same capabilities .but less "power" and "features" are implied). Laptops are useful, but now it seems that portable is not enough. wearable (ie: being pocket-sized) is better.

    2007/1/10, Niklas Wolkert <niklas.wolkert en gmail.com: The most drool-worthy aspect for me is towards the lucky people who get to work with mass market products like the IPhone in cross discipline design teams of IxDers, industrial designers, graphic designers, marketing people and on top of that having the full support of one of the greatest entrepreneurs/marketing geniuses of our time. Get me an IClone so we can have Steve Jobs copies at more places, please! --Niklas

    jeje, I was thinking basically the same (minus the iClone. there have to be others that can be 'insanely great' Apple CEOs!). (senior, top, w/e) Designers at Apple work in products that are interesting (making products that are interesting/great is the best way to sell them) and get paid about $200000. That looks like a nice enough job to relocate.

    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 10, 2007 6:34am

    I completely agree.

    see: http://www.schraadsblog.com

    On Wednesday, January 10, 2007, at 09:05AM, "Esteban Barahona" <esteban.barahona at gmail.com wrote: I was thinking, this may be a Phone. but the goal for Apple can be to make a laptop-replacement (as laptops are desktop-replacements, with almost the same capabilities .but less "power" and "features" are implied). Laptops are useful, but now it seems that portable is not enough. wearable (ie: being pocket-sized) is better.
    2007/1/10, Niklas Wolkert <niklas.wolkert at gmail.com: The most drool-worthy aspect for me is towards the lucky people who get to work with mass market products like the IPhone in cross discipline design teams of IxDers, industrial designers, graphic designers, marketing people and on top of that having the full support of one of the greatest entrepreneurs/marketing geniuses of our time. Get me an IClone so we can have Steve Jobs copies at more places, please! --Niklas
    jeje, I was thinking basically the same (minus the iClone. there have to be others that can be 'insanely great' Apple CEOs!). (senior, top, w/e) Designers at Apple work in products that are interesting (making products that are interesting/great is the best way to sell them) and get paid about $200000. That looks like a nice enough job to relocate. -- http://www.zensui.org


     
    Anderson, Douglas W.
    January 10, 2007 8:51am

    Hi Josh, et al.,

    Caveat: I've only seen glossy marketing/keynote material so far but this is a device that has already moved me from deep cell/pda/mp3 complacency and inspired me to WANT.

    I look forward to finding out what its real-world capabilities become as developers create new software for the platform (and Apple releases subsequent generations of hardware & software).

    I am decidedly not rich (yet - go Apple shares, go!) but the device price doesn't strike me as a serious obstacle considering that an 8 GB Nano sells (well?) at half the price of the iPhone. The availability of carriers & coverage seems a more serious consideration. I would not be surprised to hear additional partnerships announced before June.

    As for the fingerprint issue, that's simply another opportunity. Buy stock in the company(ies) whose products Apple, nee Apple Computer, recommends for cleaning the screen. I would love to put my fingerprints on an iPhone and would take some satisfaction in cleaning same from it. OK, so I'm weird. I'm OK with that!

    Peace,
    Doug Anderson

    Opinions expressed are necessarily mine, not necessarily those of the Mayo Foundation.

    Original message:
    Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:45:00 -0500
    From: "Josh Viney" <
    jviney at gmail.com Subject: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    To: ixd-discussion <discuss at ixdg.org
    <snip

    Note: It does look like a fingerprint magnet.

  • Josh Viney
  •  
    Mark Schraad
    January 10, 2007 8:54am

    Also: look at the price in terms of another angle. If you were to purchase a new laptop. what would it cost? How much of that activity could be done on the iPhone and put in you shirt pocket?

    On Wednesday, January 10, 2007, at 11:51AM, "Anderson, Douglas W." <Anderson.Douglas at mayo.edu wrote: Hi Josh, et al.,
    Caveat: I've only seen glossy marketing/keynote material so far but this is a device that has already moved me from deep cell/pda/mp3 complacency and inspired me to WANT. I look forward to finding out what its real-world capabilities become as developers create new software for the platform (and Apple releases subsequent generations of hardware & software). I am decidedly not rich (yet - go Apple shares, go!) but the device price doesn't strike me as a serious obstacle considering that an 8 GB Nano sells (well?) at half the price of the iPhone. The availability of carriers & coverage seems a more serious consideration. I would not be surprised to hear additional partnerships announced before June. As for the fingerprint issue, that's simply another opportunity. Buy stock in the company(ies) whose products Apple, nee Apple Computer, recommends for cleaning the screen. I would love to put my fingerprints on an iPhone and would take some satisfaction in cleaning same from it. OK, so I'm weird. I'm OK with that! Peace,
    Doug Anderson
    Opinions expressed are necessarily mine, not necessarily those of the Mayo Foundation. Original message:
    Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:45:00 -0500
    From: "Josh Viney" <jviney at gmail.com Subject: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    To: ixd-discussion <discuss at ixdg.org
    <snip
    Note: It does look like a fingerprint magnet.

  • Josh Viney

  •  
    Rich Holman
    January 10, 2007 8:56am

    How long before the iFingerSock is created?

    On 10/01/07, Mark Schraad <mschraad at mac.com wrote: Also: look at the price in terms of another angle. If you were to purchase a new laptop. what would it cost? How much of that activity could be done on the iPhone and put in you shirt pocket?
    As for the fingerprint issue, that's simply another opportunity. Buy stock in the company(ies) whose products Apple, nee Apple Computer, recommends for cleaning the screen. I would love to put my fingerprints on an iPhone and would take some satisfaction in cleaning same from it. OK, so I'm weird. I'm OK with that!
    Peace,
    Doug Anderson
    -

     
    pauric
    January 10, 2007 9:39am

    There's a fundamental difference between a laptop (replacement) and a phone. A phone inherently requires an always on status. Laptops can be completely switched off, or sent to deep sleep standby. I did not see a phone standby time figure quoted. I'll assume its not far off the 16 hours of audio playback. That means the entire 'experience' also involves charging it at -least- once a day. Probably more if you put in an hour or two on the web and working email, maybe the odd phone call. The current experience is well suited to the price tag/market. High end power users in an always connected environment.

    What I'm really excited about is the UI of the future consumer level device, iPhone Nano. The product will be;
    Better suited to being a real phone,
    Something you can throw in your bag,
    Less likely to have you burst in to a freakish cold sweat when you scratch it Lasts more than a day on one charge.

    My personal view on this being a laptop replacement - high flouting shinnanigans. I've had a Sharp Zaurus for years, the form factor is far too small to be seriously productive.

    On 1/10/07, Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona at gmail.com wrote: I was thinking, this may be a Phone. but the goal for Apple can be to make a laptop-replacement (as laptops are desktop-replacements, with almost the same capabilities .but less "power" and "features" are implied). Laptops are useful, but now it seems that portable is not enough. wearable (ie: being pocket-sized) is better.

     
    Jeremy Wood
    January 10, 2007 10:13am

    When I sense a great deal of optimism, I feel it my duty to add some gloom to the table. :) Just to balance the yin-yang of it all. I think iPhone is nice, but not "great".

    Here's another interesting article on the iPhone:

    http://apcmag.com/4965/top_10_things_to_hate_about_the_iphone

    My thoughts:
    1. I'm not buying a first generation iPhone. Remember the Razr phone? Months of hype, then it was released and several (but not all) customers were displeased with how much everything cost. (Apple, wireless providers, music manufacturers, maybe even those crazy musicians all wanted a slice of the mp3 sales).

    The design of the iPhone looks great, and the graphics look *amazing*. It is an achievement worth celebrating. But is it an achievement I'm willing to pay $500 for? :) Plus if Cingular is the only carrier for the first year or two. they're pretty free to charge whatever they want. don't think your expenses stop at purchasing the phone.

    2. I think its a great product, but I don't think Jobs deserves to be hailed as anything special. We've all seen this coming: some combination of phone, mp3 player, camera, computer all-in-one. But I think this is a well-timed (and well-designed) product, and that all the pieces are ready to come together now. Hopefully later generations of this product will see more than a 2 megapixel camera. I'm sure once competition forms we'll see some nice innovations.

    I remember my sister came back from Japan a few years ago, and was describing their amazing new camera phones (long before we had them). They were, what, 1 year ahead of us? 2? More? It might be worth just looking at a list of current Japanese trends to see what's possibly on the horizon for new phones/mini-computers in the future: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_mobile_phone_culture# Features

    Examples include: radio, GPS navigation, financial services (credit-card swiping/replacement), use as public transportation tickets, fingerprint recognition.

    (I love the idea of fingerprint recognition. another big concern I have with the iPhone is: if it's stolen: there goes a LOT of my personal info, yes? And my music, and movies.)

    3. Douglas mentioned that he's interested in seeing what developers create for the iPhone. There's a lot of buzz on the java-dev list about that idea right now (all of it rumors: of course Apple tells us nothing. the device isn't even FCC approved yet). But among the excitement, there are also articles like this:
    http://www.tuaw.com/2007/01/09/iphone-will-not-allow-user-installable- applications/

    4. As our company is focused on desktop applications, some of us are groaning at the announcement that Apple is dropping "Computer" from its name. :( Our developers get poor support as it is from Apple: if Apple diverts more time & attention into non-Mac products, then we assume that means even less attention/acknowledgement of our bug reports/concerns.

    Say what you want about XP vs OS X: our developers love the fact that XP has been around for years and is *stable*. I think we've filed 1 bug with Microsoft about XP. we've filed at least 20 bugs with Apple. (And we'd file more if Apple was more responsive; instead we immediately look for work-arounds, because we assume talking to Apple is fruitless.) It's early to say, but we hope Vista gives us the same stability.

    I am looking forward to getting an iPhone -- or some similar competing product -- someday. Not yet, though.

  • Jeremy
  • On Jan 10, 2007, at 8:54 AM, Mark Schraad wrote:

    Also: look at the price in terms of another angle. If you were to purchase a new laptop. what would it cost? How much of that activity could be done on the iPhone and put in you shirt pocket? On Wednesday, January 10, 2007, at 11:51AM, "Anderson, Douglas W." <Anderson.Douglas at mayo.edu wrote:
    Hi Josh, et al.,
    Caveat: I've only seen glossy marketing/keynote material so far but this is a device that has already moved me from deep cell/pda/mp3 complacency and inspired me to WANT.
    I look forward to finding out what its real-world capabilities become as developers create new software for the platform (and Apple releases subsequent generations of hardware & software). I am decidedly not rich (yet - go Apple shares, go!) but the device price doesn't strike me as a serious obstacle considering that an 8 GB Nano sells (well?) at half the price of the iPhone. The availability of carriers & coverage seems a more serious consideration. I would not be surprised to hear additional partnerships announced before June.
    As for the fingerprint issue, that's simply another opportunity. Buy stock in the company(ies) whose products Apple, nee Apple Computer, recommends for cleaning the screen. I would love to put my fingerprints on an iPhone and would take some satisfaction in cleaning same from it. OK, so I'm weird. I'm OK with that! Peace,
    Doug Anderson
    Opinions expressed are necessarily mine, not necessarily those of the Mayo Foundation.
    Original message:
    Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:45:00 -0500
    From: "Josh Viney" <jviney at gmail.com Subject: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    To: ixd-discussion <discuss at ixdg.org
    <snip
    Note: It does look like a fingerprint magnet.
    - Josh Viney



     
    Lorne Trudeau
    January 10, 2007 10:29am

    Thanks for the splash of cold water Jeremy, I think we all need it. I agree 100% with point # 1. Apple is a fantastic R&D company but their first generation hardware is notoriously bad. I say let the early adopters suffer through the growth pains on this one. Also, in the linked article ("Top 10 things to hate .") # 3 is a HUGE issue: built-in battery. Who ever thought that was a good idea? Honestly. They can get away with it in the iPods, but not in this hardware. That needs to be addressed ASAP.
    Lorne

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From:
    discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Wood
    Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:14 AM
    To: IxD Mailinglist
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    When I sense a great deal of optimism, I feel it my duty to add some gloom to the table. :) Just to balance the yin-yang of it all. I think iPhone is nice, but not "great".

    Here's another interesting article on the iPhone:

    http://apcmag.com/4965/top_10_things_to_hate_about_the_iphone

    My thoughts:
    1. I'm not buying a first generation iPhone. Remember the Razr phone?

    Months of hype, then it was released and several (but not all) customers were displeased with how much everything cost. (Apple, wireless providers, music manufacturers, maybe even those crazy musicians all wanted a slice of the mp3 sales).

    The design of the iPhone looks great, and the graphics look *amazing*.

    It is an achievement worth celebrating. But is it an achievement I'm willing to pay $500 for? :) Plus if Cingular is the only carrier for the first year or two. they're pretty free to charge whatever they want. don't think your expenses stop at purchasing the phone.

    2. I think its a great product, but I don't think Jobs deserves to be hailed as anything special. We've all seen this coming: some combination of phone, mp3 player, camera, computer all-in-one. But I think this is a well-timed (and well-designed) product, and that all the pieces are ready to come together now. Hopefully later generations

    of this product will see more than a 2 megapixel camera. I'm sure once competition forms we'll see some nice innovations.

    I remember my sister came back from Japan a few years ago, and was describing their amazing new camera phones (long before we had them). They were, what, 1 year ahead of us? 2? More? It might be worth just

    looking at a list of current Japanese trends to see what's possibly on the horizon for new phones/mini-computers in the future: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_mobile_phone_culture# Features

    Examples include: radio, GPS navigation, financial services (credit-card swiping/replacement), use as public transportation tickets, fingerprint recognition.

    (I love the idea of fingerprint recognition. another big concern I have with the iPhone is: if it's stolen: there goes a LOT of my personal info, yes? And my music, and movies.)

    3. Douglas mentioned that he's interested in seeing what developers create for the iPhone. There's a lot of buzz on the java-dev list about that idea right now (all of it rumors: of course Apple tells us nothing. the device isn't even FCC approved yet). But among the excitement, there are also articles like this:
    http://www.tuaw.com/2007/01/09/iphone-will-not-allow-user-installable- applications/

    4. As our company is focused on desktop applications, some of us are groaning at the announcement that Apple is dropping "Computer" from its

    name. :( Our developers get poor support as it is from Apple: if Apple diverts more time & attention into non-Mac products, then we assume that means even less attention/acknowledgement of our bug reports/concerns.

    Say what you want about XP vs OS X: our developers love the fact that XP has been around for years and is *stable*. I think we've filed 1 bug with Microsoft about XP. we've filed at least 20 bugs with Apple.

    (And we'd file more if Apple was more responsive; instead we immediately look for work-arounds, because we assume talking to Apple is fruitless.) It's early to say, but we hope Vista gives us the same stability.

    I am looking forward to getting an iPhone -- or some similar competing product -- someday. Not yet, though.

  • Jeremy
  •  
    Phil Chung
    January 10, 2007 10:48am

    There's no way this could ever be a laptop replacement with its proposed feature set (e.g., no document editing), nor do I think its designers intended it as such. It's clearly a consumer product -- merging iPod and smart phone, but surpassing neither in depth of functionality, at least in this first iteration. It won't hold as many songs as an iPod, and I don't expect the touch keypad to be faster than a Blackberry keypad (and generate more errors). Is there really an iPhone Nano, or is that rumor? Do you have any more information on it?

    The iPhone is obviously high on the "cool factor" though and, with its multi-touch interface, rides the wave of gadgets featuring new methods of interaction, like the iPod or the Nintendo DS Lite and Wii. And despite the first gen problems many Apple products seem to have, if it turns out to be as user friendly as the iPod, this phone will still sell like hotcakes (especially in
    Asia and Europe), simply for the fact that its sexy: young people want to be seen with one. For evidence of this, simply look at how many blogs (particularly among the younger demographic) have something posted regarding the iPhone's release yesterday.

    Phil Chung

    -----

    Original Message ----
    From: pauric <
    radiorental at gmail.com
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:39:39 PM
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    There's a fundamental difference between a laptop (replacement) and a phone. A phone inherently requires an always on status. Laptops can be completely switched off, or sent to deep sleep standby. I did not see a phone standby time figure quoted. I'll assume its not far off the 16 hours of audio playback. That means the entire 'experience' also involves charging it at -least- once a day. Probably more if you put in an hour or two on the web and working email, maybe the odd phone call. The current experience is well suited to the price tag/market. High end power users in an always connected environment.

    What I'm really excited about is the UI of the future consumer level device, iPhone Nano. The product will be;
    Better suited to being a real phone,
    Something you can throw in your bag,
    Less likely to have you burst in to a freakish cold sweat when you scratch it Lasts more than a day on one charge.

    My personal view on this being a laptop replacement - high flouting shinnanigans. I've had a Sharp Zaurus for years, the form factor is far too small to be seriously productive.

    On 1/10/07, Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona at gmail.com wrote: I was thinking, this may be a Phone. but the goal for Apple can be to make a laptop-replacement (as laptops are desktop-replacements, with almost the same capabilities .but less "power" and "features" are implied). Laptops are useful, but now it seems that portable is not enough. wearable (ie: being pocket-sized) is better.


    [snip]

    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

     
    pauric
    January 10, 2007 11:28am

    "Is there really an iPhone Nano, or is that rumor? Do you have any more information on it?"

    Well, its as much a rumour as the iPhone was up until yesterday. This is standard fayre in NPI (new product introduction) you launch with an early adopter model: high price, acceptable performance. Traditionally, as that product matures your specialise the offerings, reduce cost, increase performance, etc before the product becomes commodity. However, with the patents Apple holds I dont think we'll see competition for a while, except from real phones with real buttons. I do expect to see the iPhone nano based upon an onward march to dominate the phone market as they've done with mp3 players.

    The path of 1st gen iPod to the current shuffle/nano/video is a text book example of how to take over a market. The fact that Apple has done this before is even more reason to put a currently theoretical iPhone 'nano' somewhere between rumour and roadmap fact. I'm willing to wager hard-earned on it.

    I know this was designed for Jobsy, but he doesn't wear earrings. Does the iPhone also detect those diamond studs and scream 'danger will robinson!' as you take a call. There are some hard physical limitations behind why no one has been able to put a device like this together up until now. While Apple is the only company with enough design cache to pull this off, those design limitation did not cease to exist after that presentation yesterday. You can keep your ipod in a protective case, that doesnt work for a phone, especially one with a touch sensitive display. This is a killer design but I'm still buying the simple, hardened motophone discussed on this list last month.

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 10, 2007 11:33am

    How do you know what I use my laptop for?

    On Wednesday, January 10, 2007, at 02:02PM, "Phil Chung" <gradlife79 at yahoo.com wrote: There's no way this could ever be a laptop replacement with its proposed feature set (e.g., no document editing), nor do I think its designers intended it as such. It's clearly a consumer product -- merging iPod and smart phone, but surpassing neither in depth of functionality, at least in this first iteration. It won't hold as many songs as an iPod, and I don't expect the touch keypad to be faster than a Blackberry keypad (and generate more errors). Is there really an iPhone Nano, or is that rumor? Do you have any more information on it?
    The iPhone is obviously high on the "cool factor" though and, with its multi-touch interface, rides the wave of gadgets featuring new methods of interaction, like the iPod or the Nintendo DS Lite and Wii. And despite the first gen problems many Apple products seem to have, if it turns out to be as user friendly as the iPod, this phone will still sell like hotcakes (especially in
    Asia and Europe), simply for the fact that its sexy: young people want to be seen with one. For evidence of this, simply look at how many blogs (particularly among the younger demographic) have something posted regarding the iPhone's release yesterday.
    Phil Chung
    -----

    Original Message ----
    From: pauric <radiorental at gmail.com
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:39:39 PM
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    There's a fundamental difference between a laptop (replacement) and a phone. A phone inherently requires an always on status. Laptops can be completely switched off, or sent to deep sleep standby. I did not see a phone standby time figure quoted. I'll assume its not far off the 16 hours of audio playback. That means the entire 'experience' also involves charging it at -least- once a day. Probably more if you put in an hour or two on the web and working email, maybe the odd phone call. The current experience is well suited to the price tag/market. High end power users in an always connected environment.
    What I'm really excited about is the UI of the future consumer level device, iPhone Nano. The product will be;
    Better suited to being a real phone,
    Something you can throw in your bag,
    Less likely to have you burst in to a freakish cold sweat when you scratch it Lasts more than a day on one charge.
    My personal view on this being a laptop replacement - high flouting shinnanigans. I've had a Sharp Zaurus for years, the form factor is far too small to be seriously productive.
    On 1/10/07, Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona at gmail.com wrote: I was thinking, this may be a Phone. but the goal for Apple can be to make a laptop-replacement (as laptops are desktop-replacements, with almost the same capabilities .but less "power" and "features" are implied). Laptops are useful, but now it seems that portable is not enough. wearable (ie: being pocket-sized) is better.


    [snip]

    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com


     
    Phil Chung
    January 10, 2007 11:57am

    I think most people who carry laptops require more functionality than what the iPhone offers. I can't imagine typing or even editing a document of any significant length using a virtual keypad displayed on a 3.5" screen.

    Phil Chung

    -----

    Original Message ----
    From: Mark Schraad <
    mschraad at mac.com
    To: Phil Chung <gradlife79 at yahoo.com
    Cc: discuss at ixda.org
    Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:33:43 PM
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    How do you know what I use my laptop for?

    [snip]

    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

     
    Jim Drew
    January 10, 2007 12:04pm

    From: pauric <radiorental at gmail.com
    "Is there really an iPhone Nano, or is that rumor? Do you have any more information on it?"
    I do expect to see the iPhone nano based upon an onward march to dominate the phone market as they've done with mp3 players.
    I'm waiting for the iPhone Shuffle. You press the single button and it calls someone. Your choice as to whether that's a random person in your contact list or the next person in the list. You'll need to connect to iTunes to load in and manage your preferred list.

    On the other hand, the iPhone Video -- with a built-in iSight camera -- could be pretty darn cool. (Until you forget the camera is one and give the person on the other end a closeup shot of your ear. Oh, dang, proximity sensor would solve that, huh?)

    -- Jim
    Seattle

     
    Fredrik Johansson Oviedo
    January 10, 2007 12:16pm

    Pretty cool stuff! But is the iPhone really revolutionary? The mobile phone was a revolution, sure, the flat screen TV, as well. Maybe even Nintendo Wii and Playstation EyeToy are revolutionary products since the interaction differs so much compared to the traditional gamepad (still there's an evolutionary link between these two interactions, the tiltable gamepad).

    The interaction through touchscreen in mobile phones has existed for quite a while now, so that's nothing new really. However, previous touchscreen based mobile phones are designed to be used with a stylus, except for Neonode and maybe a few others. So then again, where's the revolution Apple claims to have made with the iPhone?

    I would say there is none! I would argue that iPhone is a natural evolution based on the revolutionary touchscreen capability and a portable media player. iPhone is a fine example of the kind of consumer products that todays technology allows to be produced at a reasonable cost. It also shows the possibilities for what one can do with interaction design and animation to increase understandability.

    //Fredrik Johansson Oviedo

     
    Jim Drew
    January 10, 2007 12:24pm

    From: pauric <radiorental at gmail.com
    There's a fundamental difference between a laptop (replacement) and a phone. A phone inherently requires an always on status. Laptops can be completely switched off, or sent to deep sleep standby.
    I think that's an old school was of thinking, with current energy saver techniques shifting away from it.

  • I often turn my phone completely off -- movie theaters, airplanes, ultra low battery, just when I don't want to bother with it -- or at least as off as it can be without pulling the battery. (As off as a laptop can get. Still requires startup time.) I depend on the service remaining intact to catch voicemails and such.
  • Laptops and desktop systems are increasingly intended to not be shut off. (I just got a new iMac and was intrigued by their instructions to usually Sleep it, to only power down if I'm going to be gone for more than a few days. Such a change from the days where I had to physically flip a switch on the back.)
  • The technology seems to be actively moving to where the difference between those two is blurry at best, anything but "fundamental".

    -- Jim
    Seattle

     
    Anthony Hempell
    January 10, 2007 12:29pm

    The "revolution" is taking the technology and designing and experience around it, both from the marketing and customer experience perspectives. This is where Jobs' and Apple's genius lies. The iPhone is a "natural evolution", but not so much of technology but of Apple's strategy of being the company that facilitates user's experience of digital media.

    Other phones/PDAs with the same features do not have the same commitment to industrial design and facilitating and emotional connection with their users.

    You could view the Macintosh as a mishmash of previously developed technologies, but it was the whole experience made it such a success. including the little happy face when you turned it on.

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From:
    discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss- bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Fredrik Johansson Oviedo
    Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:17 PM
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Subject: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote
    Pretty cool stuff! But is the iPhone really revolutionary? The mobile phone
    was a revolution, sure, the flat screen TV, as well. Maybe even
    Nintendo
    Wii
    and Playstation EyeToy are revolutionary products since the interaction differs so much compared to the traditional gamepad (still there's an evolutionary link between these two interactions, the
    tiltable
    gamepad).
    The interaction through touchscreen in mobile phones has existed for
    quite
    a while now, so that's nothing new really. However, previous touchscreen based
    mobile phones are designed to be used with a stylus, except for
    Neonode
    and
    maybe a few others. So then again, where's the revolution Apple claims
    to
    have made with the iPhone?
    I would say there is none! I would argue that iPhone is a natural evolution
    based on the revolutionary touchscreen capability and a portable media player. iPhone is a fine example of the kind of consumer products that todays technology allows to be produced at a reasonable cost. It also shows
    the possibilities for what one can do with interaction design and animation
    to increase understandability.
    //Fredrik Johansson Oviedo


     
    Oleh Kovalchuke
    January 10, 2007 12:31pm

    Good loking phone. From interaction point of view the proximity sensor is the coolest feature of this phone - it made the use of multitouch screen in the phone possible (or rather, useable).

    -- Oleh Kovalchuke
    Interaction Design is Design of Time
    http://www.tangospring.com/IxDtopicWhatIsInteractionDesign.htm

    On 1/10/07, Jim Drew <cfmdesigns at earthlink.net wrote: On the other hand, the iPhone Video -- with a built-in iSight camera -- could be pretty darn cool. (Until you forget the camera is one and give the person on the other end a closeup shot of your ear. Oh, dang, proximity sensor would solve that, huh?)
    -- Jim
    Seattle

     
    pauric
    January 10, 2007 12:38pm

    I would say this revolution is 1 part Mindshare, 1 part Getting the recipe right and 2 parts Multitouch display.

    You're right that this is nothing new The future is already here, but is about to become a little more evenly distributed. I'm still cautious of durability and performance but these are minor issues that will eventually be overcome.

    Jim said "I think that's an old school way of thinking, with current energy saver techniques shifting away from it." a cell phone still needs to ping in frequently to see if its being called. IT isnt magically woken up from a signal from the cell tower. Putting a phone in to a concept of 'laptop sleep' means you turn its ears off. I'm reliably informed that even when you switch off a cell phone it still pings home.

    I guess my point is there are some fundamental differences between the power operation of a laptop and a cell phone. And I have a gut feeling those differences provided some interesting challenges to designers. E.g. is the 16 hours audio time mp3 player mode only or does it include the device working its nuts off checking in with the cingular tower 10 miles away.

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 10, 2007 1:18pm

    All of the technology for the first computer existed years before it was finally put together and used as such. Revolutionary is typically not very helpful. Check out the book Diffusion of Innovations by Everett Rogers.

    You could view the Macintosh as a mishmash of previously developed technologies, but it was the whole experience made it such a success. including the little happy face when you turned it on.

     
    Brad Bonham
    January 10, 2007 1:27pm

    What Anthony says is spot on. Anyone involved with User Experience design has to really be lifting their jaws off the floor right now. The revolution will be when OS X is unleashed (in whatever form) to all the people who have an iPod or a Blackberry or a Palm but use a PC for everything else.

    The revolution will be when, on June, you pull this out, and people you've never met gather around and have you show them everything you're willing to show. The revolution will be the "Ohhh, that's so cool!" that will be uttered a thousand times over in a way the iPod hasn't even begun to witness. The Macs have had this kind of "ohhh so cool" quality for awhile, but not in a device for a market so huge that is, by nature, equipped for insanely rapid adoption.

    This thing has The Long Tail and The Tipping Point built right in, and it will turn people on to the Apple TV for the living room and maybe even a Mac Mini for the office, and all of the sudden Apple jumped into the networked economy in a way that makes the iPod seem kind of tame.

    Yes, I'm that excited about this as a revolution, and I don't even own an iPod OR a Mac, nor have I had too great an urge. But soon I will.

    Brad

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From:
    discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Hempell
    Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:29 PM
    To: Fredrik Johansson Oviedo; discuss at ixda.org
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    The "revolution" is taking the technology and designing and experience around it, both from the marketing and customer experience perspectives. This is where Jobs' and Apple's genius lies. The iPhone is a "natural evolution", but not so much of technology but of Apple's strategy of being the company that facilitates user's experience of digital media.

    Other phones/PDAs with the same features do not have the same commitment to industrial design and facilitating and emotional connection with their users.

    You could view the Macintosh as a mishmash of previously developed technologies, but it was the whole experience made it such a success. including the little happy face when you turned it on.

    * BENEFITFOCUS.COM [snip]

    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and protected by law. Unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or dissemination of this communication or its contents in any way is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this message to an intended recipient, please notify the original sender immediately by e-mail or telephone, return the original message to the original sender or to bfpostmaster at benefitfocus.com, and destroy all copies or derivations of the original message. Thank you. (BFeComNote Rev. 08/01/2005)

     
    Michael Micheletti
    January 10, 2007 1:30pm

    It's cool and sexy, but I sort of remember that the Razr used to be cool and sexy too.

    I tried using a Cingular HP iPaq "smart" phone running Windows Mobile for a while and the lack of a tactile finger-sized numeric pad for dialing was a thrill-killer. The evening I decided that it just was not going to work out I was heading up to the bus stop in the dark, holding the thing in one hand and trying to dial with the other while walking, and then finally giving up and standing there like a dork, pushing the pretend buttons on the screen with the rain coming down on the stupid thing.

    Remembering that moment gives me the power to resist the Apple phone, no matter how cool it looks.

    Michael Micheletti

     
    Jack Moffett
    January 10, 2007 1:38pm

    A lot of you are making a big deal about the lack of a physical keyboard. I just want to point out that Jobs specifically stated that the best way to use a phone is to dial numbers from you address book (or from websites, or Google maps, etc.). I rarely punch in numbers on my Treo, as I have it synched with my address book on my Mac. The iPhone makes it extremely easy to do this, and I'd wager they have spoken commands on the radar. As for typing while driving. do I have to say it?

    Jack

    Jack L. Moffett
    Interaction Designer
    inmedius
    412.459.0310 x219
    http://www.inmedius.com

    In our society,
    the scarce factor is not information,
    it is time to attend to information.


  • Herb Simon
  •  
    dnp607
    January 10, 2007 1:42pm

    Something worth noting is that by most standards, Apple is not a "Design by Committee" operation. Relatively few people are in charge of making design choices and setting direction. It's not a democracy. There are upsides to this, and downsides. On the upside, the innovation and design acumen that Steve and the ID team possess are not watered down through countless processes and studies. The goals are set, made clear, and very few get in the way of what the design team hopes to accomplish, including materials and parts manufacturers. This yields some amazing innovation. On the downside, issues such as human factors, production errors and material failure analysis tend to be less prioritized. iPods with scratching issues, buzzing processors, paint flecking off of titanium, tiny on-screen keyboards, jumping scroll wheels. it's the price paid for such aesthetic focus.

    I was surprised to have my misconception challenged - mainly, the belief that Apple was spending huge resources filming users, and doing intense user interaction studies. That's not an indictment, just an observation into a process. The original Mac was done in the same fashion: small, skunkworks teams led by Steve. It was the same with NeXT, and I watched some amazing technology feats accomplished using that design methodology.

    Lockheed Martin Skunkworks is another great example of small teams who work primarily in-house to find solutions, with obsessive focus. It's an all-too-rare scenario in a world of modularized solutions, weighty team dynamics and outsourced design.

    -Dan

     
    diego bauducco
    January 10, 2007 1:54pm

    I've been hearing all this comments about the features and quality of the iPhone,
    and I have to admit I'm a little confused about them.

    I think we are missing the point.

    Shouldn't we be excited about (finally) seeing the birth of a great mobile technology that WE can use to create amazing software and interactive experiences for?

    That's what I'm so (frigging) excited about. I want to see MY apps running on that phone! every other Mobile app. I've worked on has been extremely painful. Limitations left and right. This is finally a tool that is going to allow us all to shine like we never have!!

    Cheers!

    -- < Diego Bauducco /
    // Interaction Design & Dev
    http://www.db798.com

    On 1/10/07, Michael Micheletti <michael.micheletti at gmail.com wrote: It's cool and sexy, but I sort of remember that the Razr used to be cool and sexy too.
    I tried using a Cingular HP iPaq "smart" phone running Windows Mobile for a while and the lack of a tactile finger-sized numeric pad for dialing was a thrill-killer. The evening I decided that it just was not going to work out I was heading up to the bus stop in the dark, holding the thing in one hand and trying to dial with the other while walking, and then finally giving up and standing there like a dork, pushing the pretend buttons on the screen with the rain coming down on the stupid thing.
    Remembering that moment gives me the power to resist the Apple phone, no matter how cool it looks.
    Michael Micheletti

     
    Nasir Barday
    January 10, 2007 1:56pm

    If this thing is going to be an Internet communicator, you'll need a keyboard for text input. Not sure how the Apple implementation will be this time around, but even for two-thumb typing it seems you would want some kind of tactile feedback to make the e-mail/web experience satisfying. Maybe I'm just being a soft-button Luddite?

    I like my T-Mobile Dash partly because the key action feels so good-- it doesn't really feel like cheap plastic-on-plastic action, and the snap ratio on each button is just right.

  • Nasir
  •  
    Nasir Barday
    January 10, 2007 2:00pm

    Also, with a hard keyboard, you can pay more attention to the text you're typing than on manipulating the on-screen keys. Physical mini-QWERTY keyboards seem to lend themselves more to muscle memory, because the fingers can find the right keys without relying on information from the eyes.

  • Nasir
  •  
    Todd Zaki Warfel
    January 10, 2007 5:33pm

    Personally, I'd agree that it's evolutionary, not revolutionary. However, often the marketing spinsters interchange the two.

    In my opinion, evolutionary is the next step in something that already exists in form or another. So, the iPod was an evolutionary device for MP3 players. Revolutionary, on the other hand, creates a new industry or movement - like the industrial revolution. The first gas powered engine as an example.

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 3:16 PM, Fredrik Johansson Oviedo wrote:

    The interaction through touchscreen in mobile phones has existed for quite a
    while now, so that's nothing new really. However, previous touchscreen based
    mobile phones are designed to be used with a stylus, except for Neonode and
    maybe a few others. So then again, where's the revolution Apple claims to
    have made with the iPhone?

    Cheers!

    Todd Zaki Warfel
    Partner, Design & Usability Specialist
    Messagefirst | Designing Information. Beautifully. Contact Info
    Voice: (215) 825-7423
    Email:
    todd at messagefirst.com
    AIM: twarfel at mac.com
    Blog: http://toddwarfel.com
    In theory, theory and practice are the same.
    In practice, they are not.

     
    Nathan Kendrick
    January 10, 2007 6:49pm

    I will preface this with: a physical keyboard will always be superior to a virtual one.

    that being said: don't discount a virtual one with being _nearly_ as good as a physical one.

    A virtual one will have similar muscle memory benefits you point out, how can it not?

    I believe you are referring simply to the sense of touch as being superior - that's why on most cellphones the "5" key invariably has a little raised nub so that the user can dial a number without need to look at the keypad for verification.

    Apple has given two more cues to the virtual keyboard: visual and audio. These two will never equal the tactile feedback, but bring it close enough where it is comparable to Blackberry's SureType system, or even most thumboards that compromise on key size (Moto Q o P990i), . Its all compromises in the mobile space right now no matter how you look at it.

    -Nathan

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 2:00 PM, Nasir Barday wrote:

    Also, with a hard keyboard, you can pay more attention to the text you're
    typing than on manipulating the on-screen keys. Physical mini-QWERTY keyboards seem to lend themselves more to muscle memory, because the fingers
    can find the right keys without relying on information from the eyes. - Nasir


     
    Nathan Kendrick
    January 10, 2007 7:04pm

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Brad Bonham wrote:

    This thing has The Long Tail and The Tipping Point built right in, Explain? How does the Long Tail fit with a traditionally designed, distributed, and retailed product? How does the iPhone "tip over" into popularity when it has opened to the largest buzz and anticipation since the Macintosh was introduced in 1984?

    The revolution will be when, on June, you pull this out, and people you've never met gather around and have you show them everything you're
    willing to show. The revolution will be the "Ohhh, that's so cool!"
    I tend to agree with others on the board that while Apple pr/ marketing/steve jobs claims the iPhone as being revolutionary, it is in reality an evolution of a mobile device. Mobile device evolutio was simply cut short after the Newton, sorely failed at by Palm but then slightly advanced by the Treo, and overall slowed down by proprietary cellphone operators, and now finally knocked a bit loose by Apple's extremely large influence and impeccable use of UCD.

    If there is a revolution, it is saying to mobile network operators that to be successful after iPhone's launch, you will need to work closely with companies that center features around users and not Excel revenue projections.

     
    Nathan Kendrick
    January 10, 2007 7:19pm

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 10:13 AM, Jeremy Wood wrote:

    2. I think its a great product, but I don't think Jobs deserves to be hailed as anything special. We've all seen this coming: some combination of phone, mp3 player, camera, computer all-in-one. But I think this is a well-timed (and well-designed) product, and that all the pieces are ready to come together now. Hopefully later generations
    of this product will see more than a 2 megapixel camera. I'm sure once competition forms we'll see some nice innovations.

    huh? Then the iMac was nothing special. Nevermind its influence on industrial design, raising Apple from the dead, and effecting the entire computing industry since.

    Jobs hasn't invented the airplane, but neither did the Wrights. But the Wrights did made it fly.

    I think Apple is making things work well - and that is special, anything else is just plain useless.

     
    Brad Bonham
    January 10, 2007 7:41pm

    The iPhone has hardly "tipped over" or exploited "the long tail" at this point. I can talk to most of my friends, and if I'm lucky they've heard of it, but most of them haven't, and of those who have, they don't grasp its significance.

    That means that as of now, the iPhone is still niche. The "tipping point" hits once it's actually released and anyone who holds the phone in his or her hand has random folks gather around saying "ooooh" and "ahhhh". The "long tail" extends as the concept takes off, and all of the late adopters who have held off on Apple begin jumping on board and press for more and more obscure offerings to fulfill their entertainment wiles.

    It's interesting, I think, that Steve demoes "The Office", a show that would have been obscure 5 years ago, but that now has a sort of mainstream clout.

    Call this an evolution if you want. You'd probably be right. But in this case the evolution is the revolution, and the evolution is everyone who has been standing on the sidelines suddently jumping into the game.

    This is really exciting stuff, and I appreciate the feedback.

    From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com on behalf of Nathan Kendrick Sent: Wed 1/10/2007 10:04 PM
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Brad Bonham wrote:

    This thing has The Long Tail and The Tipping Point built right in, Explain? How does the Long Tail fit with a traditionally designed, distributed, and retailed product? How does the iPhone "tip over" into popularity when it has opened to the largest buzz and anticipation since the Macintosh was introduced in 1984?

    The revolution will be when, on June, you pull this out, and people you've never met gather around and have you show them everything you're
    willing to show. The revolution will be the "Ohhh, that's so cool!"
    I tend to agree with others on the board that while Apple pr/ marketing/steve jobs claims the iPhone as being revolutionary, it is in reality an evolution of a mobile device. Mobile device evolutio was simply cut short after the Newton, sorely failed at by Palm but then slightly advanced by the Treo, and overall slowed down by proprietary cellphone operators, and now finally knocked a bit loose by Apple's extremely large influence and impeccable use of UCD.

    If there is a revolution, it is saying to mobile network operators that to be successful after iPhone's launch, you will need to work closely with companies that center features around users and not Excel revenue projections.

    <http://resources.ixda.org/

    * BENEFITFOCUS.COM [snip]

    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and protected by law. Unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or dissemination of this communication or its contents in any way is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this message to an intended recipient, please notify the original sender immediately by e-mail or telephone, return the original message to the original sender or to bfpostmaster at benefitfocus.com, and destroy all copies or derivations of the original message. Thank you. (BFeComNote Rev. 08/01/2005)

     
    Allen Smith
    January 10, 2007 8:03pm

    ".Apple's extremely large influence and impeccable use of UCD"

    Can you cite any examples from this century of Apple employing UCD? I've always seen their design as Design By Dictator and thought they were rather proud that they didn't incorporate elements normally associated with UCD methodology into their process. Is there a confusion here between UCD as it is practiced (and prosyltized), and creating a product that's easy to use?

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 7:04 PM, Nathan Kendrick wrote:

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Brad Bonham wrote:
    This thing has The Long Tail and The Tipping Point built right in, Explain? How does the Long Tail fit with a traditionally designed, distributed, and retailed product? How does the iPhone "tip over" into popularity when it has opened to the largest buzz and anticipation since the Macintosh was introduced in 1984? The revolution will be when, on June, you pull this out, and people you've never met gather around and have you show them everything you're
    willing to show. The revolution will be the "Ohhh, that's so cool!" I tend to agree with others on the board that while Apple pr/ marketing/steve jobs claims the iPhone as being revolutionary, it is in reality an evolution of a mobile device. Mobile device evolutio was simply cut short after the Newton, sorely failed at by Palm but then slightly advanced by the Treo, and overall slowed down by proprietary cellphone operators, and now finally knocked a bit loose by Apple's extremely large influence and impeccable use of UCD. If there is a revolution, it is saying to mobile network operators that to be successful after iPhone's launch, you will need to work closely with companies that center features around users and not Excel revenue projections.


     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 10, 2007 9:07pm

    The iPhone is a product (not even released) that should be a starting point to new kinds of technological use. I will not buy it soon (a Motorola C155 that WORKS in my country is good enough for 4+ years). But later on, IF the platform is open enough, it may be preferable than a Mac Mini or even a MacBook. Hey, I don't even have a Mac (though I've saved 2/3 of the iMac cost) =P

    It's not about Apple being or not great, (since it's preferences) that will always be debatable. It's that there's not even ONE direct hardware+software design+engineering PC competitor (ie: like Sun if Solaris was made for general computing use, not servers) to Apple.

    Ubuntu is "getting there" in the OS, but what about hardware?

    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 10, 2007 9:12pm

    .it's a start. The technology and design is promising, for later products. Cut out the phone functionality (making it more International at the same time), increase by 2-3x the diagonal screen size, and it may be considered a laptop replacement. but that may not be what Apple wants to go.

    .I expect at least 2-3 days battery life in a cellphone.

    What are high flouting shinnanigans?

    2007/1/10, pauric <radiorental en gmail.com:
    There's a fundamental difference between a laptop (replacement) and a phone. A phone inherently requires an always on status. Laptops can be completely switched off, or sent to deep sleep standby. I did not see a phone standby time figure quoted. I'll assume its not far off the 16 hours
    of audio playback. That means the entire 'experience' also involves charging it at -least- once a day. Probably more if you put in an hour or two on the web and working email, maybe the odd phone call. The current experience is well suited to the price tag/market. High end power users in an always connected environment.
    What I'm really excited about is the UI of the future consumer level device,
    iPhone Nano. The product will be;
    Better suited to being a real phone,
    Something you can throw in your bag,
    Less likely to have you burst in to a freakish cold sweat when you scratch it Lasts more than a day on one charge.
    My personal view on this being a laptop replacement - high flouting shinnanigans. I've had a Sharp Zaurus for years, the form factor is far too small to be seriously productive.
    On 1/10/07, Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona en gmail.com wrote: I was thinking, this may be a Phone. but the goal for Apple can be to make
    a laptop-replacement (as laptops are desktop-replacements, with almost the same capabilities .but less "power" and "features" are implied). Laptops
    are useful, but now it seems that portable is not enough. wearable (ie: being pocket-sized) is better.


    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 10, 2007 9:26pm

    good point! It may "channels" (using Wii concepts):

    *click* one big icon (remember Fitts, larger targets are easier/quicker)

    1. phone *
    2. audio/video
    3. internet
    4. "OS X" (widgets)

    1. family *
    2. friends
    3. work
    4. others

    1. (dad)
    2. (mom)
    3. (sister)
    4. (brother)
    5. (.)

    jeje, you get it ^_^

    2007/1/10, Jack Moffett <jmoffett en inmedius.com: A lot of you are making a big deal about the lack of a physical keyboard. I just want to point out that Jobs specifically stated that the best way to use a phone is to dial numbers from you address book (or from websites, or Google maps, etc.). I rarely punch in numbers on my Treo, as I have it synched with my address book on my Mac. The iPhone makes it extremely easy to do this, and I'd wager they have spoken commands on the radar. As for typing while driving. do I have to say it?
    Jack Jack L. Moffett
    Interaction Designer
    inmedius
    412.459.0310 x219
    http://www.inmedius.com
    In our society,
    the scarce factor is not information,
    it is time to attend to information.

  • Herb Simon

  • -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 10, 2007 9:45pm

    isn't that UCD (User Centered Design?) at the extreme?

    now seriously, Apple's method may not be great, but it works. I haven't paid for Apple products (though soon will), but still I see this company somewhat clearly. The Macintosh is the best PC, more than because of their effort, because ALL the rest PC world is worst. And that is a shame. It's truly a shame and pathetic.

    The only 2 Operating Systems I've used are. time-wasters, unstable, unreliable, ugly, incosistent, or a combination of these. The only hardware that I've used isn't that bad. but some errors are way too creepy (like a dvd-rw drive functioning great on the OS but not accepting a cd for boot, even ejecting the cd after insertion!). A Mac has to be different (if not, then there's almost no hope for computing), but still it haves its glitches (no sub-$1000 upgradable PC? .for the paranoid: TPM+iSight , the hockey-mouse, etc).

    2007/1/10, Allen Smith <al en mojofat.com:
    ".Apple's extremely large influence and impeccable use of UCD" Can you cite any examples from this century of Apple employing UCD? I've always seen their design as Design By Dictator and thought they were rather proud that they didn't incorporate elements normally associated with UCD methodology into their process. Is there a confusion here between UCD as it is practiced (and prosyltized), and creating a product that's easy to use?

     
    Kevin Wong
    January 10, 2007 10:00pm

    I don't know if that is quite possible just yet. Not to burst any bubbles or anything because I'm all for open development, but this bit of news is discouraging (at the moment).

    Taken from Gizmodo:
    "The OS: It isn't OS X proper, as you'd expect. And like an iPod, it won't be an open system that people can develop for. Remember, this is both an iPod and a Phone."

    http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/macworld2007/gizmodo-iphone-hands-on-part- deux-why-isnt-it-white-and-other-questions-227575.php

    On the other hand, this doesn't stop clever individuals from trying. ; )

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 1:54 PM, diego bauducco wrote:

    I've been hearing all this comments about the features and quality of the iPhone,
    and I have to admit I'm a little confused about them. I think we are missing the point.
    Shouldn't we be excited about (finally) seeing the birth of a great mobile technology that WE can use to create amazing software and interactive experiences for?
    That's what I'm so (frigging) excited about. I want to see MY apps running on that phone! every other Mobile app. I've worked on has been extremely painful. Limitations left and right. This is finally a tool that is going to allow us all to shine like we never have!! Cheers!
    -- < Diego Bauducco /
    // Interaction Design & Dev
    http://www.db798.com
    On 1/10/07, Michael Micheletti <michael.micheletti at gmail.com wrote: It's cool and sexy, but I sort of remember that the Razr used to be cool and
    sexy too.
    I tried using a Cingular HP iPaq "smart" phone running Windows Mobile for a
    while and the lack of a tactile finger-sized numeric pad for dialing was a
    thrill-killer. The evening I decided that it just was not going to work out
    I was heading up to the bus stop in the dark, holding the thing in one hand
    and trying to dial with the other while walking, and then finally giving up
    and standing there like a dork, pushing the pretend buttons on the screen
    with the rain coming down on the stupid thing.
    Remembering that moment gives me the power to resist the Apple phone, no
    matter how cool it looks.
    Michael Micheletti


    Kevin Wong: Student & Blogger at UW iSchool - Social Technologist contact | kevinwong at kvwong.com - 425.894.9211 | aim - kdubz313

     
    Jim Drew
    January 11, 2007 12:11am

    On Jan 10, 2007, at 1:56 PM, Nasir Barday wrote:

    If this thing is going to be an Internet communicator, you'll need a keyboard for text input. Not sure how the Apple implementation will be this
    time around, but even for two-thumb typing it seems you would want some kind
    of tactile feedback to make the e-mail/web experience satisfying.
    For those who need such for extensive input, I think you can depend on Griffin or Belkin or someone to have a keyboard that serves as a dock ready on the day this ships, and it will probably fold in half and fit into a case which has a pouch for the iPhone, and only doubles the thickness. I'd buy one of those. (I did for my Handspirng Prism, years ago. Damn device conked out three years ago, though.)

    One small thing that I found spectacular was that the earjack hole fits regular iPod earbuds and every other pair of headphones you have. My current cell phone has a different size jack, so I have to have separate headphones and everything that goes with that.

    -- Jim

     
    Fredrik Johansson Oviedo
    January 11, 2007 12:32am

    My belief is that Steve and his team are reading every bit of text written about iPhone v0.9 right at the very moment! What an excellent idea, launch a suggestion (a very good one for that matter) and then gather all goods and bads that comes from the community, go for another iteration and then launch the reworked iPhone v1.0 in June. At the same time collecting material to begin development of iPhone v2.0. Isn't that large scale UCD or what? :)

    Now to a suggestion that I'd like to see in iPhone v1.0. How about adding a tiny vibration to each character input along with a confirming audio blip and visual feedback. That way I could turn off the audio feedback and type more unobtrusively, thank you very much!

    //Fredrik Johansson Oviedo

     
    Robert Barlow-Busch
    January 11, 2007 6:53am

    If there is a revolution, it is saying to mobile network operators that to be successful after iPhone's launch, you will need to work closely with companies that center features around users This is an interesting point. Carriers have tremendous influence on phone manufacturers, based on my experience doing UX work for RIM/ Blackberry. Each carrier wants to customize the UI, package the device differently, and provide their own support and marketing materials. This isn't likely to happen with the iPhone, as I'm guessing Apple will want total control over the out-of-box and user- experience.

    That should be great news for customers. It's tough for elegant design to emerge in a product where different parties are trying to make their mark.

    So yes, this might be the revolution we're searching for in this thread. <grin

    -- Robert Barlow-Busch
    Practice Director, Interaction Design
    Quarry Integrated Communications Inc.
    rbarlowbusch at quarry.com
    (519) 570-2020

    This e-mail message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, proprietary, confidential or subject to copyright. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete this e- mail message immediately.

     
    pauric
    January 11, 2007 7:21am

    I very much disagree this is just an iPod and a Phone. This also isnt a productivity tool, the vast majority of people never give presentations or crunch spreadsheets. Even when John Doe is writing his resume, he's not going to do it on a $600 handheld device.

    The long view can be found in why they went to a lot of effort providing a malleable form of input. Put cost, cingular, haptics, durability and performance aside. Think games for when I'm bored travelling, recipes beside the cooker, youtube funnies with my mates down the pub, checking the traffic after I get in the car, not having to print out google map directions before I set off, checking the snow conditions on the mountains, snapping and sending pictures/video directly to flickr/youtube. Oh yeah, and taking calls which will switch off the music, while I'm on the move.

    I think of this as an iLife device.

    The homebrew community with have an open source os on this before long. Much like iPod linux or http://www.rockbox.org/ or ubuntu on Macs. I feel it will get an SDK at the very least, that was one of the reasons the original Palm was so successful.

    However I would draw a lot from the way Apple do apps for the Mac. You'd better be bloody good to go one better than them.

    On 1/11/07, Kevin Wong <kevinwong at kvwong.com wrote: I don't know if that is quite possible just yet. Not to burst any bubbles or anything because I'm all for open development, but this bit of news is discouraging (at the moment).
    Taken from Gizmodo:
    "The OS: It isn't OS X proper, as you'd expect. And like an iPod, it won't be an open system that people can develop for. Remember, this is both an iPod and a Phone."
    http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/macworld2007/gizmodo-iphone-hands-on-part- deux-why-isnt-it-white-and-other-questions-227575.php On the other hand, this doesn't stop clever individuals from trying. ; )

     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 11, 2007 9:39am

    Can you cite any examples from this century of Apple employing UCD? I've always seen their design as Design By Dictator and thought they were rather proud that they didn't incorporate elements normally associated with UCD methodology into their process. Is there a confusion here between UCD as it is practiced (and prosyltized), and creating a product that's easy to use?
    isn't that UCD (User Centered Design?) at the extreme?

    Are you serious? UCD is a process. Nothing more. Great design that works well for users is not UCD, it's "great design that works well for users".

    Jobs has always been a "design dictator". The fact that he's quite good at it is lucky for us. The fact is, you don't need UCD to do great work. What you need is a great designer.

    -r-

    now seriously, Apple's method may not be great, but it works. I haven't paid for Apple products (though soon will), but still I see this company somewhat
    clearly. The Macintosh is the best PC, more than because of their effort, because ALL the rest PC world is worst. And that is a shame. It's truly a shame and pathetic.
    The only 2 Operating Systems I've used are. time-wasters, unstable, unreliable, ugly, incosistent, or a combination of these. The only hardware
    that I've used isn't that bad. but some errors are way too creepy (like a dvd-rw drive functioning great on the OS but not accepting a cd for boot, even ejecting the cd after insertion!). A Mac has to be different (if not, then there's almost no hope for computing), but still it haves its glitches
    (no sub-$1000 upgradable PC? .for the paranoid: TPM+iSight , the hockey-mouse, etc).
    2007/1/10, Allen Smith <
    al at mojofat.com:
    ".Apple's extremely large influence and impeccable use of UCD" Can you cite any examples from this century of Apple employing UCD? I've always seen their design as Design By Dictator and thought they were rather proud that they didn't incorporate elements normally associated with UCD methodology into their process. Is there a confusion here between UCD as it is practiced (and prosyltized), and creating a product that's easy to use?


     
    John Schrag
    January 11, 2007 9:58am

    Robert Hoekman wrote:
    The fact is, you don't need UCD to do
    great work. What you need is a great designer.
    This may be true. But in 20 years of working in the field, I have never yet seen a design, no matter how great it seemed at first, that could not be substantially improved by formative usability methods.

    Just sayin'.

    -john

     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 11, 2007 12:31pm

    But in 20 years of working in the field, I have never yet seen a design, no matter how great it seemed at first, that could not be substantially improved by formative usability methods.

    And I haven't seen any that absolutely require UCD methods to accomplish this goal.

    It may be that UCD is the hammer that makes everything look like a nail. I just mean that UCD is not the end of the line for us as designers. It's one approach in a sea of approaches. Jobs clearly has a genius for design without UCD. Who are we to tell him he's doing it wrong?

    Could his products be improved? Hell yeah. But that's true of almost all products, even those designed as part of a UCD process. The process doesn't make a design better in and of itself. The designer does that.

    -r-

     
    Nasir Barday
    January 11, 2007 12:46pm

    More info on "genius design", both from Mr. Saffer:

    A few paragraphs in an interview with Liz Danzico for AIGA here: http://voice.aiga.org/content.cfm?ContentAlias=_getfullarticle&aid=2256903

    There's an explanation of Genius design-- in comparison with three user-data-centric methodologies (including UCD)-- in his book, too: http://www.designingforinteraction.com/toc.html

  • Nasir
  •  
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 11, 2007 1:00pm

    I'm familiar. Thanks for the links, though.

    -r-

    On 1/11/07, Nasir Barday <nasir at userlicious.com wrote: More info on "genius design", both from Mr. Saffer: A few paragraphs in an interview with Liz Danzico for AIGA here: http://voice.aiga.org/content.cfm?ContentAlias=_getfullarticle&aid=2256903 There's an explanation of Genius design-- in comparison with three user-data-centric methodologies (including UCD)-- in his book, too: http://www.designingforinteraction.com/toc.html
    - Nasir

     
    Leslie Chicoine
    January 11, 2007 1:18pm

    Jobs clearly has a genius for design
    without UCD. Who are we to tell him he's doing it wrong?

    Just to be a stickler I'd like to mention that Jobs isn't the lead designer at Apple, it's Jonathan Ive:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Ive

    "Since Steve Jobs <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs returned to Apple Inc. in 1997 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997, Ive has headed the industrial design team that produces most of the company's current hardware products"

    And also the Apple team:
    "Ive is known to be unselfish in how he is attributed: In interviews, for example, he always emphasises the teamwork that goes into the products for which he receives recognition and fame."

    -Leslie

     
    Joshua Seiden
    January 11, 2007 2:12pm

    The world has no shortage of good ideas. We do have a severe shortage of companies that are able to ship them, however.

    JS

    On 1/10/07, Jeremy Wood <jeremy at tech4learning.com wrote: snip

    2. I think its a great product, but I don't think Jobs deserves to be hailed as anything special. We've all seen this coming: some combination of phone, mp3 player, camera, computer all-in-one.

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 11, 2007 2:15pm

    no, that was not said in a serious way. the other lines was meant to clarify it. I don't know any ui methods yet, but regardless of the method used at least designers should think of users. This may seem obvious, but one have only to look at examples of computers, phones, etc. to realize that some designers (and developers) don't think of users.

    2007/1/11, Robert Hoekman, Jr. <rhoekmanjr en gmail.com: Can you cite any examples from this century of Apple employing UCD? I've always seen their design as Design By Dictator and thought they were rather proud that they didn't incorporate elements normally associated with UCD methodology into their process. Is there a confusion here between UCD as it is practiced (and prosyltized), and creating a product that's easy to use?
    isn't that UCD (User Centered Design?) at the extreme? Are you serious? UCD is a process. Nothing more. Great design that works well for users is not UCD, it's "great design that works well for users". Jobs has always been a "design dictator". The fact that he's quite good at it is lucky for us. The fact is, you don't need UCD to do great work. What you need is a great designer.
    -r-

    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 11, 2007 2:23pm

    give credit when credit is due

    Indeed, Ive and the Apple design team are the ones that designed the iPhone. Even if the RDF makes some people think otherwise. Shouldn't the merit be just for Apple? Why so much ego-centered discussion? .curious for a buddhist to take so much spotlight, unless part of that spotlight (ie: the designer of the iPhone) is imagined by Mac fans.

    2007/1/11, Leslie Chicoine <theinfonaut en gmail.com: Jobs clearly has a genius for design
    without UCD. Who are we to tell him he's doing it wrong? Just to be a stickler I'd like to mention that Jobs isn't the lead designer
    at Apple, it's Jonathan Ive:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Ive
    "Since Steve Jobs <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs returned to Apple Inc. in 1997 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997, Ive has headed the industrial design team that produces most of the company's current hardware
    products"
    And also the Apple team:
    "Ive is known to be unselfish in how he is attributed: In interviews, for example, he always emphasises the teamwork that goes into the products for which he receives recognition and fame."
    -Leslie


    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 11, 2007 2:36pm

    Indeed, Ive and the Apple design team are the ones that designed the iPhone. Even if the RDF makes some people think otherwise. Shouldn't the merit be just for Apple? Why so much ego-centered discussion? .curious for a buddhist to take so much spotlight, unless part of that spotlight (ie: the designer of the iPhone) is imagined by Mac fans.

    Who's the Buddhist?

    Incidentally, you're right. There's no point in aiming credit at Jobs or Ives or anyone in particular - it's a team.

    -r-

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 11, 2007 3:05pm

    Isn't Steve Jobs buddhist? .IMO, it will be refreshing to see less RDF and more Apple products (the iPhone can be a line, not a single model).

    2007/1/11, Robert Hoekman, Jr. <rhoekmanjr en gmail.com: Indeed, Ive and the Apple design team are the ones that designed the iPhone. Even if the RDF makes some people think otherwise. Shouldn't the merit be just for Apple? Why so much ego-centered discussion? .curious for a buddhist to take so much spotlight, unless part of that spotlight (ie: the designer of the iPhone) is imagined by Mac fans. Who's the Buddhist?
    Incidentally, you're right. There's no point in aiming credit at Jobs or Ives or anyone in particular - it's a team.
    -r-

    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Nathan Kendrick
    January 11, 2007 3:58pm

    I think we are boxing UCD in too fine of a definition. Does UCD require contextual inquiry and in-person interviews and focus groups and usabilty and personas and card sorting and (insert your fave here)?

    No!, it means just what everyone on the design side is trumpeting: Think, and use a process that keeps the user top of mind, it will create efficiencies in your development, create a more usable end product, and which will drive purchases/usefulness/etc for your customers that in turn make your company financially successful.

    That's why genius design still fits. This is not idiot savant design where you create an amazing product out of zero context. It is that a genius has little need for the extended design process to validate a great idea. But he/she is still thinking of how something will be of value for someone (hence, it is a ucd method no?)

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Robert Hoekman, Jr. wrote: Are you serious? UCD is a process. Nothing more. Great design that works
    well for users is not UCD, it's "great design that works well for users".
    Jobs has always been a "design dictator". The fact that he's quite good at
    it is lucky for us. The fact is, you don't need UCD to do great work. What
    you need is a great designer.

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Nasir Barday wrote:

    More info on "genius design", both from Mr. Saffer: A few paragraphs in an interview with Liz Danzico for AIGA here: http://voice.aiga.org/content.cfm?
    ContentAlias=_getfullarticle&aid=2256903

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 11, 2007 4:53pm

    I think there are likely a hundred or so designers that deserve the term Genius design.

    As a category for process (design without research) I think it falls short. The rest are designing for themselves or they think they know what the customer needs without asking or observing. This tends to be the result of either ignorance, immaturity, or arrogance. I think the proper reference would be that it is a poor design process. Likely a huge contributer to the 90% failure rate of new product releases.

    Certainly Ives is amongst those hundred or so. Jobs on the other hand is the single greatest promoter of design that we have. His icon like status serves the industry, consumers and designers in the push to demand better products, better matched to consumer needs and wants.

    Mark

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 6:58 PM, Nathan Kendrick wrote:

    That's why genius design still fits.

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 11, 2007 4:55pm

    Personally, I think absolutely ALL design should include contextual inquiry.

    Mark

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 6:58 PM, Nathan Kendrick wrote:

    Does UCD
    require contextual inquiry and in-person interviews and focus groups and usabilty and personas and card sorting and (insert your fave here)?

     
    Daniel Szuc
    January 11, 2007 4:59pm

    "No!, it means just what everyone on the design side is trumpeting: Think, and use a process that keeps the user top of mind, it will create efficiencies in your development, create a more usable end product, and which will drive purchases/usefulness/etc for your customers that in turn make your company financially successful."

    YUP!

    http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/tenthings.html - At Number 1. Focus on the user and all else will follow.

    This does not suggest that doing this will ensure product or business success. But hey, it helps get everyone, including the Design Team, thinking about the user. Plenty of organisations don't do this.

    Rgds,

    Daniel Szuc
    Principal Usability Consultant
    Apogee Usability Asia Ltd
    www.apogeehk.com
    'Usability in Asia'

    The Usability Toolkit - http://www.sitepoint.com/books/usability1/

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Nathan Kendrick
    Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 7:58 AM
    To: discuss at ixda.org
    Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] iPhone Keynote

    I think we are boxing UCD in too fine of a definition. Does UCD require contextual inquiry and in-person interviews and focus groups and usabilty and personas and card sorting and (insert your fave here)?

    No!, it means just what everyone on the design side is trumpeting: Think, and use a process that keeps the user top of mind, it will create efficiencies in your development, create a more usable end product, and which will drive purchases/usefulness/etc for your customers that in turn make your company financially successful.

    That's why genius design still fits. This is not idiot savant design where you create an amazing product out of zero context. It is that a genius has little need for the extended design process to validate a great idea. But he/she is still thinking of how something will be of value for someone (hence, it is a ucd method no?)

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Robert Hoekman, Jr. wrote: Are you serious? UCD is a process. Nothing more. Great design that works
    well for users is not UCD, it's "great design that works well for users".
    Jobs has always been a "design dictator". The fact that he's quite good at
    it is lucky for us. The fact is, you don't need UCD to do great work. What
    you need is a great designer.

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Nasir Barday wrote:

    More info on "genius design", both from Mr. Saffer: A few paragraphs in an interview with Liz Danzico for AIGA here: http://voice.aiga.org/content.cfm?
    ContentAlias=_getfullarticle&aid=2256903


     
    Kevin Wong
    January 11, 2007 5:02pm

    What happened to the days of Master and Apprentice? =(

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 4:55 PM, Mark Schraad wrote:

    Personally, I think absolutely ALL design should include contextual inquiry.
    Mark On Jan 11, 2007, at 6:58 PM, Nathan Kendrick wrote: Does UCD
    require contextual inquiry and in-person interviews and focus groups and usabilty and personas and card sorting and (insert your fave here)?


     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 11, 2007 6:19pm

    I think there are likely a hundred or so designers that deserve the term Genius design.
    I think that number is probably way too low, fitting your definition.

    Saffer's term, however, as I recall, is an attempt to name the group of people who design without the so-called benefit of user-research, and without the resources they need, like time and people and money.

    As a category for process (design without research) I think it falls short. The rest are designing for themselves or they think they know what the customer needs without asking or observing. This tends to be the result of either ignorance, immaturity, or arrogance. Ouch. Isn't is possible that some of these people are great designers regardless of their process (or arrogance, or maturity level)?

    I think the
    proper reference would be that it is a poor design process. Likely a huge contributer to the 90% failure rate of new product releases.
    Like it or not, for a lot of companies, it's all they can afford. And there are enough shining exceptions out there to indicate that it is more than possible to build great solutions without UCD methods.

    A designer who knows his stuff can still work extremely well in an environment where UCD methods simply don't work (due to a lack of time, resources, etc). This is true, I think, because of checks and balances. As in, an experienced designer can run purely on instinct most of the time, and be *right* most of the time, as long as he's supported by people who question his decisions and make sure everything has been thought out. If the designer is made to justify his decisions, his designs improve. It makes him think things out more in the first place.

    I can tell you this: I recently designed three applications from scratch, without any user research, worked closely with each team to iron out the implementation details, and then watched them launch. Two months into the launch of all three of them, they have generated a record low customer support calls, and most of those have been about bugs. Not one call has been a "How do you do X, Y, and Z?" call. Sales for each have exceeded expectations, and the're getting excellent reviews from customers.

    I did this by designing each and every interaction in a way I thought made the most sense, for the most people, most of the time. I followed this up by writing detailed use cases to not only help the developers see how things needed to be built, but also to think things out better on my own, then I ran each design by several other people to see what questions came up. (Not one of these people was a potential user, btw.) I worked closely with the dev teams to make sure the minute details were implemented correctly. I did everything I could to make sure I created the right designs.

    Does this make me an arrogant, immature, ignorant designer?

    I think the proof is in the results.

    Apple designs things all the time without the traditional methods you tout so vehemently. And it works. Clearly, UCD is not the only way. Strict adherence to UCD, on the other hand, might very well be the death of innovation in the way we practice interaction design.

    Again, vinyl records used to be standard.

    -r-

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 11, 2007 6:38pm

    Replying in three parts to keep the messages fairly short:

    I think Dan's term gives credit to those who design without insight to the user, purchaser or consumer (who are all at times different people). I do not think they deserve it unless success in the marketplace can be substantiated. I subscribe to Peter Drucker's axiom that quality is only relevant in the eyes of those mentioned above. Designing for designers is just self gratification and adds little value - and creating value is a worthy metric.

    I do not think you need formal (what ever that is) research, but certainly insight does not come to the designer in a vacuum. Research can be as simple as watching people try and pull a knob on a door that is marked with the word "push".

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 9:19 PM, Robert Hoekman, Jr. wrote:

    I think there are likely a hundred or so designers that deserve the term Genius design.
    I think that number is probably way too low, fitting your definition. Saffer's term, however, as I recall, is an attempt to name the group of people who design without the so-called benefit of user-research, and without the resources they need, like time and people and money.

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 11, 2007 6:43pm

    Design must be judged by those outside of the discipline. Good design must be viable, feasible and desirable - but great design must gain some level of public acceptance. Getting into the ISDA or Communication Arts annual does not constitute great design. Reaching a "tipping point" of prevalence is one way to measure good design. and I am sure there are others. I do not subscribe to the notion that designers have some elite measure of what is great - and that the common man "just doesn't get it". I can't site a source or statistics, but it would seem that great design would equate with being a successful product or artifact.

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 9:19 PM, Robert Hoekman, Jr. wrote:

    As a category for process (design without research) I think it falls short. The rest are designing for themselves or they think they know what the customer needs without asking or observing. This tends to be the result of either ignorance, immaturity, or arrogance. Ouch. Isn't is possible that some of these people are great designers regardless of their process (or arrogance, or maturity level)?

     
    Mark Schraad
    January 11, 2007 6:57pm

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 9:19 PM, Robert Hoekman, Jr. wrote:

    Like it or not, for a lot of companies, it's all they can afford. And there are enough shining exceptions out there to indicate that it is more than possible to build great solutions without UCD methods. Allocation of resources is always an issue. These days time to market is one we all face in short supply. These are design constraints and there is always a way for the design to do at least some research, even if it is asking a few friends or sitting in a trade show boot. maybe even eliciting tacit knowledge from sales or support staff. I would even consider simple observation of process research.

    I can tell you this: I recently designed three applications from scratch, without any user research, worked closely with each team to iron out the implementation details, and then watched them launch. Two months into the launch of all three of them, they have generated a record low customer support calls, and most of those have been about bugs. Not one call has been a "How do you do X, Y, and Z?" call. Sales for each have exceeded expectations, and they're getting excellent reviews from customers.
    But Robert, I can not imagine that you did not gain insight from some sort of research. You have the benefit of watching the previous product in use and noting where it is failing. You did not pull those use cases out of mid air - you used the experience of yourself and others to formulate them. Granted, it may have been second hand, but its still a form of research. I am not at all surprised that a designer of your experience could improve upon the old system. The designer's analysis and problem definition is a HUGE part of solving any design problem.

    Does this make me an arrogant, immature, ignorant designer? No - but I would contend that there was in fact research used, and the user was a central focus of your process.

    BTW - I do not believe that you can ask people direct questions and get much out of that. I think that most surveys and focus groups are a colossal waste of time and money. (see Zaltman - How Customers Think)

     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 11, 2007 7:51pm

    Design must be judged by those outside of the discipline. Good design must be viable, feasible and desirable - but great design must gain some level of public acceptance. Getting into the ISDA or Communication Arts annual does not constitute great design. Reaching a "tipping point" of prevalence is one way to measure good design. and I am sure there are others. MySpace reached a tipping point, and it's one of the worst examples of application design I've ever seen on the web. So, tipping points aren't necessarily an indication of good design. They can be an indication of success in spite of bad design.

    But you also said, "great design would equate with being a successful product or artifact." This logic makes more sense to me, particularly if we agree on a definition for "success".

    In the commercial software world, a successful product is one that users can use effectively, is desirable, enables word-of-mouth marketing, improves (or at least contributes positively to) the reputation of a company, and drives sales, both short- and long-term.

    I've attained all of these things without user research, in the hands-on way anyway. I read and listen a lot. Studies, reports, blogs, blog comments, stories from people like my wife (who teaches computer classes), stories from bosses, developers, and so on. I also analyze click path reports, stats, etc, and I read psychology and philosophy books and articles a lot. So yes, in that sense, I do user research. In that sense, I've been studying people for a very long time. Not in the context of computer usage, but studying nonetheless.

    But you stated earlier you think design should never be done without ethnographic research. To that, I say . well, you might be wasting a lot of your employer's time and money, not to mention the time of the people you're studying.

    On a completely unrelated note, WOW, I think our panel at SxSW is going to be quite lively. :) I look forward to it!

    I know I regularly make controversial statements on this list. I expect to get flamed for about half of everything I say here. But the folks on this list are talented, smart, and passionate, and I learn a lot from them, even if only through challenging everything they say. ;)

    -r-

    -r-

     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 11, 2007 8:05pm

    But Robert, I can not imagine that you did not gain insight from some sort of research.
    See my other reply. :)

    You have the benefit of watching the previous product in use and noting where it is failing. You did not pull those use cases out of mid air - you used the experience of yourself and others to formulate them. I actually did *not* use the experiences of myself and others to formulate them. These were brand new apps, with no prior versions to study. Instead, I studied the activities the applications were meant to support, I broke them into tasks, actions, and operations, and I designed around those things, prioritizing which things were most important, which things to keep up front and which things to tuck away, etc.

    You know, I did all that crap I talk about in my book in my book. :)

    Anyway, no, I did not gain an understanding of how people work and behave in a vacuum (see my other reply again), but I did not study them at all while doing my design work. I ignored specific audiences. I avoided user research. I trusted my instincts and experience. I did a bunch of things many people on this list would say are bad practices. Yet somehow, I succeeded in creating designs that meet their goals.

    BTW - I do not believe that you can ask people direct questions and get much out of that. I think that most surveys and focus groups are a colossal waste of time and money. (see Zaltman - How Customers Think) I'm with you on this one, man. It's rare, but it happens. :)

    -r-

     
    Tommy Eskelinen
    January 12, 2007 7:00am

    " Jobs on the other hand
    is the single greatest promoter of design that we have."

    I agree, but I think the genius of Jobs is that he has a vision that he seems to have communicated well, not only for a computer, a portable music device or a combination of all small devices into one. I think he has a vision for how we should live with technology (be it right or wrong).

    Looking into the bigger picture, here's my interpretation of Jobs' vision:

    The PC (personal computer) should be the hub for all data, be it movies, contact lists and whatnot. You use the PC to add stuff to your personal (digital) life, the PC then syncs that data with all other relevant devices around you without a hassle. The devices all use the same software components, icons etc. so you get the familiarity effect in the UX. Add a couple of jaw-dropping effects for marketing and PR and we will be successful.

    I think that's why you don't have a radio in the iPod, or a physical keypad on the iPhone or too many input possibilities in those devices, they are simply not meant to be used primarily for that.

    If you think about it, every manufacturer is trying to cramp in all possible and impossible features in one single device, Apple on the other hand stuffs the device with stuff that works and that solves a problem.

    I think what Apple does best is the "It works!" effect. Everyone I speak to that buys a product from Apple says it.

    Finally, I don't think Jobs is trying to create a revolution, I think the word is evolution.

    Happy weekend.

    /tommy

     
    John Schrag
    January 12, 2007 7:30am

    Robert wrote:
    Apple designs things all the time without the traditional methods you tout so vehemently. And it works. Clearly, UCD is not the only way. Strict adherence to UCD, on the other hand, might very well be the death of innovation in the way we practice interaction design.
    Someone else wrote: (sorry, can't find the original to attribute the quote):
    Usability in particular is backwards looking and often scrutinized as the product is being finished or released. IxD - interactive design and in particular experience design tends to be more proactive and visionary.
    In my own work, I have never seen any tension between usability practices and innovative design work. Usability can be backwards-looking if you if you choose to do it at the end of the design process --- we've eschewed that kind of work years ago. Now we use formative usability testing as one of the primary drivers of our design work. It doesn't let you off the hook for doing your design activities, but it does provide insight and inspiration and frequently reveals surprising things that a designer could not possibly know about a user's task if he or she didn't watch a user doing work -- at least for the kind of deep work that I design software for. Many of the most innovative things we've put into our product were inspired by watching users interact with early prototypes.

    I'm not sure what Robert meant by "strict adherence to UCD", since as far as I know UCD refers to a collection of possible practices one can choose to employ or not, as suitable for a give project. And I don't doubt his success stories with a non-usability process. But personally, it would make me nervous as heck to release something without watching some end users use it for a while. I'd happily live without surveys or focus groups, but not without in-context design validation.

    A lot of my reluctance stems from certain designers I've worked with in the past (who will remain nameless). I particularly remember one occasion about ten years ago when I offered to validate a colleague's designs during some upcoming testing I was doing. He scolded me, telling me how unneccesary it was because he had a Master's degree in Design and he understood the Design process and if you Designed things properly there was no need for validation. (You could practically hear the capitalization when he talked.) This particular design looked great and demoed great and management loved it --- but in actual practice about half of our user population couldn't figure out how to work the damn thing. Fixing the problem turned out to be pretty easy, but it took a year for the fix to get into the software. I'd rather know for sure beforehand.

    -john

     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 12, 2007 8:30am

    Personally, I think that's the only way Apple could maintain its top-notch work in the future.

    I also think the master/apprentice setup could probably be the single best way to further the profession, but how the heck do you get something like that started? :)

    -r-

    On 1/11/07, Kevin Wong <kevinwong at kvwong.com wrote: What happened to the days of Master and Apprentice? =( On Jan 11, 2007, at 4:55 PM, Mark Schraad wrote:
    Personally, I think absolutely ALL design should include contextual inquiry.
    Mark
    On Jan 11, 2007, at 6:58 PM, Nathan Kendrick wrote: Does UCD
    require contextual inquiry and in-person interviews and focus groups and usabilty and personas and card sorting and (insert your fave here)?



     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 12, 2007 8:52am

    I agree that if you're going to do usability testing, you should start up front with paper prototypes instead of waiting for the first release to go out and testing to define a vision for the second one.

    But personally,
    it would make me nervous as heck to release something without watching some end users use it for a while. I'd happily live without surveys or focus groups, but not without in-context design validation.

    Try it out on something small. :) Some of it is about trusting your instincts. Some of it is about experience, and having proof that you can design well right out of the gate.

    I don't think everyone should try this necessarily. Less experienced designers could most certainly benefit from more testing, as more experienced designers can often do just as well with less testing. And of course, everyone can benefit from usability testing on unproven and innovative paradigms, deeper research (topical, wide scope), and things like that. I don't believe in doing it for every project - very few, in fact - but it certainly has its benefits.

    He scolded me, telling
    me how unneccesary it was because he had a Master's degree in Design and he understood the Design process and if you Designed things properly there was no need for validation. (You could practically hear the capitalization when he talked.)

    Confidence = good. Proof = great. Arrogance = bad. :)

    -r-

     
    dnp607
    January 12, 2007 9:27am

    I also think the master/apprentice setup could probably be the single best
    way to further the profession, but how the heck do you get something like
    that started? :)
    In ye olden days, "Guilds" were formed. They worked well, and did much to advance the cause of artists and tradespeople, and more importantly, to formalize the passing on of vital knowledge. Many were formed by pioneering personalities who had political clout with royalty.

    -Dan

     
    David Polinchock
    January 12, 2007 10:35am

    Sorry, I'm late to the conversation! I actually think that while the software & interface will no doubt be cool and make it the "it" phone for a while, I don't really like the over-all design of the phone. I think this is where we've seen so many of the hybrids fall about -- they might do other thngs well, but they usually end up being crappy phones. Look how long it took people to realize that you can't dial 800-GO FEDEX from most smart phones.

    I was really hoping to see the Apple version of something like the Nokia 9500, still the best smart phone out there for me. Yes it should be much faster, but the design was spot-on. Use it closed as a phone and open to access a qwerty keyboard. And the inside design was a lot like the old Psion's, still the best PDA out there. For someone like me who does lots of writing when I'm traveling, the 9500 has been great! Sure a lot easier to use then it is to take out my laptop to write in many places. And what was it's biggest drawback -- it's size -- frankly doesn't seem to be as bad today. For a while, phones were getting smaller and smaller and the 9500 looked HUGE! But today, with all of the smart phones out there, it's just not that much bigger.

    Sure for SMS and short e-mail replies (just look at the Apple demo. Everything is e-mail seems to less then 10 words) that touch screen keyboard may be fine. But, when I'm blogging on the spot or writing articles, I'd much rather use my 9500. If they just made a faster version, I'd be all set!

    David David Polinchock
    Chief Experience Officer, CXO
    Brand Experience Lab
    212-274-1882 office
    973-583-6746 cell
    david at brandexperiencelab.org
    Sent wirelessly from Nokia 9500 & T-Mobile

     
    Paul Schreiber
    January 15, 2007 11:04am

    Leslie Chicoine wrote:

    Jobs clearly has a genius for design
    without UCD. Who are we to tell him he's doing it wrong? Just to be a stickler I'd like to mention that Jobs isn't the lead designer
    at Apple, it's Jonathan Ive:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Ive
    "Since Steve Jobs <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs returned to
    Apple Inc. in 1997 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997, Ive has headed the
    industrial design team that produces most of the company's current hardware
    products"
    While Jonathan Ive is the VP of Industrial Design, and does amazing work, Steve Jobs is very much in charge when it comes to all final decisions. Steve is also very hands-on with software -- font size, button placement, colour choice, templates, everything.

    Paul

    shad 96c / uw cs 2001
    / mac activist / fumbler / eda / headliner / navy-souper fan of / sophie b. / steve poltz / habs / bills / 49ers /

    "I've never cared much about stepping on toes. We had a problem to solve." -- Jamie Zawinski

     
    peter sikking
    January 18, 2007 4:31am

    Guys + gals,

    written a blog entry about this.

    teaser:

    "Meanwhile on the iXda mailing list there is a thread of 120+ (!) emails, where a faction argues that there is nothing revolutionary about the iPhone. Just regular evolution in mobile phones, reached through UI ingredients that some of us prototyped a decade ago. iPhone: bombshell or pure hype, who is right?"

    read more: <http://mmiworks.net/blog

    --ps

    principal user interaction architect
    man + machine interface works

    http://mmiworks.net/blog : on interaction architecture

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 18, 2007 3:12pm

    bookmarked.

    I want to hack the iPhone OS X though.

    2007/1/18, peter sikking <peter en mmiworks.net: Guys + gals,
    written a blog entry about this.
    teaser:
    "Meanwhile on the iXda mailing list there is a thread of 120+ (!) emails, where a faction argues that there is nothing revolutionary about the iPhone. Just regular evolution in mobile phones, reached through UI ingredients that some of us prototyped a decade ago. iPhone: bombshell or pure hype, who is right?" read more: <http://mmiworks.net/blog
    --ps
    principal user interaction architect
    man + machine interface works
    http://mmiworks.net/blog : on interaction architecture


    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Jared M. Spool
    January 19, 2007 3:18pm

    On Jan 11, 2007, at 6:02 PM, Kevin Wong wrote:

    What happened to the days of Master and Apprentice? =( It wasn't cost effective.

    Jared

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 20, 2007 5:41am

    yeah. everyone's a master and an apprentice at the same time.

    2007/1/19, Jared M. Spool <jspool en uie.com:
    On Jan 11, 2007, at 6:02 PM, Kevin Wong wrote:
    What happened to the days of Master and Apprentice? =( It wasn't cost effective.
    Jared


    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Robert Hoekman, Jr.
    January 20, 2007 9:50am

    What happened to the days of Master and Apprentice? =( It wasn't cost effective.
    Seriously? I think this would be a fantastic way to go for this industry, but I haven't done any research at all to suss out the feasibility. Do you have some insights?

    -r-

     
    jackbellis.com
    January 20, 2007 7:34pm

    I think that the "paired programming" aspect of some agile programming methodologies is the modern equivalent of apprenticeship, and those who espouse it (http://www.menloinnovations.com/) would of course say it is very cost effective. Rather than being an apprenticeship from one master to one apprentice in a years-long batch, it is a constant spiral between a changing list of participants. Makes a lot of sense to me, since software is so secretive. But I can't remember what this has to do with iPhone. -www.jackbellis.com

    -----

    Original Message -----
    From: "Robert Hoekman, Jr." <rhoekmanjr at gmail.com

    What happened to the days of Master and Apprentice? =( It wasn't cost effective.
    Seriously? I think this would be a fantastic way to go for this industry, but I haven't done any research at all to suss out the feasibility. Do you have some insights?
    -r-

     
    Esteban Barahona
    January 21, 2007 3:22pm

    what about using triads for programming?! Or designing and developing an app!

    sure. you can multiply this number by 10 and the results may be the same. neat.

    2007/1/20, jackbellis.com <jackbellis en hotmail.com: I think that the "paired programming" aspect of some agile programming methodologies is the modern equivalent of apprenticeship, and those who espouse it (http://www.menloinnovations.com/) would of course say it is very cost effective. Rather than being an apprenticeship from one master to one apprentice in a years-long batch, it is a constant spiral between a changing
    list of participants. Makes a lot of sense to me, since software is so secretive. But I can't remember what this has to do with iPhone. -www.jackbellis.com
    -----

    Original Message -----
    From: "Robert Hoekman, Jr." <rhoekmanjr en gmail.com What happened to the days of Master and Apprentice? =( It wasn't cost effective.
    Seriously? I think this would be a fantastic way to go for this industry, but I haven't done any research at all to suss out the feasibility. Do you have some insights?
    -r-


    -- http://www.zensui.org

     
    Log In to Post a Response
    Re: iPhone Keynote

    Name

    E-mail Address

    Back to Top

    Copyright © 2004-2006 Interaction Design Association.