Again?
My final thoughts on the “JesusPhone.” I showed up at the Apple store on Michigan Avenue a few minutes after it opened, so I got to witness all the crazies lined up and crowding around the doors. I found the presence of Chicago police funny, even if it was justified. I didn’t end up getting my hands on one of the smudged screen until the next day after patiently waiting for one of the many that they had scattered around the store.

The funny thing was listening to all the people call up their friends on the store phones and go “Hey! I’m calling you from an iPhone!” leaving their poor friend’s number on a public phone. The phone I was using had a bunch of numbers left behind, hopefully they won’t be called up while eating dinner.

After using one for a bit, I ended up with the same view as a lot of other people. The touchscreen is neat. The visual and physical design is great. It’s also great for their first try at a phone, but it’s still lacking in the general scheme of things. Still not worth the money. The media coverage of it is a little out of control, and I think I need an iPhone detox week. That probably won’t be likely this week though.

Hello MotoLabs
On a somewhat unrelated note, it was nice to see two stories on experientia regarding MotoLabs since I really dig a lot of the stuff they do there. Their user-centeredness feels a lot more inline with what we are taught at CMU. The first post was a presentation by Crysta Metcalf called Investigating the Sharing Practices of Family & Friends to Inform Communication Technology Innovations, which is directly related to the project our group did for Grad Studio. So it’s nice to see a rigorous study conducted a little more broadly and seeing similar trends show up. It also helps to know that we were working on something relevant during school.

I had the chance to meet with Crysta a couple of times and talk with her about her research and how it fits into CXD and Motorola. I’ve also been able to speak with Frank Bentley who had the other presentation on experientia, which is about ambient motion information on mobile devices. Everyone there has been extremely generous with their time and willing to discuss anything.

I wonder what else the people at MotoLabs will come up with. I’ve enjoyed visiting them every time, but I’m not sure how many times I want to head over to Schaumburg

I’ve had a lot of random thoughts about the iPhone since it first came out in January, ranging from lust to disgust. Although I wanted to hold back until it came out, I thought it might be appropriate to say something on the eve of its release. Jamin had a an entertaining post about it, and it seems to have deeply angered people like Dvorak from PC mag. There are lists all over the place about the top reasons to buy or not to buy one. I always find discussions of Apple and their products interesting.

Bad Apple
I don’t really know much about them as a company besides the rumors that are circulated. For a long time I had no interest in them and I regarded them as people who made stuff for simpletons. I started using them in undergrad at the computer labs just because the log-in process was significantly faster. After using them extensively during the first year of grad school, I’m totally sold on their simplicity and I tell everyone to get one who isn’t tech-savvy. They are computers made for people whose goal is do get stuff done and not to just use a computer.

All politics aside, that’s how I see the iPhone. Like any product, there are lots of benefits and detriments. But Apple has attempted to make a device for people whose goal is to call, get info, and listen to music. Not only that, but they announced and presented it in a way that is easy for people to understand and realize why they would want it. We learn in school how important the argument is for new products and this is a prime example. They are stressing the functionality of it in a clear and concise manner that makes sense, there’s no shame in that.

I see it as a really positive wave of energy because they are proving how important user-centered design and clarity is for mobile devices. Their innovation was not in bringing a new technology to market, but taking existing technologies and features and packaging them in a way that will hopefully allow for a greater experience for people.

Money, Money, Money, Money 
While this is great and all, it’s not worth it to me. It’s probably also not worth it to a large percentage of the population that will settle for free and low-cost phones. I was considering buying one at first because I had never shelled out the cash for a phone or an iPod, so it seemed like it might be worth it. But $600 plus a $60 phone bill is not something I want to deal with right now.

Perhaps when there is a potential for longer-term usage (changeable battery, memory extensions, etc…) I might consider spending that much on a product. So whenever good design becomes affordable for the everyday person, I’ll get in line the night before. For right now I’m fine just ogling at it and wishing for a free one.

A quick glance at digg today revealed another major announcement from a tech company, this time Microsoft. Microsoft Surface is the new way they would like us to interact with our digital self.

The Argument
First, I appreciate the way it’s presented. There is a simple site with trendy visual effects and three video pieces. The videos are somewhere between ads and scenarios of use. Seeing it done from afar makes me realize how effective videos can be, and how important it is for us to demonstrate products in a way that makes sense and appeal to people’s needs, whether or not these do the job. At the very least it confirms that the way we learn how to present our work at school is relevant to what people are doing in real companies.

For anyone who has seen the many multi-touch display videos floating around, this is just a commercial version of what is already being done. The easy integration of physical objects and devices is something relatively new and encouraging to see. It’s great because it means that people like Microsoft care about how their products interact with other products regardless of who made them. I also like the fact that there is sensitivity to the expressiveness of motion and playful features.

Is this the right direction?
On the other hand, there are still issues that bug me when seeing products like these. One is the use of a touch screen as a way of interacting with information. While it is a more direct way of manipulation, I still feel like it’s not necessarily an appropriate behavior. There is something that bothers me about having the digital world extremely rich and full of information, while the physical side is limited to pushing on glass and sweeping hand motions. We have adapted to be able to process information in so many forms that it’s a shame that we still haven’t been able to properly take advantage of our senses.

There are so many tactile experiences that hold deep meaning and cannot be conveyed through visual means. Whether you’re flipping through some high quality card stock or feeling the craggily bark on the side of a tree, there is deep sensorial learning that happens which is lost in computing in general and specifically with touch screens.

In a similar vein, although I just said I like their visual style, at the same time I despise it. The slick bubblegum UI that Apple and now Microsoft use is something I find troublesome. There is no aging or deterioration besides the slowdown when your computer is bogged down with new programs. Where is the metaphorical rust of interface? How can we have rich experiences with computation if everyone is staring at the same unchanging representations? Do custom visual styles solve this?

There is a variety in our interactions with the natural world that is absent when it comes to digital devices. You could argue that it creates an illusion of immortality for people, especially as storage space and processing speed no longer become an issue. It’s easy to forget that although the digital representations of our lives appear permanent, we are in fact products of the natural world and will soon return to it.

Update 6/12/07: I found this article after I wrote this, it addresses the visual aspect of what I was talking about. The analogy to fashion is interesting and something I have been trying to articulate for a while.