Front to back

Last week we had the SA UX Forum Cape Town meet-up. 16 people braved the rain and cold to show up and share ideas about user experience.

Because user experience is just getting a foothold down here, we started at the beginning.  I did a talk called "What is user experience and why do we care?"  [PDF 8MB]

Led by Bertus "AJ" Kock, the group also took a look at various attendees' computer desktops. We pondered what the different layouts said about them, and about the limitations of the desktop GUIs they used.  Fun and fascinating.

Web and mobile services are growing fast in South Africa as broadband prices drop. And all the South African businesses I speak to are keen to get the benefits of UX. They know they need input, but don't always know where to start. Hopefully the UX forum, and the face-to-face meetings, will help spread the word and raise awareness.

A few attendees (whose websites I know):

• Piet Alberts from Clayant
• Dennis Williams from DNA
• Jacobus Van Niekerk from Azapi
• Anne Sophie Leens from Apartment
• Vanessa Clark from burgeoning social media consultancy TwoKats
• Andrew Smith and Shane Dryden from Yuppie Chef
• Shaun O'Connell from Career Junction

... and many more wonderful people whose website addresses I can't recall now. That's just the Cape Town gang. The Johannesburg gang had a larger gathering a little while back - and there's another one scheduled soon.

Overall the forum has 80 people.  Maybe you should join too. (It's free).

Organised, industrial society creates left-over time for its citizens -- and that time has to be used up somehow. At first it was with gin. Then TV. Now it's just beginning to be with mass creation and collaboration.

Thanks to Anne Sophie Leens for the pointer. And "wow" to Clay Shirky for such a great post. I hope the book is just as good.

I have to say - it really shifted my mindset.

...if you take Wikipedia as a kind of unit, all of Wikipedia, the whole project--every page, every edit, every talk page, every line of code, in every language that Wikipedia exists in--that represents something like the cumulation of 100 million hours of human thought. I worked this out with Martin Wattenberg at IBM; it's a back-of-the-envelope calculation, but it's the right order of magnitude, about 100 million hours of thought.

And television watching? Two hundred billion hours, in the U.S. alone, every year. Put another way, now that we have a unit, that's 2,000 Wikipedia projects a year spent watching television. Or put still another way, in the U.S., we spend 100 million hours every weekend, just watching the ads. This is a pretty big surplus. People asking, "Where do they find the time?" when they're looking at things like Wikipedia don't understand how tiny that entire project is, as a carve-out of this asset that's finally being dragged into what Tim calls an architecture of participation.

See? Read the whole thing...

If if the 1st Gen iPhone was so "bad" - what was Apple thinking when they launched it?

Lots of people are excited about the new iPhone because they think it will address many of the annoyances present in the first one. (Well - not all of those issues are getting addressed, in fact. But some are.)

There was much complaining about the iPhone 1.0. And vocal user complaints are not usually a great recipe for a popular product and strong sales. In fact often, companies that rush products out to be "first to market" end up having their lunch eaten by products that arrive a little later, but offer a better UX. Apple themselves demonstrated with the ipod that late-comers can steal the the show by being "best-to-market."

Here are 5 reasons I can think of why Apple launched a "bad" product, braved all that negative publicity, and gave companies like Samsung and HTC a chance to take a shot at them.

1. Launch simple products first.

Apple like everyone else had to launch a version 1.0. Business reality and human psychology demand it. At some point you have to get something out the door becfore you run out of cash or go insane. iPhone 1.0 was a product of controlled project scope.

2. Get feedback from beta testers

Getting live market feedback works well - but mostly with early adopters. So perhaps Apple didn't want go mainstream yet. Did they elect to keep sales constrained and stay with the iPhone *BETA crowd until they had perfected the product?

3. Move the focus to UX

The iPhone caused a stir because it moved the focus to a different aspect of the mobile UX. Were Apple deliberately saying "it's not about hardware. Stop competing on hardware. This new phone is all about the user experience." So in a way, the hardware shortcomings drew attention to the UX. People complaining about missing hardware could be accused of "missing the point/having no vision" - and frequently were.

4. No competitors stand a chance anyway

Apple decided it didn't matter if their prodcut wasn't perfect, because they were confident that none of the existing mobile manufacturers could get their act together to compete on Apple's UX turf nearly fast enough. Efforts from HTC and Samsung were hardly mind-blowing. Nokia's device is still in development.

And realistically, that wasn't hard to predict. For traditional electronics companies try to squeeze into the Apple mold seems to be all but impossible. So Apple put their money where their mouth was and went first to market with an incomplete product. They knew they would get a way with it.

5. And now they can generate more buzz by launching version 2.

All publicity is good publicity.

Are people going to buy iPhone2? Some more will. That I suspect that question doesn't matter to Apple too much. We're still, arguably, in beta 2. One more release and it's going to get interesting.

Tower Bridge has joined the ranks of an increasing number of intelligent objects that can tell us things about themselves.

My colleague David Whittle uncovered this beautiful little story: Tower Bridge is now on Twitter. Effecitvely the bridge is keeping its own micro blog of its activitiy and notifying anyone who cares to subscribe about what it is doing.

This makes Tower Bridge into a spime - an object that is in some why aware of its's own position in space and time, and able to report it to interested parties.

You've found your keys

Spimes offer a lovely way to connect the world of physical objects to the information flow of the Internet.

Lost your keys? If they were spime keys, you could Google for them.

Lent a book to someone but can't remember who? If it were a spime you could Google for who had it. And maybe even if they had read it.

Bruce Sterling describes a vision of the future where product designers can iteratively enhance spime-products using spime data about when and where the products were used. Kind of like Web analytics but for physical products too. (Fascinating and useful for the designers, but no replacement for experience labs and other ethno techniques. Why? Because a spime will still not be able to capture and relay its users intentions, motivations and desires.)

Spimes and spime kludges

You can't yet google your keys or get analytics about how someone used their new shoes. But there is already a lot of spime-like stuff out there, beyond Tower Bridge.

Track packages: Express parcels are spimes. They have barcodes and RFID tags, so that you can track where they have got to. There was furore a few years back over the idea of RFID tags embedded in clothes to help with inventory tracking. If you forgot to remove the tags, then conceivably, people could track you!

Find children: Mobile phones and cool sneakers with GPS are being used to help worried parents keep track of their children. (No need to implant the chip in the child, just give them a kid-friendly phone or trendy sneakers and they'll take their treasure with them everywhere).

And this low tech but ingenious approach is helping people find lost digital cameras. If you find a lost camera, just mail four pictures from it to the Found Cameras and Orphan Pictures blog, and maybe the owner will find them and claim it.

Spime your stuff now

If you own something that you feel need to be searchable by others, Google can help. Google Base lets you store any information about anything online now, so that others can search for it. But unless you can find a way to update the information in real time, then your object won't yet be a spime.

Know any other good spimes? Do tell.