Now leaving the Android bandwagon

I haven't posted in a while and I had intended my return post to be about CES.  However, my new iPhone 4S came in the mail yesterday and I thought it would be irresponsible of me, as a tech guy, to activate it and shut down my Droid X without a post explaining myself. 

I am, by nature, a contrarian.  So, as the iPhone exploded I was looking for what was next.  I found it in the Droid.  I liked being cutting edge and controlling my own destiny.  I liked being able to hit Flash sites and do things that others couldn't.  But, Android has now suffered from the mistakes made by Windows....time 10.

Today, the Android ecosystem is fragmented beyond recognition.  Developers struggle to build applications for it and so the most successful applications aren't available until their 3rd round of funding or 2nd year of popularity.  Moreover, my operating system is now dragging with delays of seconds.  God knows what's running on it with all of the application updates.  I just don't trust it.  I'm tired of having to re-boot my phone.

Google must do something to save Android from itself.  It must make it easier for developers to have some dependable version to rely on.  It must find a way to stabilize both the OS and the versions.  It must have a more consistent policy management. As much as people scream for "Open", open has become the wild-wild west.  We can settle for "Mostly-Open" and be just as happy. For those that are rebels and want TOTALLY Open, let them eat Linux. 

And so, I must say goodbye to Android.  You are now nothing more than a test device for me to experiment with things.  I must sacrifice your versatility for stability and availability.  You can win me back, Android.  I'm a fickle man and my eye is always wandering.  But right now, my phone belongs to Apple.

Tradeshows: Been there. Done that. Got the shirt!

We're at the ides of September and you know what that means: TRADESHOW SEASON!!  I've been doing these for 20 years and these things cost companies BiG bucks. (the font was not a typo, but reflective of attendees expenditures and exhibitors).  Yet, I am constantly amazed at how bad show organizers and exhibitors blow it.  So, I'd like to publish some guidelines for a tech tradeshow:

Organizers

1. Can we please provide enough bandwidth for both exhibitors and attendees?
2. SET UP MEETING SPOTS.  I don't mean meeting rooms.  I mean a few areas for people who have never met to schedule a place to initially meet before they walk off to find a place to talk.  Today, the only thing we can count on is the registration area, which is off the floor and increasingly a poor place to meet. Even better would be a micro-LBS service where I can track to my meeting.
3. In today's age of technology, why are we still standing in registration lines?
4. The BEST show's I've ever attended are the CompTel shows.  Why? As an exhibitor I get an attendee list with contact info.  My days have 8-10 meetings a day.  That's easy to justify attendance.  SELL ATTENDEE CONTACT LISTS OR PROVIDE A MANDATORY CONTACT PORTAL.  Screen scrape the LinkedIn event sites if you have to. At the very least, let me know who's going to be there so I can do my own homework and reach them.
5. Provide literature repository accessible by search or QR code and end the tons of paper that gets shipped around and (mostly) thrown away.
6. Stop with the readers.  Use QR codes or TAG. Everyone has a phone.
7. People want to meet panel speakers. Usually, it's why they go to the panel.  Why not plan the room for that instead of the crush at the speakers desk at the end of every panel?
8. I still haven't seen a conference app that's any use.  The maps are the worst.  Really?  A scanned pdf is the best you can do?

Exhibitors

1. If I can't walk by your booth and know what you do in that 10 ft. of walking by YOUR BOOTH SUCKS and I'm wondering why you are there!
2. Why are you there? Target your audience, booth message and objective for the show.  Then execute.
3. As above, can you please use TAG or QR codes so I can get the literature I see immediately (and share it) rather than sign up for literature that you never send?
4. Give away stuff I want and will use, rather than stuff I'm going to throw away (or leave in my hotel room for housekeeping to throw away).  
5. Everyone wants a shirt.  But:
1. Have an objective of the shirt (will I wear it in the office? the gym? golfing? hang it on the wall of my office?)
2. Design one I WANT to wear.
3. To point 4.1, make it useful  Put a small (not obnoxious) TAG/QR code on it
6. The Internet connection will suck. It's a fait-accompli.  Don't do online demo's.

 Panel Speakers

1. We know you're on the panel to pimp your company.  But, also go into the panel with the objective of providing some information of value to the audience.  Tell something they DON'T know unless they're running your business.
2. People are there to meet you.  Keep the half hour after the panel free to meet everyone.
3. Bring enough cards.
4. Don't give "DUH!" answers.  i.e. when someone asks how to market their apps, don't tell them "Be on iTunes" or "go Freemium".
5. Disagree.  Cause some fireworks.  It makes it fun for everyone.

 Marketing

1. Marketing only tracks "leads" from shows.  But shows go a long way in building relationships due to the face-to-face time spent with customers.  Track all of the companies that were met with at shows and assign deal value to all of them to evaluate the TRUE value of the dollars spent at a show. 
2. If you are not exhibiting, have your people send a text message every time they are asked about a booth and track the number of requests vs. the number of meetings actually had.  This will give you a measure of whether a booth would aid sales, outside of lead generation.

I'm not going to do a section on attendees.  Those are MY hard earned secrets. ;)

Balancing the Amazing with the Practical

Our COO sent me an e-mail the other day and I told him I was going to steal his phrase.  Within the e-mail he said, "We have to be careful to balance the Amazing with the Practical."  The great part of my job is that people look to us to create unique experiences and so, like and ad agency, I allocate part of my day (EVERY day) to reading lots of cool articles and then to general brainstorming.  I dream up many amazing ideas.  But are they practical?  What is "Practical"?

I've been involved in many projects where the UI is designed by a design shop.  The problem is that they create things that just don't work and so the designs have to be modified or even thrown away and started over.  It kills many projects.  But it's not just designs, it's features and functionality as well.

Foursquare and Augmented Reality are examples of two applications that are very cool in concept but the user experience can leave something to be desired.  Any location based service (both require location) absolutely hammer on the phone's battery.  On my last trip to SXSW, I checked in everywhere. The result was a battery that was dead by the early afternoon.  Did I mention that I didn't wake up until 10?  Augmented reality not only requires GPS, but a persistent connection to pull reference data.  Bye bye, battery and hello lots of "network not founds".

Last year, I helped design an iPad application that held the #1 spot on iTunes for 5 months.  We used OpenGL technology to build a 3-dimentinal object that spun..  It was the most advanced UI on the market, but the tax on the iPad's processor was more than it could handle and we spent more time dealing with memory management issues than we did in developing the application.  It was amazing, but we couldn't take that design to any other devices.  We got it done and it was an amazing design, but  it was a one-shot deal. 

So when you design, make sure the designers are talking with the developers.  Think about the user experience over time, the extended ecosystem of the design and the rest of the features surrounding the design. Balance the amazing with the practical.

Mobile is driving tremendous User Experiences....and some that go to 11.

Regardless of what yesterday's 512 point drop in the stock market implies, companies are spending money.  They are investing big dollars in creating great user experiences.....and some of them are being created by me and my team! :)

The definition of mobile is expanding....enough that many people are debating the question, "what is mobile?" Mobile is no longer a phone. However, when one says, "mobile" most people will think of a phone.  But it's so much more. I even chided one of my team yesterday for using that term to refer to what we do.  Today is all about "Connected Experiences". It's my new term.  Use it.  Spread it around!  It will soon replace that boring term, "cloud!"

I have always preached that it's never about "the application" on a mobile device.  It's always been about the content or the service.  The device was just away to experience it.  Today, we're building experiences on laptops, phones, tablets, cars, bluetooth devices, DLNA (connected home), power systems and RFID enabled products.  We have things connecting that have nothing in common with a phone.  We're doing this for companies that understand that they have great stuff and they want to create new ways for users to interact with their stuff.  They also want to find new things for users to do, using their stuff as a foundation or launching point.  My creative team and I help them stretch out of the box, flip paradigms on their heads and design these new experiences.  But I'm still amazed (and have worked with) companies that are satisfied in just taking their same stuff and putting it on a phone or tablet.

In the classic movie, Spinal Tap, Nigel is showing off all of his "rare" gear to Marty.  He gets to his amplifiers and brags that, "these all go to 11.  Most amps only go to 10.  Mine go to 11!"  Marty asks the logical question, "so, why don't you just make 10 louder and play at 9, then turn it up to 10 when you want to go louder?" to which Nigel responds, "But these go to 11!"

Too much "mobile" design is just like that.  Brands want, "an app" so that the CEO can say, "check out our iPhone app!"  There's nothing different about it that the user can't do on their website, or nothing meaningful. And they CERTAINLY aren't considering how they create a new experience that grows their brand, products and services. But they don't care.  To them, they don't understand the point of building a connected experience.  "But, Mr. CEO, can't I do the same thing on your website?"  "Yeah, but it's an app!"  Hmmm......And it goes to 11!

Wireless Trends: Prepaid and Data Throttling

There have been two troubling, but major trends in wireless over this bizarre summer. The first is today's findings by the New Millenium Research Council that projected that by the end of this year, 1 in 4 wireless users will be on prepaid plans (vs. the traditional monthly subscriber plans). The second is the recurring announcements from carriers who are eliminating "all you can eat" data plans and throttling down data usage allowances.  Both are troubling.  Let's read between the lines.....

The pre-paid movement is likely driven by both economic and service issues.  With "real" unemployment  (including the under-employed and those who have stopped looking for work) over 22% (according to TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence), over 1 in 4 people either don't have jobs to qualify for credit and/or can't commit to a long-term billing plan.  Add to that those that generally have poor credit and that 25% number is spot-on. A bad economy drives people to pre-paid much the same as it drives up stocks in discount retailers like Wal-Mart.  However, is this a long term trend?

Let's also not forget the fact that carriers are shifting rapidly (as are devices) and that carriers haven't done much to distinguish themselves and instill long-term trust and confidence in users to the point that they' allow themselves to be locked into a contract.  The carriers should also look at these numbers and decide what kind of customer they want and make it worthwhile for users to sign up for long-term contracts.  Carriers should take these numbers as a slap in the face as consumers seem to have no sense of loyalty. Number portability took away the "I can't lose my number" anchor and once LTE is fully implemented on all phones and in all networks they will also lose both the GSM vs. CDMA anchor as well as the "I won't change my handset" anchor. They need to figure out how to create longer term value.

The loss of unlimited data plans is a blow to an industry that is just starting to roll out powerful enough devices and networks to make the promise of an all-mobile world a reality.  However, with Credit Suisse's report last week that most wireless networks are running at 80% capacity and 23%  of base stations in the U.S. have peak rates OVER 80%-85% utilization it makes sense.  As LTE coverage increases, I'd expect this problem to get worse before it gets better.  Implementing high speed services is not as simple as improving the handset transmitters and base station receivers.  Carriers also have to increase the speeds of the back-haul lines that connect the base stations to the network and the network as a whole.  This is neither a small nor simple process and in many cases network simply does not exist to make this happen.  Most of the base stations are still connected over copper and not fiber.

Much like a gas station owner who works hard to create a successful business, only to find out that he can't get more gas to sell to the customers who are now coming to his station, the wireless industry has FINALLY got consumers buying rich media from their devices only to find out that they can't turn up enough capacity to service those customers.  The end result is throttling and high data charges.  This problem will get worse before it gets better as carriers continue to spin down their voice networks and run VoIP to reduce costs.  The core networks are already mostly running VoIP and as SIP technology improves they'll start running VoIP from the handset.  It will be seamless for the consumer but the effect on the data networks could be significant.  Look for major investments in network for years to come.  Hmmm......a stock buying opportunity???

What is User Experience?

I am constantly amazed at the volume of articles that I read that improperly use the term, "UX" (User Experience).  I guess that's good for me because their mis-understanding of the term is why their products so often fail.  Most people (including mobile product managers and designers) classify the UI (User Interface) as what the user sees before they engage with the product.  It includes the color, layout and screen flow.  They also classify the UX as what happens once they engage with the product.  It includes the useability, load times and emotional response to the product.  It's not necessarily that their definitions are completely wrong, but that they are woefully incomplete.

Wikepedia uses the ISO definition of User Experience, which defines it as, " a person's perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a product, system or service."  The key word in this definition is, "anticipated."  Said another way, a part of the User Experience are the user's thoughts about a product or service when they are NOT using it.

Too often products are developed to fulfill a need.  They may fill this need gloriously.  But what happens AFTER the product's usefulness has been exhausted?  What draws them back to the product to use it some more?  The great appeal of Angry Birds is not just that it's "fun".  Even fun has a limit.  Angry Birds has a great UX because it touches and augments several emotions.  It's fun when one is playful or bored.  It is destructive for when one is angry.  It is competitive when one needs fulfillment and it is comical when one needs a topic to discuss.  It draws the user back to it with a level of fulfillment whenever time is available and no matter the user's emotional state.

Contrast that to a hotel application, for example.  It can help the traveler plan and confirm their visit and get around while they're in the hotel.  It can even provide some entertainment.  But what happens AFTER the trip?  Why would a user keep engaging with the product when they only travel once a year for vacation?

Great products do one thing exceptionally well.  Products that try to be all things to all people do everything very mediocre.  However, a well designed UX not only has ease of use and a positive, useful experience.  It also creates an anticipation of use.  Great UX is designed with thoughtful consideration of what happens when a user is NOT using the product.  

TechCrunch re-design....why??

I was preparing a post on UI vs. UX vs. content....until I logged on to TechCrunch and saw their re-design.  SCREEEEEEECH!!!!  Um......, WHY re-design the site? 

If you don't know the site, TechCrunch is a veritable bible of what's happening in tech.  I check the site several times per hour.  These guys analyze new products, new startups, founders, VC's and press announcements.  However, I think this is a great example of the analogy that being a film critic doesn't mean you can direct films.

As I read the Product Manager's Overview of the re-design, he mostly talked about performance issues being the big improvements.  However, those issues are back-end issues that can be addressed without a visual re-design.  There are a couple of visual cleanups, but for the most part the re-design added an obnoxious amount of tech-green and horribly re-designed their logo with an un-recongizeable "C" and an overall design that made me check the resolution on my screen to see if something was wrong.

As a matter of full disclosure, I'm a (UW) Husky and have a pure hatred of the University of Oregon, so I'm a little sensitive to green in general.  However, because TechCrunch uses an electric green they REALLY need to be sensitive to overusing it in the site as they've done with the new design.  Between the logo, the overuse of electric green and the fonts most of the comments I've read lean towards "obnoxious".  I haven't really read any fan mail.

They used to have a neat carousel at the top that was very functional and app- like, but they took it out.  But regardless of my opinion of the visual design, there was nothing significant added from a useability or functional perspective.  The design has fewer elements, yet is more cluttered.  Every Apple principle of simplicity was violated.  In fact, the product manager had to explain several items in the design and it took me a while to find them even after the explanation.  He also explained that he considers this launch a "beta" and more changes are coming.  "Huh?"  So, my question is, "Why was this re-design done?"  What was accomplished for the users? 

Although there are some very cool things that they can do with an app or with new web browsers, I'm going to cut them some slack because with web design you always have to design for the lowest common denominator. (aka: old browsers)   However, I think that the re-launch has a few lessons for visual and UX re-designs.

1. Have a business reason and a value proposition for the re-design that is obvious to your users.
2. The changes should be self-explanatory. Subscribe to the Steve Jobs rule of, "If you need an instruction manual, it's too complicated."
3. Don't change the familiar (your brand logo) at the same time as you change your layout. Leave something familiar to your users.
4. Don't launch to all of your users and call it a beta.  By the time you launch, you should have had 1-2 beta launches with increased sizes of user groups who provide comments.
5. Do a UX study.  Find out what you don't know.
6. Prepare your readers.  Let them provide input and be a part of the process.  Give them sneak-peaks.  The new stuff should almost always be, "....because you asked for it...."