Mobile Forward

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Sign Up
  • Support MF
    • RSS
    • Twitter

Car Consumers are Primed to Value a Better Experience

August 25, 2015

I know, I know – you’ve seen this. (But if you haven’t, it’s an interesting read.) J.J. Martin, for WSJ, talks with designer Marc Newson. Specifically on cars:

My design pet-peeve is: the automotive industry. There were moments when cars somehow encapsulated everything that was good about progress. But right now we’re at the bottom of a trough.

Hold that thought. Now combine it with Alexandria Sage’s piece for Reuters, titled Many U.S. drivers ignoring new tech features in cars: survey

Carmakers are adding everything from remote car unlocking to self-parking systems in their newest models as they try to make vehicles more connected to the Internet and more automated.

But the 2015 Drive Report from market research company JD Power found that 20 percent of new car owners had still not used approximately half of the technology features available in their vehicles after three months of purchase – the period after which drivers are less likely to adopt new features, researchers say. […]

“Customers say, ‘I have a competing technology that’s easier to use, or I’ve already paid for it – so why do I need it again?'” said Kristin Kolodge, executive director of driver interaction at JD Power.

Here you have a situation where:

  • Many mobile devices (cars) are poorly-designed, and
  • Overloaded by technology (that is poorly communicated), and
  • A context where people use smartphones and find them helpful.

… if only there was a company well-positioned and willing to think different about what consumers really value out of the entire car experience.

I highly recommend reading both pieces.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Cars, Design, Technology - Gen'l

Do We Need New Designs for Mobile Devices?

August 13, 2015

Several interesting bits today, loosely related to new form factors. Most of them evoke a need, rather than a solution, but they’re still interesting.

[With the Galaxy S6 Edge display] Samsung discovered a latent appetite for new, interesting mobile designs, even ones without a lot of practical value. Samsung Has Two Big New Phones, and Even Bigger Ideas (David Pierce; Wired)

The mobile phone in general and the smartphone in particular are designed to be carried first, and spoken into second. […] They’ve fallen out of favor because using the telephone feels mechanically ungainly as much as socially so. Don’t Hate the Phone Call, Hate the Phone (Ian Bogost; The Atlantic)

Language like “interface-free” and “invisible UI” point up just how stuck we are on the idea of VISUAL interfaces. (Josh Clark, @bigmediumjosh; Twitter)

Beyond the antenna designed for a smartphone, Apple notes that the design could also relate to Apple Watch, a MacBook an iMac, an iPad, iPod, gaming device or health monitoring device, and so on. Apple Designs Advanced Wireless Antenna with Unique Sapphire Structure for Killer iPhone Form Factor & Beyond (Jack Purcher; Patently Apple)

That second snippet sounds a bit obvious, in that everything needs to be carried before it’s used. More broadly, though, it prompts ideas about other form factors, including wearables.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Design, Interface, Phablets, Samsung, Smartphones

Monday Assorted Links

August 10, 2015

1. On recent rumors of an Apple MVNO: two thoughts, from John Gruber and Jean-Louis Gassée, sum up the reality perfectly, in my view:

Apple is a partner with all the carriers around the world that support iPhone. They can’t compete against them while partnering with them. (link to Gruber’s post)

“[Apple’s] one and only goal is selling devices. Everything else is in support of that goal. Would [an Apple wireless carrier] sell twice as many iPhones? Probably not.” (link to Gassée’s post)

2. Samsung Invents another Round of Concepts for future Smartphones with Multiple Displays. Exciting. Glad to see someone tackling this problem. This is one of many patents Samsung has filed. The specifics of this one don’t matter as much as the notion that Samsung (and others) are working to make this a reality. Someday.

3. Xiaomi ties up with Taiwan’s Foxconn to assemble smartphones in India. This aligns with Xiaomi’s focus on cost reduction (because it sells at razor thin gross margins) and helps it pursue the hearts and minds of consumers.

4. HTC stored user fingerprints as image file in unencrypted folder. Lovely. Reminds me of one of the six reasons I’ve used an iPhone since the 3GS: industrial design, ease of use, camera, apps, software updates, and … security.

6. Back to the future: Nokia prepares for mobile comeback. Increase in hiring / activity, in preparation for 2016/17 brand-licensing comeback.

6. Graava is a new action camera that does the editing for you. Watch the two minute video. I like the idea of it. I don’t need the actual product, though. Will we ever see something comparable in a smartphone? It reminds me of HTC’s “Zoes”.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Assorted Links, Design, Display, Foxconn, HTC, Imaging, India, Manufacturing, Nokia, Samsung, Security & Privacy, Smartphones, Wireless Service, Xiaomi

Apple’s Approach to Updating the iPhone’s Industrial Design

July 17, 2015

Good words by John Gruber, on Daring Fireball, about the iPhone’s industrial design:

I think Apple’s logic is that they want top-tier iPhone industrial designs to sit atop the lineup for two years […].

Keeping the same industrial design for two years serves multiple purposes:

  • It recoups the hard work put into design. During this time, designers can focus on developing better ideas for the next generation of products. Remember, design isn’t just the “look”; it’s also the functionality. Considerations like display size, button placement, material selection for durability and radio transmission, heat dissipation, acoustics, waterproofing, and more.
  • It allows for a similar hardware configuration inside the device, because the dimensions remain the same. This minimizes changes to the shape and layout of the circuit board, the antenna placement, the battery shape, etc. In turn, this makes efficient use of Apple’s massive investment in manufacturing. Engineers and supply chain experts can shift their attention to new consumer needs and new technologies to address them.
  • It allows many customers who like the design, but who aren’t able to upgrade when the first version debuts, to purchase it in year two. And the people who do buy the first version of any design don’t feel, one year later, that their model is out-dated.

Basically, solving important problems is intense work, and Apple wants to maximize the return for the time, investment, and risk.

______

Update: To improve readability, I shortened the introduction of this post, by removing the reference to Jason Snell’s article and reducing the excerpt from John Gruber. That content wasn’t directly related to the rationale for a two-year design cycle.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Design, Product Development, Smartphones

On Xiaomi: Imitation is a Choice, Sameness is an Opportunity

July 16, 2015

Emily Chang, for Bloomberg, interviewed Xiaomi SVP Hugo Barra. Hugo had some interesting things to say:

So this whole [accusation that Xiaomi copies Apple] all boils down to one chamfered edge, on one particular phone model, which was Mi4, which people said looked like the iPhone 5.

Judge for yourself, about this “one” product: here, here, or here.

If Jony Ive and his team — who are the most constrained to continuity in the iPhone’s design language — can make the latest major generation of iPhones look different from the last major generation, then so can any other OEM. Imitation is a choice. Different design is possible. It just requires leaders with fortitude and integrity.

On that note, congrats to the Nokia and Microsoft industrial design teams, who cared to be original and succeeded with great designs: the N9 and the Lumia series.

But Hugo had more to say:

Without a doubt every smartphone these days kind of looks like every other smartphone, right? You have to have curved corners. You have to have at least a home button, in some way. That’s how interaction design works.

Sounds like an opportunity to me – an opportunity to be different in a sea of look-alikes. This difference can range from the small to the large: industrial design details, form factor, or even product type. Think of the beige boxes that PC makers shipped before Apple introduced the iMac. Or the candy bar phones before the Motorola RAZR.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Design, Product Development, Smartphones, Xiaomi

Moto G (2015) to Offer MotoMaker Customization

July 15, 2015

Interesting Tweet from Evan Blass, here. Below is a screenshot, to make sure readers can also see it in RSS or email.

Mobile Forward 00342 2015-07-15

Letting consumers pick the color, finish, or material of their device is cool – that’s MotoMaker. And now it’s coming to a very budget-friendly product.

I have great respect for the mobile phone makers that make affordable devices for billions of people who, otherwise, might not have one. To echo the title of this site, they move mobile forward in a big way. Motorola, and the Moto G product, are great examples of companies and products that do this. And the thing about a product like the Moto G is that you don’t need a case. It’s very durable.

Tip of the hat to Andy Ihnatko, for voicing a similar sentiment – about making affordable devices – on one of my favorite podcasts.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Design, Motorola, Smartphones

Two Key Questions After Jony Ive’s Promotion

May 26, 2015

This post is “inside baseball” and written that way… but if you like baseball, cheers.
______

Two key questions remain after Jony Ive’s promotion. They’re not new questions, but they’re worth re-visiting:

Is Jony Ive now more involved or less involved in evaluating future Apple products and categories?

What person or persons are Apple’s “product pickers”?

Earlier, I mentioned how:

No one expects Apple to name projects and specify details but, if Ive was going to stay meaningfully involved with products, you’d expect some additional language and emphasis in that regard. It’s a sign, in my view, that his future contributions while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

From the “original” senior leadership team, only Cook, Schiller, Cue, and Ive remain. This matters in the sense that they learned a lot from Steve Jobs and from each other (and taught Steve Jobs, in many ways, I’m sure). Of these, my guess is that Schiller and Ive have both the deepest and most rounded product sense. I think there’s little question they’ve been the face, heart, and hands guiding Apple products for the past few years, no doubt with support from a broad cast of talented employees.

So, what’s the answer to the questions above? I have no idea. None. These things are rarely that clear; the Steve Jobs era(s) were the exception, and even then “clear” is the wrong word. Perhaps “clear-er”. If I had to guess, here’s my hunch: Jony Ive will continue to give his senior leadership vote, as he always has. And Phil Schiller will continue to drive product definitions, with Kevin Lynch continuing to be on-point for the watch.

This is what transition at Apple looks like: slow, smooth, hopefully imperceptible from a business standpoint. And yet very apparent from a human standpoint, as one era transitions to the next.

So nothing changes? Not quite. Richard Howarth (industrial design) and Alan Dye (interface design), Jony Ive’s direct reports now have a (bigger) voice and more respect. They’re not “new”, but they’re new to the senior leadership team. With Ive transitioning from day-today management, you can be sure they’ll be in senior staff meetings. The direction, detail, and questions in key discussions will be different. Better or worse? Of course we won’t know, at least for a while. But different.

Oh, and Phil and Eddy, they might be edging off a bit, too. Again, of course I’m guessing. But this is what transition at Apple looks like: slow, smooth, hopefully imperceptible from a business standpoint. And yet very apparent from a human standpoint, as one era transitions to the next.

[Richard Howarth and Alan Dye] are not “new”, but they’re new to the senior leadership team.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Design

Jony Ive’s Promotion is Likely a Gentle Fade to an Incredibly Impactful Career

May 26, 2015

We can view Jony Ive’s promotion to Chief Design Officer (Stephen Fry’s article and Tim Cook’s memo) at Apple thru the following lens:

Why does a company create a new position?

Several reasons, in order of most mission-focused (and most frequent) to least:

  1. To provide more formal and senior oversight to a critical area
  2. To accommodate an executive’s strength or weakness
  3. To retain an executive (e.g., match a prior role)
  4. To move an executive off the critical path of the company’s operations
  5. To honor an executive

Which of these might apply in this situation?

1. Nope. Design was already a formal area, and Jony Ive was already in charge.

2. Nope. Some of Ive’s comments to Stephen Fry might appear to support this (i.e., that the move accommodates Ive’s design strength by freeing him from administrative and management work). But, in fact, as Senior Vice President of Design, he was already able to pick and choose how he applied his time and talent. If this was truly about reducing time spent in meetings, performance reviews, and resource planning, it wouldn’t require a promotion to “Chief” anything.

3. Nope. Not an issue.

4. Likely, in my view. For the same reasons that Seth Weintraub of 9to5mac speculates about: that Ive probably wants to spend more time with family. Ive’s promotion makes for a smoother transition. Important when you’re the world’s biggest company, and when your stock is particularly sensitive to news.

5. Likely, in my view. If you read Tim Cook’s memo, it’s not about citing new information (accomplishments) as the promotion drivers. It’s about rewarding Ive with the title that matches the influence he’s had all along. It’s an acknowledgment; an honor. And he uses general language that, while in the present tense, also sounds commemorative. In fact, this is a strong indication that this “memo” was really meant for public consumption. And by “public”, I mean “investors”.

But between Cook’s memo and Fry’s article, talk about the future is glaringly absent.

But wait, doesn’t Tim Cook’s memo also say that Jony Ive will now focus “entirely on current design projects, new ideas and future initiatives”? Yes.

But between Cook’s memo and Fry’s article, talk about the future is glaringly absent. In Fry’s piece, Ive only went so far as to inform him about helping with the store re-design and the campus.

Let me state this more clearly: Ive, to-date a product-critical executive has been promoted into a more senior and impactful role, and the discussion about his future is limited to stores and work spaces. (To be clear, the stores are absolutely critical to Apple’s success and, arguably, in need of a meaningful re-design. Vital work. Interesting work. Odds that it makes the best use of Ive’s time and talent? Low, I would say.)

Ive, to-date a product-critical executive has been promoted into a more senior and impactful role, and the discussion about his future is limited to stores and work spaces. […] a sign […] that his future contributions, while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

Granted, no one expects Apple to name projects and specify details but, if Ive was going to stay meaningfully involved with products, you’d expect some additional language and emphasis in that regard. It’s a sign, in my view, that his future contributions while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

So, to repeat: it appears that Ive is gently stepping aside, being duly honored by Tim Cook, and reserving the right to make an impact here or there, on the project and level of his choosing. If this — and, to emphasize — it’s obviously speculative — if this is true, it’s certainly an immensely well-earned, well-timed taper to an incredibly-impactful and inspirational career.

If [his stepping aside] is true, it’s certainly an immensely well-earned, well-timed taper to an incredibly-impactful and inspirational career.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Design

Wednesday Assorted Links

May 13, 2015

1. Almost all smartphones sold today have the same two flaws — and the cases you’re buying prove it. Durability and battery life. Battery life is always in the news. This is a good reminder that durability is important too. The question is, for the next $1 of R&D to spend, do you allocate it to optimizing durability? Tough call, but most might answer “no”.

(Correction: I don’t think I should have framed it that way. It really depends on what other features you’ve developed and what parts of the product you’re able to control. And, crucially, the degree of improvement you’re able to make.)

2. Why 8 and 10 CPU cores in smartphones are a good idea – a lesson from the kitchen. (Remember, not every company is in a position to optimize its own CPU.) The main point:

The clusters of cores have different performance and power characteristics. With clever scheduling the mobile OS is able to use the best core for the best job […] more cores equals […] better power efficiency, but not necessarily more performance.

3. How Smartphones Have Changed Photography, In Three Numbers. And add to that the simple ability to share them.

4. Samsung answers the Apple Watch Digital Crown with a rotating, round bezel. What they need to avoid is this.

5. Why the Verizon-AOL deal just might work: Mobile video ads are worth a lot. “Verizon didn’t buy AOL, a dying ISP—it bought AOL, a digital ad company.” Maybe because of this.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Acquisitions, Assorted Links, Design, Imaging, Power, Processors, Samsung, Smartphones, Smartwatches, Verizon

This is How a Lot of First-Run Experiences Go Wrong

May 12, 2015

Good words on experience design by John Gruber, on the The Talk Show last week:

I think this is how a lot of first run experiences go wrong: the team that makes it gets into it and gets it, and understands it, and loses track of what it would be like to [use it on the] first day, and then you feel “oh my god, this thing [is driving me nuts]”.

Yes. And there’s the related danger of knowing all the little work-arounds and compensating actions that make your product tolerable. But of course, new consumers won’t know those. So what can you do? Keep getting perspectives from others. Ideally, in your target market but new to your product. And get some distance from your product (time, sleep).

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Design, Product Development

Market Scan Highlights

April 26, 2015

Peruse the whole thing here (it’s easy). Some highlights, with my comments.

1. The real way to tell whether Google’s wireless service is a success (BGR)

2. Why Apple has purchased camera technology company LinX and what will happen now? (i-Micronews)

  • Good read RE computational imaging, dual cameras

3. Xiaomi Boosts Its Business In India With Strategic Investment From Tata Sons Head (TechCrunch)

  • Dollar value not clear. PR value very clear

4. Xiaomi’s $205 Mi 4i mirrors the iPhone 5C design, claims 1.5-day battery (Ars Technica)

  • High performance to price ratio. Profitable? TBD

5. Full video of Vogue interview with Apple designers Jony Ive and Marc Newson posted to Web (AppleInsider)

  • Always worth it to hear the thoughts of subject matter expert or influential leader

6. Apple: First Look: Apple Watch Apps & Stats (App Annie)

  • Top category (so far) is Utility; 12% of all apps

7. Google: Android Wear’s Low-Power Ambient Mode (Daring Fireball)

8. Samsung filed for “Glastyle” and other Key Trademarks this Week (Patently Mobile)

9. Imaging: Yole on Image Sensor Future (Image Sensors World)

10. Microsoft CEO thinks there’s one BIG reason you’ll love Windows 10: Cortana (Business Insider)

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Acquisitions, Android Wear, Apple, Assorted Links, Design, Google, Imaging, India, Intelligent Assistance, Market Scan, Microsoft, Samsung, Sensors, Smartphones, Smartwatches, Wearables - Other, Windows, Wireless Service, Xiaomi

Monday Assorted Links

April 20, 2015

1. Microsoft Plans First Retail Store Outside North America. First of many outside the US?

2. Android Wear’s biggest update ever takes aim at the Apple Watch. Wi-Fi, doodles, gestures.

3. Can We Find Meaning In Our Wearable Data? Wonder if someone would ever boil it down to a single daily figure (a composite of many)?

4. Inside Microsoft’s Secret Design Lab. No real secrets, but it’s always good to see how stuff gets prototyped. This sort of openess is one of the best things I’ve seen in years: Motorola, Microsoft, (and I’m sure I’m missing others) letting people see a little bit about how devices get made. I like Apple’s videos (e.g., glimpses of how the watch is manufactured), but those are factory settings (nothing wrong with factories), whereas I prefer the device labs.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Android Wear, Assorted Links, Design, Distribution, Google, Microsoft, Product Development, R&D, Wearables - Other

The Next Big Thing In Design? Less Choice

April 16, 2015

Aaron Shapiro, CEO of Huge, writing at Fast Company,

Anticipatory design is fundamentally different: decisions are made and executed on behalf of the user. The goal is not to help the user make a decision, but to create an ecosystem where a decision is never made—it happens automatically and without user input. The design goal becomes one where we eliminate as many steps as possible and find ways to use data, prior behaviors and business logic to have things happen automatically, or as close to automatic as we can get. […]

At its core, the function of anticipatory design is to gather the data necessary and move from the era of personalization to automated decision-making.

I’d emphasize that, despite the reliance on more data, the value of the human designer will remain paramount. There’s just so much information that isn’t captured, analyzed, or understood, but that goes into “good design sense”. This relates quite well to the earlier post on Frictionless Design Choices.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Design, Product Development

Frictionless Design Choices

April 3, 2015

Insightful post by Steven Sinofsky (of Andreessen Horowitz; before that, president of Microsoft’s Windows division). He writes at Learning by Shipping. Below are key highlights (I added the orange emphasis):

Frictionless and minimalism are related but not necessarily the same. Often they are conflated which can lead to design debates that are difficult to resolve.

A design can be minimal but still have a great deal of friction. The Linux command line interface is a great example of minimal design with high friction.

  • Minimalist design is about reducing the surface area of an experience.
  • Frictionless design is about reducing the energy required by an experience.

Therefore the real design challenge is not simply maintaining minimalism, but enhancing a product without adding more friction.

Low-Friction Design Patterns
Assuming you’re adding features to a product, the following are six design patterns to follow, each essentially reducing friction in your product. They cause the need to learn, consider, futz, or otherwise not race through the product to get something done.

  • Decide on a default rather than options
  • Create one path to a feature or task
  • Offer personalization rather than customization
  • Stick with changes you make
  • Build features, not futzers
  • Guess correctly all the time
Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Design, Interface, Product Development

MOBILE FORWARD POSTS

Popular Posts

   Go to Complete List  ››

Latest Posts

  • The PC is Passé. What Now?
  • Google RankBrain: AI in Search
  • Tim Cook on Cars
  • Foxconn Makes About 30% of the Components in a Tesla
  • A Search for Another Run-Time Model
  • How Tesla is Ushering in the Age of the Learning Car
  • Nobody Can Override the Director
  • Apple’s Bold Platform Risk
  • Toyota Executive: “Toyota has to change its ways” to Move Forward
  • Intel Working on an iPhone Modem: New Chatter
  • On Product Names
  • Windows Laptops Need Better Engineering, Not Better Marketing
  • On Robot Creativity and Imagination
  • Perfecting Pixar’s Movies Takes a Crazy Amount of Research
  • A Leading Indicator of Success

Categories

Archives

  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015

Mobile Forward

About
A
Contact

Categories

Recent Posts

  • The PC is Passé. What Now?
  • Google RankBrain: AI in Search
  • Tim Cook on Cars
  • Foxconn Makes About 30% of the Components in a Tesla
  • A Search for Another Run-Time Model

Support MF

Subscribe

Follow MF

Twitter
A
RSS
A
By Email

Search

Copyright © 2021 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in