Random Post: Life on the command line
RSS .92| RSS 2.0| ATOM 0.3
  • Home
  • Blog
  • News
  • Insights
  • Services
  • Clients
  • Team
  •  

    À propos the 'app phone'

    November 5th, 2009

    David Pogue has a review today of Motorola’s Droid which includes some discussion à propos how to categorize and name devices of this type.

    Motorola Droid

    Motorola Droid

    He promotes the noun ‘app phone‘ for them, attributing it to @mentalworkout.

    [Cool app, BTW, for those who have fear of flying. I took the Virgin Atlantic flight to London earlier this week; if you're lucky enough to fly in Upper Class, it's such an extraordinarily soothing experience that you probably don't need the app.]

    I really like ‘app phone‘ , and suggest that we all adopt it for this class of devices:

    • Apple’s iPhone
    • all current Android ‘phones
    • most modern BlackBerrys – post Curve
    • Palm’s Pre
    • Nokia’s N97 and N97 Mini running the latest version of Symbian

    This post re-surfaced for me, however, one of the key topics that we have found ourselves debating frequently over the last many months; what is a ’smart phone’, and what should we call it?

    This is a common challenge in high-tech; how do you think about new phenomena? How do you build robust mental models? We believe that having the specialist expertise to do this, and the relevant experience of having done this, is one of the key things that differentiates Endeavour Partners.

    First, what are the key criteria:

    • downloadable applications – in which case do BREW and Java devices qualify?
    • user interface, such as (responsive) touch screen or QWERTY+touch pad/trackball interface to allow easy navigation for the web and similar applications
    • running multiple applications – which disqualifies the iPhone?
    • great at browsing – typically with a full WebKit browser
    • third party applications have to be available, affordable and accessible
    • what about size – is there some constraint here, because otherwise a laptop could qualify?

    And what about the additional capabilities that are now part of the competitive benchmark:

    • fast graphics – for video, browsing and gaming
    • accelerometers
    • GPS – for location services
    • WiFi

    There are several specific devices or types of devices that illustrate this challenge, and the grey areas involved:

    • older BlackBerrys with thumbwheels but without trackballs – great at e-mail web but suck at browsing
    • the Nokia E71, a great (particularly when it launched) device handicapped by its click-pad for navigation (which on one occasion proved enormously frustrating as the cursor moved in clicks that circumnavigated a small target without ever being able to actually click on it, on a site that should have been designed with mobile devices in mind – Handango)
    Nokia E71

    Nokia E71

    • many of Nokia’s myriad Symbian S60 devices that have 12-key keypads, lacking either a touch screen or a viable navigation method for browsing
    • and what of the forthcoming Nokia N900 – is this a smartphone, or not?
    • and given how unresponsive the touch screen on the N97 and N97 mini can be, and some of the usability challenges that remain with Symbian, do the N97 and N97 Mini qualify?
    • almost all Windows Mobile devices, that lack a touch pad, requiring a stylus or arrow keys for what is enormously painful navigation (Sony Ericsson’s Experia X1 is one of the few devices that overcomes this challenge)

    On purely pragmatic grounds, and notwithstanding flame wars from some purists and Verizon’s new advertising campaign, clearly any definition that excludes the iPhone on the technically focused grounds that it does not run multiple applications at once, except for some built-in apps such as Mail and Phone, does not make much sense. Although this may be an important consideration, it clearly does not deter users, and the ease of switching amongst applications mitigates this significantly.

    The related question was what to call these things? We tried the term ‘smart device‘, to emphasize the that the capabilities went way beyond making a call. Unfortunately that promotes confusion as it embraces some very devices that do not have ‘phone capability at all.

    So, let’s endorse the term ‘app phone‘ for these high end devices, and use the term ’smart phone’ for the broader group of which these are a subset.


    Will Microsoft be in the pink?

    July 1st, 2009

    So, one of the most interesting questions about the smartphone marketplace is what will Microsoft do? WinMo is weak and late. OK, some the hardware is sexy, such as Sony Ericsson’s X1, but this won’t be enough to enable it to remain relevant in the face of the onslaught from Apple and RIM and Android. Possibilities abound:

    • launch its own device?
    • overhaul WinMo completely?
    • buy a device company (HTC or Microsoft or Palm)?
    • buy a platform players (Palm or RIM)?

    Recent rumors suggest it may do its own device; and that this is what the Danger, Inc. team have been up to Microsoft Moves Office to JWT From McCann


    Ease of use and ecosystem before elegance

    June 26th, 2009

    With the dawn of the superphone, where is Microsoft? – FierceWireless

    In a post on FierceWireless about smartphones (which he tags superphones), Stephen Drake poses the question that many of us are wondering about – what is Microsoft going to do?

    It seems to me, however, that although it’s the right question, he’s missing the point, focusing on aesthetics and hardware, rather than on ease of use and software.

    He characterizes these smartphones (or ’superphones’) as a:

    “…high-end device class characterized by its ‘wow factor,’ a real or perceived buying frenzy, or an otherwise stylish, functional and pretty-to-look-at device…”.

    While aesthetics matter, as hardware features, functions and form factor continue to be difficult but do not any longer differentiate, he completely misses the single most important factor: the user experience.

    Talking about the Pre, he focuses on its: “…multi-touch capabilities and beautiful interface…”, hardware and aesthetics, when what matters about the Pre is WebOS. And the apps. Or lack of them.

    When he comes to Microsoft, he asks where is “… the iconic, shiny device that users have coveted….” There are iconic, shiny devices: Sony Ericsson’s Xperia X1 for example, but WinMo just isn’t there.

    Yes, aesthetics matter, but much less so than first ease of use, then the ecosystem (apps and content), both of which outweigh elegance.

    Unless and until Microsoft can deliver the usability that customers are coming to expect from Apple, Android and Palm, it will remain uncompetitive.

    Tragically, although this should have been apparent since before the launch of the iPhone, as Andy Lees put it at the announcement in Barcelona in February of the forthcoming 6.5 release:

    “…[the user interface] seemed less important…”