Have been spending some time thinking about micro content especially within location based activity. I guess what is occupying my mind could be summed up simply as location within location: your at a night club and you want to generate content based on the room, floor or bar you are at for example.

I've been thinking about how this can be useful to both users and publishers - within apps such as Foursquare, that generally work at a macro level.

A question that gets raised is what is a location how micro can we go before it stops being useful, or is it down to the users perceived value of the data.

It's also becoming a general topic in a number of macro data projects we are working in to establish that macro and micro seem to have different audiences. We generally follow content by a number of authors whom we don't know but, trust, admire, respect, find interesting etc - we consume their macro data, but is it useful to be able to remove their micro data, or at least turn it off at the highest level. Comparatively we are much more interested and intent on consuming micro data from our closest network members.

In platforms where there is a distinct difference between public and private or restricted level data this becomes a powerful requirement.

How best to manage this is throwing up some useful and interesting opportunities in projects at the moment.

As we sit at the dawn of finger based interaction vs the old mouse method, I'm looking at how to best establish the differences this interactive method causes to the user experience?

One question that initially came up was if using your finger is in some way similar to what users who use a graphics tablet rather than a mouse experience on a standard desktop machine.

One exception being the difference in feedback between smart touch devices and a standard computer OS in that there isn't really a hover state for the touch device as you are either taped on or not, ie you have clicked or you haven't.

Note there is in some cases hover activity - if you move you finger away from a button before releasing then you don't actually activate that trigger but you will have seen the hover state. Having experimented with this behavior it is interesting that this isn't intuitive in the way hovering with the mouse pointer is - with our finger we click and release instinctively, we almost don't expect a hover or intermediate piece of feedback to occur. We just tap around until we find the button/trigger so to speak.

We'll hope to have more in depth notes to share on this subject over the coming hours, days and weeks. Also read some of our observations over at Function/Form.

Another great article from the iA team can be read here.

 

On going notes and observations will be added below (feel free to favorite this post to follow it, and if quoting any observations please attribute them to TOL™)

1) At last a computer you feel at one with - yes I know we can make this comment of our phones, but compared to computers or handheld gaming devices (from gameboy to PSPs) this feels way more intimate. There aren't external buttons or controls unlike all previous iterations of gaming devices and this makes if feel different, even Nintendo DS employs a stylus, and a stylus creates a removed interaction just like a physical keyboard or mouse.

Tablets when done well are computers to get intimate with.

2) A sharing experience - we like passing the iPad around, here have a look at this, have a play with this, read through this - we don't even do this with our laptops. With a laptop it's more like come here have a look at this over my shoulder!!

3) Our favorite examples of print brought to life by the iPad are the ones that enhance the enjoyment in a genuinely emotive manner. Our best experience of this so far would be the frame by frame reading option on the Marvel Comics app. Essentially the user is given the option to read the comic frame by frame. A mask is used to hide all the other frames on each page but the one you are reading. It gives a strangely cinematic quality as you follow the story one frame at a frame which is really enhanced by the colour and contrast qualities of the iPad screen. This is a unique touch that just isn't possible in the original print format that adds a totally new dimension to the content - and it's simple, not some cheesy gimmick. Marvel 10 out of 10 move straight to the top of the class.

4) From @helvector - I like the term Natural User Interface: NUI instead of GUI (Graphical).

5) Just because you can doesn't mean you should - we accept this isn't a normal GUI as noted above and that the element of touch brings with it a whole new range of interface possibilities and metaphors, but just be careful, question decisions and experiments and still respect what has be learned over these past few years designing interfaces for desktop web and OS.

6) Do you need to make stuff look real? - we're not to sure about how necessary or even effective this is. A number of articles have made the argument that because you touch this device it makes sense for things to look tangible, but we're not sure this argument stands up all of the time. If it were so, why have Apple done it with some apps but not all, and how come it's the ones they have done it with that have been met with mixed feelings.

The whole bookshelf thing just isn't anywhere as nice as the interface they have used in the past for browsing multiple album art - Cover Flow. Cover Flow's name suggests this would have been a better starting point than obvious faux wood textured bookcases.

The main issue we have is that often making things real means those graphical decisions then have a bigger impact on the actual mechanics and process of using the interface. With a real life approach, things need to be reasonably consistent in scale and relationship before they just become textures for the sake of textures - Visual Kitsch. This means the graphical direction has a bigger impact of the architecture and layout of the interface than when not applying a real life graphical theme - like the aforementioned bookcase.

Unless these subsequent restrictions happen to deliver a more usable interface/experience you should question if the direction you are heading down is the right one. You may for example be sacrificing valuable screen real estate for the sake of maintaining faux realism and as a result may have more navigation/browsing to consume the information or perform a task.

Certainly in the earl days of flash interface design, designers rushed in with excitement at the chance to make everything real and tangible. But over time it was understood that this only works some of the time and when it works best is when the user experience or the task being performed benefits from the embellishment.

We would argue that the Kindle is a better eReader than the iPad over longer durations and it looks nothing like a book compared to the iPad's page curling, faux bound paper experience. The Kindle embraces that it isn't a book made from printed pages and challenges itself to be a good eReader by tackling it's format for what it is, rather than mimicking something it isn't.

Jakob Nielsen has weighed in on this debate and it's no suprise where he sits. For him the biggest issues lie around the many different ways in which the touch interface is being interpreted, for a man who champions the idea of Usability norms and standards this is a difficult area. Note to day he hasn't tested this across a large user base, but it's an interesting read none the less, and if we are all swimming in uncharted waters so to speak, we should be considering as many opininions and ideas as possible - http://www.nngroup.com/reports/mobile/ipad/

7) Maybe we can't quite judge it yet! - by this we mean we are eagerly wating for the competition to get involved but when and will they. This week both HP and Microsoft have delayed their rumoured slates/tablets for varying reasons, and while an Android OS ouch device in this market seems a fair bet it's not a certainty yet. Until we get to experience the competition the iPad has little for us to judge it against. This in someways has been a coup by Apple - having the momentum of the app store in place and timing the size of the eBook market perfectly, it has a head start in the all important content stakes. Our feeling is that unlike the traditional web market, the tablet market may yet come down to content rather than the hardware. However evolution of the actual hardware is best served in a competitive market place so we hope the iPad gets some good opposition some time soon.

8) Extended use cases - do I need it and where does it fit in my life seem to be one of the big questions for anyone thinking about getting their first tablet. Some places we think this type of device will excel:

• The classroom - this is the computer for education, so much more mobile and accesible than a laptop. A quality product nearer to price point. Less maintenance issues. Less security issues.

• The home - obviously this is where eReader, come social web and micro content comes into it's own. This is the entertainment browser for shorter form content alongside traditional TV viewing.

• The office - we don't think this is a replacement device by any stretch (not yet anyway) but for presentation, content and updates in the field and between offices and office/home it comes into it's own. Don't believe us well it's already the law!

• Travel - from commuting to overseas travel a tablet comes into it's own once more. 10 hour play back for movies, email, web browsing and game playing before you even think about eBooks and subscription content the iPad appears to be the best mobile entertainment device available. How many of us are already doing this on smart phones instead of laptops, lets be honest a tablet is better for this than a smart phone!!

• In the field - this might be a little way off but maybe not, but basic field reporting for medical teams, technical and maintenance teams seems to be very suited to this kind of device.

• Door to door - could be the perfect device for the door knockers, from selling you a new borad band package to donating money to charity. Less paper work and much more mobile than a laptop.

9) Usability vs learnability - We've be interested to notice now quickly people seem to be at ease with touch devices compared to the traditional computer/keyboard/mouse set-up. Obviously there is a natural quality to exploring and touching, where feedback is generated by your actual physical actions without the need for an input device between us and where the feedback occurs Also there is the fact we are already very used to other manual interactions with other technology such as mobile phones for example. We mention Jakob Nielsen's concerns over the lack of consistent approaches to UI but can this be negated if the actual device itself has an inherent learnabilty. A compelling and powerful observation for us has been watching 40+ year old technology afraid users and pre-school age children. Both seem to be very at ease with touch devices, and in turn learn very quickly. This doesn't erase the need for relearning as we move from app to app, with their varying takes on UI, but the device seems to negate this as being a barrier in the way it is within a traditional desktop OS. This may also be a result of the type of OS at play on iPad and iPhone/Touch. As such it closed, one task at a time - no real ability to accidentally move or erase items, it lacks the fear factors of a standard desktop OS that would traditionally scare the computer illiterate.

 

 

 

 

 

It's fairly excepted that in the debate over the worlds ever widening poverty gap that what an individual's 'needs' is pretty much the same universally - you know shelter, full belly, clean water, security etc. Essentially in monetary terms not very much at all.

So what is causes the gap to keep growing. The answer is what we 'WANT'. We want so much and we in the west more so than anywhere are fed messages 24 hours a day that blur the line between 'need' and 'want'. You know when your kid comes up and says daddy I need such and such, it's an age old story - in truth there is very little that we need. Yet even adults tell themselves that you can't just opt out the world is like this so we must participate, and in our western society the things we 'want' quickly get excused as the things we 'need'.

So with an estimate by the UN of 6800000000 people on the planet in 2009 imagine the difference just 1% of people sacraficing just $100's would make. In short sacraficing something each year they 'want' that costs at least $100 for providing something someone 'needs'

Well it would raise exactly $1 per person on the planet, at anyone time, no small sum of money $6800000000 and rising. Given that the international poverty line is $1 per day - that's 6800000000 days of basic life for people in the poorest countries alone.

Now obviously poverty is relative to the cost of living in any given country but even so, people in developed countries need to step and think about these kinds of basic figures - every time we buy a pair of running shoes we don't need for $200!!

I genuinely think there is a campaign idea in this - and sitting there pondering the idea has made me realise how much more I can do even at a monetary level, how little I really 'need' vs how much I think I 'want'.

1% of the global populationcan can create $1 per person, by giving $100 each - what a simple idea!!

Just how long would you wait for a delayed train before accepting it's just never going to come? That maybe the trains have stopped for good, that it's a sign something much bigger is at foot?

Got asked this question by mother in-law the other night and couldn't think of an answer. Today realised a couple of things: the answer changes as your life variables change, none more so than when you have kids. Secondly there is no one single place, not to sound greedy but I think there are at least 2-3 homes I would need around the world: probably in Canada, Australia and Switzerland; having a UK place would also be good.

Don't want much do I!!

ThinkingOutLoud™ is the new home for my occasional moments of quick thinking. Not wanting to spoil the moment and have time to over think this will become a kind of shared mental note book - if it's good enough to blurt out it will go here, to be mused on later.