Sunday, February 19, 2006
A mobile device that is not useful, is nothing
In CanalPDA has published an excellent article in describing what the technology companies that "know", that is, they know what is what users really want, and that is what we give them. At present it seems that the important thing from a "gadget" is the technology that incorporates: bluetooth, wifi, voip, and all the other acronyms that flood the pages on the subject. The more complex and multi-function is, it seems that more heat is received. But this is just the feeling of the most geek, techies, or as we like to call it. And this group is a minority in the population.
In my opinion, a smart mobile device has to be focused and integrated to be truly effective. With focused, I mean that, first and foremost, you must solve a specific problem for a specific type of user. Multipurpose products, which are intended to be everything to everyone, are bought by enthusiasts, but for anyone else. The companies that are specialists learn to leave out the functions that are not essential for the commodity.
What users are looking for is that the equipment in question meets its work: to do so quickly, that she does, it is easy to use. And I will daring to add one thing: those who love technology also appreciate that. One can have a PocketPC (for example) with all technologies and for integrated occurred. But when you really need it, pointing to a note or put an alarm, you have to say the typical "forgive, expected to close this program such and such, and you open the nosequé y. .." Is that functionality? The functionality is to have a Palm with the programs that brings the factory, and little else, and when you have something to aim at the calendar, get your PDA, click the button agenda, you tap on the day and write. That's it! That is the function of a PDA, not to play Age of Empires.
[...] The product must combine hardware and software (and in some cases, wireless services) seamless, to produce a product that works. People accustomed to using mobile devices in short bouts and while traveling. That makes them very intolerant even with regard to small usability problems that could ignore if it were a PC. If the user has to complicate life with the setup or if the user experience is not as simple, we will be selling back to the fans.
Some companies know this. And spend a lot of effort to make their equipment easy to use. Only integrate the technologies that will be using at least 80% of the buyers, and dispenses with the rest. The part of society more "technology" is rie of these companies. But if you think, are the more respect they deserve. The author points to Nintendo and Palm as two examples of this, and could not be more appropriate.
Despite being battered by a press more concerned about the features, Nintendo has continued to prosper because it is concentrated in a particular market (games) and one type of customer (young), and functions that make it takes something special to them. My favorite example is the games console Nintendo DS. A him Tecnofil require WiFi, high resolution display and a faster processor. By contrast, Nintendo has put a second screen, and already, tactile. Then, the firm has designed applications that exploit the possibilities of the touch screen to create a unique gaming experience.
Ã? His is a classic example of design thinking of the solution. The traditional approach of PC-style design ensures that sell well there that "on Time" in all the specifications. Nintendo has realized that its customers are less interested in the characteristics that the gaming experience. Nintendo does not add features, but differentiation.
When the author talks about Palm, emphasizes precisely this ease of use, this great value on a daily basis, which defines the essence of the Palm.
[...] What impresses me most is his obsession apadionada the smallest details.
They are able to give you around like no one available to the pixels and the flow of the interface. And that practice is not a science but an art in which are discussed again and again, relentlessly, the details of managing the product by a typical user, constantly wondering how they could save the average user, the second time or a moment of confusion.
The interfaces that were designed not always pretty. In fact, they were often the most ugly. But they were always amazingly efficient ways to exploit the available space on the screen.
I recommend you read the full article, which presents examples of each of their ideas that make a clear look at things like water, as well as talking to other companies that have managed to differentiate themselves from the rest, while connecting on a muydirecta with consumer tastes: Apple, RIM and Danger. It is not the first time in this blog are commented on these ideas, if you have not done I strongly recommend reading what is and what is not a Palm, and what you are "losing" per user is PalmOS.
By: Mark Gonzalez Troyes in General
RSS comments | 
Print this post
Subscribe to stay abreast of developments in this blog
