DUX2007 - Ubiquitous Computing

Alice Toth, Thursday, November 8, 2007 @ 6:40 pm

Adam Greenfield of NYU’s Interactive Telecommunications Program gave a great keynote presentation at DUX07 on ubiquitous computing -- embedded devices that are wirelessly networked, imperceptible, mobile and post-gui. Devices that are not perceived as computers by the people who use them, but rather as a facet of their lives. An example he cited is the Nike+ product for runners, which pairs with an iPod to give you feedback on how you’re running while you’re running and records info such as distance, time, etc. You can then sync your workout data to either iTunes or the Nike site, where you can then become part of the Nike+ community. It is a computer, but to most people it's just a piece of plastic you put on your shoe.

Ubiquitous computing. Existing or being everyware. Perceived as a facet of the user’s life. Eroding the distinction between product and service

Consider the automobile. When the first Model-Ts rolled off the assembly line, the car was a product. You drove it here and there and that was basically it. With the addition of On-Star, the car’s autonomy eroded as it was now networked with a diagnostic tool, roadside service, emergency contact, etc. The perception of a car as only a product began to erode as well; the car began to evolve to a platform. Fast forward a decade or so and we now have car as a service -- the Zip car. Glimpsing into MIT’s Smart Cities project, we begin to see the car as an interface to the city and not the engine.

As designers, then, our challenge is to design for these product/service ecologies.

Back to the Nike+:  although the device is basically a pedometer it only works for runners, not walkers. In addition, participation in the Nike+ community requires Flash because that's what the Nike site uses. This is a closed ecology and by their very nature, closed ecologies are brittle. Greenfield, therefore, advocates designing these products/services to use open frameworks because of their openness, their ability to be flexible and extensible. The downside of an open framework is a loss of control and for companies heavily vested in controlling their brand, this option may not even be considered. His argument, however, is that open frameworks aid in a product’s long-term viability.

Some final thoughts from Greenfield:

• As designers, we can no longer assume that the product we design will be a standalone product.
• Everything that can be networked, will be.

A final thought from me: it's an exciting time to be designing.

Technorati Tags: Design, User Experience, Usability, DUX07

user experience design

Comments

• Leave a comment
• Comment feed for this post
• TrackBack URL

None so far.

Leave a comment