The Marriage between input technologies and mobile interfaces

To truly cash in on the mobile media market, cellular network providers and cellphone manufactures need to collaborate more on creating user friendly interfaces in their mobile media applications along with creating complimenting user input technologies.



Navigating content and accessing media on the internet has become second nature to most users, and people are accessing content faster and easier than ever before. With innovations in interfaces and organization of content like that of YouTube, Google, combined with the customizable input technologies built into most internet browsers today, has caused users to have high expectations and little patience regarding how we interact with machines or devices in accessing information. While the combination of the QWERTY keyboard and mouse have produced a input duo that is well suited for accessing information from the internet and on the computer, it is obvious that these traditional input systems will not work for mobile devices like cell phones or portable media players. Here in lies the problem.



The importance of interface and input technologies is epitomized in the evolution and the success of Apple's iPod. The iPod revolutionized the way we access media on a portable media player by combining a unique and intuitive input system with a simple and clutter-less user interface, allowing the user to access content or media will little effort or thought.



The answer for mobile phones for the past couple years have consisted of two forms of input systems, the full QWERTY keyboard, which is obviously infinitely smaller on a mobile device, or just the keypad, which can utilize input systems like predictive text (T9). Both of these systems have their limitations, but these systems have served there purpose for the primary uses of their respective phones.



However, the future of phones holds much more than just text messaging, watered down internet browsing, and phone calls. The mobile phone is increasingly becoming more important to our media consumption. This poses a problem for the previous input technologies because they are not suited to perform the dynamic tasks that the phones and mobile devices of the future will be performing.



An recent example in an innovation of input technology coupled with user interface advances is the iPhone. This phone utilizes dynamic input, meaning the phones input methods and buttons change with respect to the task its performing. This is made possible because there are almost no physical buttons on the device, all but one button is located on the touch screen. By utilizing touch screen technology a phone can better adapt to its task at hand by utilizing the best input system for that task. Combined with the intuitiveness of the multi-touch input system, the iPhone has seemed to zoom ahead of competition in providing a interface and input system that complements and simplifies the process of accessing content and media on a mobile device.



This is a good example of how when cell phone manufactures design the input systems to compliment the applications or uses of the phone. Apple has provided a good start in this area, but for the mobile media market to really take off and for serious monetization of mobile content to become a reality, companies need to devote more resources and efforts to this marriage of input technology and interface. When these two things begin to work harmoniously on mobile devices and it becomes second nature to access content on a mobile device, just as it is accessing the same content on a personal computer, then and only then, will people fully embrace the technology and media and begin to spend money in a widespread fashion.

powered by performancing firefox

Lack of 3G in iPhone a concern

Apple aired a teaser ad during the Oscars tonight to promote the iPhone. Even though the iPhone isn't scheduled for release until June, Apple felt the Oscars might be a good time to stir up some more hype. I am surprised that Al Gore didn't answer one on stage, with all the Apple product placement in his Oscar winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth". Anyways, the advertisement didn't really show off any of the groundbreaking features of the phone, like the full html browser, or the visual voicemail. Which made me think of the one glaring undesirable spec about the iPhone. Its lack of 3G technology.

3G technology refers to the next generation wireless networks the cell phone companies have recently being implementing into their existing services. You might see the ads on TV from various carriers about which has the fastest network. Cingular or AT who has been the butt of the joke in most of these ads, is the proud carrier of the iPhone. The iPhone, instead of having the 3G, like the Samsung Blackjack, will offer only EDGE support initially.

This might hurt iPhone sales initially for a few reasons. First, by the time Apple releases their product in June, Cingular will have even more 3G phones out than they do now, which aside from the other innovations in the phone, makes it almost obsolete. Also, rumors have it that a 3G iPhone will quickly replace the EDGE version by Christmas or early January, which will make consumers hesitant to buy something that will become obsolete so quickly. Finally, without the latest and greatest in cellular technology implemented into the iPhone initially, consumers concerns about the first generation of a phone so groundbreaking and different will only increase and cause for them to wait and buy the 2nd generation of iPhones.

Apple probably knows this and is planning on releasing a replacement very soon after the initial release, but it still makes you wonder why they would release the self proclaimed savior to cell phones with antiquated technology.

powered by performancing firefox

Media Indigestion

An important factor to incorporate into future mobile media models is how people digest media. On Mark Cuban's blog today, the media mogul mentioned an analogy that eloquently describes the way in which we digest media on a daily basis. He likened online video and tv as snacks and meals respectively. This sums up perfectly the way I feel about online video content and its relation to TV.

I still flock to the TV to receive a much more enriching experience than that of online video. YouTube is the world's largest snack place, offering multitudes of snacks easily accessible to anyone at anytime. This type of content is great for to casually browse in a few moments of free time during the day, whether at the office or at school. It provides quick, to the point satisfaction with short media clips that are entertaining but generally lack substance. Conversely it is easy to become bored with these "snacks" and crave more general satisfaction. That is where the fulfilling and nutritional meal comes in. TV, or the type of content TV delivers, provides a generally more enriching experience, because the content is not so democratized and still professionally created. User generated content is great for a snack, but people still need substance.

No matter where we are watching or listening to the media we digest, whether it be on a computer, a Portable Media Player, or any other entertainment portal, when examining the mobile market, it is important to note the way people digest media. Offering short summarized videos of last nights sports highlights while I inhale a McGriddle at the local McDonald's seems like a natural fit. Offering the download of discounted TV shows while I wait for my tires to be changed, or while I am waiting for a doctor's appointment also seems reasonable. As we venture into the mobile media market, people will be more receptive to consume more and more media, as long as their media digesting habits are duly noted and paid close attention to. Otherwise it could end up becoming a huge failure because of a lack of adoption and consumption.

Cut the Wires

As I mentioned in the previous post, the mobile media marketplace holds great potential for increasing media consumption in every form, including music, video, and broadcast. The technology for a constantly accessible wireless marketplace already exists, but our Portable Media Players (PMP) don't utilize this technology yet.

Wireless technology, with the exception of Microsoft's Zune, has not yet been fully implemented into our PMP. The lack of wireless connectivity in the PMP greatly hinders the opportunity for successful mobile media marketplace. For the sake of this article I will be using Apple's iPod as the example, since it is the leading PMP, and constantly drives change in this area of technology. In the near future it is likely that we will see technologies like Wireless USB and WiFI or WiMAX chips built right into PMP like the iPod. Evidence of these and similar technologies are already showing up in Apple patents related to the iPhone, but because of current DRM restrictions, these wireless technologies will not focus primarily on the sharing of media, but more on the consumption of media in our day to day lives.

In my MUIN 495 class this week, we discussed the possibility of giving consumers to purchase additional media with day to day purchases at places like Starbucks, McDonald's, or any other routinely visited business. For example, in addition to purchasing a latte in the morning, for $0.40 extra, I could purchase a podcast of my favorite morning show, or the highlights of last night's NBA games. These are only examples and as you probably know, the content offerings are infinite. This model seemed like a great idea to me, because people are more willing to spend a little more money when they are already purchasing something.

However, the logistics of people receiving their media without wireless capabilities, greatly inhibits this model from being successful. For the additional money being spent to be justified, the process of ordering and receiving the additional media has to be seamless, painless, and fast. Even though data transfer rates are very high within USB 2.0 and other connections, the plethora of proprietary inputs on PMP's makes it impractical for companies to invest in a certain PMP ecosystem and then alienate another one.

Wireless connectivity could bring the much needed interoperability into the PMP world, and allow for more companies to invest in ways to offer more content to more consumers. This seems like a win-win situation for business and consumers. More on this subject next week.

WiMAX: Media's Mobile Future

Media, as we know it today, has come a long way in terms of mobility and availability, but WiMAX could be the last step for revolutionizing modern media into a completely mobile enterprise. WiMAX is the developing technological standard for wireless broadband Internet over large areas, up to 30 kilometers.

WiMAX holds the potential to create an inescapable marketplace, a network that truly is always accessible, and generation that is undoubtedly “always on.” It is evident through the efforts of the cellular network providers that all types of media are moving into the mobile market. Music has been the leader in the mobile market with portable digital music players, but with WiMAX technology, opportunities exist for music to be mobilized in non-traditional fashions. Instead of a portable digital music player, streaming your entire library of music from your home computer anywhere in the world could become a reality. A car would no longer need a traditional radio, with WiMAX, you could just access the thousands and thousands of internet radio stations.

The constant connectivity would provide multitudes of ways to listen to music. Also, the technology would bring an even greater ability to personalize a users experience. For radio, a users tastes, habits and interests could be analyzed by the radio station to direct the user an optimized station with their musical interests in mind. Playlists could be altered on the spot from information gathered from the current listeners. Marketing and advertisements could be tailored towards the users interests to provide a more pertinent advertising method. With the implementation of WiMAX technology, personalized media portals will dominate the non “on-demand” markets like radio, and provide a more interesting and interactive experience.

This technology could really mean something for radio, but more importantly, it would vastly improve the mobility of media content and be a great boom for the consumption of content.

Mobility in a DRM Free World

I often wonder what the consequences of abolishing all forms of Digital Rights Management, allowing people to truly have access to all of their media all the time, on any device. Yet, I am always stopped short, knowing that media companies have seen what happened to the music industry and its intellectual property with the proliferation of the Mp3, and that it will take some pretty good convincing to abolish DRM.

I think DRM and its existence essentially has two faces. On one face, I can see the need for DRM to protect intellectual property and ensure that people are motivated to continue to create meaningful content (not 2 minute you tube clips) which might help properly compensate artists. On the other face, DRM hurts the consumer by limiting the uses of media for which they paid good money. Here in lies our dilemma.

Today, Steve Job's posted an article on his thoughts on DRM and the role its playing and should play in the future of music and related medias. Some interesting statistics were mentioned in the article, one of which were that "only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats." This statistic shocked me. Considering all the grumbling you hear about DRM and how terrible it is, it doesn't really seem to be effecting that large of a percentage of the music we are listening to. Which brings me to the other thing Steve said. He mentioned that "DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy." If DRM only exists to halt music piracy, which it isn't even doing, then why do we even have it?

The record companies are weary of doing this because it would most likely take a huge chunk out of their lucrative CD sales. But I believe that people are listening to more music than ever before, and if they could more readily use and access without the barriers DRM poses to their music, it would continue to rise. Why not focus on capitalizing on the fact that because of things like the walkman, iPod, cell phones, and iTunes, music has become more a part of our daily lives than almost other media. Consumers will always pirate music, DRM is not stopping them from doing that now, but why not give honest people the benefit of the doubt and trust them to embrace DRM free music by paying for it.

Without DRM it makes the mobility of music and other media almost endless. We could eventually see people being able to access their content anywhere, anyhow, anytime. I think the record industry could make some money in that model.

Zune Phone

So now that Apple has officially announced its iPhone, its time for Microsoft to respond to Apple's ever growing presence in the mobile media market. Yesterday reports that "Microsoft is working on its very own phone to be branded under the Zune moniker." The Zune phone would most likely be a smart phone and work "homogeneously with the Zune Market Place[...]and be able to sync with the Xbox 360." The phone would not run the Windows Mobile operating system, but instead have an interface similar to that of a Zune.

This new development is not surprising, considering Microsoft's shameless mimicking of the iTunes, iPod interface with its Zune and Zune Marketplace. Microsoft is obviously committed to winning a share of Apple's coveted position in the mobile media market. However the Zune phone, unlike the Zune music player, might actually have some advantages over Apple.

The most glaring advantage for a Zune phone would be its capability to collaborate with the millions of Xbox 360's already sold in the United States. Microsoft already owns a portion of this nation's living room real estate with their video game console. Apple is trying to claim a spot with their Apple TV, but Microsoft has a huge head start.

Microsoft has already been in the mobile phone business for a while, and most of today's smart phones run a version of Windows mobile. While the Zune phone probably won't run a version of Windows Mobile, Microsoft, unlike Apple, has some experience in the mobile phone market, giving them a possible advantage.

Also, the Zune music player already has the ability to share songs with other Zunes, something that the iPod can't do, but the problem with this is that so few people own a Zune. Microsoft has a unique advantage in the mobile phone department with their already heavily present Windows mobile operating system. If they can make the Zune phone capable of sharing songs with Windows Mobile phones, like Cingular's Samsung BlackJack, they could immediately enlarge their network and make that feature something that is actually worthwhile and useful to people immediately out of the box.

Even with the leg up in the living room and the mobile phone market, its tough to foresee Microsoft creating something more desirable than the iPhone. Microsoft has always fumbled in the design department, which is something mobile phone users obviously care about. The success of phones like Motorola Razr were completely dependent upon their design. They will have to duplicate Apple's proven success in creating a striking design, and seamless connection between the phone, computer, and the media stored on the computer to even have a shot at the title.