An essay worthy of its own thing. No words from me today. Just go read what Bret Victor wrote, and click the links.
http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesign/
An essay worthy of its own thing. No words from me today. Just go read what Bret Victor wrote, and click the links.
http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesign/
No buildup introduction area for this post. I just love these batteries.
They look like this:
Here is why they’re great:
1) No instructions necessary. This is pretty much the success criteria of all great design. You want a battery that works like a battery and charges via USB. Done.
The packaging they arrive in is worth mentioning:
Packaged this way, you can see everything you need to know about how these work. In the bottom configuration, they’re batteries. In the top configuration, it’s obvious that the cap easily pops off to reveal the USB prod.
Were these packaged like traditional batteries, this wouldn’t be intuitive.
2) There’s a little rubber band that keeps the cap attached to the body. Because otherwise, obviously, you’re destined to lose the caps within 30 seconds of opening the package.
3) Because they charge by USB, you don’t need to lug around an enormous wall outlet charging station as you would with traditional rechargables.
4) If you look closely, the “BCELL” part of the USBCELL logo looks like the product. If these guys were feeling especially clever, they might color the “US” portion green to fit the whole product into the logo…but that might be pushing it. (It looks like they recolored the U, S, and B in “re-usable,” which I think looks dopey, but it at least establishes some design parameters.)
There is one thing I don’t care for: It’s kind of tricky to tell when they’re done charging. The instructions (which did exist, though I threw them out immediately) described some kind of system where green lights around a ring where the body meets the cap will start flashing, or hold steady green, or blink once for yes and two for no, or something. My solution is simple: I just leave them to charge for a while. Or overnight. My laptop mouse still gets weeks and weeks of power either way, so I’m sort of indifferent.
If they rated things in dentistry the same way they rated things in sports, entertainment, and the like, I’d say that flossing is highly underrated.
Here’s an article from WebMD. Two things stand out: 1) under 50% of people floss regularly, and 2) dentists say flossing is even more important than brushing when it comes to preventing gum disease and tooth loss.
Why don’t people floss?
That’s what flossing looks like. The girl in the image above seems like she’s having a fun time, but I’d wager otherwise.
Classically, you might say the steps of flossing look like:
Step One: Floss.
But thinking holistically, I’d reframe the process to look like:
Step One: Decide to floss.
Step Two: Unravel and cut a length of floss.
Step Three: Floss.
Here are the pain points behind the scenes:
Cut too small a thread and you’re prone to losing your grip mid-stroke. (Stroke? Swoop? I don’t know.) Cut too long a thread and it feels like you’re being wasteful — one of those human phenomena that’s truly ridiculous but totally exists. A thing of floss costs about $3; an excessively long thread might cost you a fraction of a penny, not to mention the long-run savings in dental work.
Adhering to our brushing metaphor: It’s mindlessly easy to judge how much toothpaste to apply — the head of the toothbrush is really only so big.
Here’s what I use:I don’t think these things even have a name, though “flosser” seems to be what brings them up in an Amazon search.
Here’s why they’re brilliant:
Ultimately, I save a small amount of time and a large amount of mental tax. But I got lucky that I thought to give these things a try. Biggest next step from here is to understand what’s going on with the influencers — Crest, and more importantly, your dentist — and see if we can’t figure out why these aren’t a bigger deal.
Let it be no secret: I’m totally into SnapChat. In fact, my lofty goal for the summer is to eviscerate all other communication mediums on my cellphone — text, calling, facebook, twitter, etc. — and go SnapChat exclusive. I think it’d be funny.
That’s not the point today.
Towards the end of June, SnapChat raised $60 million in funding. So I’m not the only one who thinks this app is huge…but the difference is, those other guys are also of the impression that this app can make lots and lots of money. Right now, I can send pictures with doodles and notes on them.
So here’s a first stab at SnapChat for business: Groupon on steroids.
I don’t mean the minimum-threshold-coupon part, but rather, the instantaneous, exciting coupon part. “On steroids,” because it’s not a daily deal or even an hourly deal. You’ve literally got ten seconds between opening the coupon and completing the transaction.
If Dunkin’ Donuts, or some other brick and mortar giant, wanted to make a big, awesome PR splash, I think they could pull this off without even setting up a formal campaign with SnapChat brass — it’d be a free marketing platform, minus the cost of the coupon. Steps as follows:
Of course, now that you’ve got everyone’s attention, you can start sending SnapChats regularly. And have fun! Doughnuts with strange doodles on them. Puppies with doughnuts on their heads. A four second photo SnapChat is in my mind without question the absolute lowest threshold for entertainment the world has ever seen — and here’s a world that’s had Twitter for the last half decade.
Just this week we’ve seen that even the most inept, curmudgeonly organization in the country, the TSA, can pull off a successful and humorous social media campaign. So cheers to you, SnapChat and brick & mortar company. Good luck. I have high hopes.
The Samsung Galaxy SII. That’s been my phone for the past year or so. I used to hate it. This past week, everything changed.
Far and away my biggest gripe about the phone is its meager battery life. The quoted use time for the phone’s battery is 8.7 hours. I guess, depending on how much you’re talking, SnapChatting, or whatever, your mileage may vary.
“The damn phone can’t even get through an entire day on one charge! How worthless is this??” –Me.
I’ve gone through a number of phases in confronting this issue.
Phase One: Phone “babysitting.”
For sure, one of the most prevalent and under-reported user experience traumas of the modern era. Here’s what I’m talking about:
You’ve got the idea. This sucks.
Phase Two: Proactive phone management. I’d switch my phone to airplane mode for hours at times when I wasn’t actively expecting communication. In fact — and, I know, this is *really* crazy — I’d actually turn my phone completely off during movies, on airplanes, in classes, and the like.
On the balance, being disconnected every once in a while is probably not such a bad thing. But that’s not what I signed up for. I wanted a phone that was at my complete disposal at all times, and as I’ve written before, I didn’t want the ever-incrementally-mounting headache of having to deal with phone minutia throughout the day for my entire life.
Phase Three: I brought a charger to work and charged my phone during afternoons. This felt stupid.
Phase Four: I picked up a case for the phone that had an extended battery built in. Sort of like this one.
This effectively solved the battery problem, but it created others. Specifically: my phone was now large enough to win modest disapproval from the King of all Cosmos. (In other words, it was the size of a small planet.)
My phone+case now barely fit into my pocket. It probably looked ridiculous. In a silo, I didn’t mind. The phone passed my criteria of “fits in my pocket” and “lasts an entire day.” Size for battery life was a good trade.
Stepping out of the silo and into the real world, I found that my phone’s girth prompted me having to explain myself for three minutes any time a friend saw it, ever. No thanks.
Luckily, the thing broke anyway.
Phase Five: Anger/Frustration/Despair.
Phase Six: The re-frame, and the eureka moment.
At long last, I finally internally raised a critical defining question:
“WHY is it a requirement that my phone lasts an ENTIRE day on a single charge?” —Me again.
This is the fundamental reason why really smart design thinking companies like IDEO base so much of their methodology on the concept of “framing.”
Here’s what I mean: A modern laptop with a “great” battery life will last something like five or six hours on a single charge. (Granted, the technology is improving — but that’s not the point.) Invariably, if you take your laptop out somewhere, and plan on using it longer than just through your cup of coffee, you know to bring a charger with you. Nobody has a fundamental problem with this.
Why doesn’t the same framework hold for your cellphone?
I largely blame Nokia. Because you, and I, and everyone else on the planet got accustomed to using a modern cellphone when we owned a phone in the Nokia 3300 series. Which looked like this:
Things you should immediately notice or recall:
What you might not readily recall:
In many regards, phones evolved incrementally from this point on (I guess an iPhone fanboy might argue differently) — screen sizes inched up, pixel density demands followed suit, and battery life capacities receded from “sure, what’s an extra three nights without a charge?” to “every night or bust” to a modern society, where people babysit phones, and where the best seat when you’re traveling by plane is not in first class but the one seat in the waiting area that’s next to the wall power outlet.
Another relevant, subtle phenomenon: More so than I think with any other device, people seem to innately care about conserving the quality of their cell phone battery. One theory is that every time you recharge your phone, the battery suffers because it thus has fewer charge cycles, or something. In fact, there are all kinds of conflicting fan theories — google it, if you want to learn nothing for 20 minutes — but suffice it to say, I’ve never heard or seen the same level of concern raised for the battery in your laptop, TV remote, Xbox controller, or anything. Many (myself, until this past week, included) would sooner risk their cell phone dying prematurely in the night than put undue burden on a piece of equipment that, worst case, probably costs around $30 to replace.
So, no more. It’s 3:30PM at time of writing this sentence, and my phone is plugged in and charging. 8.7 hours is now plenty of time to get through anything day-to-day, day or night.
You’ll notice, if you actually bothered reading all 1100 words here, that I’d actually already uncovered this solution weeks ago in “Phase 3.” Here lies the inherent power of framing, and perhaps, of marketing: I was able to fix the problem not by adjusting the product (expensive), but by adjusting the frame and worldview (free).
Peter Thiel (co-founder of PayPal, head honcho of Founder’s Fund) recently taught a class at Stanford simply called “Startup.”
One of his class’ students, Blake Masters, typed up all of his notes in essay format, and it’s absolutely phenomenal — both easy to consume and riddled with insightful, practical knowledge. Recommended reading for anyone even remotely interested in tech or startups, or interested in the things I’m interested in.
I’m a Kindle kind of guy, so I scraped everything into a into a .pdf which I figured I’d share. Similar to what Blake disclaims, all credit for good stuff goes to Peter, all credit for the labor and love goes to Blake, and all errors and omissions (the links and attachments and stuff won’t work in the .pdf) are mine.
In October, I wrote about my favorite soup bowl. The one that’s oversized, has a handle, and specifically, is orange.
Turns out someone at Arrested Development likes it too. From the first episode of Season 4:
This qualifies for an “I love it when I’m right,” right? Come on.
I did one of these the the last time I finished a school. A quick, far-from-exhaustive memory dump of all the favorite things I can think of which made the last two years of school so special.
RC Fall:
RC Spring:
EC Fall:
EC Spring:
Any math textbook will tell you that if you flip a fair coin 100 times, you’ll probably get results of just about 50 heads and 50 tails. This, by now, is common knowledge.
But.
Specifically, textbooks all use the word “fair.” I don’t think that makes sense in today’s society. Every coin minted in the modern world, as far as my preliminary Google searches could tell, is fair. So in other words, the above sentence is pretty much like saying “In all ‘fair’ NHL games, a goal is worth 1 point.” Nobody would ever say that. So why the distinction for coins?
And now that I think about it: What’s the deal with all coins being “fair” coins in the first place? There are plenty of things in my life on which I need help deciding, and many of them I don’t want to leave up to a 50/50 shot. Whose turn is it to take out the trash? Which captain gets the first draft choice in the pickup softball game? Should you go talk to the attractive stranger at the other end of the bar?
Maybe you’re Two-Face and you want to use the unfair coin for your own unsavory motives. A typical reaction to a biased coin is that it’s a trick used to cheat unsuspecting strangers (or casinos) out of gambling monies. That’s not what I’m proposing. (Although I guess, I could see the issue of educating the masses about a newly weighted nickel. Shut up. Work with me here.)
I say that the biased coin would still be useful even if everyone knew about it. I took out the trash last time, so we’ll flip with the biased coin and it’ll probably be your turn this time. I’m a little better at softball, so you should probably get the first pick. You should almost definitely go talk to the attractive stranger at the other end of the bar (this coin should probably just have two heads).
At the very least, we thus justify the otherwise redundant diction in all those schoolbooks.
An email sent to Nish, regarding the latest Daft Punk album.
Josh Petersel <peterselj@gmail.com> Wed, May 15, 2013 at 6:54 PM
Reply-To: peterselj@gmail.com
To: Nishant Lalwani <[redacted]@gmail.com>I have more thoughts than I could properly articulate via cell phone email. But here’s the core:
1) victim of impossible hype.
2) the album doesn’t even have to be great. All DP (and perhaps just as importantly, the infinity of beat makers
and DJs) really needed was a base of fresh material to mix in to other work. As underwhelmed as the album
proper was, just wait until you hear transcendent mashups across other work. I think from that perspective, a
modest modern success.
That all said….god how i wish they would’ve been able to recapture the magic of Digital Love.
A week later: Daft Punk — themselves — plan to remix Random Access Memories.
I hate it when my cell phone’s autocorrect makes it look like I can’t grammar. But I love it when I’m right.