Monday July 2, 2007

iPhone, NASA and NASCAR

by Nathan Smith in Technology

4 comments

Unless you’ve been living under a rock somewhere, you’ve probably caught wind of the latest consumer craze that has everyone talking. Yes, I am referring to the iPhone. Unlike many of those who are talking about this newfangled product, I am myself neither fan, nor naysayer. However, I do appreciate the implications it has for the web development profession as a whole.

Gadgetry

I should say upfront that I am not really even a gadget guy. I have a basic mobile phone that does not take photos, play music, or do anything else beyond sending and receiving phone calls. That’s not to say I’m cheap, because I certainly enjoy using a Mac. I just don’t really like having tons of miscellaneous devices on my person. Oddly enough, I don’t own an iPod. Come to think of it, I don’t even wear a watch (Okay, I lied – my phone has a clock on it). Needless to say, I don’t have immediate plans to purchase an iPhone.

That being said, I still appreciate the iPhone. Why? All shortcomings aside (which are to be expected with a 1st generation product), I am glad that the iPhone exists because the sophistication of Safari enables web developers to keep doing what they’re doing, allowing the browser to scale things as needed. Granted, you can still develop iPhone “apps,” which are basically sites that fit within 320×390 pixels – not the full 420px (to account for browser chrome).

Two years ago at SXSW Interactive, I got a laugh out of the crowd during a Q+A session for one of the mobile panels, suggesting that maybe there needs to be a “Designing with Phone Standards” book. Really though, I was only half-way joking. At the time, mobile companies were just re-creating the desktop browser wars of the 1990s, via proprietary technology.

I think that going forward, Web Standards will become increasingly more important for mobile browser vendors. This is an area in which Safari and Opera are already leading the way. The fact that people are willing to wait for hours upon end in line, and then pay through the nose for a new product, should show the more traditional telecom companies that we now live in an age of user experience – not features, hardware or ring-tones. It must be about the cohesive whole.

Expense

Since its inception on July 29, 1958 one of the biggest criticisms against NASA has been the national expenditures put into the space program. While we have put a man on the moon, and learned much of our celestial surroundings, most of the population of our planet is largely oblivious to these accomplishments. But wait, are we really so unaffected?

Granted, I will probably never hold a moon rock with my bare hands (though I can’t say its ever been an aspiration anyway), but I use products every day that have been influenced by NASA. So much so, that these products I use are now everyday items, and I give them no second thought. As an example, here are a few items you might recognize in your own day-to-day…

• Smoke detectors
• Improved shoe soles
• Enriched baby food
• Scratch-resistant sunglasses
• Composite golf clubs
• The list … goes on

So, while the initial price investment for an iPhone might be too high for my taste, the more of these iHotcakes people buy and the more research goes into improving them, the better all mobile devices will be in the long-run, eventually reaching a point where what seems fascinating today simply becomes the the standard, everyday way that mobile phones are expected to work.

Fanaticism

Driving around Dallas, I see quite a few Apple stickers in people’s rear windows (no pun intended). These types of Mac enthusiasts are frequently pointed out as fanboys or as having “drank the Kool-Aid,” but such dedication is also to be found elsewhere. More frequently than Apple stickers, I see stylized italic numbers emblazoned on various vehicles.

NASCAR is another phenomenon which is difficult for me to comprehend, but is one in which I share the passive benefits of its existence. NASCAR fans are not unlike Apple aficionados, in that they are both unwavering in their support.

The dedication with which race attendees watch brightly colored cars going around in circles (for the better part of a day) is similar to the gumption it takes to stand in line for the chance of obtaining a shiny new communication device. In both cases, the individuals in question are swept up in the collective excitement of being so close to the cutting-edge. Again, while not a NASCAR fan myself, I can appreciate the fact that all cars are indirectly made safer overall as a result of the research and development that goes into refining the sport of racing.

So What?

According to Kathy Sierra’s Zone of Mediocrity theory on Creating Passionate Users, both Apple and NASCAR fit the criteria. People either love or hate these respective brands, with very little luke-warmness in the middle. Fans band together in like-minded understanding, while skeptics and antagonists deride them for blind loyalty.

There is much to be learned from products and companies which create such devotees. Rather than make pot-shots from the sidelines, I think it would behoove mobile carriers and web development agencies to take notes, rather than take sides.

Whether you think the iPhone is worth the money or not, as with the many spinoffs of NASA, it is clearly “one giant leap for mankind” in terms of user interface, which can only mean Good Things™ going forward. Who knows, in the future perhaps we really will interact with gesture-sensitive technology as effortlessly as seen in the movie Minority Report. Only time will tell.

Comments on “iPhone, NASA and NASCAR”

1. Nate Klaiber said:

   I have an Apple sticker on my drivers side window.

   My wife and I both own iPods.

   My wife and I both own iMacs.

   My wife owns an iPhone.

   I love Apple products. However, they are not without flaws. That being said, I would consider myself a ‘fanboy’ for lack of a better term. I watch all the battles take place online and off – Apple haters versus fanatics. I still can’t shake the fact that, how is it bad for a company to create brand loyalty? Most companies dream of this type of loyalty. I used Microsoft products for years before I switched to Apple. I was never a fanatic about them. They didn’t think about user experience. They didn’t engage with the user through many different aspects. That isn’t to say MS is bad – it definitely has it’s great products. I just feel, after working on both, that Apple is superior at what they do.

   Apple says no. They don’t always concede to what everyone wants, and I think this is why so many have distain for them. MS, on the other hand, tries to do way too much and be everything to everyone. I like Apples constraint. To me, it lets them refine products and do what they do best.

   Also, I have hated cell phones. To me, they were a necessary evil. I had one for work – but it was as vanilla as it could be. No camera, no special ringtones, no crazy gadgetry – it was a plain cellphone. I was happy to get rid of it and not have one. However, the main reason I have hated them is because I always had to reset the phone with information when I would get a new one. This was a hassle to me. I always though ‘I wish there was a way I could do all of this and connect it to my address book.’ With the release of the iPhone – it seems like they have hit everything I would want in a phone – because it easily syncs to my iMac and my address book, calendar, web browser, etc.

   So, there will always be a battle between people. People will always complain – look around at a few blogs and you can see this instantly. It is up to the user to discern what works for them.

   ---

2. Nathan Smith said:

   @Nate Klaiber: My sentiments exactly. I think it’s amazing the brand loyalty that Apple commands. It’s something that all businesses should be fascinated by, or at least studying to understand more. I agree that much of their success can be attributed to singularity of vision, focusing on a core line of products. It follows the old adage: “If something is worth doing, it’s worth doing well.”

   ---

3. T.Scott Stromberg said:

   nice article I’m at the apple store demoing the iPhone and I thought I would use it to post a comment.

   ---

4. Josh Read said:

   Nate Klaiber – well said!
   Also, speaking of vanilla cell phones, I read something on kottke.org a couple of months back (sorry I don’t have the time to find the exact link) about how feature creep seems to get people to spend the extra money on dumb things like camera phones, special ringtones, etc. but in the end, most users can’t figure out the “extras” or get frustrated using them and say they were happier with the vanilla phones. Apple doesn’t put the extraneous non-user friendly items into their products. They don’t try to “pull the wool over the consumers eyes” and I think that’s why if you’re an apple user, you’re an apple “fanatic”. By the way, my buddy got an iPhone that he let me borrow for an hour last night, the thing is INCREDIBLE!

   ---