User Experience

In this week's reading, Jesse James Garrett talks about the everyday gadgets and tools that we use that help us pick up the pace and make things easier for us. What people don't realize is that the hardest part of making these tools are the "user experience." People are attracted to things that spell it out for them, essentially, because that is the whole point of technology - to make things move along faster for them without having to do a whole lot to get there. This is his ultimate definition of the "user experience":

"Not about the inner workings of a product or service, it is about how it works on the inside, where a person comes into contact with it."

Another interesting thing that he mentions is the "form follows function" concept, where the design of the product is dictated by its functionality. An example I can think off the top of my head are like the Android phones versus the Apple iPhone 5's, versus Blackberry's (if people even use them anymore?) I personally have used all three of them, and have found that they are good and bad in different aspects. For instance, the Android is probably appearance-wise the most appealing, as it is very futuristic-feeling (hence why Apple probably felt the need to add the somewhat unnecessary fingerprint-scan security function on their latest phones). However, I didn't stick with the Android that long despite its pretty exterior, and even interior because it was so complicated to figure out. I couldn't navigate to even the simplest things and that made me extremely frustrated! The iPhone I would say is probably the most user-friendly, because everything is literally right there on the screen, and its simple designs take you anywhere you need to go.

                                        

                                    

In Chapter 2 of The Elements of the User Experience, Garrett talks about the user-experience I believe specifically in the case of online-shopping. Now, I am definitely no stranger to this experience, but when I think about it, there are only a specific number of websites that I am actually willing to buy from. For instance, there is a website called Taobao.com, which is essentially the Chinese version of Ebay. You can buy things, sell things, and you can even talk to the store owners or customers that are interested in selling you or buying your products! What I love about this particular website, is that when you search for a product, it gives you links to similar items at the top, or it helps you narrow your search. I think it's actually a pretty smart marketing tactic, in that it makes you want to buy all these things that you maybe wouldn't have thought about buying before. I haven't really experimented too much with buying stuff on ebay, and I generally don't like to do so because I know that they do a different thing where they auction it and there is only a limited amount of time. I also don't like that it shows you how many people are viewing this item, because it adds on so much unnecessary pressure! The whole point of online shopping should be fast and easy, so that you can do it in a short amount of time and not have to worry about the technical difficulties.

Perception

In part 3 of Virillo's Open Sky, he talked about perception and how it can be deceiving, and proceeds to raise an important question: "Are we free, truly free, to choose what we see?" (95) Virillo claims that we are in fact, "clearly not" but at the same time, reasonably he also defends the idea that we are not actually obliged or forced against our will to see what we see as well. I personally don't believe that we are obligated, as human beings, to see anything that we don't want to see. I guess it also depends on what he means by the actual things that we see. Is he referring to crime? poverty/beggars/homeless people/etc? General sights that, to society, has taught us are not necessarily the most pleasing to the eye? It seems to me, that he is almost insensitive in saying that we don't have the freedom to see what we see. Some things are just a part of life that are inevitable and we cannot avoid, so we might as well embrace it. Or maybe even change the sights that you don't want to see. Within reason, of course. I guess what I'm saying is, I don't believe that anyone really has the power to make us see what we don't want to see.

In From Sexual Perversion to Sexual Diversion, it actually made me quite sad to read about how people are deliberately coming up with ways that can actually replace human interaction. Call me old-schooled, but I just don't really believe that physical interaction can be that easily substituted, and is kind of insulting if anyone would actually think that some kind of technology in replacement of me, is fulfilling, or worse, better than me! I suppose I could see the appeal with couples doing long-distance relationships, I suppose it would be better than nothing, and maybe even it would eliminate temptation of cheating. But at the same time, I feel like someone in a committed relationship shouldn't need some kind of technology to fulfill their desires, to stay committed. But nevertheless, in the midst of trying to fathom Virillo's argument, I wanted to knwo what kind of technology is really being pushed out there for these types of situations. I came across this "blue tooth hand held" device introduced at a Japanese tech expo. Turns out, one of their biggest mobile carriers, DoCoMo came up with what they called "Taion Heart" shaped like a plastic heart.

Here's their description of this device: "When given a squeeze, the device would measure the rate of your heart and the tightness of your grip. This info would be transmitted to your partner’s phone, and then to his or her matching device, which would get warm and light up into a variety of colors — while vibrating according to your pulse of course." 

And more: “Couples can use it by each person holding the heart in bed as they sleep,” DoCoMo told the press. Edgar Allen Poe would be so into this."

Source: http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/tech-support-technology-for-getting-really-intimate-in-a-long-distance-relationship

Law of Least Action

Law of Least Action.

      I'm sorry, but what?? Is this what our society has come down to? That we are so lazy that we can't even physically take a couple of minutes in our day to open the blinds, turn on the lights, little things in our houses that doesn't even require us to leave the house? That's just unacceptable. People blame US's high obesity rate on the fact that they serve food with way too much sugar in it. After reading this chapter, in particular the section where he mentions "Law of Least Action,"I beg to differ for obvious reasons...not that I'm particularly active or anything, but it definitely isn't encouraging me to get my butt off the bed to hear that they're finding ways so that I don't even ever have to leave it anymore. With communication though, obviously there are perks to not having to hand deliver everything. Although I will say it really isn't quite as sentimental when you get an email or message on Facebook, as opposed to a handwritten letter or postcard. Think about it. Someone was actually thinking about you, with the intent of putting effort into whatever they were writing, then had to go through the trouble of mailing it. All of that takes a lot of effort. Today I actually did receive a postcard from a friend studying abroad in Germany which totally would have been different if she had Facebook messaged me, and it totally made my day.

     I also found it particularly interesting on page 57, when he talks about Shinohora's notion that "the city of the future will express the beauty of confusion." This is oddly profound to me, in an almost eerie way. I keep thinking back to the movie IRobot from years ago and how the robot eventually becomes evil or something like that, and Will Smith has to fight them off. Especially when Virillo then says, "I am on the other hand, quite convinced that it will in the near future illustrate the tragedy of the fusion of the 'biological' and the 'technological.'" I'm not too sure what he means by that, but perhaps it isn't always a bad thing. Perhaps technology can make the biological more powerful, but i guess then again in those make-believe action movies it always seems that some greedy villain finds a way to make himself more powerful using technology, and then using his newfound power to disrupt the once quiet and peaceful community/village. Maybe this isn't really the same thing (if at all), but I know that those with severe back issues can have spinal surgery, replacing the bone with metal. Which is sort of technology and biological fusion. Sort of.

Open Sky: Part I

         After reading and re-reading again Part I of Open Sky, it seems to me that what Virillo is trying to make a case out of, is simply that we as human beings are moving too fast. He implies this in several different examples, complete with the definition of literal speed which is velocity. One of the things that stuck out to me when reading this was when he mentioned "The urbanization of real space is thus being overtaken by this urbanization of real time which is, at the end of the day, the urbanization of the actual body of the city dweller." It made me think of some computer software program thing called Second Life that my Intro to Comm professor mentioned, which is essentially designed for people to live "digitally," sort of like your playing sims but actually believing you are the character you choose in the program. To me, that is really sad. No judgement or anything (okay maybe a little...) but you're not really living life if your living through a machine. For someone who is handicap/disabled, there is definitely something appealing I could see, as they don't have the same abilities that normal people do and can't function the same way.

         Things definitely got more interesting when he talked about the debate between Auguste Rodin and Paul Gsell, and how the sculptor said that "No, it is art that tells the truth and photography that lies, for in reality time does not stand still." But wouldn't you be able to argue the same thing about art? What people paint, or sculpt or anything art-related for that matter, is capturing an image. By committing the act of capturing, isn't that considered "a moment frozen in time?" Virillo then, compares all of that with videos, which of course is where time does not stand still and is in fact constantly moving. I thought it was kind of a unique perspective to say that the transition from photography to video is essentially similar to that of the transition from daylight to electricity. Never thought about it in that way before.

         Thinking about the transition of art -> photography -> video, then I thought about what the next big thing could be. In relation to Virillo's whole obsession with speed/velocity, I thought about stop-motion videos, which I think are incredibly fascinating. A friend first told me about it when we were applying to universities, and she had decided to make a stop motion video of her experience as a track runner in high school. I don't have her video but I went on youtube and looked up some pretty cool post it stop -motion video.

The Given and the New

In Kress & VanLeeuwen's Reading Images, they talk about the idea of how everything visual comes with a "given" and a "new," and how in different types of media such as advertisements in magazines, interviews, books or whatever - there is this idea that people purposefully place things that people know on the left side and "new" information on the right side. When I read this, I felt like it was pretty obvious for things such as advertisements, but I was a little skeptical (maybe a lot skeptical...) about how they said painters back in the day such as Rembrandt used this technique in his paintings. This reminded me of when I took IB in highschool, and how our teachers emphasized certain themes or symbols in the book. For instance, they would rant on and on about how the curtains in the book were the color blue, and how the author uses it as a hidden theme to express depression and sadness. So that was my little stance on how I felt about that...
As usual, I wanted to prove these guys wrong about their theory. But after flipping through and looking at my Introduction to Mass Communication's textbook The Media of Mass Communication by John Vivian, I thought perhaps there was indeed, some truth in the "Given" and "New" thing regarding the layout. On page 176, the random page that I am now flipped to is actually an example!



On the left side of the page is a picture of the man, who although not everyone may know who he is (Marc Anderssen), its still a picture/familiar name that people may have heard in passing or something. On the other side, is full text, depicting who this man is and other information about his accomplishments and his involvement within the media industry. That, I suppose, would count as the "Given" and "New" thing, where the given is the name/picture of the man, and the new are long detailed explanations of his character and life accomplishments. As someone who merely skims through much of long text, I don't believe I've ever really taken a moment to analyze/appreciate (?) the layout of textbooks. Perhaps I'll take a better look next time when I'm flipping the pages of Cosmo or People or something...yay guilty pleasures!