Thoughts on Mobile, Part Three: Connecting Dots 4, 5, 6

Yesterday’s post ran long, so I decided to cut it in half. Here’s the rest of it, or the third in a series of two articles. (Something like that…)

A group video call on Skype.

A group video call on Skype.

Dot #4: Connectivity and Sharing. Here in the 21st century, we demand not only connectivity but sharing of information in real time. We fall short in whiteboard-type environments where we can see ideas and people simultaneously, and when we do, the interaction is sub-par, but this will steadily improve through Skype, Google, and new ventures. All portable devices must connect anywhere, at any time–this is a shortcoming of some apps (Evernote, for example) and some devices (most portable computers, unless a separate wireless hot spot is generated by a nearby cell phone). This is foolish retro-thinking. The next generation of computers, tablets, all devices should include built-in connectivity for WiFi, 3G, 4G, and so on. Fortunately, these devices and their related systems work very well. And, fortunately, the technology is constantly improving to allow more throughput, faster speeds, fewer problems, and increased security. What we don’t have quite yet is a kind of super-DropBox where it’s easy to share any document on any device, regardless of whether it’s in the cloud or on a specific device. VPN (Virtual Private Network) technology resembles a solution, but what we need is a more robust, full-featured, easy-to-use system. I suspect Apple and Google are hard at work developing something to do this job–they’re already on the way with Google Docs and the new iWork set for release later this year.

illo_newworld

Dot #5: Output. This one is confusing. I own an iPad which doesn’t do well in an environment where printed documents are the standard. Most printers won’t talk to a tablet–though some now have email addresses for that purpose (yes, some printers have email addresses–seems confusing, I know). When I was using a portable computer, I often printed documents. With the tablet, I find myself storing documents and reading them on the tablet’s screen. Far less printing. Almost none, in fact. My output is, typically, an email to someone who wants or needs to read something I wrote. I do print some documents for reference, but printed documents are difficult to revise, so I tend to focus on digital copies. The file folder in my briefcase were once filled with paper, but now, not so much. Even handwritten notes are being replaced by the notes that I take on the tablet–when they’re in Evernote, they’re very easily shared with my other devices and with other people via email or shared settings.

Dot #6: Portable. For me, this means the device goes just about everywhere I go. In that regard, the iPhone (any smartphone, really) is a suitable solution, if one with a too-small screen. There is access to web and email, phone, messaging, internet, iWork documents, Evernote, the list goes on. The tablet does not go everywhere because it’s a little too big, even for someone like me who is rarely seen outside my home without a shoulder bag. There’s some minor conflict here about size: the phone ought to be larger, the iPad needs to be both small enough to carry everywhere (the iPad Mini) but large enough to provide a full page of printed material or to create diagrams or word processing documents or spreadsheets or presentations (the iPad full-size model). At first, I was sure I would need a keyboard, so I bought one and thought I’d carry it everywhere. I don’t. In fact, I use the portable keyboard only when I have a lot of writing to do away from home–not so often, as it turns out.

How long does the device need to run between recharges? Eight hours seems pretty reasonable, more is nice.

GoalZero's external solar charger is convenient, but this technology should be built into every portable device.

GoalZero’s external solar charger is convenient, but this technology should be built into every portable device.

Any accessories required, as one might carry with a portable computer? Absolutely not.

One further notion about portability: the device must be easily used anywhere. With an iPad or tablet of sufficient size, that’s anywhere at all, standing, sitting, lying down. With a portable computer, a desktop surface makes the process so much more comfortable–though some people can work with the computer on their lap (I need a fat pillow to do that, and the computer tends to slide around). The tablet can be raised or lowered to adjust for eye position and lighting; this is difficult to do with a portable computer.

Of course, everyone’s needs are different, and some people use their portable device as a power tool. For most users, I suspect this is overkill–just like a gigantic SUV might be for local grocery runs and soccer practice.

What’s next? I think we’ll see keyboards becoming vestigial, and improved touch screens as the standard for portable devices. I know the devices will become faster, contain more storage, offer better screens and longer battery power, and we all know that prices will remain quite low, but will slowly rise. There will be more pocketable devices, and attempts to move away from a traditional flat screen. OLED technology, for example, allows a screen to roll up for storage. This will be the next frontier, worthy because the size of the screen is the key determinant for portability. Once that dot becomes more flexibly defines, all of the other dots line up in support. That’s the longer-term future.

itri-6-inch-color-flexible-amoled-img_assist-300x315

For the shorter-term future, I’d look to combining my tablet and phone into a single device that works and plays nicely with a more powerful computer (which will also evolve) in my home or office.

And what about power? Since they can be charged almost anywhere, I like solar cells. They’re small, flat, and becoming affordable. I also like charging mats. AC adapters are probably unavoidable, but better batteries make them less essential.

Sorry for the long post, and for the multiple parts. This was interesting to write, so I just kept going.

Thoughts on Mobile, Part Two: Connecting Dots

Dot #1: Input. In order to operate any sort of computer, you need to provide it with the information floating around in your brain.

Dot #2: Display. In order to process the information that you’re pouring into the computer, you need to see, hear, or otherwise sense your work-in-progress.

Dot #3: Storage. Whatever you input and display, you need to be able to keep it, and, change it. Also, it would be best if there was a second copy, preferably somewhere safe.

Dot #4: Connection and Sharing. Seems as though every 21st century device needs to be able to send, receive, and share information, often in a collaborative way.

Dot #5: Output. In some ways, this concept is losing relevance. Once displayed, stored and shared, the need to generate anything beyond a screen image is beginning to seem very twentieth century. But it’s still around and it needs to be part of the package.

Dot #6: Portable. Truly portable devices must be sufficiently small and lightweight, serve the other needs in dots 1-5, and also, carry or collect their own power, preferably sufficient for a full day’s (or a full week’s use) between refueling stops.

Let’s take these ideas one at a time and see where the path leads.

Dot #1: Input. Basically, the “man-machine” interface can be achieved in about five different mays. Mostly, these days, we use our hands, and in particular, our fingertips, and to date, this has served us well both on keyboards (which require special skill and practice, but seem to keep pace with the speed of thinking in detail), and on touch screens (which are not yet perfect, but tend to be surprisingly good if the screen is large enough). ThinkGeek sells a tiny Bluetooth projector that displays a working keyboard on any surface.

20130616-213558.jpg

There is the often under-rated Wacom tablets, which use a digital pen, but this, like a trackpad, requires abstract thinking–draw here, and the image appears there. It’s better, more efficient, and ultimately, probably more precise, to use a stylus directly on the display surface. So far, touch screens are the best we can do. Insofar as portable computing goes, this is probably a good thing because the combination of input (Dot #1) and display (Dot #2) reduce weight, and allow the user direct interaction with the work.

20130616-215054.jpg

This combination is becoming popular not only on tablets (and phones), but on newer touch-screen laptops, such as the HP Envy x2 (visit Staples to try similar models). The combination is useful on a computer, but more successfully deployed on a tablet because the tablet can be more easily manipulated–brought closer to the eyes, handled at convenient angles, and so on.

Moving from the fingers to other body parts, speaking with a computer has always seemed like a good idea. In practice, Dragon’s voice recognition works, as does Siri, both based upon language pattern recognition developed by Ray Kurzweil. So far, there are limitations, and most are made more challenging by the needs of of a mobile user: a not-quiet environment, the need for a reliable microphone and digital processing with superior sensitivity and selectivity, artificial intelligence superior to the auto-correct feature on mobile systems–lots to consider, which makes me think voice will be a secondary approach.

20130616-215041.jpg

Eyes are more promising. Some digital cameras read movement in the eye (retinal scanning), but it’s difficult to input words or images this way–the science has a ways to go. The intersection between Google Glass and eye movement is also promising, but early stage. Better still would be some form of direct brain output–thinking generates electrical impulses, but we’re not yet ready to transmit or decode those impulses into messages suitable for input into a digital device. This is coming, but probably not for a decade or two. Also, keep an eye on the glass industry–innovation will lead us to devices that are flexible, lightweight, and surprising in other ways.

So: the best solution, although still improving, is probably the combination tablet design with a touch-screen display, supported, as needed on an individual basis, by some sort of keyboard, mouse, stylus, or other device for convenience or precision.

(BTW: Wikipedia’s survey of input systems is excellent.)

As for display, projection is an interesting idea, but lumens (brightness) and the need for a proper surface are limiting factors. I have more confidence in a screen whose size can be adjusted. (If you’re still thinking in terms of an inflexible, rigid glass rectangle, you might reconsider and instead think about something thinner, perhaps foldable or rollable, if that’s a word.

Dot #3: Storage has already been transformed. For local storage, we’re moving away from spinning disks (however tiny) and into solid state storage. This is the secret behind the small size of the Apple MacBook Air, and all tablets. These devices demand less power, and they respond very, very quickly to every command. They are not easily swapped out for larger storage devices, but they can be easily enhanced with SD cards (size, speed, and storage capacity vary). Internal “SSD” (Solid State Device) storage will continue to increase in size and decrease in cost, so this path seems likely to be the one we follow for the foreseeable future. Add cloud storage, which is inexpensive, mostly reliable (we think), mostly private and secure (we think), the opportunity for low-cost storage for portable devices becomes that much richer. Of course, the latter requires a connection to Dot #4: Storage. Connecting these two dots is the core of Google’s Chrome strategy.

Thoughts on Mobile Computing, Part One

It’s risky to generalize, but I suspect the following is true for most people, most of the time:

  • Higher-stakes projects involving significant amounts of concentration require a quiet work environment with a more powerful computer and a larger screen; and
  • Lower-stakes projects, initial planning, and work-on-the-go require a lightweight computing device, often with a smaller screen

Certainly, some people must work on the go, or prefer the flexibility of a more powerful computer on the go, and others, quite sensibly, prefer just one device, not two (or three, or more). Seems to me, the high-stakes machine ought to be a versatile notebook connected to a 20-inch or larger screen, with proper backup, and the low-stakes machine ought to weigh as close to two pounds as possible, offer all-day battery life, and easily connect to any WiFi, 3G, 4G, or whatever other service may be available. That is: the portable really ought to be portable, and no so much a full-scale machine unless you feel the need to combine functions into a single box.

iPad and iPhoneWhen the latest upgrades to the MacBook Air were released last week, I thought I might finally break my pattern–iPad for portability, iMac for serious work in the home office–with an in-between machine that could do both. After hours of research and experimentation with the Air in various settings, I decided to wait until the autumn to upgrade the iPad, once again leaving the portable out of the mix. Why? The Air does not connect via 3G/4G, but instead requires a separate network to be established on my iPhone (clunky solution, but it works). And, to my astonishment, I actually prefer the touch screen to the keyboard when computing in a mobile environment. I sacrifice a degree of functionality for the reduced weight and increased connectivity, but then, most of my mobile work does not result in an elaborate finished product–this, I do on a computer.

I suppose that’s why the call from HP was so intriguing. Here was an opportunity to experiment with a portable computer in my daily life–something I have not done in several years, and an opportunity to experiment with a Windows computer, something I had not done in a decade or more. And, the computer would be running the intriguing Windows 8 operating system, the one with the cool colored tiles. What’s more, my sample model offered 3G/4G capability.

At the same time, I decided to learn more about the $250 Google Chrome portable computer sold by Samsung. It, too, offered the connectivity that the Air sadly lacks.

Keeping an open mind about new and better ways to work, I tried the HP EliteBook 2170p. The specs are similar to a MacBook Air, and the cost is about the same (around $1,000 for the basic model). It weighs less than 3 pounds–more than that seems too heavy, at least for me, to be carried everywhere–and the feature set is similar, too. There’s a light-up keyboard, an SD card slot (more versatile here, and, BTW, absent on even the latest MacBook Air), similar processor options, no HDMI slot (odd to see a VGA port on a contemporary computer, but this one is designed for older-style business use). Screen resolution is about the same, but the images on the Air are more vivid, and the type is easier to read. The 11-inch screen size is comfortable for light work, but challenging for serious word processing, spreadsheets, even word processing–and this is true for the Air as well. It’s possible to use this computer with a 3G/4G network; this feature is sadly lacking on the Air.

Windows8Today is Sunday the 16th, and I have lunch at noon. That’s easy to see on the colorful Windows 8 interface. Right now, it’s 68 degrees and it’s going to rain today. Click through for details, and the weird non-intutitive interface design returns. It’s unclear what to do next, the brief instructions are unclear and the type is often too small to read. Click once or twice more, and the whole deal looks like Windows from the turn of the century. For reasons I do not understand, several “chickets” appear on the right side of the screen. These offer a combination of settings, search, and device access–not sure why these are shown separately, but the more I dive into Windows 8, the more I come up with “why would they do it that way?” questions. I’ve now spent several hours with Windows 8. Overall, I’d give it a “meh.”

HP-Elite-BookHow about the HP Elite as an example of a contemporary portable computer? It’s okay, but the design is boxy, it’s a little heavy for the 11-inch screen it carries (the 13-inch MacBook Air also weighs 3 pounds). It offers just one operating system (Air offers both Windows and Mac for about the same price).

homepage-promo

For one-quarter of the price, I think most people would be able to accomplish most of their tasks on Samsung’s Chromebook, which costs $250 ($329 with 3G, which is very useful). No fuss: buy one today at neighborhood Staples store. This is a basic, 2.4 pound (lightweight!) portable–not fancy, but it is reasonably well-built and functional, if you limit your desire for functionality to word processing, web browsing, spreadsheets, presentations, email, watching movies, listening to music, and a few dozen other activities. The Chrome Web Store makes the selection and installation of a great many Chrome apps available for use on any Chrome computer, and on any computer with a Chrome browser installed. This level of flexibility is hard to find in the Apple world and nearly impossible to find in the Windows world–Google and its users benefit from a design approach that is totally 21st century, and, in fact, totally new in the 2010s. It’s fresh, inexpensive, and it works.

Here's a small sample of the many apps available in the Google Chrome store.

Here’s a small sample of the many apps available in the Google Chrome store.

It’s not easy being a Windows computer maker in 2013. There is so much legacy–so many enterprise interests to be served–that there is limited available space for innovation. Easy of use, portability, interoperability, slick interfaces, web app stores, these are not ideas that fit comfortably into an enterprise structure that demands standardization (new approach is focused, mostly, upon customization), a work-anywhere approach, high levels of security and reliability, rock-solid applications, and more. HP is one of many Windows-based computer makers who struggle with these issues. This situation has been made much more challenging by Apple’s elegant design and passionate user base, and, now, things are even more difficult because Google is changing the game with a far lower cost structure. And in here, somewhere, is the growing Android ecosystem–not quite as well-positioned but a significant force just the same.

Swing back around to the simple demands of getting work done in the office and at home, I think I’ll stand pat with the iPad because it weighs about a pound-and-a-half and easily connects to either wifi or 3G (my next one will be 4G), and an iMac at home with a larger screen. No, the iPad is not perfect (but I have surprised myself with its flexibility, and with my comfort level in using the touch screen almost all of the time and the accessory keyboard almost not at all). Yes, I pay more for the privilege of using the integrated Apple system. Comparables are emerging, sometimes offering features that Apple cannot or will not, but in the horserace, it’s Apple, Google, and perhaps Android, with Windows off in the distance in a post 20th century haze.

Coming in Part 2: thinking a few years into the future.

Six Thousand Cheering Fans

MacBookAirI raced home tonight to watch two hours of programming that will never appear on television. You may not even recognize the name of the program: “WWDC2013” I don’t know how many other people watched, but I suspect it’s over a million.

It’s difficult to think of any company whose business partners are also its biggest fans. Throughout today’s Apple Worldwide Developer’s Conference, every time an Apple executive introduced a new feature, the crowd went wild–just like they do on “The Price Is Right.” Here, we’re talking about the addition of tags to file icons in the Finder menus, so the applause (which seemed genuine, and was likely not prompted by the “Applause!” signs that hang above game show audiences).

Think about this: Apple one of the top companies in the world. Twice a year, they hold an event in a large auditorium to tell partners and customers about the latest MacBook Air, or improvements in their  operating system, and they generate more excitement than the majority major league sporting events ( more press, too).

This phenomenon goes far beyond traditional product marketing or consumer behavior. On the very popular MacRumors website, which does nothing but track possible directions that Apple may go, there was a countdown clock with the number of days, hours and seconds until the big event. I checked the site at least once a day (okay, three or four times a day) to see whether anything new was posted. This is obsessive behavior, not at all reasonable, and completely dissimilar to anything else in my life. I’m hardly the only one who is engaging in this silliness.

Today, Apple announced that they now own the number one slots in desktop and notebook computer sales. Their five year growth is more than 5x the entire PC industry. Their iPad and iPhone are industry leaders. The entire ecosystem works together as one–and they’re improving their iCloud systems so that the experience is that much more satisfying, rich, and competitive. Each successful product adds to the value of the whole, not just for the company, for every participant in Apple’s supremely well-constructed and well-managed ecosystem. It’s a brilliant bit of 21st century thinking, and it’s remarkable that there aren’t a dozen other companies with similar schemes.

I probably spent more combined time with my iPhone, iPad and iMac than I do with anything else I own. They contain my creative work, my communications with just about everybody I know, my schedule, my written work… in short, they play a very significant role in my daily life. Do I have an emotional connection to these metal and plastic parts? I want to say no, but I did spend the evening watching two hours of Apple propaganda this evening (and rushed home to do it).

Is this some sort of a man-machine addiction? I do find myself at something of a loss if I’m separated from my stuff for too long. I do spend time with Apple products just as soon as I wake up and in the minutes before I head for my bedroom and sleep. And I’m not disclosing these personal habits because I think they’re unique. I suspect there are a few million people who are behaving in ways that are far more extreme than the ways I think about these tools.

I could go on, but I do have some things I want to do tonight. (No, I’m not going to stroke an iPad while I confirm tomorrow’s schedule. I’m going to watch the Samsung TV downstairs because we recorded the TONY Awards on CBS using the Verizon FiOS DVR last night when we were too busy shopping at IKEA to make it home in time for the show.) I am pleased with all of these brands because they deliver upon their promises, but none of them have managed to become a part of my life in  the way that Apple has managed to do.

Why? Mostly because the Apple stuff works so well (and if it doesn’t there’s the Genius Bar at the Apple stores, and Apple Care by phone). Nothing else I own has achieved that level of interoperability (to use a tech term). Taken individually as products or collectively as a complete system, it’s all elegant, reliable, and cool. And although my iMac tends to crash from time to time, and the iCal sync doesn’t work too tell on one of my devices, the whole thing is very, very impressive. Better, in fact, than just about anything else I own.

Maintaining Clear Focus, Setting Priorities, Not Forgetting

Every once in a while, a tool becomes an indispensable part of everyday life. We’ve certainly experienced this phenomenon with smart phones, then tablets, email, web browsing, and for some, Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking activities. During the past few months, I have retrained myself so that all notes are dated, tagged, written and stored in Evernote. And every task, every to-do, every reminder is logged in a capable, well-designed software application called OmniFocus. I no longer make random lists (well, almost never). When something needs to get done, I enter it into OmniFocus.

What I like about Evernote, I like (or will soon like) about OmniFocus. I’m busy, I jot down a note or reminder on my iPhone, and I can fetch it, adding details or changes as I wish, on my iPad, or office iMac. (The one thing that I like even more about Evernote is that I can also access everything via any web browser, but that has not been much of an issue when I use OmniFocus because I always have a OmniFocus device with me).

OmniFocus-for-iPad-sync-new-iconsSo what’s the big deal about OmniFocus? There are dozens of to-do and reminder apps, with sync, available for far less than OmniFocus. Wunderlist is free, and so is Appigo’s To Do (available in Pro edition for $19.99 per year); Things for iPad costs $19.99, and OmniFocus costs twice as much.

For me, the key to OmniFocus and its value is a view of tasks by date. Sounds like every other task management software, like every GTD (“getting things done”) app, but that assessment is not quite right. Allow me to run through a task, an illustration of how OmniFocus is used to run much of my life.

OmniFocus entry screenAlthough it is possible to make a quick task entry, the more complete entry panel is more useful. After naming the task, I select a context from my own list that includes: Awaiting Response, Call, Create, First Contact, Followup, Just Do It, On Hold, Purchase, Research, Schedule, Visit Web Site, and Write. Then, I select a project, again from my own list that includes: Art, Books, Digital Insider, Home, Music, Software, Travel, Web Site, and various, specific work-related projects. I can stop there, deciding to add a flag to any high-priority tasks, but I prefer to add a due date to every task (start dates are also an option, but I don’t work that way). There’s a nice big note field, and I use hat to capture URLs, reminders of the most recent attempted contact (left phone message on 3.13.2013; sent reminder email on 10.12.2012). I can add a photograph, .jog, .gif, .png, or record an audio message.

That’s how I compose each task. Note that there are no priority levels (three stars for most important, two for moderate importance), and no color coding for each category (Music is red, Books are purple). I used these often when Appigo’s To Do was my management system. It looked pretty, but I seemed to spend more time futzing than actually, you know, getting things done.

So, that’s half of the story. The other half us a very reasonable view called Forecast. On the iPad, along the top, there are a series of boxes, each with a date and a number of due tasks. I click on Saturday, May 4 and I see the four tasks that are due on that day. I click on Monday, May 6 and I see the list of 13 tasks I have assigned to that date. Each task is clearly identified by its context (Digital Insider, Home, Music, etc.) In addition, down at the bottom of the screen, I see a quick view of my day’s calendar (among my few criticisms: I would be happier with even a hint of what meeting was represented by each of the schedule bars). Still, in a single screen view, I can assess my entire day and make way through all that I intend to get done. I’m surprised that so few task programs also offer this calendar feature; in fact, this was the single feature that initially drew me to OmniFocus.

This is a slightly truncated version of the iPad view. I have eliminated part of the (empty) middle section to draw your attention to the task list on the top and the calendar blocks on the bottom. In real life, few of my days go by with just two tasks. (Yours too, I suspect.)

This is a slightly truncated version of the iPad view. I have eliminated part of the (empty) middle section to draw your attention to the task list on the top and the calendar blocks on the bottom. In real life, few of my days go by with just two tasks. (Yours too, I suspect.)

Apple includes a geo-location feature in its Reminders app, and OmniFocus does the same. Of course, I can survey every task by looking at a context-based organization of the tasks on one screen, or a projects-based list on another. This is sometimes useful, but I much prefer the date view (I guess I think in terms of what I want to do today, not what I want to write for Digital Insider over the next few weeks). I find myself sending tasks from Safari, but some bookmark manipulation is required to do so (common among Apple and iOS products, a silly misstep on Apple’s part; I don’t know about the Android equivalent, but someone might comment on that question).

Apple (and other users) are accustomed to seeing tasks organized not only by time but by place. In OmniFocus, this feature is especially well integrated.

Apple (and other users) are accustomed to seeing tasks organized not only by time but by place. In OmniFocus, this feature is especially well integrated.

Another useful feature, which I ought to use more often, is called Review. It allows management of categories by group (for example, I can de-activate Art for a while), or place a group of items on hold. I prefer to work at the individual task level, but I probably could save some time and operate even more efficiently by using Review.

On the iPhone, I get just about everything that’s available on the iPad version. In fact, the day’s schedule does list specific events, a feature not available on iPad (yet?). How about the desktop version? Well, it’s available, but the current iOS versions are so good, OmniGroup is redesigning the desktop version to match the feature set. Apparently, the Beta testing is going quite well; from time to time, the publisher offers an update on the company’s blog. The new release will be tied to a fresh syncing approach called OmniPresence, also described in the blog.

With all of this positivity, I supposed that you should know that OmniGroup is a leading developer of Mac and iOS products, but these products are not available for Windows or Android. That’s too bad, and, I suppose the company’s executives keep wondering whether to continue to excel in the Apple world, or whether to expand so that their good work can be appreciated by users of other systems. In fact, this is the second Omni product I have written about in this blog (OmniGraffle was the first; it’s a diagramming program that I use all of the time), and I’m anxious to write about another one, OmniOutliner, another product being redesigned for desktop because the mobile version has been so warmly received.

Would I change anything about this program? Well, just a few things. First, I think I would offer flags in at least three colors, just to add a bit of additional “hey this is pretty important” highlighting (priority levels would only confuse an elegantly simple approach, so I would leave that alone). And, I wish I could see the names of my appointments on the iPad as I can on the iPhone. A means of web access would be nice, but it’s hardly essential.

Overall, based upon daily use for months, I wholeheartedly recommend OmniFocus to people who (a) tend to be very busy, and tend to manage many of their own tasks; (b) believe that good organization and clear task lists make it possible to get things done more efficiently and effectively (if you’re not a believer, there’s no point in any of this), and (c) require a more professionally-oriented system than most products in App Store provide. If you’re just working out shopping lists, OmniFocus can do the job, but so can a lot of other software. If you’re attempting to manage a business life, or a busy personal life, OmniFocus is probably a wise choice.

Encouraging Schools to Join the 21st Century

Darryl WestConventional public schools are “arranged to make things easy for the teacher who wishes quick and tangible results.” Furthermore, “the ordinary school impress[es] the little one into a narrow area, into a melancholy silence, into a forced attitude of mind and body.” No doubt, you’ve had a thought similar to this one: “if we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s, we rob them of tomorrow.”

There’s a reason for the old school language. The words were published in 1915 by educator John Dewey. A century later, the situation has begun to change, mostly, according to Brookings Institute vice president Darryl M. West, as a result of the digital revolution. Mr. West advances this theory by offering an ample range of examples in his new book, Digital Schools.

Quite reasonably, he begins by considering various attempts at school reform, education reform, open learning, shared learning, and so on. Forward-thinking educators fill their office shelves with books praising the merits of each new wave of reform, and praise the likes of Institute for Play, but few initiatives taken hold with the broad and deep impact that is beginning to define a digital education.

digital schoolsBlogs, wikis, social media, and other popular formats are obvious, if difficult to manage, innovations more familiar in student homes than in most classrooms, but the ways in which they democratize information–removing control from the curriculum-bound classroom and teacher and allowing students to freely explore–presents a gigantic shift in control.

Similarly, videogames and augmented reality, whether in an intentionally educational context or simply as a different experience requiring critical thinking skills in imaginary domains, are commonplace at home, less so in class, and, increasingly, the stuff of military education, MIT and other advanced academic explorations, and, here and there, the charge of a grant-funded program at a special high school. More is on the way.

Evaluation, assessment, measurement–all baked into the traditional way we think about school–are far more efficient and offer so many additional capabilities. No doubt, traditional thinkers will advance incremental innovation by mapping these new tools onto existing curriculum, perhaps a step in the right direction, however limited and short-sighted those steps may be. The big step–too large for most contemporary U.S. classrooms–is toward personalized learning and personalized assessment, but that would shift the role of the teacher in ways that some union leaders find uncomfortable.

The power behind West’s view is, of course, the velocity of change in the long-promising arena of distance learning. During the past ten years , the percentage of college students who have taken at least one distance learning course has tripled, and  passed 30 percent in 2011. Numbers are not available, but I suspect we’ve now passed the 50 percent mark. The book does not address the stunning growth of, for example, Coursera. Kevin Werbach, a Wharton faculty member, taught over 85,000 students in his first Coursera course (on gamification)–students from all of the world. Indeed, the current run rate is 1.4 million new Coursera sign-ups per month.

Mimi Ito is one of the more influential thinkers about modern education and its future. Click to read her bio.

Mimi Ito is one of the more influential thinkers about modern education and its future. Click to read her bio.

The author quotes education researcher Mimi Ito:

There is increasingly a culture gap between the modes of delivery… between how people learn and what is taught. [In addition to] the perception that classrooms are boring… students [now] ask, ‘Why should I memorize everything if I can just go online? … Students aren’t preparing kids for life.”

Is this a ground-breaking book. No, but it is useful compendium of the digital changes that are beginning to take root in classrooms across America. Yes, we’re behind the times. In many ways, students are far ahead of the institutions funded to teach them. The book serves notice: no longer are digital means experimental. Computer labs are being replaced by mobile devices. Students are taking courses from the best available teachers online, and not only in college. Many students are enrolled nowhere; they are simply taking courses because they want to learn or need to learn for professional reasons. Without formal enrollment, institutions begin to lose their way. The structure is beginning to erode. Just beginning. And it can be fixed, changed, transformed, amended, and otherwise modernized. And so, the helpful author provides an extensive list of printed links for interesting parties to follow.

Just out of curiosity, I called up Darrell M. West’s web page–it’s part of the Brookings Institution’s site–and, as I expected, he is a man of consider intellect and accomplishment.  And so, I hoped I would find the above-cited links as a web resource. I looked for Education under his extensive list of topics of interest but it wasn’t there. (Uh-oh?) I did find a section on his page called “Resources,” but the only available resource on that page was a 10MB photograph of Mr. West. I couldn’t find the links anywhere. Perhaps this can be changed so that all readers, educators and interested parties can make good use of his forward-thinking work.

Sorry–one more item–I just found a recent paper by Dr. West, and I thought you might find both the accompanying article and the link useful.

Here's a look at 42-year-old John Dewey in 1902. To learn more about him, click on the picture and read the Wikipedia article.

Here’s a look at 42-year-old John Dewey in 1902. To learn more about him, click on the picture and read the Wikipedia article.

A Portable Speaker as Good as Your iPad

Tablets are spectacular inventions, but, as a rule, their internal loudspeakers do a poor job reproducing sound. With tiny loudspeaker drivers, often pointing in any direction except toward your ears, assisted by an amplifier never intended to seriously reproduce music, even the most appealing iPad is so uninterested in music, it contains only a single monaural loudspeaker.

Most people either enjoy the experience as-is, and don’t worry much about fidelity. Or, they use a pair of stereo headphones and enjoy the kind of audio that seems to exist inside the tablet (or phone), but won’t come out without some sort of accessory.

For months, I’ve been seeking a portable speaker for use with a tablet, or a phone, that provides the seemingly impossible combination of small size, convenient weight, sufficient amplification for listening at desk or in a bedroom, and, most important of all, clarity across the dynamic range (that is: nice clear highs, credible mid-tones and, perhaps most difficult in a tiny setup, bass is crisp and well-defined).

FoxL, basic model, front view, now apparently on sale for about $120.

FoxL, basic model, front view, now apparently on sale for about $120.

At a trade show, I found what I was looking for. It comes from a small company called soundmatters and it goes by the name of FoxL. In fact, there are several models.

The core of these devices is a hybrid loudspeaker design that soundmatters calls a “Twoofer,” which combines “tweeter” and ‘woofer.” This design allows a dynamic range that begins as low as 80Hz, or roughly what you would hear from a good tabletop stereo system, and also allows highs in the 20KHz range, which seems fairly commonplace. These speakers fit into a ruggedly constructed (mostly) metal box that is, truly, pocketable. The dimensions: 5.6 inches wide, 2.2 inches high, and 1.4 inches deep. It’s about the size of an eyeglass case. It weighs 9.5 ounces. (By comparison, the popular JAMBOX weighs 12 ounces, and, overall, it’s about 20 percent larger). Does the size matter? For a portable device, sure it does… the smaller (and lighter) the device, the more likely I will take it along in my shoulder bag.

But only if it sounds (very) good.

Right now, I’m listening to a recording by The Lincoln Center Jazz Orchestra led by Wynton Marsalis. The album is called Live in Swing City, and the tune is a complicated arrangement called “Chinoiserie” and it contains some very aggressive performances, lots of solos, deep notes, a barking saxophone, a sweet backup horn section, and a live audience in the background. Not an easy combination for a so-so audio system. The results are excellent–but I am careful to keep the audio level no higher than about 80% on both the iPad and the FoxL (which contains its own amplifier and volume control). The system can play louder, but bits of distortion and harshness make the listening just a bit unpleasant.

For something completely different, I switched to Peter, Paul & Mary, a trio that was always well-recorded, and whose individual voices and harmonies are both distinctive and familiar. The album is See What Tomorrow Brings and the song is “If I Were Free.” Mary is singing lead, and the nuances of her vocal are presented with appropriate warmth, if just the slightest bit lacking in punch. The guitars and the male background vocals sound clear and wonderful. The opening guitar on “Early Morning Rain” and Paul Stookey’s vocal sound ideal, and once again, the vocals are right, too.

The opening drums and other percussion on Vampire Weekend’s “Oxford Comma” grabs the listener with just the right power and clarity. The vocals sound fine. The more frenetic “Walcott” has enough bass and the right drum sound to fill a (very) small room.

“Way Over Yonder in the Minor Key” by Wilco on their Woody Guthrie tribute album, Mermaid Avenue, also sounds right. The vocal is crisp and clear, and when the background vocals kick in, with the additional instrumentation, everything holds together beautifully.

Dawn Upshaw brings her operatic voice to artful arrangements of Weill, Bernstein and other 20th century heroes on her album, I Wish It So. I’m very familiar with her version of Sondheim’s “There Won’t Be Trumpets” because it was one of a half dozen songs I used to test loudspeakers and sound systems for a feature story in Stereophile, a high-end audio magazine. Once again, Upshaw’s nuance in Upshaw’s voice is about right, but again, there’s a small lack of punch.

Presence turns out to be less of an issue for Karan Casey, who brings her pretty Irish voice to the ballad “She Is Like The Sparrow” on her self-titled album, but the low string accompaniment must be played at about 70% to avoid distortion. When the sound level is monitored, and the FoxyL is placed on its soft rubberized mat (supplied), the presentation is rich and quite wonderful.

Concerned about the occasional presence of distortion, I find some songs with distinctive and abundant bass. The little speakers sounded fine on Bonnie Raitt’s “Love Has No Pride,” and when Charlie Haden plays the bass behind James Cotton’s voice and harmonica on “All Walks of Life” from their Deep in the Blues album, the level of distortion was neither obvious nor troublesome. No problem on the Emerson Quartet’s version of various Beethoven String Quartets, either. In fact, they sounded terrific.

All of my listening was done with an iPad2 connected, by a supplied cable (miniplug to miniplug) to the most basic FoxL model ($149). For fifty dollars more, you can buy a Bluetooth model (I’m not a huge fan of Bluetooth for music listening because the sound, inevitably, cuts in and out). Both will run for 12 hours on a single battery charge (charger included). An additional $30 buys a total of 20 hours of battery life and a pretty silver enclosure. You can also charge via USB. My one complaint: a poor design on the back of the device–an easel stand is made of plastic and can be difficult to open.

Visit the website to learn more about an accessory subwoofer (also quite small) that plugs into any FoxL device.

FoxL with its subwoofer.

FoxL with its subwoofer.

Changed Channels: 2011 to 2013

All My ChildrenOn January 5, 1070, the ABC Television Network debuted a new half-hour soap opera series called All My Children. After seven years, the series was sufficiently popular to win an hour-long time slot. It remained on the air until September 23, 2011, cancelled due to changing audience and lifestyle behaviors.

On April 29, 2013, All My Children returns, with stories and many original cast members intact, five days a week, in its original half-hour form, but the series will not be seen on broadcast television. Instead, the series will be shown on Hulu’s website and on iTunes (if you want to watch on a tablet or phone, you must subscribe to Hulu Plus). One further inducement: in addition to All My Children, another long-time ABC daytime staple, One Life to Live, is also returning.

Taken as an isolated incident, the return of soap operas (or, politely, daytime dramas) is interesting news for the advertising and television industries. It’s not an isolated incident. Somehow, sometime between 2011 and 2013, something happened.

In my house, we occasionally watch a network television series at the time that it is being broadcast, but this is no longer routine behavior. Instead, we DVR anything we want to watch. The ease of simply pressing a button to record a program–a button that may be remotely operated by smartphone or tablet–turns out to be a radically new idea, different in both utility and convenience when compared with, say, VHS tapes. Alone, this convenience did not shift our behavior. Video-on-demand is also an interesting idea, but we have not used it as often as we thought we would. So that’s not the big shift.

Mel Brooks, Carl Reiner and Jerry Seinfeld eating corned beef sandwiches at Carl's place.

Mel Brooks, Carl Reiner and Jerry Seinfeld eating corned beef sandwiches in Carl’s living room.

Turns out, the big shift is the apps that are now on my TV, computer, iPad and iPhone. At first, I didn’t really understand the importance of the software. For me, HBO GO was the tipping point. The network offered not only current programs, but complete collections of all of their popular series, essentially for free to anyone subscribing to their cable service. Showtime has done the same with its Showtime Anytime app. Between HBO and Showtime, I have access to enough original programming to keep me busy for a decade. Still, the overall composition of our family’s media diet didn’t change as much as I thought it would. Then again, that was only 2012. By 2013, the shift occurred. The tipping point was a new TV set and one app in particular: Amazon Prime. Why this one? Well, it was kinda-sorta free: we buy enough books to justify the $75 annual “free shipping” charge; with this package, Amazon Prime comes as a bonus. We started by catching up on a whole lotta Twilight Zone episodes, then switched to Arrested Development. When we feel like “just watching TV,” we watch three or four Arrested Development episodes. And if we’re more ambitious, we choose a movie. Or, we fill-in with Jerry Seinfeld’s Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee via the Crackle app (two of the best episodes: the one with Carl Reiner and Mel Brooks, and the one with Ricky Gervais). I haven’t yet seen Crackle’s popular thriller series, Chosen starring Milo (Heroes) Ventimiglia. We haven’t yet bothered with Hulu and we’ve just signed on to Netflix, whose selection of online movies is  embarrassing and not worth the money.

House of CardsWe are not, however, subscribing to Netflix for the movies. Instead, we’re watching its well-publicized entry into the world of high-end television drama: House of Cards with Kevin Spacey. We don’t have much interest in Netflix’s next series, Hemlock Grove, which begins on April 19, because we’re too busy watching West Wing reruns to bother with a werewolf thriller. Netflix has announced a pilot with WGBH for a new children’s series, and will launch its first animated children’s series, made by Dreamworks, based upon its motion picture, Turbo: F.A.S.T. Also from Netflix: a new Ricky Gervais comedy series called Derek seen on TV in the UK on their Channel 4, but here in the U.S., it’s not on TV, it’s on Netflix.

We may, however, sign up for Hulu+, in part because (guilty pleasure) I used to watch All My Children, but mostly because the app/channel (not sure what we’re supposed to call these “not-quite-networks”) is launching four new series, including a promising comedy spoof from the funny Seth (SNL) Meyers, The Awesomes.

On YouTube, you can watch more than forty original episodes of H+ The Digital SeriesThe first episodes ran in August. It’s a sci-fi thriller. Battlestar Gallactica: Blood & Chrome is the prequel to the cult-fave TV series seen on both YouTube and SyFy.

A scene from Tom Hanks' elaborate new Yahoo! Screen animated post-apocalyptic series, Electric City.

A scene from Tom Hanks’ elaborate new Yahoo! Screen animated post-apocalyptic series, Electric City.

On AOL On, On Yahoo! Screen, there’s a spoof of dating reality shows called Burning Lovebut the big news from this online channel is a new Tom Hanks project called Electric City. I’ve been having fun watching Video Game High School, which crosses reality and the cyber world.

Traditional television networks are trying their hand, too. FOX is debuting Short-Com Comedy Hour this summer.

More is on the way. And, I suspect, much of it will be better than average network fare for two reasons. First, creative decisions are being controlled by a smaller executive committee, and producers are being allowed more freedom (that will change, but for now, it’s worth savoring). Second, there’s a lot of talk about “the HBO Model” which assigns greater value to the quality of the property than to a third party relationship (in a typical network’s situation, every decision is affected by the opinion of the sponsor, and again, for this brief shining moment, the focus is on the creative work and not on the needs of the sponsors).

2013. The year that everything changed.

What We Don’t Know About Distracted Driving

DistractedDriverEvery day, about ten American die and about ten more are injured in motor vehicle crashes involving a distracted driver.

Sending or receiving a text message takes your eyes off the road for an average of just less than five seconds. If you’re driving 55 mph, in 5 seconds, you will drive the length of a football field. (Yikes.)

In 2011, we sent nearly 200 billion (!) text messages, twice the number of texts we sent in 2009. But the number of deaths and injuries remained stable. That made me wonder what we know about digital devices and driver safety.

Preliminary web research uncovered dozens of articles published around 2009-2010, but not much material that was more recent. At the time, there was great concern about the most at-risk groups (mostly, 18-24), and cries for additional research, including scientific research of all sorts. And that got me to thinking.

In theory, I suppose it’s best to drive without any distraction whatsoever. In practice, commuting is often a boring routine, so we listen to the radio, or, if we’re sharing the drive, we chat with another passenger, and if we’re on a long trip, it’s always easier with at least one passenger. Are these distractions positive (keeping the driver alert, awake and interested), helpful (second pair of eyes), or negative (any distraction is a problem)? That’s probably the first question we ought to answer. Inevitably, the answer will include a large grey “it depends” zone–if the other passenger is offering light conversation, it’s not much of a distraction, but an argumentative or boring passenger might add to tension or drowsiness.

Related question: does radio listening affect driver safety? It’s difficult to imagine a long drive without a radio companion. Half of all U.S. radio listening is done in a vehicle. Sirius/XM has built a business by providing a large number of radio program services to truckers and noncommercial drivers. Some radio programs are very engaging–political programs can really raise the level of listener emotion–and it’s fun to turn the radio up loud and sing along to some dreadful 1980s pop tune. How would we measure the level of distraction associated with radio, or CDs, or recorded books? A really good book, presented by a really good actor, can captivate the imagination. On a long drive, that’s heaven. But is it safe? Is a great book with fabulous characters more dangerous than a book with a weak story?

For the moment, let’s put aside the goofy “I probably shouldn’t do this while I am driving” behaviors that include applying makeup, drinking hot coffee, pawing through a grocery bag in the back seat while driving 60 mph, turning around to tell little Timmy to stop pulling little Kimmy’s hair, and all that.

Instead, let’s turn to digital communications devices. And let’s start with the telephone.

First question: is it more dangerous to talk (not dial, not set up a conference call, but just talk) any more distracting or dangerous than talking to a passenger in the seat next to the driver?

Second question: why have manufacturers made it so difficult to talk on the phone in the car? My car has a bluetooth setup so I can talk and listen to phone calls through my car’s sound system. Great idea, but the system doesn’t work because the car manufacturer refuses to update the firmware. BlueAnt offers a portable speaker that attaches to the visor, an adequate solution that should, in this day and age, be built into every automobile. With voice-controlled dialing.

Shifting the focus to the cell phone makers, they should be taken to task for not establishing standards for voice calling, and for not establishing features that make in-car use easy and safe. Simply: every car should include a standardized port in which the place can be safely and securely placed. The port should include power and connectivity to the car’s sound system. There should be NO access to the phone’s keypad while the car is in motion. This requires a superior in-car voice dialing system, either from the phone or from the car’s digital systems. Not a giant technological challenge.

What about email and texting and web surfing and Angry Birds? Not while you’re driving. Not at all. When the car is stopped (stopped = the engine is off), sure. Otherwise, these activities should be unavailable.

Apple MapsOne gotcha: maps. A voice navigation system is helpful, but the map really needs to be available in visual form. Should the driver be looking at that map while driving? Absolutely not. Eyes on the road, please! We’ve become addicted to our GPS systems, but we need to think about this system in a more rational way. Voice systems are probably the answer, but they need to become more reliable. Printed map directions are helpful, but they should not be used while the vehicle is in motion. A heads-up display (map projected on the driver’s windshield) may be a promising solution, but we need more scientific testing to determine whether a driver can both navigate the real world and study a map simultaneously. My brain cannot do both at the same time. I cannot multitask while in motion–I need to stop the car, study the map, try to remember what the map told me, and then drive the car. Some evolution is in store: both for humans interacting with digital maps and digital maps becoming more useful to humans in motion.

What’s missing? Video, for one thing. We’ve been smart enough to keep the video player pointed toward the back seat passengers, but radio control, map navigation, and other kinda-sorta-video is making its way into the driver’s field of view. It won’t be long before on-screen navigation is sponsored, and, here and there, the driver might be exposed to a video commercial. And it’s certainly tempting for McDonald’s to play a commercial around dinner time, especially when a driver is about to pass a McD’s installation.

And what about emergencies? You’re driving 65 mph and you absolutely must call or text somebody RIGHT NOW. I’m trying to imagine a situation. There’s a drunk driver in front of you (oh, no, wait, I think she’s just texting). Your car is heading for a bridge that used to be there but is now a Wile E. Coyote cliff. Stuff happens, and sometimes, you need to make that call. One solution: save the number 9 on your autodial for 9-1-1. Seems to me, the likelihood that you will be in a situation where (a) there is an emergency that requires an in-motion call, (b) that is not the sort of thing where 9-1-1 is the call to make; (c) there is no passenger in the car to make the call; and (d) you cannot pull off the road and stop to make the call is fairly small.

So, where does that leave us? I’d like some answers and I’d like some changes. First the answers:

1. Will the US Department of Transportation please fund annual research and an annual report to the American people about distracted driving. Which distractions are most dangerous (by the numbers)? Which are less so? What are USDOT’s specific recommendations to consumers, and specific agenda items for legislative change (at the Federal or State level) to ensure our safety? If in-motion telephone use is truly unsafe, we should pass legislation and enable enforcement to prevent the use. If in-motion telephone use is safe, but the use of one or two hands to operate these phones while the car is in motion is not safe, then manufacturers should be required to offer a standard solution that always works properly.

2. Will the car manufacturers please take responsibility for reliable, flexible systems for the safe in in-motion use of telephones (not texting and other uses) in cars? I’d like to see an annual report to consumers that addresses release dates for industry-wide standards, and, subsequently, annual upgrades so that every phone works in every vehicle. Yes, we may need some legislative help on this one.

3. Will the phone manufacturers please take responsibility for reliable, flexible systems for the safe in-motion use of telephones (not texting and other uses) in cars? Once again, an annual report should be required by any manufacturer selling telephones in the US.

Changes:

1. As consumers, we should fully understand the product and human safety issues related to phones in moving vehicles. We should demand real answers to these questions from our state and Federal agencies and from our lawmakers–and not just once, because cars and phones and consumer behaviors keep changing. What is and is not safe? We should know.

2. Unless we are certain, or reasonably certain, that hands-free telephone conversations are truly unsafe, more unsafe than, say, listening to the radio or talking to a passenger, both the phone makers and the car makers should be required to provide safe, reliable communications systems in moving vehicles.

3. We should establish reasonable industry review processes for a rapidly-changing digital environment.

Digital Hollywood (in NYC)

Summit300x250Digital Hollywood is an ongoing series of media industry conferences held, mostly, in Los Angeles, New York, and Las Vegas. Generally, the conferences focus on media, advertising, programming, consumer behavior, financing of new media, technical platforms and marketing. I have spoken at several of these conferences. This week, in Manhattan, I attended the 2013 Media Summit (their tenth anniversary, by the way). I listened to perhaps a dozen panels populated by industry insiders. And learned.

OreoI learned about the relationship between Oreo cookies and social networking. As ridiculous conversations go, this is sublime. The argument in favor of social networking for cookies goes back to the old arguments about the ultimate value of brand awareness, which remains exceedingly difficult to measure. Still, the hipster panel insisted that there is a new of thinking required here (suspend disbelief). The terminology has revolved, but the arguments echo dot.com marketing strategies circa 1999. Still, the idea of an entire brand team approving Tweets in real time at, say, the Super Bowl, is an image worth remembering. Why? Because marketing teams are no so complicated, and for large brands, so scattered among specialist agencies and specialized departments within larger agencies, with so many complicated political games, consensus has become difficult to achieve. In the brand marketing universe, there is great importance placed on 21st century marketing, doing incredibly cool stuff, and keeping/gaining clients through innovation. Ask the average person whether any of this affected their decision to buy a pack of Oreos, or to eat an Oreo, and it’s unlikely that they would make a connection between the cookie and any of these campaigns.

At another session, I learned about the industry’s high hopes for the new MPEG-DASH format.

The term KPI (Key Performance Indicators) was probably most-often-uttered. In a consumer marketing environment whose changes are both difficult to measure (too much data, too many variables), agencies and corporate marketers are trying to figure out which indicators actually matter. CPM (Cost per Thousand, a long-standing audience measure that is common currency among agencies and media) is losing favor. One might measure brand impact, but there is little agreement about how this can or should be done with any degree of standardization. Nielsen is not well respected; there was consensus that this method of sampling was silly. If I correctly recall, a comparison was drawn as follows: instead of using supermarket cash register data to measure the store’s activity, the Nielsen approach is more similar to asking one in twelve individual shoppers what they purchased.

Verizon Media Server. For more, click on the pic to go to The Verge.

Verizon Media Server. For more, click on the pic to go to The Verge.

I found conversations about large tech companies and their platform strategies to be especially interesting. Verizon’s panelist complained about their high costs of set top boxes, and told attendees about a new Verizon Media Server that would serve all sorts of client devices throughout the house. If I understand this strategy correctly, Verizon wants to charge a monthly fee for Internet and program services, for the connection between home and outside network, and for a single box in each subscriber household. Microsoft claims that half of XBox use is non-videogame, so it is now thinking in terms of program service subscriptions (not unlike Verizon), and producing its own programming (like Netflx and Amazon). Much smaller Boxee is thinking in terms of a cloud-based DVR not only for television programs, but for all types of audio-video media.

One fascinating idea: will consumers control their own data? For example, when I use E-ZPass, or when you browse Amazon or search Google, or watch a VOD or DVR file, where does this data go, where is it stored, and what permission is required for access? Maybe I want all of my data stored by, say, the American Red Cross, which may, in some wildly imaginative future, repackage and resell the donated data in accordance with personal donor’s wishes?

Another: the role of intellectual propery attorneys who must, due to the nature of their profession, remain in a 20th century approach that transforms copyrights into cash, and blocks unauthorized access or use with vigorous enforcement. I mentioned the phrase Creative Commons as part of a question, and only one person in the room of one hundred seemed to understand what was meant by the forward-thinking term. Still, the attorney panel was brilliant in their discussion of negotiation strategies:

  • Start with a phone conversation, do not rely upon emails. Establish a personal relationship based upon humor, warmth, personal connections.
  • Today, there are so many people, projects, companies – slow down, think about partners, need to educate the other side, develop an understanding of everybody’s strengths.
  • Take ego out of the equation.
  • Do not hold grudges, and do not allow yourself to assume anything resembling a victim mentality.
  • Do not make it personal.
  • In television and Internet video, the buyer’s creative team establishes deliverables based upon their own set of standards, but these people do not negotiate the deals. Instead, this work is done by a business affairs team that is closely aligned with the finance department. Be careful about allowing business affairs or finance to control the conversation. If they push too hard–as they often do because they are paid to control their company’s interests–then the creative team will not get the project they ordered, and the producer will, inevitably, be blamed. if the conversation shifts into an unacceptable zine, do not hesitate to suggest that the business affairs staff bring in the creative staff to reset expectations, and, perhaps better yet, off to do so yourself. often, the business affairs response to this awkward request will be: “no, we will deal with this internally,” and then, well, every situation is different.
  • Be very careful about “this is a deal breaker” or drawing a line in the sand.
  • No two deals are ever the same, even if the same people are involved.
  • Moving to yet another panel, I liked the term “Selective Consumption.” Roughly, it seems to mean a a presorted, highly personalized, behavior-based list of currently aailable media assets that miraculously (digitally, enabled by artificial intelligence and algorithms) anticipates each individual consumer need of the nanosecond.

Other interesting ideas and notes:

  • When designing a multi platform, transmedia approach, it’s easy to develop a visual identity on your own platforms but quite difficult to manage this level of control over third party platforms (because each has its own unique technical and design standards and its own strategic agenda).
  • The industry has made something of a mess in the consumer household where multiple boxes, screen interfaces, access codes, remote controls, and a lack of standardization now results in considerable frustration and “we’re not responsible, go talk to those people over there” interoperability problems. Not much progress in this area; in fact, things will probably get a lot worse before the industry gets ahead of the problem.
  • An interesting discussion about “who is the voice of the brand?” Is it the Chief Marketing Officer, the senior agency account person, or the twenty something with her hand on the Twitter keyboard? Plans are made months in advance and approve queues are common practice, but real time communication via social networks seems to subvert these plans. Lots of damage can be done, and so quickly! Then again, there is the urgency of timely messages about (or by) Oreo cookies.
  • About 30 percent of Verizon FiOS use is non-TV. People are shifting, rapidly, to tablets and away from TV for their PRIMARY video viewing experience. That seems significant.