• The iPad will crush the Kindle market.  It’s cooler, slicker, has a color screen and will have thousands of apps at lau nch. While people can read books and newspapers the bulk of the interesting content is on the web and the web is much better on the iPad then the Kindle.
• The iPad will crush netbooks.  It’s a more portable experience and it’s touch enabled. The keyboard is close to full size. The apps are designed to be portable unlike a netbook where you’re trying to use full size apps on a 1/2 size screen.  Netbooks are underpowered from a performance standpoint to run typical productivity apps (Office.)
• The computer has traditionally been in the office or the den. This is a move into the living room. If the phone is a communication device and a laptop is for creating content then the iPad is for consuming it and that hasn’t existed before.

Why it is doomed to fail

• The potential owners of the iPad already have an iPhone and a laptop. While some of the scenarios could be better on such a device they are not sufficiently better and the limitations of the platform out-weigh the advantages.
• If the device is a browsing device then the browser makes a huge difference. Because of the closed nature of the iPad we can’t expect to see Chrome, Firefox or Opera on the iPad.  Last I checked Safari only had a minority browser share. Add the lack of flash to the equation and a lot of sites will have you reaching for a laptop.
• The iPhone was a success because when the device was released all the existing phones were terrible. The iPhone was a replacement device to something that was flawed. With the iPad it’s not a replacement device. It’s a supplemental device. The problem it’s solving is less of a pain point.
• Basic multi-tasking is obvious and needed on a larger device (music+browsing) or (homework + calculator.) While a single app makes for a simpler experience there’s no reason that I can’t be productive while other apps are loading data, syncing, downloading or doing other background tasks.

1950’s Styalator electronic tablet, 1960’s RAND Tablet and Dynabook. Various generations of Apple Newton devices, Microsoft Slate’s and Windows for Pen based computers. Even the Kindle that has sold about 1.5 million units total could be viewed as a failure when compared to numbers like 40-60 million iPhone’s and iPod Touch devices.

Why have so many companies tried and so many failed? Perhaps more importantly what does Apple think it can do to succeed? Here’s what I predict:

• Best overall device for consuming content. Books, Magazines, Music, DVD’s.
  Devices of the past focused on creating content (usually with a pen) only the Kindle was good at reading content and only book form at that.
• Best mobile web-browser. Sure you can pinch and zoom on your phone but if you really want to surf you need something larger. This middle ground is great for a tablet sized device.  You can finally read a website on a bus or train without trying to balance a laptop or looking too conspicuous.
• Interface based on the iPhone. Clearly Apple has nailed the iPhone UI. They will take this base and extend it to a larger device. Not as big as a laptop but somewhere in between. The touch based interface will be enhanced with a two hand multi-touch predictive keyboard.  Everyone will hate it at first.  Three months later everyone will call it brilliant.
• It’ll look like a flat iPhone.  90% screen, a little edge. Thin as hell.  It’ll be priced so that people perceive it as being expensive and premium compared to everything else. $799, maybe more.  Expect people to say…  Why would I get that when I can get a Kindle for $259.  That sort of thing just makes people desire it even more.
• App developers will flock to it.
• Magazines will be the killer content.
• Social games will be the killer app.

I’ve found a better way to use favorites.  When reading from a mobile device I will ‘favorite’ a story that I want to read later. I then have an RSS subscription to my own favorites list. This means that I can ’skim’ while mobile and read when I’m in front of a larger screen when I have more time.  There are dedicated services for this idea such as ‘instapaper’ however favorites and RSS works great across all clients and don’t require any special tools.

With that here’s 10 of my recent favorites:

• RT @leebrimelow: Building iPhone applications using Flash CS5 - http://gotoandlearn.com/play?id=116
• chrisblizzard: The most amazing shuttle launch footage I have ever seen. Really. http://vimeo.com/7852885
• stephlemieux: Bridging physical and virtual navigation/IA: Apple & IKEA web vs. store wayfinding case studies http://bit.ly/uwJ58
• opetopic: learning a lot about promotion from “Winning iPhone Strategies”. Some interesting case studies.http://bit.ly/5i9kAd
• Dylan_Beadle: App Store pre-submission checklist: http://www.makayama.com/checklist.html #iPhoneDev
• Just uploaded a demo video for our next app. Mother Goose Nursery Rhymes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKJfg9X_xvY
• asgrodd: RT @angusdav: Brilliant as usual, andrew! RT @andrew_chen: New blog post: Product design debt versus Technical debt http://bit.ly/8xfHbV
• j_b_f: Ever seen a check for $9,000,000,000? http://bit.ly/6PVACK
• bussgang: Posted the video from my HBS talk: What Makes Boston’s Start-Up Scene Special?http://bit.ly/34LJR3
• IntoMobile: iPhone app success story: Pizza Hut generated $1 million in sales http://bit.ly/3KloLT

P.S.  Don’t forget to follow me here.

You can’t easily tap every region of the phone with equal ease. Your hand isn’t designed for this.  Yes your thumb is opposable but unless it’s double jointed there will still be parts of your phone that will be harder to tap.

When designing an application consider how it’s going to be held.  In one hand, sometimes in the other, perhaps in your pocket?  That’s why it’s so important to get the app out of the simulator and actually into your hand. The mechanics of how you hold your phone make it much harder to grip the device in certain orientations. It makes it particularly difficult to reach the lower corners by your thumb.

Consider the built in Camera application that Apple provides. The application is simple and attractive but the buttons for the application are in exactly the wrong place. To take a proper picture you need to hold the phone perfectly vertical (unless you’re taking a picture of the floor.)  The slippery edges of the phone require you to either grip the phone firmly with your hand making it difficult to tap the camera or alternatively balance the camera precariously on your pinkie finger.

I have dropped my phone at least twice attempting this and know of at least one person who has smashed their phone into little bits because of this.

There’s a principal called “Fitts’s law” that describes how clickable items are on screen. Said simply:

Items that are larger and closer to the mouse cursor are easier to click.

The mathematical details then explain that traditional screen edges are infinitely click-able since they have a virtually unlimited size.   On a mobile device the same assumptions don’t hold true. The mechanics of your hand play a significant role.  Not only do items have to be larger to be easier to click but they have to be easily reachable when holding a phone in one hand.

It’s a relatively simple form.  It’s certainly not bad but I think it could be better. Here’s a quick mock up:

Here are the key design points:

• The body of the form has “What, When, Where”  but doesn’t have “Who” if you’re having a meeting it stands to reason that the people attending are pretty important. I always felt that having guests hidden in the right didn’t make sense.
• The majority of meetings are measured in duration. 30 min, 45 min, 1 hour, 2 hour, all day, etc. It’s much easier to pick a common duration and allow “custom end time.” as a fall-back rather then making users select end times.
• Most meetings don’t repeat. Logically this is a secondary consideration. This can be moved to the secondary area on the right.
• Checking availability should be a secondary area action as well. Plus over on the right there’s more space to present availability in-line.
• It should be really easy to preview a location with a map.
• The current UI makes it difficult to add people to a meeting without the system automatically emailing them. You have to place names into the description area. Having a simple checkbox to email guests could solve this.
• There are a lot of simple UI 101 alignment things that can make the UI look cleaner and simpler just by lining fields up.
• The right hand side could be extensible with new modules, plug-ins, ala Google Labs.

1. It’s still not possible to easily tell if your message was received, read or even opened.  Just like email you will never know if the important proposal made it.
2. Information overload.  The problem is finding what’s important. New things move to the top regardless of how important they are. Compare this to how you organize papers on your desk, important things move to the top.
3. If you say something stupid you can’t take it back. Just like email once it’s out there you’re done. Even if the other person hasn’t seen it yet. They will now play it back in it’s full glory.
4. Privacy. You can’t send something and keep the recipient from forwarding it on.
5. Transfer of large files or collections. You can still attach things but if you want to share 50 wedding photos or a large home movie Wave won’t help you much.  It’s a communication pipe but files are secondary citizens.
6. Bonus #6. Spam.  You’ll can still get it and you’ll still be expected to flag it.  So there will be false positives. An extensive social network reputation doesn’t help.  A lack of a social network doesn’t keep you from sending 1000’s of messages.  It’s still early so there is little spam but this will change if this catches on.

Often times we don’t use these icons verbetam but they provide a valuable design language and starting point that offers some level of predictability and consistency across apps.

Get them over at http://www.glyphish.com/

Before:

Example image from drupal 7 content list

Key points with this screen:

• The title areas don’t tell you what you’re supposed to do on this screen. In fact there are at least three competing title areas. “Content” as a title, “Content” as a tab, “Add new content” as a secondary title and two group boxes that cover filtering and updating. The actual title of the screen doesn’t reflect the modal nature of dialog. You’re actually adding content to something else and it’s not clear what that is.
• The information is presented in the wrong reading order.  The content table should be first.  You first have to read the list to see what you’re dealing with before you decide to either filter it or update it.
• An empty list is a dead-end. It tells you there is no content but doesn’t direct you on how or where you should go to create some.
• The X in the upper doesn’t make it clear what it would close. The tab? The dialog? A simple cancel button or a standard cancel button or a close button in the upper right would be more obvious.

After

Key points

• Title should say what you’re doing.
• Filters should sit above column headers whenever possible. No additional button action should be needed and multiple filters can be applied at the same time.
• It should be easy to reset the filters and hide them. Hidden should be the default.  The filters should give you a clue as to the number of items in each filter bucket:  Articles (3)  Posts (120). This makes it easier to select the right filters.
• If the table is empty it should be easy to get to a content creation page.
• Buttons along the bottom of a dialog provide clear ways to exit or complete the task.
• Things that don’t map to the core task should be hidden.  In the original mockup there were options to update the status of content from published to unpublished. This type of functionality belongs in a management section, not when you’re “adding content.” It should be removed or hidden in a similar way that filters can be hidden.

A typical scenario is between someone with an idea and someone who’s in the position to help fullfil that idea. This can be a VC with money, a contractor with skills or a business partner. The person with the idea begins the conversation…

“I need your help, but before I can even tell you how you can help, I need you to sign something.”

What a conversation killer. When you put it that way, it sounds rediculous but that’s exactly what these conversations are about.

1. I don’t know you.
2. I don’t know your idea.
3. I don’t know your background or company.
4. I don’t even know if I can help you.
5. What is the upside for me to sign an agreement?

Let’s tell some more truths.

1. Few people read their NDA’s closely. It takes time.  This is time that is spent looking at papers rather then discussing your idea and how to execute it. What would you rather spend time doing?
2. It’s not clear to me how enforceable NDA’s are if they are violated.  It’s practically impossible to tell how information leaks out and who is responsible. If information leaks out will you really spend thousands of dollars in legal fees?  If you’re a startup the answer is always no.  The only time NDA’s get more serious is when they are with a larger publicly traded company.
3. In most cases the NDA does exactly the opposite of what actually needs to be done.  If you need help the best way to get help is to put the word out. You’ll find the best people and the best answers to problems.

At best the NDA says that both people signing agree not to be assholes.  Of course you shouldn’t need a piece of paper to tell you that, after all you’re the one asking for help.

Ideas are worthless

Imagine you’re a brilliant entrepreneur, a savvy business women or a brilliant negotiator.  No matter how good your idea, the idea itself is worthless. Zero. Nada.  There are two things that matter with ideas:

1. Execution
2. Advantage

As I just said ideas are worthless, litteraly a dime a dozzen. Execution, is the way you implement the vision of the idea. No one is going to execute the idea the same way that you would execute it. It may be your drive, your passion, your tenacity. Whatever it is, no one else has it.  You have to be more passionate about your idea then anyone else.

The other thing that matters is your advantage. This may be your connections, your education, your life experiences, your expertise. Whatever you bring to the table that gives you the lead over your competition.

If you can execute your idea and you have an advantage you can tell your idea to people all day long and it doesn’t matter.  If other people don’t have the same passion and advantage as you they will never be able to bring the idea to completion that way that you would.

It’s been done.

Your idea, however brilliant has already been done. It’s been done by someone else, in some other country, in some related field, in some other time, to some similar product, using a derivitive technology. For all the NDA’s that I’ve signed I have never once seen an idea that is totally new.

Ideas are by nature evolutionary and build upon past ideas.  No matter how good your ideas may be it’s already been done. It’s has already been disclosed. A simple google search of your idea will show that there are tons of people doing what you’re trying to do.  What hasn’t been disclosed is how you’re going to execute your idea.

Ideas are a People Business

VC’s talk about intelectual property or the secret sauce for your idea. In most cases it’s not the patents sitting in a drawer. It’s people who have a vision to execute and a tactical advantage to make an idea successful.  If you’re asking for help you need the right people and to get them you need to have a lot of conversations.  The more NDA’s you sign the less total conversations you can have.  Among other reasons this is one of the reasons you won’t find VC’s signing NDA’s.

Someone is building your idea right now. What are you waiting for?

An NDA?

The problem is that controlling this experience requires secrecy. It means that within Apple there are people who know the secret and people who do not.  The secrecy creates dividing lines between groups. The groups that are not ‘in the know’ then go off and create their own secrets.  This is what has happened at Apple and it’s getting out of control.

Everyone gets paranoid about saying too much and in turn says too little. This secrecy has created a particularly deep divide in the iPhone part of Apple’s business. The cloak and dagger secrecy behind the ways that Apple runs the app store have made me question if the secrecy is ‘worth it.’

I appreciate the show and the magic that goes on to make it happen. That said a clearer line needs to be drawn between what’s good for hardware sales and what’s good for the rest of the business.