I have been doing a bit of research into ubiquitous technology, and came across a series of papers on the
AIGA website.
The first paper I looked at was
Mobile Computing in High-End Retail. It shows how an ethnographic study into how managers guided clients through the experience of buying their fashion related products led into the design of a prototype and set of requirements. It was interesting to see how quickly the process was completed, and how valuable they found involving users in the process.
The second paper I looked at was
Mobile Essentials: Field Study and Concepting, which looked at the study of
"what people consider to be mobile essentials, how those mobile essentials are carried and problems typically encountered." I liked how they looked at the context and situations/places these Mobile Essentials (MEs) were being used in, rather than concentrating on the objects themselves i.e. they looked at the
why and
how as well as the
what. I laughed at the paragraph describing how people remembered their MEs, as I am often seen doing the Phone, Keys, Wallet pat down before I leave the house.
The paper
Nokia Sensor: From Research to Product goes into much more detail, providing some insight to the process and decisions made. The product itself can be seen
here. Personally I'm not sure on the product's success, however I found an interesting comment
here stating that it seemed
"like yet another mobile product looking for an application". So I suppose that even when the design is user-centred, and done with all good intentions, the end result can still be ineffective.
