A friend recently asked me how many iPhone apps I use regularly. My response: 2.

Facebook and Tweetie are really the only apps I use. A couple months ago I even took the unnecessary step of deleting all the apps that were collecting dust on my iPhone, simply because I got tired of looking at them. I’m not the only one like this. A recent study found that 20 days after download only 5 percent of apps are used.

So what’s wrong here? My view: It’s partly the apps but mostly it’s the app store. It’s too heavy. Let me paint you a picture.

* My intention is not to single out the iPhone here. I mean mobile applications in general (e.g., iPhone, Android, Palm, etc.)

A day in the life

I’m wandering around a Best Buy (see hypothetical) and am having trouble locating Blu-Ray players. While I could go ask someone for help, I decide to pull out my trusty smart phone instead (here an iPhone). Here are the steps I have to go through:

1. Click App Store
2. Search “Best Buy”
3. Review app list & select the official Best Buy app
4. Wait about a minute for the download to finish over 3G
5. Launch the Best Buy app and wait for it to load
6. Find Blu-Ray devices

Finally I’m presented with a Blu-Ray page and what are my options?

“View Online.”

Two major issues here:

1) Wow, that was a lot of work.

2) I’m standing in a Best Buy and the Best Buy app is telling me to shop online.

I, of course, am operating under an assumption here. Namely, mobile applications should enhance my physical environment. That’s the difference between a desktop app and mobile app for me. While a desktop app is immersive and provides its own context, a mobile app is auxiliary and responds to context. Mobile apps that don’t fit this bill are simply desktop apps fitted to small screens – ubiquity with no added utility.

Unfortunately, mobile app stores are designed for these types of apps. The arduous setup process, discoverability and, more fundamentally, the notion of an “application” itself are hindering true innovation in the mobile space.

So, let me paint you another picture and present three concepts that illustrate a different approach.

#1 Transitory not transactional

App stores are geared towards transactions. You browse, buy (sometimes for free), and keep goods (applications). In the Best Buy example, I not only stood in the store for almost two minutes before realizing that the application wouldn’t help me but I now had a Best Buy app sitting on my phone. I visit a Best Buy next to never – so why is it still there?

Same thing happened when I downloaded a French dictionary to use in France and a snow report application while in Tahoe. Months later those apps (and their many updates) were still in my face. This is poor design in that it forces a transactional framework onto a transitory interaction. This is what I mean when I say that mobile apps are “heavy.” Getting from inspiration to an open app requires too much work.

There is of course one platform that handles transitory interactions particularly well: the web. I should be able to call up the Best Buy “app” much like I do a website. No downloads, updates or uninstalls, simply “Go.”

#2 Context not subject

While the open (generative) web makes for a great, lightweight app platform, organization via URLs and search engines makes for horrible discovery on mobile. More fundamentally, the challenge is that the web has been developed to interpret user input – but not environmental input. That made sense back when computers were bolted onto desks but today’s “computer” lives in the pocket and the catalyst for usage is often tied to some measurable environmental factors.

Some applications have done a good job responding to such factors. And here I must really commend the iPhone, in particular, for providing so many valuable inputs. I would count Shazam as a great mobile app; with one click the song you’re hearing but don’t know the name of is analyzed and, if successful, the song name returned. That wouldn’t have much application on a desk-bolted computer but on a mobile device that’s with you in cafes and bars, it’s golden.

But how does one get to downloading Shazam? Well, you have to know it by name or do some novel searches to find it, or in other words it’s only discoverable via user input. Wouldn’t it make more sense if it were suggested to you when the phone detects a song playing? What I’m really getting at is designing an App Store around discoverability via context.

Let’s revisit the Best Buy example to see what I mean. This time I’m packing an iPhone with a very context-sensitive app store and applications.

A better day in the life

I’m wandering around a Best Buy and am having trouble locating Blu-Ray players. While I could go ask someone for help, I decide to pull out my trusty iPhone. Here are the steps I have to go through:

1. Open App Store (i.e., a customized browser)
2. Search “nearby” or just click the location button
   1. This contextual search uses information about the surrounding area to present relevant applications. Since I’m standing in a Best Buy that application is presented first. The Starbucks next door is also presented.
   2. 
3. Select Best Buy from the list
   1. Note: With one click I not only load Best Buy (no download needed) but I’m put directly into the context of the specific store I’m standing in.
4. Ask “Where’s Blu-Ray?”
   1. I’m presented with GPS-like directions. As I move throughout the store the screen continuously updates and I can simply replace “Blu-Ray” with “Checkout” or “Restroom.”
   2. 

So there you have it. A much better user experience driven by context both in the app store and in the application itself. As a bonus, this kind of discovery can reinforce synergies found in the physical environment. There’s a good reason why a Starbucks is located next to a Best Buy – we should replicate that on mobile as well and perhaps suggest to the user to order their drink when they are waiting in the Best Buy checkout line.

#3 Eco not silo

So far I have suggested we kill the transactional nature of app stores and reorganize them based on context but my last suggestion may be the most radical – let’s kill the concept of an “application” altogether. Here’s my beef (it’s one that was first articulated to me by my Mozilla colleague, Aza Raskin, so consider this section co-production):

Applications are selfish – they keep innovations to themselves. While Web 2.0 has done a better job of “mash ups” this really occurs at the data level – what applications need to do is share functionality as well. What do I mean? Let’s say a word processor does a great job of producing rainbow colored text like this and that you love it so much that you want every word you ever type to be in rainbow. Ideally you’d set that up once and then no matter what application you are using, be it Word, Facebook, Photoshop, your type would be colorful. What I’m really suggesting is an architecture where features, as well as data, are pervasive. An application here would be redefined as a particular grouping of global features and data. Differentiation here purely resides in user experience as all applications could share in the best features and data available.

Why is this particularly important in mobile? Because while on the desktop we’ve developed task bars and shortcuts to help us manage the dozens of applications that we have running, on mobile we don’t have the same power or screen real estate. When we launch a mobile application it effectively takes over our phone. That makes not having access to data or features that much more painful.

Or put more positively wouldn’t it be great to have all your favorite features within reach? What if the Best Buy app utilized the same “nearby” feature that I had used to launch it in the first place? I could recursively search “nearby” again and now see what’s around me in the store:

And since this functionality transcends the app, the Best Buy app could deliver a lot more than just product information. It could even tell me that a friend is in the store too.

Not bad for a brick-and-mortar, eh?

“There is a secret bond between slowness and memory, between speed and forgetting. Consider this utterly commonplace situation: A man is walking down the street. At a certain moment, he tries to recall something, but the recollection escapes him. Automatically, he slows down. Meanwhile, a person who wants to forget a disagreeable incident he has just lived through starts unconsciously to speed up his pace, as if he were trying to distance himself from a thing still too close to him in time.

In existential mathematics, that experience takes the form of two basic equations: the degree of slowness is directly proportional to the intensity of memory; the degree of speed is directly proportional to the intensity of forgetting.”
- Milan Kundera, Slowness

I was leafing through my copy of Big Issues: The Examined Life in a Digital Age the other night and was struck by this quote. Owen Edwards excerpts this in his essay “Remembrance of Things Fast” in which he critiques the speed with which we live in the modern era. Some call it “social acceleration” and when pushed to its limit it is characterized by the acceleration of change such that experiences blur and memories vanish.

Edwards wrote the essay in 2001. If then he was anxious, today he must be utterly overwhelmed. In many ways, the internet has gone from mere accessory to displacing the world that built it. Bits are replacing atoms at an alarming rate. In 2008 alone, the world created 487 billion gigabytes of information (up 73% from 2007).

This is both beautiful and terrifying. The internet is the great democratizer, unlocking information and making it accessible to anyone that can plug in. It proliferates on the principle that there is virtually no cost in participation. It is that paradoxical book shelf that can accommodate seemingly infinite books at little to no marginal cost. But while the economics can justify an infinite stream of information, something must be said of the psychological implications. Today, amidst the flurry of activity that is one’s inbox, mobile phone, tweets, and web apps, many are overstepping the line of hyper-productivity. In a world of one-to-many communications, simply keeping up with the stream at times requires super-human capabilities. Which is really to say that we’re going too fast.

The internet opened up a landscape of unfathomable possibilities. And here we are at the foot of the New World, itching to grab all we can. The new Manifest Destiny is reaching the end of the internet. And with every new bit consumed and new level of productivity, we experience more but retain less. The new thesis is 140 characters long. It’s delivered in real-time and flashes across the screen and our minds in a matter of seconds. The phone is buzzing, the browser several tabs deep. unread emails number into the hundreds. We are awash in all of it. The answer is in your sigh, in your closed eyes and refrain. The key isn’t more information. It’s more focus.

Slow down.

i liken this to a kid at an arcade that claims he will beat the latest game. thing is this kid is only packing one quarter. he’s got only one chance to win. any bad moves and its literally game over. this is what most of us do when we try to launch something new. we do all the research, make all the decisions, build a complete solution upfront and then double down on it. we drop in our only quarter and see how far we can go.

problem is we do this all outside the context of the game. vision, strategy, solution are all defined before we even get into the game. we might win but it requires incredible skill and luck.

the stakes are high in such a world. most of us refuse to even play. this is the world of cushy jobs in mega corporations. where might and passion are replaced with rationality and soundness. i don’t mean to completely discredit this world — for some this world presents its own opportunities. i’m not writing to them. i’m writing to those that are still itching to play.

the fallacy here is that we have only one shot. that we have to get everything right the first time.

we need to put down the strategic plans, the complete specifications and vision maps. its simple really, just walk up to the machine and just drop a quarter in. what better way to learn how to play? what better way to get you closer to success?

the key is packing quarters — lots of them. success is being prepared to fail and continue on. when the “game over” sign is flashing and the continue timer is counting down, you not only have another chance to play but you also get to keep all your past wins and build from there. there’s a learning curve to everything and you have to give yourself a chance to climb it.

it may sound like it requires a lot of money to play like this — but it’s quite the opposite. when you recognize that there will be multiple rounds and multiple failures you will minimize the risk of any round. that means running as lean as possible. and in playing, the lessons learned tower over any insights you gain in research. these lessons can help you avoid costly mistakes you may have otherwise made.

the old metaphor of “launching” a start-up likens it to a rocket. you blast all the firepower you can at once and hope to get off the ground. a different way to look at it though is that the start-up is more like a plane and to take-off you need a long runway.

so enough with the 30-page business plans, the 5-year projections and the huge rounds of funding. they are a mountain of start-up costs and are typically way off anyway. all you need is a pocket full of quarters and the audacity to keep on trying until you get it right. drop in a quarter and hit go!

take the facebook “wall.” sure, naively, we can say that when we post we are writing to the owner of the wall but that misses the fact that the message is also potentially seen by hundreds of “friends.” when this fact becomes conscious and we continue to post, we are, in a sense, speaking to be overheard. the message is crafted and censored for the audience and what emerges is not just a correspondence between friends, but something to be consumed by those tuning in.

twitter pushes this one step further. the broadcast is now on the public dial and anyone can tune in. there is no intended recipient to our messages, just a mass of people aptly called “followers.” unlike facebook, typically we do not know a majority of our followers and so we are doing what our parents told us never to do: speaking to strangers. the age old privacy measures are now obsolete. the security envelopes, the confirmation slips. the federal mail tampering and phone tapping laws. privacy is not needed in this world. today we partake in mediums where the message is common to all. this indiscriminate form of communication, I simply call, commonication.

that’s the definition. what it all means, the merits and downfalls, well that’s another question and another post.

“commonicate” by commenting below :)

help me

Kacie Kinzer, a student at the NYU Tisch School of Arts, built the simple-minded robot as a way to explore our engagement with the world around us. or in her own words:

I wondered: could a human-like object traverse sidewalks and streets along with us, and in so doing, create a narrative about our relationship to space and our willingness to interact with what we find in it? More importantly, how could our actions be seen within a larger context of human connection that emerges from the complexity of the city itself? To answer these questions, I built robots.

the premise is simple: she would leave tweenbot somewhere in NYC and attach to it a flag stating its goal destination. tweenbot could move, but only directly forward and at a constant speed. so it was up to passersby to help tweenbot when it got stuck or was headed for danger. remarkably, even given the fast-paced nature of city life and modern skepticism and fear, tweenbot reached its destination every time thanks to the dozens of people that would help it along the way.

what does this say about our relationship to the space and things around us? are people obliged to help out the vulnerable people, animals and even robots they pass in the street? do these same people quickly shoot out a “sorry” when approached by the homeless?

i’m happily surprised. maybe its the vulnerability. we’re always so suspicious of one another, maybe its tweenbots utter defenselessness and its impossible goal that pushes people to step up.

makes me wonder what would happen if we all started walking around with “help me” flags…

http://www.tweenbots.com/

the white album like many of the beatles’ later albums ranks among my favorites. it’s the beatles longest album and contains gems like while my guitar gently weeps, happiness is a warm gun and blackbird to name a few.

it’s known for its sprawling, almost hodge-podge collection of songs. opening with the tongue-in-cheek back in the USSR, the music stretches out its legs, reaching an experimental high-note with revolution 9. crazy to believe that this album was made 40 years ago.

NPR recently broadcasted a retrospective on the making of the album and its subsequent impact. look for the “Listen Now” link here to listen to the show. it’s filled with interesting stories on the band dynamics and how certain songs came to be.

oh and there’s talk of all The Beatles albums being remastered and released sometime soon. i’m sure the Beatles are waiting for this before finally releasing their music to iTunes. apparently the remastered tracks sound amazing.

The competition has been a great success in that over 300 entries were submitted. We (Project MOE) are part of the lucky 10 team finalists.

Our proposal revolves around tapping into the power of Mozilla’s open source community and creating an education program to promote Mozilla’s non profit roots. As part of our proposal, a classmate of ours, Michelle Florendo, created an awesome animation. Check out the animation and full proposal below. And don’t forget to vote (before December 17th!)

Our Proposal: http://docs.google.com/Present?docid=dfpdfzx6_50fxbmxcdt

Vote Here: http://impactmozilla.com/vote/

have you guys seen these ads by dentyne? i really like them. its funny how asynchronous and digital the majority of our relationships have become. it’s a good reminder that as powerful as all these streaming bits and bytes are, somethings just can’t be replicated. so,

get out more and talk face-to-face. and chew some gum too i guess.

oh, blogs.

are they the modern day journal or gossip mag?

can they really serve as a transcription of our authentic thoughts when they are simultaneously prepared for public consumption? self-discovery or self-promotion?

let’s explore these questions together. but first question first: you pretty things?

the title is short for the lovely song “oh! you pretty things” from david bowie’s hunky dory. i’ll leave it at that. actually i’ll leave it at this lyric excerpt and a clip of the song.

“i think about a world to come
where the books were found by the golden ones
written in pain, written in awe
by a puzzled man who questioned what we were here for
all the strangers came today
and it looks as though they’re here to stay.”

you can say this is the spirit of the blog. whatever that means *grin

UPDATE: Clearly the blog is no longer titled “you pretty things.” I felt like naming the blog after an obscure song may lead to more confusion than good. Either way enjoy the song and the lyrics.