Using location based services – have I missed the point?

I have been making some use of foursquare for a number of months.  Previously also tried the google latitude solution. Not convinced that either has been of any real benefit to me.

Examples of my use of foursquare: checking in when attending a football match, a concert, a restaurant, a conference.  Apart from telling people that I am there what has been the benefit.  And has that in itself been a personal positive or personal negative?

Google Latitude I tried with a small number of colleages for a period of time.  However we generally found it intrusive and impacted far too negatively on our privacy – such as it is.

There was talk about using location based services to target me with offers in my location e.g. you are now in Dublin 4 and here is a coffee shop offering a free scone with every cup of coffee.  The value proposition is not standing up – am wasting too much time checking in, sharing too much information about my whereabouts – all for no real value.

According to the survey just released by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project:

28% of American adults use mobile and social locationbased services

This survey includes using solutions to get directions within ‘location based’.  I certainly make good use of ‘Navigation’ on my Android phone when trying to find various sportsgrounds all over the city for the first time at the weekend as we act as chauffeurs to various football and hurling teams.  And this is a location base service – in the sense that it is aware of where I am when I am trying to find a route to somewhere else.

So, overall, am disappointed with the benefits to date of location based services (other than navigation type services).  Perhaps it is also a generational thing e.g. perhaps other age-groups are using these services as an integral pert of their social lives.

Wasting or burning time with technology

As one of those curious about new applications and how things work I often wonder how much time I burn trying to figure things out.  And how much of our time is now used up by self service type support offerings.  If you want to be at the front (even if not quite the bleeding edge) you accept burning time.

Two recent examples.  My daughter’s Dell Inspiron – the touchpad was not working.  Downloaded the relevant diagnositcs from Dell, ran them, checked that most current drives etc loaded.  Eventually contacted Dell.  There is, unbelievably, a ‘;swithc-off the touchpad’ button right of the F11/F12 key.  Would not have solved this in a month of sundays.  There’s a good hour gone!

Trying to upload photos from my Samsung S-II to Picassa.  Have two accounts on the phone – one goole apps, one g-mail.  Well recognised and reported issue.  Spent, maybe, 30 mins reading the support threads.  Downloaded another tool (Picassa Tool) – provided a workable solution – althoughthe issue is still there.  Another hour gone.  And it continues.

Not to mention the various applications I have researched for my android, downloaded, tested and used or dropped.  No free lunch – you may get the efficiencies but you burn lots of time finding the solutions that really add value.  And none of that includes time spent watching programs such as Leo Laporte’s www.twit.tv, etc., reading blogs, etc.

Lot of time, every week – for how many million people?

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Manage or be managed

instant messaging sites
Image by Will Lion via Flickr

Read Alex Pang’s piece on contemplative computing – courtesy of this article from ReadWriteWeb.  Fits in with much of the discussion taking place across lots of enterprises – is IM, social networking, blogging contributing very much to the business?  Surely IM (now often including video) is just another distraction to people who should be getting on with ‘the task at hand’.

As an individual consultant and researcher I am constantly required to manage the distractions – notwithstanding that were there no distractions there would be no interaction and no work.  The debate reminds me of something about 10 years ago – we should not let the team have internet access because they will waster their time surfing.  We seem to have moved on from this because, thankfully, in many cases the web has become a way fo doing work, communicating, researching, whatever.

I don’t think the answer has changed.  You have to work out what you are trying to do and figure out how to use the available resources.  If you expect to gain from online interaction then you need to recognise that it is a two way street – you will need to be active (or at least be responsive) in order to gain.  When you need to work in a quiet, non distracted mode, you need to make yourself unavailable.

Business has changed.  It’s not just the desk based personnel who are being bombarded by distractions.  Smartphones mean that anyone can be online at any time.  Education in the workplace has not caught up – people need training, awareness and guidance on tools which they can use to assist them in managing the online world rather than being managed by the online world.

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Will poor battery life kill the smartphone?

Image of Samsung i5700 Galaxy Spica mobile phone
Image via Wikipedia

Having moved some months ago from my very boring but reliable Nokia E71 I am now enjoying my Samsung Galaxy.  That is, I am enjoying it when I have battery life.

Read this interesting piece about all of the things to be done to extend battery life.  Unfortunately much of it relates to making the phone less useful.

And the other key action: remember to plug it in whenever you get a chance e.g. when in bed, when in the office, etc.

Given my dependence on mobile comms I am beginning to think that I may need to carry a boring E71 as backup.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thoughts on Web Summit 6

Map of the baronies of County Dublin in Irelan...
Image via Wikipedia

I attended today’s 6th Web Summit at the RDS in Dublin.  Paddy Cograve continued his run of sell out conferences – this time with almost 1,000 attendees, on a Friday afternoon in Dublin.  I have now attended 3 of Paddy’s 6 web summits.

I think today was the weakest yet.

Sam Barnett was a weak kick off act – did not provide much insight until he explained how he avoided paying rent in his startup (his landlord was a criminal).  Eamon Leonard offered a fairly laboured comparison between rockbands and startup companies (not sure how Paddy found this so interesting). However Eamon’s delivery style and sense of humour kept people amused. Strange that Jennifer O’Connell should pitch thejournal.ie and then announce she is moving on (hardly the greatest pitch for any business).  Emi Gal (Brainient) was exellent – speaking of personalisation and relevance in video).

The coffee break appeared to be sans coffee – a bit Irish for the price people paid.

Tariq Krim (Jolicloud) and Marcus Segal (Zynga) were excellent.  Microsoft and Techcrunch presenters were not particularly inspiring.

And on the networking front – yes probably had the opportunity to catch up with 6 or 7 people and make one or two new contacts.  The pre and post gatherings offered ample opportunity to meet with various people.

So – will I attend future web summits?  I’m left a little cold after today’s – but to be fair there were a couple of thought provoking presentations and the general atmosphere was decidedly upbeat in comparison to much of what we see in Dublin these days.

 

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Does the end user device matter?

Interesting to read of Google’s launch of the ChromeBook.

As corporates migrate their applications to the Cloud can they move away from providing corporate desktops or laptops to the end user?  Provision of these devices and their support is a major corporate expense.  Could we move to a position whereby ‘the expectation is that if you want to work for us you need to manage your own connectivity to the Internet‘?

This position has to major attractions:

  • end users can use whatever device they want to use
  • corporates avoid the cost of supply and maintenance of a fleet of end user devices
  • the end of the ens user support desk as we know it

Many end users are completely frustrated by corporate guidlenes restricting how they can use their device, which applications they can download and install, the fact that their work PC is way below the spec of their home PC fleet.  In many cases we operate Lowest Common Denomionator type thinking – the advanced user is restricted to that the LCD can use.

Corporates struggle to manage end users and struggle to meet their expectations.  And there is a vast range of devices: PCs, laptops, notebooks, phones.

Much of the technology is there to enable this move.  Many of the corporate apps (or the apps required to do your job) can be provided via the cloud.  There are many relevant and effective security solutions.

Who would support end users in this scenario? A combination of the end user, the cloud providers and, to some limited extent, the corporate. It requires a mind set change – it becomes the end user’s responsibility to be able to connect to various applications (whatever device she/he chooses to use).  This drives a different experience for the end users, the corporate and the cloud provider.  But in the long run it will result in corporates investing more time in delivering solutions and less time in providing ‘free’ support.  If you require a car to do your job it is your responsibility to have a car, maintain the car and use it safely for work.  Why not the same with end user computing?  Fleets of company cars are the not the only model.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Per Steve Blank now in another bubble

When you hear about potential multi billion offers for relatively new companies being turned down and when you read about valuations around some of the social networks it is hard not to believe that it’s bubble time again.

Now, perhaps when you’ve just lived through an awful property bubble, as we have in Ireland, you tend to be looking for bubbles.

However I think Steve Blank’s comments are well worth reading and considering.

Last time we had the major internet bubble we had lots of companies with losses.  Now, we may actually have lots fo companies with profits – but how many of them are sustainable?

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Shallows – Nicholas Carr

I just finished reading Nicholas Carr’s book, The Shallows – how the internet is changing the way we think, read and remember’.

Carr provides lots of historical and scientific background material – all of which I found relevant and stimulating.  In many respects I found myself identifying closely with Carr’s own experience – wondering what impact my increasing involvement with the online world is having on me.  I am also trying to understand the threats and opportunities for my kids as they grow up in this web centric world.

I suppose the first theme is Carr setting out to substantiate his theory that the mind is impacted by the tools we use.  He refers to its ‘plasticity’.  He quotes a range of authorities (and experimental evidence) to support this.  And I found this conclusive.

He also takes us back as far as Socrates and his concerns as to the impact on the mind of writing down details of events – the potential negative impact on mind/ memory.

I was most struck by the discussion about memory and how the mind commits detail to ‘long term’ memory.  Carr talks about the current processing and the long term storage.  In particular he focused on the importance of focus/ concentration when reading – the impact on the ability of the mind to process and store information being related to this ability to concentrate (and, it would seem, the impact of your immediate surrounds e.g. quite rural v. busy metropolitan). In this context it is interesting to compare the online, hypertext enhanced, web experience with reading a book.  The web experience is immediately more attractive (and vastly more distracting).  Generally the online experience is accompanied by interruptions from social networks, email, instant messaging, text on the side of pages, etc.  Reading a book, as I have just done, in a quiet room, with no online distraction, is quite different.

I would not suggest that reading a book in a quiet room is without distractions.  As a consultant, reading a book such as ‘Shallows’ I find myself inevitably thinking about recent experiences in client situations, current client issues and, more generally, other books/ materials I have read on related subjects.  Carr references some of this in an interesting observation on the difference between computer memory and human memory.  At different stages we recall detail from long terms memory to current memory, associate it/ correlate it with current memory content and eventually, depending on quality of our experience, may restore it in an enhanced way in long term memory.  And we would describe this as a richer memory storage than any we may ‘outsource’ to computer memory.

Carr admits he has not changed much in his own behaviour.  While writing the book he withdrew from much of his online interactivity.  He readily admits to his own ‘withdrawal’ symptoms during this period.  Having completed the book he returned to the web.  He also acknowledges that for many working in this web centric world they have little choice but to participate actively.  However none of this is to undermine his analysis – there is a real need to distinguish between genuinely human thinking and memory and that which is driven/ influenced by search engines, social networks and online content.  Fail to make time for quality, offline, reading/ research/ contemplation at your peril.

I would very much like to see a discussion of Carr’s book incorporated into secondary school education – if there is an appropriate subject/ class in which to discuss it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

leaving Ecademy

I have recently left the network, Ecademy.  I did not find it in any way useful

I had been a member of Ecademy for some time.  Foolishly I had loaded a contact list at some point to determine which members of the contact list were also members of Ecademy.   Recently, after a period of inactivity in Ecademy, individuals on that contact list was mailshotted by Ecademy, on my behalf, inviting them to become members.

I do not have the time to determine whether Ecademy was entitled to do this.  It has certainly been a nuisance for all those mailshotted and for me.

Best reference I have come cross is this web post explaining how to delete your Ecademy account.

Web 2.0 not all positive

Photo of Jaron Lanier performing at the Garden...
Image via Wikipedia

Close to finishing Jaron Lanier‘s excellent book: ‘You are not a  gadget’.  For someone like me who promotes social networking and web 2.0 Lanier certainly asks some tough questions.  I will comment in more detail in a later post – but I have to say his criticism of our obsession with the wisdom of crowds and of Wikipedia make a great deal of sense.  When I studied English in High School the cheat guides to the classical texts e.g. Hamlet, Persuasion, etc were Coles’ Notes.  They provided you with bullet proof analysis/ critiques for the texts – but obviated the need for original thinking/ imagination/ creativity.  Likewise Lanier argues that crowds will never produce original thinking on a par with an Einstein.

Today read an interesting piece in the New York Times on Hasbro‘s plans to dumb down a number of their games e.g. Monopoly.  They are making an effort to make the games more attractive through inclusion of some unnecessary technology – dressed up as a way to prevent cheating!  Seems to me cheating was always part of the fun in these board games.  More interestingly they also comment on the fact that younger people’s attention spans are continuing to shrink.  Without doubt this is a serious challenge for all educators.  And Web 2.0 has contributed significantly to the problem.

Enhanced by Zemanta