Phone Wars: iPhone 4 First Impressions 7/13/10

As long-time iPhone owners we’ve done our share of railing against AT&T. Time to put our money where our mouth is. We’ve ordered an iPhone 4 (with AT&T) and a Droid Incredible from Verizon. In 30 days we return one. Two phones enter…

We’ve had the new iPhone for three days now. Since there are plenty of full reviews elsewhere, I’ll restrict myself to a few highlights.

It’s fast. Fast, fast, fast. I cannot overemphasize how important this is. Presumably it’s a combination of the faster processor and the pseudo-multitasking, with an emphasis on the former. (I am upgrading from an iPhone 3G whose iOS4 upgrade slowed it to a crawl.)

The new screen is beautiful. It’s evolutionary, but the type of evolution that feels revolutionary because it makes such a difference. I was doing my Kindle reading on an iPad, but the crispness of text on the iPhone 4 has switched me back to it. In some ways it feels like a different technology.

The hardware is not as dramatically different from previous generations as Apple would have you believe, but nice, compact, clean-looking. It’s a little harder to pick up because of the square edges.

The best news is the signal. Reception is definitely better in San Francisco – and the Mission in particular. It’s possible to make calls in our apartment and to load data on the street, though it’s still spotty. Whether that’s the device or AT&T’s ongoing improvements is unclear: we know they’re adding towers, and our iPhone 2G seems to be doing a bit better as well.

Then there’s the much-discussed antenna issue. It’s real, not simply cosmetic, and confirmed by Consumer Reports. (Mini-rant: the frustrating part is not the hardware problem, but Apple’s all-too-typical response ranging from, “What problem?” to “You’re the problem.” It takes a special brand of arrogance to deny something so easy to reproduce.)

Otherwise…well, it’s an iPhone. Overall a delight to use, irritatingly locked down at times, occasionally annoying. The Droid should be arriving soon…

Trade-offs 6/30/10

Great products require trade-off. Which features should you promote with big, glossy buttons? Which materials or technologies should you use, and at what cost? When should you release it? How heavily should you test it first? Should you fix a crash bug that affects 2% of users or a cosmetic bug that affects 90%?

These trade-offs are unavoidable. If you don’t make them explicitly, you make them implicitly. Can’t decide which feature get a big button? You can create ten buttons but you’re making another trade-off: each will be a little less prominent, and your product’s simplicity and elegance will suffer.

Trade-offs are necessary at every stage of the product lifecycle:

  • Apple is often praised for simplicity. Less is more: remove all the physical buttons and do the rest in software. But that’s not the whole truth. The iPhone has two volume buttons, a power button, a Home button, and a ringer switch. Only the power button is necessary. Someone made a trade-off, sacrificing a certain degree of simplicity for the convenience of four more buttons. The result may, in fact, feel simpler: without taking the phone out of my pocket I can adjust the volume or set it to vibrate. What we call simplicity is, in fact, a successful trade-off.
  • Facebook has repeatedly favored speed over caution, angering users by releasing features and design changes (e.g. the newsfeed) without vetting them thoroughly. Many look to the resulting uproar as a cautionary tale, but I believe this is the wrong lesson. At worst, Facebook’s tremendous growth has proceeded in spite of these choices. But I suspect Facebook has succeeded because of them: by trading speed for pre-release research and by making sure they can correct course quickly, Facebook has innovated, stayed ahead of the competition, and gotten free user research in the bargain.

Make no mistake: trade-offs are hard. They require sacrifice. They require risk. But then, it should come as no surprise that these qualities are needed for great product design as well.

A Great Compromise 3/2/10

A great compromise

2009 Co-Worker Feedback for Maggie 1/16/10

Strengths

Maggie is an enthusiastic office manager with a keen interest in the details of what goes on around the apartment. Her broad range of interests is perhaps her strongest asset – from tackling tissue paper to folding laundry to changing the sheets to whatever seems to be going on under the stove, her passion reminds us not to take the details for granted.

Maggie sees tasks through to their completion. For example, on several occasions I’ve seen her work late simply to defend a pile of laundry from being worn or put away. This drive to go above and beyond the call of duty – and indeed beyond what anyone actually wants her to do – is admirable or possibly irritating.

In recent months Maggie has focused on developing an extremely fuzzy winter coat. While the associated shedding can be problematic, the entire team appreciates the resulting increase in cuddliness.

Development Areas

In 2010 Maggie should work on her periodic tendency to become confrontational. While I admire her passion, I would encourage her to find a more effective and professional outlet than leg-biting or drive-by swatting.

In past peer reviews I’ve commented on Maggie’s progress in lap-sitting and purring; in 2010 I’d encourage her to build on those skills and turn her attention to hugging.

Maggie would also do well to cultivate team-oriented traits like staying off the table, vomiting only on non-porous surfaces, and increasing her “face time” by restricting incessant meowing to normal business hours.

Additional Comments

It’s been a pleasure working with Maggie over the last ten years, to see her grow professionally and socially. While her performance in 2009 was excellent, I am not yet convinced she will reach her overall career goal of remembering what she was doing ten minutes ago.