I won’t beat around the bush. The iPad is the future of computing. And I don’t want it. Well, not yet.

Image credit: www.apple.com

Just Like Any Other Tablet

Many look at the iPad as a wi-fi enabled 10” 1024×768 flatscreen with no USB port, SD card slot, or camera. They look at the iPhone OS and wonder why you’d use something with far less functionality than the hundreds of other tablets that have been on the market since the early 2000’s.

What they’re missing is the potential for the iPad to be the start of something new. Coming in the form of an evolved iPhone, something familiar to most of us, it doesn’t seem all that new or different.

But imagine, for a second, using the iPhone as your main computer. The reason you never have to dig through folders to find what you were working on, deal with software conflicts, or spend time cleaning up the iPhone after removing a piece of software is because the iPhone approaches computing from a different angle than the computers we’re used to dealing with every day. By expanding the iPhone from a small pocket tool to a larger device, Apple is trying to apply the iPhone’s model of computing to the tasks we currently use laptops for.

Yes, It’s Underwhelming

At the iPad’s unveiling I could sense the disappointment in the discussions within my company and across much of the internet. When the iPhone was first introduced, it blew away notions of how a phone worked and what kind of experience a low-powered mobile device was capable of.

People were hoping for a similar sense of disbelief with the iPad. They wanted it to save the publishing industry, they wanted new input methods, they wanted “out of control” multi-touch interactions, and most importantly they wanted it to do things they hadn’t even dreamed of doing yet. In short, they wanted to feel like Apple had developed the future and was showing it to them. That’s what the iPhone introduction felt like.

Instead, what people got was something they’d already seen. And so it was easy to pick out the flaws. No open app distribution model? No camera? No multitasking?

But when you’re looking at the prototype of a new computing platform, those complaints are irrelevant. All of them will be added in time. What cannot be changed are the fundamentals of the software design.

The iPhone got these fundamentals dead right from day one, and the iPad is now inheriting them. Fundamentals like a touch-based interaction model. Fundamentals like an easy to understand way to acquire and run applications. Fundamentals like the complete change of focus from navigating a confusing hierarchical file system to a simpler task-based interaction model.

As Andy Ihnatko says,

“It struck me that Apple was making a clear statement with the iPad: ‘We were right about the iPhone.’ They had a clear and ambitious concept about an entirely new computing platform and an entirely new way that humans would interact with hardware. They were so right about it that when the time came to build a tablet device, changing the UI seemed vulgar at best. […] If the iPhone had never existed, the iPad would still have made sense as a touch-based computer.”

Image credit: Sebastiaan de With, http://blog.cocoia.com

A New Interface

The very things that make the iPad so great are also its biggest weaknesses. By developing a new interaction paradigm — touch-based rather than mouse-based — Apple has rendered all existing desktop software incompatible with the platform. To truly take a step forward, this is necessary.

Starting from zero is a daunting proposition. It is the reason Microsoft has never been able to garner mainstream acceptance from the tablets it promotes, despite grand proclamations about the coming tablet revolution back in 2001. In Microsoft’s universe, compatibility is king, hence the constant attempts to put Windows on a touchscreen. The taskbar, windows, dropdown menus, contextual menus, rollovers, and the rest of today’s pervasive interface elements make for an awkward tablet experience, but one with the advantage of an entire universe of software already built for it. Starting from zero, as Apple is doing, takes guts. The risks are exponentially higher, as are the rewards.

Apple is bootstrapping the process by launching the iPad with enhanced versions of the same applications that have been successful on the iPhone. Watching movies, listening to music, browsing the web, checking email, and more are all designed to be seamless and elegant experiences. With these basics, the iPad is capable of meeting the casual needs of some people. In addition, it features compatibility with the existing library of iPhone apps, although this is of questionable value for many. Even with these boxes checked, it won’t come close to replacing a laptop for most people.

I Still Don’t Want One

For years, the tech industry has chased the dream of the device that fills the space between the mobile device and the computer. The difficulty with this space is that there isn’t obvious demand to fill. Devices have to muscle in and make their own space. The iPad may be one of the best to try, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s not something many people need, myself included. My colleague Ben McNeil summed it up when he said, “This device doesn’t seem to blend everything I need but rather gives me one more gadget I own.”

And like a child needing a parent’s steadying hand on the saddle when learning to ride a bike, the iPad needs to be tethered to a real computer for tasks like backing up, downloading photos, and syncing music. Until my files live online, rather than on a hard drive tied to one computer, the iPad won’t seamlessly integrate into my digital life without a lot of awkward shuffling and copying to make things available to the iPad on an as-needed basis. I don’t need to pay for the added complexity of working this device into my life, and my iPhone already does a good job of surfing the web on the sofa.

And Yet

Given the option, the prospect of carrying an iPad around is already so much more enticing than using my laptop. I yearn for the portability, the battery life, and most of all, the efficient and focused interface that my iPhone has given me a taste of.

I want the productivity and joy of using something that sheds the 20+ years of baggage my computer has inherited. The design decisions made in the 1970s that seem unprepared for the scale of my online life today, such that I am constantly having to organize and clean and manage my system.

As Fraser Speirs states,

“The Real Work is not formatting the margins, installing the printer driver, uploading the document, finishing the PowerPoint slides, running the software update or reinstalling the OS. The Real Work is teaching the child, healing the patient, selling the house, logging the road defects, fixing the car at the roadside, capturing the table’s order, designing the house and organising the party.”

I want something that lets me get The Real Work done.

Image credit: www.apple.com

A Whole New World of Apps

Application development on the iPad has the ability to sustain bigger apps than what we’ve seen on the iPhone. The 99 cent app market on the iPhone has exploded because the device lends itself to quick, cheap entertainment. Lots of people will spend a buck for a couple of minutes’ excitement while waiting at the bus stop or standing in line. The iPad won’t be used in those situations, so the demand for those cheap thrill apps won’t be as strong.

Instead, people will start demanding more functional apps. Apple sent a clear signal by showcasing a highly functional and polished office suite in the form of iWork for the iPad. By doing this, they were in effect asking others to follow their lead by developing desktop-class applications. This call is already being answered. The Omni Group, the leading Mac development house responsible for OmniGraffle and OmniPlan, among others, has announced an immediate pause on developing their next generation of desktop software while they port their complete portfolio of applications to the iPad.

Apple also has the advantage of being in a better position than anyone else to cultivate a healthy 3rd party ecosystem of applications. It may be counterintuitive considering the discontent over their tight control of app distribution. But Apple has developed something even more valuable than open application distribution: a cohesive platform. This advantage may diminish in the future, but when launching a new platform it is incredibly important. Software developers will be hesitant to invest significant money developing applications if they are not sure what hardware, and by extension how many users will be able to run them. Android is starting to feel the effects of varying versions of the OS spread across a myriad of hardware configurations. Apple, meanwhile, has shown with the iPhone that it can drive a platform forward while minimizing the expense of dealing with device incompatibility.

What Happens Now

I won’t bother with a prediction about the iPad’s success or failure because they’re a dime a dozen in the wake of its launch. This post isn’t about whether Apple will tumble from its current summit or climb the next peak. This is about understanding why the iPad is more than just another tablet.

For the iPad to succeed, it doesn’t need to be a home run now, it simply needs to stick around and gain a modest number of users who are willing to pay for apps. If that happens, in 5 years time we’ll start to see a healthy ecosystem of applications that begin to turn the iPad into a viable general computer replacement. And in 10 years time we’ll see a new generation of users that have adopted iPads, or whatever Android- or WebOS-based tablets are around at that point, as their main computer. We’ll see existing expert users spending a large portion of their time doing work on tablets.

Of course, even then most of the computing landscape will still revolve around the traditional computers that are deeply entrenched today. But it will also be clear that they are part of a waning era. In 20 years’ time they will have relinquished the spotlight to take the place of the mainframes of yore: running back end services and thousands of custom business applications for years to come, while people use touchscreen devices for their everyday online lives.

And at that point, we’ll look back and realize that this drastic shift from Old World to New World computing, as Steven Frank terms it, began with something that at the time seemed like a boringly predictable, some would even say say lacking, evolution of an iPhone.

Nigel Warren is a UX designer at Roundarch

The Avis iPhone app that was designed and developed by Roundarch is featured in an Apple television spot.

A great article about our in-house ninja. “Daytime Developer, Nighttime Ninja: An Interview with Mortal Kombat’s Mocap Artist”

Coming from a background in branding and marketing, I spend a great deal of my time confusing and conflating the concepts of “user experience” and “usability,” often to the dismay of my more learned colleagues. I probably deserve their contempt — what with my slander of their profession and coral polo shirt — but the physical violence is generally unwarranted.

I am regularly reminded of the importance and inherence of the user’s expectations — the consistency of experience and interactivity — and how it can and should manifest throughout thoughtful application design. Beyond those grand efforts of simplifying features and improving interface design, how can we best communicate that experience just around the bend? How can we best rely on expected interactions and, when it’s necessary, attach overt user cues to unexpected ones? And so the bruises multiply.

But I cut my teeth in the land of sizzle, where the unexpected made the user experience, and the most we needed audiences to “get it” was to laugh at the punchline (right before the logo appeared and right after the duck barked). And though brand experiences and application experiences serve different purposes, I wonder if brand experiences have taught us to expect something from applications — just as application experiences have taught us to expect usability from brands.

Perhaps we have begun to expect pleasant surprises — intermittent bits of entertainment to break the monotony — from even our “function-first” applications.

As UX geeks, we often explore playful design and clever interactions as a way of nudging behaviors and deepening engagement. Even dry content is moistened with a bit of rewarding animation or a vaguely human-like conversational tone (Skype thrives as much on charm as it does technology, and everybody loves a 404 error with a little sympathetic spunk.). Unique interaction metaphors further up the ante. Hell, I recently found myself playing with an iPhone app that does unit conversions. UNIT CONVERSIONS.

But I propose that we are entering a time when engaging user experiences (including RIAs and other interfaces) transcends playfulness and, in select-and-increasing instances, toward a series of deliberate pleasant surprises. These pleasant surprises — scraps of media, public recognition, spontaneous games — enhance engagement, encourage exploration and, when metered out in balance with critical functions, improve productivity. That they come in unanticipated forms and at unexpected times encourages users to spend more time at their workstations (or whatever task acts as the trigger), trying to “crack the code” or simply stumble upon the next payoff.

It’s slot machine psychology for the everyday, really: nobody complains when they’re blindsided by reward. Instead, they sit patiently, work diligently, and look forward to it.

Those in the publishing business have all been aflutter with the official announcement about the joint venture between Conde Nast, Hearst, Meredith, News Corp, and Time Inc.. This story has been relatively well publicized and talked about over the past few months including a few demos of what some of the digital magazines experiences might look like from Conde Nast for Wired Magazine, and Time Inc. for Sports Illustrated. I haven’t seen any concepts for the actual storefront yet but hopefully something will surface soon.

The concepts are similar in that they both replicate the magazine experience to some degree (page based navigation, magazine-like layout) while including the obvious must have features such as rich content (e.g. video, photo streams) and ecommerce (e.g. links to stores for product purchase). However, if this is all there is, I’m not sure it’s enough to get consumers to pony up the cash for subscriptions as well as potentially a new piece of hardware. Remember, much of this content is available online for free so the experience has to be compelling enough to get over this hurdle.

For the time being I’m going to set aside all of the questions I have around the ability of the publishers to work together to agree on a common content format, bandwidth constraints, battery life of devices, etc. and remain hopeful that we’re going to see something very original and compelling. I’m going to tell myself that the features and demos we’ve seen to date are just the tip of the iceberg and that the publishers are holding off from publicizing the new killer features so as not to give up competitive advantage. However, in the event that this is not the case, here are a few suggestions of some things I’d like to see.

First off, resist the urge to try & fit a “magazine” into a digital form. Magazines are great, but the experience created and refined over the 270+ years they have been in existence is based on a print medium. For example, is flipping a virtual page as rewarding as flipping a print page? If not, then how have you improved (or at least maintained) the experience? The answer here is likely that they have not and in most cases the experience is made worse.

Instead, look at the core value propositions of magazines and create an experience that utilizes features in the digital medium to improve upon them. There are lots of things to build on here but one of the first that pops into my head are index pages. Index pages give the reader an overview of what is in the magazine but also offer a reference as to what pages specific articles of interest are on. Why not expand upon this and create an index page that spans all of the publications I own as well as specific issues. Doing this would also enable features such as dynamic grouping of articles by topic, person, or event across all of my digital magazines. Teaser content and thumbnail videos and/or images could be offered on all articles (if available) instead of just featured ones. Finally, making the index searchable and hyperlinked should improve the concept of an index page quite dramatically.

Secondly, we all know that luring advertisers to buy ad space in these new digital magazines is key. So how about offering something more compelling than full page, half page, tower, leader board, or any of the other dozen types of ads that currently dominate the pages of sites and print magazines. Please skip the animated overlays that take over my page. They are annoying on the web but probably even more so on the digital magazine – especially with all of the rich content that will be on it.

The digital format should allow publishers to offer advertisers a device with behaviorally targeting ads, comprehensive reporting and results tracking, and recommendations for how I can improve my media buys for future campaigns. For readers more contextually relevant and less intrusive ads would be my preference. Search advertising is also on the table given the global index. For example, a search for all hotels that have been covered in all of my travel magazines could yield links to those articles, inline booking, and related ads such as car rentals, flights, and restaurant recommendations.

Some other items on the wishlist that I won’t dive into detail on are social media (e.g. comment streams, fantasy sports, recommendations, etc), live event viewing (e.g. VMA’s, Red Sox games), one-click purchase & bookings, and personalized folders to catalog articles of interest for later viewing).

I applaud the experimentation and desire of publishers to create a new product in the digital medium. The demos and PR are great. There is a long way to go though and I haven’t seen anything that leads me to believe that anyone has arrived at “the” killer product yet. However, the payoff of a well thought out, strategically placed product could revive an industry that is in desperate need of it.

With the introduction of Chrome OS, it’s tempting to criticize Google for what seems like a half-baked product. Compared to OS X, Windows 7, or even Google’s own Android, there is a lot lacking. But there are interesting ideas, even if they are not the first to propose them.

Where they’re not pushing the envelope enough is the interface. It’s a little disappointing that when they thought of making a web-based PC, they turned it into a web browser-based PC. There must be a better way to enable what they’re doing besides putting browser tabs at the top of the screen and an address bar underneath. It would be like Apple being unable to think outside their desktop OS and releasing the first iPhone with an interface that used a scaled down menubar.

Where Google is pushing the envelope too much is the entire rest of the OS. It’s interesting in theory, but not yet practical. It’s a good thing they are starting down this road so that hopefully in 5 years it will have developed into something that will be useful. Currently, there’s simply not enough infrastructure in place to make it a successful experience.

Where is your private file space in the cloud? When you buy a computer, included by default with any and all computers is space to store your stuff. You can share things if you want, but that’s something you opt-in to. If you buy a ChromeOS device, you had better be prepared to spend a lot of time getting up to speed on the privacy controls of each service you use, because private spaces in the cloud are hard to come by. Or you better know about dropbox/sugarsync/whatever and be prepared to pay an annual subscription to rent some online space. Simply put, the vast majority of people are not yet at this point.

Internet access isn’t where it needs to be either. HTML5 is a great starting point for offline connectivity, but so far it’s only a starting point. Will ChromeOS store your entire Gmail archive in its offline database by default, so if you’re working at a cafe without internet, you can reference an email you sent 3 months ago? Not yet.

Thinking about how ChromeOS is being developed and presented, one of the striking differences between Google and Apple is that Apple almost never* releases something before all the pieces are in place that are required to make it completely useful. Apple didn’t make the iPod when MP3 technology first appeared, they waited until they had music management software with an interface that made it easy to fill up an MP3 player AND enough storage could be packed into a small enough space that people could put it in their pockets. Whether Apple will successfully compete in the cloud is to be seen, but you can bet that they won’t release something along the lines of ChromeOS until they can craft an experience that fits seamlessly with the way people live their lives.

And so this is the key to evaluating ChromeOS. It’s unfair to look at it as a finished product to be stacked up against whatever Apple and Microsoft have currently released. For all its flaws, it’s obvious that it isn’t a product built for now. It’s a starting point for the future. Google’s description of using it as a “companion PC” is another way of saying “this isn’t ready for prime-time”. It’s a prediction of where computing will be 5-10 years from now.

Does ChromeOS have more potential than the many other thin client projects that have come and gone every several years? Google’s deep pockets and long gaze are cause enough to pay attention. Watching its evolution will no doubt be informative.

* Apple TV = the reason for the “almost” in “almost never”

Things are looking up in Phoenix, and if you’re our enthusiastic traveler pictured below, they’re looking up and squinting.

As part of Sky Harbor’s not-so-recent facility facelift, the Paging Assistance Location (PAL) is intended to supplement audio paging and better service both hearing impaired travelers and, well, iPod users. Says PHX Assistant Aviation Director Carl Newman: “I believe we are the only airport in the country that has a visual paging system at the airport … in most terminals, you can’t go more than 1,600 feet and you are running into one of the paging screens.”

While Sky Harbor deserves fair credit for introducing a means to reach the increasingly headphoned masses, their execution seems to stumble in the tiny shoes of the system’s infancy. And since its intent is to capture the attention of a specific traveler, our PAL might be considered downright ineffective. Fortunately, it’s not beyond the loving reach of a few usability considerations and simple attention to the interface.

The existing PAL display uses a static 2×10 grid to page travelers. And whether displaying 2 names or 20, the PAL confines these folks to the same static grid, at the same font size (just like the papyrus on which passenger paging queues were originally written):

By dynamically generating a grid based on the number of travelers in the paging queue, we’re immediately able to reclaim any real estate occupied by the empty grid …

… and fill it with big, bold text:

This method really pays off when negotiating shorter lists, but always gives as much real estate as possible to each individual name. We can reclaim even more space by dumping extraneous branding and messaging or moving it to the hardware surface. Since the days of the courtesy phone were the days before the ubiquitous cell phone — and I want to keep walking to Sbarro while retrieving my message — perhaps just “Please call XXX-XXXX” will act as a sufficient replacement (which maintains effect even when the screen stands without the bulky console):

If we have evidence that it’s easier to recognize our name displayed briefly but at full-screen — rather than “permanently” amidst the clutter of other names — sequential queues provide some interesting possibilities. The challenge becomes selecting a display duration that is just long enough for recognition, but not so long that the entire cycle becomes tedious. We might increase this duration without disrupting the overall usability by introducing a gentle decay to a cascading, sequential queue. For fluidity and aesthetic appeal, the names in the instance below float in from back right to front left:

Naturally, the shorter list has the best results, but we can accommodate view time issues by placing screens for the benefit of temporarily captive audiences, such as near conveyors, next to arrival & departure information, or even in restrooms. Additionally, this cascading sequence could cater to our ad-mad, this-thing-had-better-pay-for-itself world, potentially interjecting brand logos within the alphabetical paging queue:

With thoughtful use of color / weight (to indicate priority, categories, etc.), queue labels (to better indicate the position of the queue sequence, as well as the total number of travelers in the queue), and other improvements that might emerge during testing, we’ve finally given our PAL a fighting chance for travelers’ attention.

Early this year Roundarch had the opportunity to work with Nystrom, the industry leader in classroom maps, to create an entirely new way of delivering content to the classroom. In less than 6 months we developed a first-of-its-kind web-based product that delivers all Nystrom wall maps and globes in a 3-D environment. About 730 licenses for StrataLogica have been sold to school districts across the United States thus far. Early adopters of StrataLogica include schools in the states of Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Texas, and Virginia.

The Product
Using the dual-map viewer, StrataLogica allows teachers and students to compare and contrast high resolution, age-appropriate map and globe views side-by-side on a computer screen, projection screen, or interactive whiteboard. Users can overlay any Nystrom reference map, thematic map, or Google Earth view on one side of the screen while simultaneously overlaying a different layer on the other side. Users can also emphasize and display rare perspectives by zooming in and out, flying through, and tilting views while maintaining an age-appropriate presentation of content. The level of customization is unprecedented — and it’s encouraged via an intuitive user interface. Students and teachers can easily enhance these views by using place marks, teacher notes, drawing tools, labels, and icons.

The Impact
The flexibility of StrataLogica stimulates classroom discussion and naturally develops critical thinking about a variety of relationships, including: population, climate, time zones, and physical, political and historical content. Custom views can be saved with teacher notes, so there is no need to waste valuable class time re-creating a lesson, and because StrataLogica is web-based, teachers and students can also access these custom views anyplace with an Internet connection. Since all the information is stored in the cloud updating information based on current events is extremely streamlined and fast. This ability to update information quickly ensures children are working with the most current and accurate information in their lessons and no longer will teachers have to use antiquated maps. Also, by greatly reducing the number of printed maps and materials in classrooms StrataLogica is an eco-friendly option for schools. StrataLogica is doing its part to preserve the world it showcases so stunningly.

The Reaction
“The early reactions we’re getting for StrataLogica have been overwhelmingly positive. We have been demonstrating StrataLogica in school districts around the country since the start of the school year and educators tell us they have never seen anything like it—it’s a true 21st century product.”

Don Rescigno, director of marketing for Herff Jones Education Division.

“StrataLogica involves the student using different modes of learning which allows the teacher to capture students attention and communicate the lesson more effectively. Technology skills acquired by students using StrataLogica will transfer to other applications. Our world is constantly getting smaller, and it is important to have the right tools for students to learn about our world.”

Nancy Moss, Media Specialist, Forest Avenue Academic Magnet School, Montgomery, Alabama

StrataLogica Video Challange
Nystrom is announcing the StrataLogica Video Challenge at booth #409 during the National Council for the Social Studies Annual Conference (NCSS) in Atlanta, November 13-15, 2009. Using either a purchased license or trial version, educators are tasked with filming a brief video—up to three minutes in length—that best demonstrates StrataLogica in action in the classroom. Videos will be uploaded to a special website. Nystrom and the public will vote on the videos December 21 through January 28, 2010. Prizes will be awarded for the best videos. The challenge will run through December 21, 2009. To learn more and sign up for a free trial visit www.stratalogica.com or www.StrataLogicaChallenge.com.

Dave Meeker, director of emerging technology at Roundarch, was interviewed on The Digital Scene Show during our participation in Adobe MAX 2009 in October. Dave discusses the innovative work we are doing with Tesla Motors and explains our prototyping process with Tesla. He expands on the development of the 17-inch touch screen panel to be incorporated into the console of the new all-electric Model S Sedan set for production in 2011. It is a compelling interview about our ongoing effort with Tesla to develop a first-of-its-kind infotainment system that will be the cornerstone of the user experience in the future vehicles.

The IT world is aflutter with discussions about cloud computing.  This amorphous concept has become the IT buzzword of the year.  But cloud computing should not be the domain of the geeks.  In fact, cloud computing should really be exciting marketing departments and product designers.   It has the power to change how organizations conduct marketing and how they design products.  What is Cloud Computing in Marketing Terms?

According to Wikipedia, Cloud computing “is the provision of dynamically scalable and often virtualized resources as a service over the Internet on a utility basis.”  In layman’s terms, this means that a whole bunch of applications are becoming available as services on the internet.  You can access them as an application (think salesforce.com) or better yet as an API where you can build the interface and use the service.

A few examples:
Varian, a manufacturer of electronic measurement devices, decided to forgo the annual industry conference and instead create an immersive web experience entitled The Varian Experience.   This is just the type of web application that IT departments hate.  Unpredictable volume with high spikes that needs to be deployed globally and immediately.  This is why so many of these applications end up on underpowered agency servers.  But instead, we hosted the application on Amazon’s EC2 cloud.  For a fee starting at $50 a month, we got more stability and scalability than most Fortune 500 web sites today.  Check out The Varian Experience later this month.

Nystrom, the industry leader in classroom maps, knew that they needed an electronic map offering to compete in the digital age.  The first reaction was to create their own mapping interface.  But after assessing the time and effort to create even a basic offering, we looked for a better way.  We ended up creating a application that sits on top of Google Earth utilizing their open API.  We use Google Earth for basic mapping functions and we have created an overlay application which displays Nystrom’s educational maps and content.  We brought the product to market in less than 6 months and Nystrom now focuses on content creation versus basic mapping.  Check out StrataLogica.

When Tesla Motors reinvented the automobile with the world’s first commercial electric car, they wanted to do more than just reinvent the engine and drive train.  They wanted to change how cars are conceived, designed and built.  Franz von Holzhausen, famed designer from VW, GM and Mazda has an ambitious vision to recreate the in-car experience as well.  In the Model S, Tesla’s breakthrough sedan, there are two LED screens where the instrument panel and center console are in most cars.  The center console itself is a 17-inch multi-touch display.  Sitting in the car, you immediately get the sense of how these screens define your experience, and that is exactly what Franz intends.  Whereas electronics in today’s automobiles are proprietary and out of date before they even leave the showroom, the Tesla experience will be constantly updated, heavily leveraging the cloud, and will be completely personalized.  To take one example,  in the current prototype we were able to add GPS navigation leveraging a $40 USB drive and Google maps.  We had the working application up in less than a week.  Ditto for internet radio.  Ditto again for HD radio.  Try that on your BMW iDrive.  Franz can redefine your driving experience constantly and by doing so keep the Tesla brand fresh in the eyes of its customers.  Check out the Tesla Model S .

Interior of the Tesla Model S prototype

If you are a marketer or a product designer, you should really consider how the cloud can help to accelerate, change or even redefine what you are trying to do.  And do it quick.  The IT community is already starting the backlash against the cloud.  In a recent Gartner conference, the IT dialogue has moved from the possibilities of the cloud to the risks.  Many of the risks are real but all are manageable but talk of risks will carry the day if marketers and products designers aren’t more imaginative in how they use the cloud to advance their causes.