MOBLIN ZONE

by Lisa Morgan

As the number of mobile devices and their capabilities continue to grow, new application development opportunities arise. Part One of this three-part series discussed some of the ways developers can better understand the requirements of their target audience(s). This article, Part Two, discusses how end user requirements influence user experience design. Part Three will discuss software design and device factors that can affect a product’s success.

Time is one factor that’s working against developers. Product lifecycles are shorter than they once were and mobile users have short attention spans.

“Users are impatient because they’re distracted,” said Boaz Zilberman, chief architect at Fring. “Our ability to get their attention as developers is limited because there are so many options people jump from one buzz application to another which [translates to] poor customer loyalty."

Mobile users generally want software that’s easy to use, simple to understand, and designed for an on-the-go lifestyle.  To keep their attention over time requires constant innovation based on what they want today and will likely adopt in the near future.

“Users have higher and higher expectations of mobile applications,” said Paul Cooper, Moblin community manager at Intel.  “I think for a big chunk of the existing user base the novelty has worn off and now they are looking for applications that are useful rather than just gimmicks (although new gimmicks always sell).”

User expectations are also increasing as they relate to devices and network services. Because devices are capable of doing more, users continue to expect more from them.  In addition, a greater number of users have wireless broadband connections than they did in the past and they now expect reliable network access everywhere.

“User expectations are always set to the best works in the field,” said Intel’s Cooper.  “If you want to understand what users will expect in the near future, study the best devices and applications in your field then aim to create something even better.”

Innovative user interfaces like Clutter are also affecting consumer attitudes.  Users expect fun graphical elements they can manipulate.  They’re also looking for simplicity so they can easily accomplish tasks.

As user expectations continue to shift, so does the approach to software development.  Traditionally, software development has been driven by features and functions.  Today, there is an increasing focus on “user experience” which some developers consider to be synonymous with the user interface.

Shane Lennon, SVP of Marketing and Product Management at GyPSii said there’s an important distinction between the two.  The UI involves graphical tools, I/O, and metrics.  The user experience involves a user’s interaction with the application as well as his or her emotional reaction to it.  At GyPSii, user experience drives the design of the user interface rather than vice versa.  

“Your user interface can be good but your user experience can [nevertheless] be poor,” he said.  

One way of measuring user experience is to conduct formal usability studies in which the developer observes how end users approach and complete specific tasks.  The trick, especially for developers, is to observe rather than interfere.  

“Find some test users and simply watch them use your application,” said Intel’s Cooper.  “Set up a simple task and just observe them; don’t interrupt or help unless they get really stuck.  Once they’ve finished chat about how they think it went and what worked well and didn’t, then record the results so you can compare them with your next test.”

Developing the right application for the right audience at the right time often involves some combination of science, art, and luck.  Timing can also affect success.

“Much of that right place, right time stuff is just luck so instead of spending 6 – 12 months on one big hit-or-miss project it may be smarter to spend one or two months on six products,” said Intel’s Cooper.

He also said being early to market with a basic application that finds or creates an audience is often better than being late to market with the perfect application that has to steal audience from the early entrants.

The velocity at which new applications are being developed can work against the first to market, however.  “First Mover Advantage” was once a sign of innovation and achievement; however at the time product development cycles were also considerably longer.

“Given the speed of development there is almost no first-to-market advantage anymore,” said Fring’s Zilberman.  “The first to market seeds the market with a concept and so they’re exposed to the initial market response.  The second or third to market can use the market’s reaction to their advantage and come out with a more mature product.”

Intel’s Cooper pointed out that being second or third to market may only be advantageous if the first-to-market’s attempt failed.  He also said if a developer is building smaller products that require shorter development cycles then being first, second, or third to market makes less of a difference.  What matters is which developer responds to the actual user requirements quicker.

 “When you’re rapidly developing products you have to be willing to throw out [unpopular product features],” said GyPSii’s Lennon.  “You can build anything but if you want to be successful you have to build it so people will use it.”

Understanding what end customers will actually use is not always obvious which is why early and ongoing dialogs with users are critical, especially for mobile application developers.   Since mobile devices are an integral part of user lifestyles it pays to discover how the application will fit into user lifestyles and how user lifestyles affect the design of the application.

Lisa Morgan is an independent high tech management and marketing consultant who creates content and provides commentary to print and broadcast media.

Related Links

• Fluendo
• Fring
• GyPSii
• Moblin.org