Author: jamesclay

Posted on

Getting Bigger

Phablets by Maria Elena

You have probably noticed that over the last few years mobile phones have been getting bigger, and tablets, such as the iPad have been getting smaller. Almost a convergence in terms of size between phones and tablets.

Doing some internet research for another article I found this comment I made on Brian Kelly’s blog post (from 2008) on what devices we would be using in 2013. My main comment was wondering if devices (such as phones) would get bigger!

James Clay said
7 February 2008 at 1:16 pm

I believe that the key difference will be is that the storage capabilities will become less important, as connectivity improves allowing easy access to information and content whenever and wherever you are.

I wonder if the devices will get bigger rather than smaller?

Think about phones, the Nokia N95 is a BIG phone compared to the compact small phones of a few years ago.

The iPod touch screen is so much bigger than the iPod video screen.

Bigger and thinner possibly?

Though for me the downside of all the functionality is battery life and I wonder if there will be minimal improvement in functionality, but a huge leap in the battery life as technology improves the power efficiency of the chips and memory.

As with all things rather than look five years in the future, look five years in the past.

In 2003 I had a phone which could play music, video, had an in-built radio, could surf the net (slowly on a GPRS) connection.

In 2008 I can do all those things but in higher quality and I know where I am (GPS).

In 2013…

I thought it would be interesting to see what said then and see how things have changed and also look forward a little more.

I said back then “I wonder if the devices will get bigger rather than smaller?” well in 2013 we saw the first large phones or phablets. The iPad mini had been released the year before and we had played around with the iPad since 2010, but now we wanted smaller tablets.

Now in 2015, the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus have been released by Apple and as with many Apple devices, and as I predicted, these are bigger and thinner than the phones we had in 2008.

Connectivity is much better with most new devices able to access 4G speeds, but not all of us can afford to be connected at those speeds.

These larger screens, more powerful connectivity have large power requirements compared to older devices. Back in 2008 I said

I wonder if there will be minimal improvement in functionality, but a huge leap in the battery life as technology improves the power efficiency of the chips and memory.

Manufacturers have improved battery life for their devices, still for most people there is a requirement to charge every day, but at least the battery does last most of the day. I remember having a Nokia N95 and too often the battery would only last half a day as I did use many of the different functions on the phone.

One thing that wasn’t mentioned in the first post was battery life, but I commented on in the following post.

Upon reflection I realised why I carry multiple devices around. The key reason is battery life.

If my phone has GPS, plays video and/or music, internet, acts as a 3G modem for my laptop, oh and makes phone calls; then even with a large battery I don’t expect it to last the day.

Spread the functionality over multiple devices and suddenly I can ensure that I can do all of the above, over catching the 6.30am train to London, all day in a meeting or a conference, and back again to reach home at 7.30pm.

I have multiple devices as a single device can not last for the time I need it.

The one change from 2008 that is much more apparent is the decline of the specialist device and the move to a multi-function device. No longer are we carrying pocket cameras, dedicated music players, video devices, e-book readers; our larger phones now do all that for us and then some…

So what will the device of 2020 look like?

Well that’s more difficult to predict, what do you think?

Image Credit: Maria Elena

Posted on

Google Glass is Dead, or is it…

Google Glass is Dead, or is it…

Yesterday Google announced that they were to halt sales of Google Glass Explorer Edition. It’s only been on sale in the UK for less than seven months, and many expected that it would be followed by a full consumer launch. Another expectation was that the existing Explorer Edition of Glass would be replaced with an updated, cheaper retail version.

So why have Google pulled Glass, there are probably many reasons for this, the official line from Google, according to BBC News is:

The company insists it is still committed to launching the smart glasses as a consumer product, but will stop producing Glass in its present form. Instead it will focus on “future versions of Glass” with work carried out by a different division to before.

You can interpret this response, that this was a planned approach to Google Glass by Google. They had always planned to stop selling Google Glass at some point. There is the possibility that there is a planned consumer or retail edition of Google Glass. However the way in which Google Glass has been “killed” by Google does make me think the possibility if this is very unlikely.

You can of course also interpret this, that with all the issues that Google were facing with Glass, they decided to pull the product and in order not to annoy those people who spent their cash on Glass, placated them with talk of support and future products.

There are many reasons that Google have stopped selling Google Glass. Though they’ve not been too open about these reasons, we can speculate about the cost, privacy and looking downright weird!

One reason is cost, at a £1000 per pair and the additional cost of £500 for a smartphone to work alongside it. This wasn’t a product that could be considered an impulse purchase, or a “nice to have”, for most people this was a significant investment. Though Google Glass was an innovative product that had lots of benefits, was there £1500 value in those benefits? We don’t know how well or how badly it was selling, what we do know that it wasn’t been sold on the high street in retail chains akin to other high value devices.

Another core reason was the negative response that Google Glass got in terms of invasion of privacy, there was lots of press and comment on how the use of Glass would invade people’s privacy, though how was this was that different to the use of cameraphones. Yes using mobile phones is more in your face, than Glass, the look of Glass wasn’t that prominent, you could mistake it for a pair of reading glasses, however after all the negative press, those people who were worried about privacy knew exactly what Glass looked like.

The “you look weird” reason has to be up there near the top. One wearable technology that has been around a while has been the Bluetooth headset for mobile phones, but though an useful technology, the reality is that for most people they would never wear a Bluetooth headset and those that wear them all the time, well, they look for a lot of people either geeky or just plain silly. Similar arguments can be had with those wearing and using Google Glass. It’s one thing to use it an environment such as a workshop or a tech conference, it’s something quite different to wear it on the tube home.

Another reason is what did it bring to the party, that a device we had already, couldn’t do. Maybe a mobile phone wasn’t as clever or as smart as Google Glass, but it could take videos, it could take photographs, it had web access, it notified you, it had a better battery life and you didn’t need to wear it. Yes there were scenarios where not holding a phone and wearing Google Glass would be advantageous, but for most people or most of the time their mobile phone was probably easier.

As I said above, the the in which Google Glass has been “killed” by Google does make me think the possibility of a new consumer retail version of Glass very unlikely. It also raises the question of whether the attraction and functionality of wearables such as smart watches, Google Glass, Apple Watch and other similar devices will have a strong enough pull with consumers to make them a commercial success? What do you think?

Posted on

iPhone Syncing Issue

iPhone Sync Cable

I rarely synchronise the iPhone with my Mac, since unlike earlier phones there is so much you can do over the air these days.

Syncing it last night I was slightly confused over why it wasn’t syncing. I unplugged and replugged the iPhone into the Mac. No luck.

A quick search on Google found that sometimes problems arise if you have an USB drive plugged into your Mac. I knew I had plugged in a USB 32GB stick into the Mac, I unplugged it and removed it, and then the iPhone was able to sync no problem.

Posted on

Cadbury QR Coding and Twirling




I have in previous blog posts looked at QR Code implementation and how some companies implementations of QR Codes have worked or not quite worked.

Sitting down after munching some Cadbury Twirl Bites I noticed a QR Code on the back of pack and I had my phone with me, so I thought, well why not scan it.

Cadbury Twirl Bites QR Code

Using Qrafter on the iPhone I scanned in the code. It took a while to scan in the code as the foil packing and colours used on the QR Code made it difficult to capture the code. It reminded me of the chocolate QR Codes that the University of Bath made for the QR Codes project we did a few years back. Generally QR Codes work best when they are black on white.

Once I finally managed to scan the code I was surprised initially that I wasn’t given the choice to open the URL that was encoded into the code.

Qrafter Screenshot

I had to copy it and paste it into Safari manually. The reason was that the URL though correct, Qrafter didn’t recognise it was it started with landing. rather than www.

landing.cadburydairymilk.co.uk/qr/twirlbites/100

This is partly an issue with Qrafter not recognising a non-traditional URL and partly Cadbury for not putting http:// into the URL before encoding as a QR Code.

So

http://landing.cadburydairymilk.co.uk/qr/twirlbites/100

would have worked.

Having put the URL into Safari you are then faced with a mobile site for Cadbury.

https://technologystuff.co.uk/?cat=150

Swiping as directed results in a video of a chicken crossing a road.

a chicken crossing a road.

No I don’t really get it either, no idea what the connection is with chocolate!

Posted on

It’s no wonder…

I am not surprised that people can sometimes go over their data limits with modern smartphones such as the iPhone.

I was on the Edinburgh Tram system the other day and it offered free wifi, so I connected and signed in. A little disappointed that there was a 20MB data limit on the free wifi

I was astonished to see the data usage on my phone gobble up the data so fast. Within seconds I had already used 3MB, and all I was doing was watching the sign in page.

 I was on the Edinburgh Tram system the other day and it offered free wifi, so I connected and signed in. A little disappointed that there was a 20MB data limit on the free wifi

I am guessing that the phone was doing something in the background, probably checking e-mail, but what this does show is how much (and how fast) smart phones use data. You can start to imagine the bills if you were using your phone abroad or on a limited data contract.

Posted on

Finally, free FGW wifi on the train

London Paddington

As I write this, this morning, I am using the free wifi courtesy of First Great Western on their High Speed Trains.

IMG_3446 3

You have been able to use wifi on their Cotswold line Adelante trains for a while now, but FGW announced last year they were finally rolling out wifi across their fleet of High Speed Trains on the Great Western mainline. The carriages are been revamped and upgraded and when they are they are having wifi fitted. You can tell if your carriage has been upgraded as they have white domes fitted into the roof.

IMG_4285

The speed, as you might expect travelling at 125mph is inconsistent, but having done a speed test I was hanging to get between 5-9 Mbps which is more than reasonable. I was also able to stream video using YouTube and iPlayer. CrossCountry for example block streaming video services on their “you have to pay for it” wifi. Upload speeds were less than 1Mbps, so you may not want to spend your train journey uploading photographs and video.

fgwtrain

The train this morning is quite empty, it will be interesting to see how the experience changes as the train fills up as we head to London. I suspect I might be the only person using it at this time, what would happen if we had 84 people in the carriage all trying to watch BBC iPlayer.

As I travelled down the line, you noticed variation in the speed and experience. As I would have expected, the connection was quite flay as we went through the Box Tunnel between Bath and Chippenham.

Over the last few years I have written quite a bit about travelling and connectivity, both in terms of wifi on trains, but also using 3G (and now 4G).

Back in 2007 I wrote an article, This is the age of the train… talking about the refurbishment by FGW, then I said

Do you think I should point out to First Great Western that some train operators provide free wireless on their trains, or do you think that would be pushing it?”

After seven years, it looks like FGW finally listened…

Again in 2010 I wrote another article about train travel and communication

As I travel I like to try and get some work done in the time I have available. One key aspect of my job is communication and for that I need a decent internet connection. First Great Western, unlike some other train operating companies does not provide wifi on their services.

I went onto say

One thing I have noticed though is that though my 3G connection from Bristol to London is pretty good, travelling on the Voyager trains from Bristol to Birmingham, the signal is really poor. I initially thought this was just down to the route, but I have heard that the main issue is the construction of the train and the metallised windows. This basically blocks the 3G signal!

At this time, CrossCountry did not provide wifi, and I discussed this a few months later after the previous post.

I did wonder why CrossCountry Trains didn’t put in wifi as you find on the East Coast Main Line services and Virgin Trains Pendolino. Well it appears that providing wifi was part of their Franchise agreement with the Department of Transport. CrossCountry Trains was suppose to have wifi in place by November 11th 2009. They failed to meet this deadline and the revised deadline of the end of January 2009.

Eventually CrossCountry did put wifi into their trains, which I discovered in 2012 when I travelled with them to Birmingham,

I realised it must have been some time since I last travelled with Cross Country as on my most recent trip with them I was astonished and surprised to find that there was wifi…

A year later I did moan a little about the flakiness of their wifi and why I wasn’t going to renew my subscription.

My main reason was that the last couple of hours was rather flaky and I often had dropped connections. With that kind of connectivity then I might as well rely on 3G and not pay any extra money.

I am still a little astonished it has taken First Great Western until 2014 (and it won’t be complete until 2015), over eight years, to put wifi into their trains, they know that their customers wanted it as did the regulator. We have had wifi in planes for a while, and they travel a little faster and higher than trains. Will the travelling public use the wifi, what with 4G and 3G so much more commonplace than back in 2007?

I should also say that I am still impressed that I can connect to the internet whilst travelling at over a hundred miles per hour.

Posted on

It’s bigger…

Dropped into the Apple Store on my way home, this was an unplanned stop, as due to traffic problems I took the opportunity for a break to take a look at the new iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 plus.

iPhone6 and iPhone 6 Plus

As you might imagine the shop was quite crowded on launch day, but as it was early evening I was able to try out and get a feel for each of the new iPhone 6s.

I did think when I picked up the first iPhone 6 that it was the plus model, as it felt quite large and comparing it to the iPhone 5 it looked much bigger. I then realised that this was not the plus model, just the 4.7” iPhone 6. I then realised how much bigger the 5.5” iPhone 6 Plus is!

It is huge, not as big as some of the Samsung phones, it felt very much like an iPad mini. The 5.5” screen certainly gives you a lot more screen real estate than you get with the 4” screen of the iPhones 4 and 5. I can see how such a device will allow you to increase productivity, and is more usable.

I have read though that unless apps have been optimised for the iPhone 6 Plus they don’t look quite right. I am sure most developers will get round to changing their apps at some point (if they haven’t done already).

I am less sure about the design, the thinness does make it feel lighter than it probably is, but the curves seem more of a backward step, quite retro. The gold version looked like and felt like my Google Nexus One, more brown than gold.

Overall the new iPhone 6 looks and feels much more a response to what has been happening in the smartphone market than something new and innovative, that will make other companies sit up and take notice. The original iPhone and iPad, though not the first touch screen smartphone or tablet, were from a design and technical perspective innovative and game changers. The iPhone 6 is an interesting evolution of the iPhone, but it isn’t a game changer.

Posted on

And they’re back…

In a previous blog post I mentioned the issues I was having with my new Sony Smart TV.

After getting a response from BBC iPlayer on the Twitter.

I checked the TV to find my UK apps were back.

And they're back

It was apparent that the problem was not with the TV in itself, but with the services provided by Sony. It does demonstrate the reliance that these kinds of devices have on external services. If the decision is made to switch them off, there is very little that the end consumer can do to stop this from happening. Additionally the closed nature of these devices means that you can’t (or if you can not easily) add these services back.