San Francisco vs. New York

People like to compare NY and SF and having lived in both, I actually think they are more similar than most people give them credit. It's just that New York is the larger of the two and so gets pulled up to the ranks of London, Paris, Tokyo and Los Angeles.

Three years ago, there was an excellent post that compared New York neighborhoods to San Francisco ones. While some of the equivalencies felt a little forced, I thought many of them were spot on, e.g. Park Slope = Noe Valley. I would compare the gay Polk Street corridor to the West Village, especially Christopher Street but that's all I would really change.

There was quite a bit of disdain for this exercise, with many exclamations that no where in New York could possibly be compared to rinky-dink San Francisco because it's soooo much bigger. This supposition is not quite true.

People tend to forget that MANHATTAN is relatively small in terms of RESIDENT population – only about 1.5 million people live there. The parts that most people refer to – south of 125th – would be more comparable to San Francisco. People perceive Manhattan to be larger than it is because every day over 8 MILLION people commute into the enormous midtown and downtown business districts from all over the metro area. If Manhattan were set up solely for its' resident population, the scale of the city would be smaller than it is. San Francisco’s workday population merely doubles the city’s size and it’s concentrated in the Financial District and SoMa.

Another thing is both Brooklyn and Queens dwarf Manhattan in terms of population. They each top out at over 2 million with Brooklyn being the largest of the two at 2.5 million. With that in mind, Brooklyn is more comparable to the entire urban East Bay shoreline before the tunnels vs. just Oakland.

Apple v. Google

The geeks are going crazy over the recent Apple sly backhand of Google by restricting manufacturers of hardware or software platforms from obtaining analytics from AdMob advertising. For those who don't know, AdMob places text ads in applications that devs use to earn advertising revenue and help pay for development. This new rule is directed at Google, of course, because they just acquired AdMob. The cries of indignation have been amusing:

Anti-trust violations! Anti-competitive practices! Evil empire! If Microsoft did this...!

If you want to hate Apple, go ahead and hate them. But hate them for valid reasons, not spin disguised as a reason.

As I have posted on several blogs, there's a simple reason why Apple did this Google. Apple blocked Google from harvesting sensitive information about Apple's customer base. Pure and simple.

What people don't realize is AdMob is able to capture quite a lot of information about iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad users through advertising, such as user ID, location, demographics, time spent in app, and other apps on the device. In fact, AdMob has been able to discern new device specifications based on the network presence of equipment in testing. It captures all of this data to serve up more effective advertising but it can also be used to provide a competitor with valuable usage and equipment data.

Why would Apple hand over sensitive behavioral information to a competitor? No smart company would do that.

Apple has no problem with AdMob. Its' presence has underwritten free/low-cost apps in the App Store. But now that AdMob is part of Google, this data treasure-trove has to be turned off. That's why Apple created iAd – to offer developers a means to continue to offer free/low-cost advertising without the risk of sensitive information falling into the wrong hands.

Of course Google/AdMob is angry; they make a lot more money off the iOS platform which has far greater market share than Android devices. I'm sure they could have made a lot more by selling integrated advertising – desktop and mobile alike. But to paint Apple as Godzilla trampling the rights of users, developers and advertisers alike is hyperbole. You don't give your enemies the keys to your castle. User data is one of those keys.

I do want to address the Microsoft angle. Whether we like it or not, Apple has proven to be a far better steward of privacy than most people give it credit. Private browsing has been part of Safari for a long time, before it was fashionable. Unlike other phones, the GPS function in iPhones is off by default and users must explicitly provide permission to turn it on. Things such as viruses and other information harvesting bugs occur far less frequently on the Apple platform. Apple hasn't sold its' customer list' to millions of spammers nor does it change its' privacy rules every few months. Microsoft has made and continues to make so many security gaffes, one would look askance at promises to 'keep information private.' Google has made a number of well-publized errors – Google Buzz, Wifi location harvesting etc. I'm glad Apple takes security seriously.

So let the moaners moan. I'm sure the FTC will find that Apple has done nothing wrong. AdMob isn't banned; they are simply restricted from harvesting sensitive data. I don't mind.

Another day, another agency

Mitsubishi selects 180/LA in Santa Monica for creative duties. It will be interesting to see what they come up with that hasn't been done in the past.

Font Joy - Sirba

Reminds me of Stone Serif with a little more weight to it.

Hat tip [Typography Unlimited]

iPhone 4

Is it as revolutionary as the first one? No. Is it a vast revolution from the 3GS? No. Is it awesome? Yes.

There are three things that I'm most looking forward to with this new iPhone.

1. Sharper screen. I think this will make reading a much more enjoyable experience.
2. Improved camera. Flash is probably the most important addition here but I'm also looking forward to the improved resolution, clarity and the dual lens. HD recording doesn't hurt.
3. Three-way Gyroscope. Finally the iPhone will have the hardware that will make games like Super Monkey Ball an enjoyable experience.

There are many (many) people who will dismiss these improvements as things that have been available on other platforms. Very true. But there's no arguing with Apple's installed base. And developer base. Once devs optimize their software for the improved hardware, there's no telling what could come about.

Beautiful lounge

I haven't posted much furniture lately. Here's a lounge chair that I really like, constructed from recycled and certified sustainable wood. The designer is Paolo Alves for Marcenaria.

Hat tip [Trendir]

Packaging - the unsung hero

I love Method. I use their bathroom and cleaning wipes and their hand soaps. I haven't strayed from my beloved Tide to try their relatively new laundry detergent but I may give it a shot. I love their commitment to the environment, their light natural scents, and most of all, their efficacy.

One of the directors of industrial design at Method wrote a great article for dieline, a packaging blog that I follow and have cited here from time to time. So many companies treat packaging as that thing that you bung the product into before getting it out the door. Method took the opposite tack, creating a breath of fresh air on crowded drug store and supermarket shelves all over the country. I suggest you read Joshua Handy's article. His point is that packaging is often created by 'best practice,' which leads to duplicating all the wrong things and throwing out the good stuff.

To me the money quote is:

My experience has taught me that effective packaging has three dimensions that need to be equally considered: Beauty, Functionality and Responsibility. Traditional “best practice” emphasizes the functional aspect over all others, which is why most packaging is ugly both aesthetically and environmentally.

Great read.

Crowd sourcing = committee thinking?

Call me crazy but I always thought that committee thinking was a bad thing. It tends to lead to weak advertising and uninspired product development. Agencies and partners have been railing against 'the committee' for years.

So it's a bit odd to hear companies going 'ga-ga' over crowd-sourcing – or as I like to call it, letting consumers dictate your product or creative strategy because you have run out of ideas.

I know there are a lot of smart people out there that do not work in the marketing communications field. Harnessing their brains is to be encouraged. But if 'the crowd' is the idea, then it's not a sustainable one. Are clients willing to pay their ad agencies to manage their accounts if every major ad is outsourced to 'the crowd?' What about product development?

I fear crowd-sourcing is going to go the way of the customization craze. Brands everywhere tossed consumers a bone under the guise of 'having it their way,' such as changing the color of one's yogurt. The reality is infinite options and economies of scale tend to be fight against one another.

Before I come off as a total grump, crowd-sourcing has a role in certain spheres, such as refining concepts or troubleshooting. But there comes a point when it's simply 'committee thinking' with a fancy 'web 2.0' name.

Working on a paper

So I'm finished with the paper. Now I'm working on an article. Hence the amount of time it's taking to post on behavioral economics. It's an interesting exercise. If I do this for every paper, it will take forever. On the flip side, I'm analyzing this paper quite rigorously. I'm looking forward to the end product. I have a sense I know what it will be but it's form is still hazy.

Natural integration

What I like most about this stool design concept is the integration of both the manufactured and the natural.

Hat tip [Industrial Design Served]

Behavior Economics and Purchasing Behavior

It all started with an article in Admap. February 2010 to be exact. I'm getting hooked on Behavioral Economics (BE). I guess it shouldn't be that much of a surprise. It's the merger between two of my passions – psychology and economics. I'm glad that the planning community is getting on board. In reality, planners have been thinking this way from the start of the discipline – mapping consumer behavior to the purchase process, capturing 'shortcuts' that consumers use, and exploring what preconceived notions are triggered along the way.

BE entered popular culture with the publication of 'Freakeconomics,' a book I have not recently started. There have been a number of articles in the NY Times that incorporate BE in their analysis, largely in light of the current financial crisis and the behavior of the markets. David Brooks mentioned it in the midst of the Wall Street melt-down in this article dated October 29, 2008. John Tierney talks about 'Saver's Remorse' in this blog post from March 23, 2009.

My interest piqued, I decided to explore the discipline from the source. For that, I'm grateful to MIT and their OpenCourseware. I'm currently auditing – I guess you could call it that – their Behavioral Economics and Finance class that was taught by Prof. Xavier Gabaix in 2004. It's only now that textbooks are appearing for the discipline so much of the reading is centered on original academic papers that ushered in the discipline. As part of this process, I'd like to share some insights from one paper that I'm reading; it helps me grasp the material better. The first paper is by Daniel Kahneman, "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics" that was published in the American Economic Review (December 2003).

In this article, Kahneman acknowledges that people are "not accustomed to thinking hard' and rely upon snap judgements unless they are forced to do otherwise. One example would be laundry detergent; many people use what their Mom's use and rarely question their choice unless circumstance warrants it, some of those being the need to save money, improve efficacy, brand availability at the store they shop etc. This behavior flies in the face of economic theory, which treats purchases are rational beings that ruthlessly evaluates every purchase. In reality we do both.

There are two systems of thought that we use to make it through the day. System 1 is what I would call 'auto pilot' or intution. It's automatic, effortless, habitual and often difficult to control. The other is System 2, which is rational, slow, and deliberate. System 1 generates impressions of the attributes of objects of perception and thought. System 2 is involved in all judgements calculated rationally, whether they are expressed or not.

It's often interesting to see where the two meet and which gets activated first. One example would be the purchase of a car. We have that list of things we are looking for in a vehicle – number of doors, zero-to-60 speed, cargo space, etc. In the dealer showroom, many a buyer has been romanced by something zoomy, sleek, stylish, and completely impractical. Sports cars would not exist without System 1.

Key to research and purchasing behavior is the accessibility of these judgements. Some attributes are more accessible than others in both perception and judgments. The term 'natural assessments' are those that are routinely and automatically produced by the perceptual system, System 1. Things that influence System 1 are called precepts and include size, distance, loudness, similarity, casual propensity, "surpringingness" and mood.

Using familiar precepts, the dominant 'private label' strategy has traditionally been to be to mimic competitor established brands as closely as possible; it's just like your favorite brand but cheaper. Walgreen's is a master of this, to my frustration on many occasions. Their NY competitor, Duane Reade, took a very different tack – creating a private label brand that capitalized on their NY roots and pared it with a reductionist style popular with Apple aficionados. Judging by the number of Apple products on NY streets, cafes, and restaurants, it was a wise pairing aesthetically. It will be interesting to see if the new Walgreens retains their brand mimicry or embraces Duane Reade's style.

One point that made the most impact on me as a researcher is the concept that for many, assessments are quite binary – good or bad. These assessments are carried out split second and then reevaluated if additional data warrants. So often we ask consumers to evaluate things on the basis of a scale – zero to ten or zero to five – when in most people's minds, it's simply good or bad. Rationalizing why happens later. The scale exercise taps into System 2 but System 1 is where the decision is initially made. Using this insight,I plan to be more insistent in capturing the 'good/bad' first.

The last point for today is about familiarity and its' importance in System 1. Someone with greater category experience relies upon their intuition (system 1) in greater amounts than those with less experience. Kahneman mentions that doubt is a System 2 process. That makes sense because being familiar with your own insecurity is a conscious and rational process. The research process that consumers undertake when approaching a new category – e.g. shopping for a flat-screen television – is a desire to feed System 2 and minimize errors with System 1 or intuitive decisions. You feel better about choosing that sexy flat-screen design or that brand when you have done your homework.

Based on this one could argue that the primary job for most new product introductions needs to be seeding doubt, activating System 2. Without it, consumers remain in default mode and that mode leaves little room for something new. That doubt need not be rational. It could be something like – this product is sexier.

I'll have more from this paper next week.

this is what I want to do with an iPad

Read journal articles and mark them up. There are apps that get close but not to the Holy Grail just yet. I hope someone cracks it. I would love iBooks to have more robust annotate features. I appreciate that with the Kindle software but they don't go far enough.

[Note: seems as though iBlogger doesn't allow attachments, e.g. photos. I always found it an awkward piece of software.]

[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]

Christina Aguilera Bionic Press Conference (Part 1)

I got the link to this video from a gossipy site that took Christina Aguilera for complaining that someone on the set was coughing during her interview.

That was interesting enough but what REALLY intrigued me started at about the 4:34 mark. There she talks about the creative process, one that is surprisingly visual considering she's a music artist.

If you have been in a focus group, you probably have done a collage exercise – tearing words and pictures from magazines with the goal of describing the 'mood' of a brand, person or product. Well Christina does that for her recordings. She tears pictures and the like from magazines, creates mood boards and then takes them to her producers to impart the 'feel' of the song that she's trying to achieve.

I can't say I am a fan of Christina but I do have more respect for her as an artist knowing the work she puts into every release.

Font Joy - mister jun font

I love this font. It has such presence.

mister jun font: ""

The decline of interest in travel

I'm old enough to remember when airlines served free food, free drinks, and service with a smile. Truth be told, I used to be a bit of a plane spotter. I think my interest in design started with an interest in airline livery. I would comb through the phone book and check out all the airline ads. I miss the livery and logos of People Express, Air Florida, Braniff, BOAC (British Overseas Airways Corp) and so on. I'd pour through books on aircraft, military and civilian.

Now my interest in planes and livery is waning as the travel experience becomes more about removing service than enhancing it. Airlines are moving to non-reclining seats, less distance between those seats, charging for even one checked bag, and even charging for carry ons. It's hard to respect companies that move in lock-step in the 'nickel and dime' games.

USA Today has a pretty good blog on air travel and one of the comments to an article about non-recling seats on Spirit made me think. I can't find the comment right now but the person said s/he was a former plane/airline enthusiast and is no longer interested in following the industry any more due to its' behavior.

When an industry loses its' enthusiasts, you know it's in serious trouble. I can't wait for the next step in long-distance travel to reveal itself because I know I'm sick of this one.

Cultural anthropology

As some of you may know, I've been toying with the idea of grad school. I say toying because I'm still unsure what exactly I want to study. To date, it's been a choice between a traditional MBA and cultural anthropology. But lately I've been considering a relatively new field called behavioral economics. I was an econ major in college and so it would build upon what I learned oh those many years ago.

Anyways, I've started reading some books and papers about both social science fields. I started a classic from the godfather of anthropology in the U.S. called Anthropology and Modern Life [Amazon link] from Franz Boas. He went on establish cultural anthropology at Columbia, one of my target schools. He was also the one that brought empirical discipline to the field. It's amazing that some of the concepts that we take for granted now – e.g. location plays as large a role in values and and even physical development as ethnicity – were 'out there' back then. I'll report back as I spend more time with the tome.

As a side note, you can buy the book on Amazon but it's also available as a public domain book if you have a good eReader, such as Stanza on the iPhone and iBooks on the iPad.

House Hunters International is the best travel show in America

I have to confess that I am obsessed with that show. If you ever wanted to know what it would be like to live in a foreign country, watch this show. The show, hosted by Suzanne Whang on HGTV, travels throughout the world and shows you the house hunt of a particular hetero or homo couple, and the occasional single.

The locations are what keep me coming back – Malaga, St. Johns, Belize, Buenos Aires, Panama, the Greek Coast, Berlin, Edinburgh, Hong Kong, Tel Aviv, Fez etc. The areas are usually charming and are where most people would want to live.

It also doesn't hold back; there are trade-offs, sometimes significant ones. But I think that's what I like most about seeing places like Fez (squat toilets), Tel Aviv (bomb shelters in the apartment) and Hong Kong (so tiny).

It's also a peek into the culture. What is a kitchen? How much privacy can be expected? Where do people put their clothes? What items unite the global Ikea culture?

Finally the people looking for property are fun to watch. Their ages run the gamut – retirees, budding families, empty nesters, and even single people looking for their first place. But being the human behavior geek, it's the dynamic between the couples that I find fascinating. How much of partnership is it?

Great show.

Standing up

I am thrilled with the iPad but one criticism is that it's not light. You can't hold it in one hand and use it for any length of time.

I don't know about you but I'm tired of sitting down when I interact with a device.

I love the idea you have seen in some commercials lately ― people pointing to air while they walk down the street, surrounded by a forcefield of digital knowledge.

I'm not saying I'm thrilled to actually do it. Seems a little odd pointing to random places on the street. But then again everyone would be doing it, if iPhone adoption in NY sets any precedence.

Standing up allows you to interact and still move about without looking down and missing what is around you. In this country, we should be standing more and sitting less.

What do you wish technology would enable you to do?

One button madness

So the new iPhone software is coming this summer. It has everything that most people have wanted since the beginning, starting with multi-tasking. Overall it looks like an amazing upgrade and I can't wait to install it on my phone.

I do have one issue with the way it is implemented. Double-clicking the button bring up a tray at the bottom that shows up to seven apps that one has running at the time. Problem is that double-clicking was previously used to pull up either the phone or the iPod functions. What happens to that keystroke now? Is it contextual?

In a way, this is similar to a UI change that occurred one maybe two generations of software in the past. In order to quit an app, one pressed the home button for a long time. That shortcut was changed to a more cumbersome holding of the power button etc.

I love Apples one-button/minimal button ruthlessness but sometimes I think it gets in the way of what they are trying to achieve – ease of use. Remapping keystrokes only serves to frustrate users and lengthen the learning curve. Apple gets away with it sometimes but they should know better.

App design

In the previous post I mentioned one apps that annoyed me and one app that didn't.

A common complaint that I have with the apps out today is a giddiness with the size. Case in point, the Reuters app. They want to provide as much information within the frame as possible so they have stacks of rotating panels that can be unpredictable to navigate. There's just too much sliding and flipping overall. I don't think that format would work on a piece of paper, on television or on the computer screen. When looking at the iPad, you can't approach it from a tech point of view.

I think the Cool Hunting developed with BBH is the exact opposite. Cool Hunting is in effect a magazine. They balance the content by dedicating one block to each topic and each block has a headline and a striking visual. All of the main topics of the day can be seen at a glance. Inside each story is a cool stream of pictures above. The copy block has a strong presence and is easy to read. Tags and icons of related content appear to the right, just like the blog, but it feels as natural as on a glossy page.

It's not surprising media companies got it right. Many of them had iPads under lock and key so they got to experience what it could do first hand. Only now are other developers getting on board. I imagine things will improve.