iBabble

Laura Ries points us to an observation on the iPhone from non other than Jon Stewart.  From her Origin of Brands blog:

"and last night on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, Jon delivered a classic comment on the fruitlessness of combination convergence devices.

During a discussion about Ultimate Fighting, which is a mixed Martial arts sport, Jon says that by combining all the fighting disciplines you lose the form and artistry of each. (Indeed Ultimate Fights usually just ends up with two guys rolling around on top of each other on the ground.)

John Hodgman refutes Jon’s statement with “So why combine a cellphone and a camera then?”

Jon comes back with “Why? That’s my question. You just end up with a crappy phone and a crappy camera.” It receives big cheers from the audience and at this point Hodgman concedes that Jon wins the round."

Honestly, I think Jon's argument is one of the lamest I've heard about why the IPhone could possible fail.  I won't go into reasons why it might fail—I haven't had a chance to play with one yet.  But the "people don't want convergence" argument is thin stuff.  Here's why.  Jon's comments imply that someone will buy a phone with camera or video to replace their current equipment.  This is nonsense.  Smartphones act as "supplements" and appeal to people who want to e-mail, browse the web or take a spontaneous picture now and then.  Is it even possible to buy a phone without a camera in it these days?  Do you want a phone without one?

These features support the evolution of human behavior fueled by classic needs (like the need to connect + share).  I see moms and dads at Target and Home Depot snapping pictures of a product they are interested in and sending it to their spouse to take a look.  I see people commuting to work glued to their mobile e-mail as they make their way home.  Have these people thrown out their computers or digital cameras?

No—the "crappy phone, crappy camera" argument is thin.  And what about video?  We've already seen a surge of vidoes uploaded and distributed on YouTube taken by people on their mobile phones.  Is the video good quality?  As good as a the latest digital cam corder?  No, of course not.  But it supports a shift in human behavior.  It's called citizen journalism—or marketing.  I think there may have been a few books written about this phenomenon.

Jon should stick with the jokes.  PS, phones are lifestyle devices—or at least many phones are beginning to achieve this status.  We all have different lifestyles with different needs.  I may not get an iPhone.  But the new Blackberry Curve (shown above) is looking awfully tempting to me.  With a 2 megapixel camera, media player and full sized QWERTY, maybe it fits my current state of human behavior.  It might not fit yours.  And that's OK.

Comments

[Roger von Oech]

If auto designers had Jon Stewart's mentality, they never would have put radios in cars ("doesn't sound as good as in the parlor").

[ann michael]

Personally, I'm all for convergence. I am looking forward to getting an iPhone - if and when it does what I need it to do.

I was all pysched until I heard about battery life issues and really slow internet access. Regardless, I have to admire it's beauty and design. When I'm sure it'll work for me, I'll get one and ditch my iPod (one less thing to carry around).

Until then, I'll keep loving my Blackberry Pearl and carring my iPod separately.

[Pete]

Personally, I don't know why people even bother with Ries and Ries anymore. Most recently was the Ad Age article where Al predicts the iPhone's failure, because all convergence devices fail. Daughter dutifully defends. Same situation happened last summer with BMW. Not entirely sure how you meant "babble" b/c your posts are generally very positive - but I think the term is perfect.

[DA]

Roger, I think your car design comparison is really interesting. I'm sure there were also people who said "who would want to listen to music while driving? That could be very distracting"

Ann, I think your key phrase is "when I'm sure it'll work for me" that's how most people seem to feel before they make a purchase decision like this. The buy "when it feels right for them"

Pete, I'm not real familiar with Ries, but the Babble part was meant to reflect my feeling of some of the commentary like this. I've seen a lot of smart analysis, but Stewart's example in particular irks me. Would the RAZR continue to be popular if it didn't have a camera?

My guess is a decision like that would limit the shelf life. Whether or not the iPhone itself is successful, what it does is offer a glimse into the future. 5 years from now, I believe that mobile devices will be more versitile, stylish and connected to the Web among other things. That's going to change a lot. It's going to tweak our behavior. Like for example, a lot less reading of newspapers on the train etc... but more importantly, freedom from our desks.

[Todd W.]

While I agree with the position that convergence devices are "supplements", not replacements, that's generally not how they are positioned by their manufacturers. Sony Ericsson, Samsung and Nokia all position their high-end convergence products as on-par replacements for your mp3 player and point-and-shoot camera. The fact that they are NOT replacement-level yet, leads to the view, like Stewart's, that convergence itself is the culprit. And he may be right, that the added complexity of providing multiple usage modes (or even simultaneous use of disparate functions) while still packing all these features into a form factor that is hard enough to fit ONE function into degrades the overall experience.

A successful RAZR w/out a camera? If it even did one thing well, it might have had a chance without camera phone functionality. Look at BlackBerry. But I have yet to run into anyone who got a RAZR and thought it was a good phone aside from its (now dated) looks.

[Scott McArthur]

I'm going to stick to face 2 face! The power of the "eyes" have for me everytime!

[DA]

Todd,

Certainly the marketers of any of these devices spin the truth. Even the iPhone ads make it seem like the best thing since sliced bread. But give the average consumer some credit will ya? We know better and will make our choices based on what fits our lifestyle at the moment.

I don't believe Stewart's comments were anti marketing. They were anti multi-functioning device (or as you stated, convergence)--which is silly. Not everyone wants a phone that only makes phone calls. Some of us also want cameras, video, e-mail, chat, and one day, hopefully a web browsing experience that actually works. Our wants and needs are all different, hence the choice you see in the marketplace. Last time I checked, there were still plenty of basic phones that are small and lightweight and only do a few things.

Personally, I've held off on getting a Blackberry because it didn't have a camera, an important feature for me-- but now that they offer a model with a camera and a whole lot more, I'm considering one.

Marketers can spin the truth all they want saying that their device offers the "convergence" some of us have been waiting for. However, the products/services that work for us at the individual level will succeed and the ones that don't, won't. And that's where the ultimate fighting analogy, funny as it is--ultimately begins to break down.

[CK]

Very good piece! I agree that convergent, or multi-function devices, are supplements...but the whole premise of convergence—as Todd states--is replacement not supplement (that's how the co's bill them out is what I'm saying). So in that sense a lot of us are agreeing the iPhone…and ergo, many convergent products, are not going to win on that front.

Per Roger's comment above, a radio in the parlor/radio in the car is not an argument in convergence’s favor (or against John's mentality, I don't think) since that extends experience and functionality (in this case while traveling). Just like saying we're going to be able to read news while on the go/away from our desks. You're not saying we're not going to read papers solely on these devices, just that we can when we're out (cuz I'm certainly not going to read the paper at home on a sunday on a small screen...but I will when traveling on a train and have no other alternative).

When I'm in Times Square and I see a shot of something I want to capture but don't have my camera? I'll take a shot with my phone. And it sure is great to know that I won’t miss a shot because I don’t have my “good camera” on me. But if I'm going to a 50th Anniversary Party, I'm thinking ahead and bringing my good camera (and my wireless phone will also be in my pocketbook). My point is, the many great features of the phone are supplementary/convenient but they aren't a replacement...and if they aren't a replacement, then it isn’t convergence. It’s extending that experience (and it’s actually redundancy). Now, my DVR that acts as BOTH a recording device and a cable modem? That's a successful convergent product--and yet it only does 2 things well.

Because I didn't see John's joke, I need to ask: did he say "people don't want convergent stuff" or did he say that “people don't truly buy-in to convergent stuff”? Big difference so I need to ask before I know if I agree/disagree with him. See, people have long wanted convergence...convergence is sexy, it’s cool, and it promises to make life easier--a la "do all things with one slick, small device!". But even if they've "wanted convergence," people by and largely haven't bought into it (my blackberry has not gotten me to shut-off email on my laptop).

CK's prediction? People will decide between the iPhone and other multi-function phones for 2 reasons. One is the love for "all things Apple" but the big decision will be between wanting a touchpad vs. a keypad. It will come down to what they feel is highest in usability for them. I'm completely prepared to be wrong on this prediction, btw (but it would be nice to be right for once ;-).

Interesting commentary here: http://blogs.mediapost.com/mobile_insider/?p=92

Thanks for making me think--great piece.

[DA]

I'm going camping. And when I go, I'm going to bring my Swiss Army knife. It's great on camping trips. Saves me from bringing lots of other things like a corkscrew, bottle opener, scissor, screwdriver and in a pinch I can even saw off small dead branches for firewood.

I love my Swiss Army knife for all the stuff it does even though I don't use it much at home, since I've got all that stuff there anyway and it's just easier to use them.

Still, I love my Swiss Army Knife.

[CK]

Yup. Your SAKnife is great for camping. But at home...you're using your other stuff. So it doesn't replace but gives you an on-the-go solution.

I don't think convergence is faulty, I think the promise of replacing other "things" is false. It just hasn't happened.

(PS: Do you have the new hi-tech SAK? The one with a flashcard? So fun and a faboo gift idea!)

Hey, you know one thing I fear Apple overlooked? Creating a new category. I get the "i" in "iPhone" for innovation but, the thing is it doesn't, to me anyhow, fit in the category of smartphone or PDA or whatnot. What to call it? A phone? An entertainment device? Have I missed the new category they've defined? I really haven't followed it enough so I might be missing this.

And ya know a program that would be fun? Apple creating a wiki or a blog that asks users "what does iPhone mean to I?". Some people would regale its mapping functionality, some its touchscreen, others the music, etc. Let micro-communities regale its myriad qualities and conversate around those. How fun that content would be.

Again, really liked the thought and tone of this piece.

[DA]

Thanks CK, I think you've added to this conversation considerably. My personal POV is that it's less about the actual products like the iPhone and even the Blackberry curve and more about what they symbolize which are stepping stones to something else. That something else is mobile connectivity which will be a richer experience compared to what we currently have now. Stepping stones. That's all.

BTW, it's worth noting that I haven't commented on this thread one single time from a laptop. I've been out and about using my "phone" to keep up here.

Or maybe I should call it my digital Swiss Army Knife... ;)

[Herb]

To me, its more wrong vs. right convergence of technology.

Wrong - Camera and cell phone. Sure, some people love it. But a cell phone camera is going to be out done by a digital camera. And people never took to it because it wasn't a device that was really aiding their life style.

Right - The internet and the internet's function in the palm of your hand. This is right place/right time. I mean, my blackberry saves me lugging around my laptop. And yes, I love having the option of tapping the internet in the palm of my hand. And because some 75% of us are used to broadband information, we generally want it when we want it. i.e. i'm lost give me google maps NOW!

Now add in a mix of well designed function so that my mother could almost figure out...and I say its a winner.

I know this isn't a bullet proof argument. But I think people (masses) want the convergence of what the internet gives them, information at their figure tips.

Down the road we will then want the perfect cell phone-mobile internet-camera.

[CK]

And in fact you've written entire posts from your PDA, we should note that, too (see what a loyal reader I am? ;-).

This "stepping stones" is a darn good theme for you to continue exploring. I no longer want where I am to preclude me from contributing to the convo...but I also want the experience to be easier (those little buttons are hard for me, for me the touchscreen would work better -- but that's just me).

Btw, have you seen MS's homepage today...why are they trying to look like Apple? Why even play that (losing) battle when MS is great because of the other sectors they play in? that's what they should be promoting now--otherwise they do themselves a huge disservice.

[DA]

Herb, I think you are underscoring my main point. Each of us have different mobile wants and needs. You dream of a great mobile browsing experience. I dream of a mobile experience that will let me take pictures, upload them and publish blog post just as easily as I do on a computer I also like the idea of sharing videos via the small screen.

If the iPhone TV ads did one thing right, they wet our appetites for the kind of mobile experience many of us crave. Which device + service provider actually delivers on this and when is most likely yet to be determined.

[Greg Krauska]

David, I think you meant to say that Laura Ries' comments on the iPhone are weak. Jon Stewart is a comedian, last I watched.

I struggle with Ries' comments, not so much because she is right or wrong (no one can predict the future), but she seems to argue that there is only one way to successfully design products (specialization). So combination phones are only 10% of the market: how much of the phone market do I need before I am successful? Ries also forgets the love for all things Apple, which for many folks (not all) is as good or better than a Good Housekeeping seal.

Meantime, the fact that the joke about lousy camera and lousy phone received as many laughs as it did suggests one thing: there is certain amount of truth to it.

[DA]

LOL,

OK Greg, fair assessment. But it was more fun to take on Jon Stewart. ;-)

[Greg Krauska]

And who knows, it might earn you a spot on his show! :-)

[Erin Swigart]

I agree! The thing about the camera phone or a phone that plays MP3s is NOT that it replaces other toys, but rather caters to our desire to have a little bit of everything all the time. If you don't want a camera phone you either a) work in an environment where you're not allowed to have one or b) don't feel excitement at being able to take a picture of that piece of gum on the side of your table at McDonald's that looks like Abraham Lincoln. I mean, who wants to miss out on a photo opportunity like that just because you left your Cannon Sure Shot at home?

[Ike]

Stewart better be careful. His whole show is the convergence of news and comedy.

[phil gillman]

The interesting thing to me so far in using the iPhone vs various other smartphones is how little it seems like a phone.
It really seems to be some sort of new device, primarily due to the unique UI -- the experience of using it is fairly different from any phone I've used in the past, yet it is not just the paradigm of a browser or iPod with other features. I'm not sure what it is, except that it is unique... and I'm guessing that is EXACTLY what Apple was shooting for -- an entirely unique and "brand-able" experience.
So far, like it or hate it, the iPhone completely validates the importance of experience design in consumer/brand/business interactions.

[Ryan]

Id say Overrated and Over HYPED! Id stil prefer my Blackberry and LG Choco from http://www.bestcellularphoneserviceplans.com than the Iphone.