Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Heavy Text on iPhone? Not so Accurate


You probably would have guessed this would be the case: User Centric, Inc., a Chicago-based usability consultancy, says iPhone owners can enter text just as rapidly as a BlackBerry user can, but the error rate for iPhone users is higher, and significantly higher for longer messages.

While iPhone owners made an average of 5.6 errors/message on their own phone, hard-key QWERTY owners made an average of 2.1 errors/message on their own phone. Nor does it appear experience makes that much difference. Though User Centric found that experienced iPhone users could type faster, they made as many mistakes as users who never had touched an iPhone before.

Participants who had previously not used either a hard-key QWERTY phone or an iPhone also were significantly faster at entering text messages on the hard-key QWERTY test phone than on the iPhone. These participants also made significantly fewer errors on the hard-key QWERTY than on the iPhone.

Numeric phone owners made an average of 5.4 errors/message on the iPhone, 1.2 errors/message on the QWERTY test phone, and 1.4 errors/message on their own phone.

The study involved data from 60 participants who were asked to enter specific text messages and complete several mobile device tasks. Twenty of these participants were iPhone owners who owned their phones for at least one month. Twenty more participants were owners of traditional hard-key QWERTY phones and another twenty were owners of numeric phones who used the “multi-tap” method of text entry.

Each participant entered six fixed-length text messages on their own phone.
Non-iPhone owners also did six messages each on the iPhone and a phone of the “opposite” type.

The opposite phone for numeric phone owners was a Blackberry and for hard-key QWERTY phone owners it was a numeric Samsung E300 phone. Some participants did additional tasks, including a contact search and add contacts, as time allowed.

iPhone owners entered six text messages on their own phone. They also typed two pangrams – a sentence that includes every letter in the English language at least once – and one corpus – a set of characters that represents the exact letter frequencies of the English language. These tasks were included to ensure that participants experienced the various phone keyboards in a thorough manner. iPhone owners also completed tasks involving text correction, contacts, and visual voicemail

Non-iPhone owners entered a total of 18 text messages – six each on their own phone (hard-key QWERTY or numeric phone), the iPhone, and the “opposite” phone (numeric test phone for QWERTY phone owners, hard-key QWERTY test phone for numeric owners). These participants also entered two pangrams and one corpus on their own phone and completed the contact list tasks if time was remaining.

As it turns out, subjects preferred hard keys for texting. “Not only was their performance better,” says Jen Allen, User Centric user experience specialist, “their rankings and ratings of the phones indicated that they preferred a hard-key QWERTY phone for texting.”

Participants rated the hard-key QWERTY phone highest out of all three phones for ease of text messaging. The hard-key QWERTY phone was also most frequently ranked first out of the three phones by the numeric and QWERTY users. Overall, the hard-key QWERTY phone was ranked first in text messaging by 85 percent of users.

The iPhone was ranked second by 60 percent of these users. None of the hard-key QWERTY phone owners ranked the iPhone first for text messaging and only three numeric phone owners ranked the iPhone first.

In general, hit rates for all keys on the iPhone keyboard were consistently 90 percent or higher. The average hit rate was about 95 percent.

But participants repeatedly pressed certain keys when they intended instead to press other adjacent keys. Several iPhone keys had high error rates: Q (66 percent), P (27 percent), J (22 percent), X (21 percent), and Z (15 percent). In contrast, the median false alarm rate across the iPhone entire keyboard was 5.48 percent.

iPhone keys with the highest false alarm rates were those in close proximity to the five most frequently used letters in the English language: E, T, A, O, and I.

In addition to the high false alarm letters listed above, other false alarm letters included W (10 percent), R (6.5 percent), Y (8.7 percent), and S (6.0 percent), which are also adjacent to high-frequency letters.

B (8.2 percent) also had a high false alarm rate, potentially because of its location near the letter N (which is the sixth most frequent letter, User Centric says.

On the hard-key QWERTY keyboard, the hit rates for all keys were above 97 percent, except for V (96 percent). Additionally, the false alarm rates for keys on this keyboard were below three percent, with the exception of Q (8 percent).

Performance on the keyboard was much better than on the iPhone keyboard. The letters with higher false alarm rates were similar on both keyboards, involving many of the 5 least frequently used letters in the English language, such as Q, Z, V, and B.

Also, the Q and P keys were problematic for users of both keyboards, suggesting that the issue for these keys arises from their location near the top edges of the keyboards.

Participants made different types of errors on the iPhone and the hard-key QWERTY phones.

The majority of errors made on the iPhone involved substituting a nearby letter for the intended letter. However, on the QWERTY phone, participants made more insertion and omission errors than substitution errors.

Also, many of the substitution errors that were made on the QWERTY keyboards involved swapping the order of the correct letters in the words, such as typing “stomr” instead of “storm”.

Compared to hard-key QWERTY devices, the iPhone may fall short for consumers who use on their mobile device heavily for email and text messaging, says User Centric.

The iPhone was clearly associated with higher text entry error rates than a hard-key QWERTY phone.

The finding that iPhone owners made more texting errors on iPhones than their hard-key QWERTY counterparts (on their own QWERTY phones) suggests that the iPhone may have a higher fundamental error rate. The iPhone’s predictive and corrective text features do alleviate some of the errors users make while texting, but it does not catch them all.

The touch screen obviously is an elegant interface for some tasks. It just doesn't appear to be the best interface for all tasks. Mutlitap and touch screen will work fine for many people. Others will find QWERTY keyboards the only way to go.

Nortel Launches Communication Web Services


Nortel has unveiled a Communications Enablement strategy that enables Web services on some Nortel products and provides a software-based environment to simplify the creation of customized communications-enabled applications and business processes.

Nortel also is working with IBM to support Service-Oriented Architecture and Web services that allow customers can integrate advanced communications services into business applications.

Nortel recently unveiled Web Services enablement on the Application Server 5200 and Communication Server 2000 IP Multimedia Softswitch, which allow service providers to offer their enterprise and residential customers interactive multimedia communications tools for their websites based on functionalities such as instant messaging, videoconferencing and presence. Nortel has also rolled out extensive Web Services capabilities on its Contact Center and Advanced Speech platforms.

Nortel also is developing a software-based foundation environment that enables network engaged applications or services across a customer's multi-vendor communications infrastructure. It is expected to be available to customers in the first quarter of 2008, and will provide orchestration of real-time services in a multi-vendor infrastructure environment across multiple domains (enterprise, carrier, wireless and wired).

The intent is to enable the creation of communications-enabled applications that are integrated to customers' business processes.

Vodafone: Pipes, Not Content?


Vodafone had a good quarter. It might also have had an instructive quarter. The stand out? Organic growth of 45 percent in non-messaging data revenue. In fact, non-messaging revenue is now up to a level of half that of messaging (text and multimedia messaging.

"The organic growth in data revenue of 45.1 percent was particularly strong and can be attributed in part to increasing penetration of Vodafone Mobile Connect 3G/GPRS data cards and handheld business devices," the company says. Translation: Wireless notebook computers and BlackBerry style email devices are driving data growth.

Vodafone handhelds in the business category increased by 112.6 percent since September last year and Vodafone Mobile Connect 3G/GPRS data cards grew by 78.9 percent. Assume there are 1.8 million data cards in use and 1.4 million email-centric handhelds as well.

Assume the monthly revenue stream for a notebook card is £35 a month. Assume an email device such as a Blackberry represents £25 a month. That suggests £294 million in revenue from data cards and £165 million from email devices, or £459 million, over a six-month period. EU-wide, Vodafone got something like £843 million in non-messaging data revenue over the same period.

So "pipe" revenues have increased from 46 percent to 54 percent of Vodafone's European data revenues over the last year. "Dumb pipe" trumps "content," in this case.

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Another Ridiculous Patent Suit

Technology Patents, a Maryland entity having its principal place of business in Potomac, Md, (address P.O. Box 61220, Potomac, MD 20859, http://www.arismardirossian.com/), has filed a patent infringement suit claiming that 131 carriers, handset suppliers and application providers have infringed a patent covering global transmission of text or short message service (SMS) communications.

Technology Patents alleges that all of the defendants, which include T-Mobile, Vodafone, China Resources Peoples Telephone Company Ltd, AT&T, Samsung, Palm, Microsoft, and Yahoo! (among the 131 defendants), have caused international text or SMS messages to be sent to and from Maryland, thereby resulting in infringement of the asserted patents in Maryland.

TPLLC has asked for a permanent injunction against the defendants, enjoining them from providing international messaging operations and capabilities in the U.S. market.

My views on this, as previously mentioned, are that there is way too much use of "patents" as a business weapon or means of extortion, and too little use of patents as a genuine way to spur the formation of intellectual capital. We aren't talking about one or two "infringers." We are talking virtually the entire global telecommunications industry here. Can that possibly be the case? Or is this yet another example of "prior art" that should never have been given patent status in the first place?

It's crap.

iPhone Not Enterprise Class? Avaya Says It Is

Avaya says its Avaya one-X Mobile unified communications platform will support Apple iPhone. The company also announced the availability of Avaya one-X™ Mobile for RIM, Palm, Java and WAP mobile devices. The first company to announce access to enterprise communications from the iPhone, Avaya now extends this access from the broadest range of mobile devices of any enterprise communications manufacturer today.

Avaya one-X Mobile unites enterprise and mobile networks, allowing the two to work together more effectively while increasing the value of existing investments in communications infrastructure.

With Avaya one-X Mobile, mobile devices from Apple, RIM, Palm, Motorola, LG, Nokia, Samsung, Sanyo, Sony Ericsson and others become endpoints on the corporate network.

From the iPhone, users will have iPhone optimized access to the Avaya one-X Mobile interface, providing the same ability to make the iPhone their personal remote control for enterprise communications.

Flat Rate Data Roaming from Asian Mobile Providers

A group of Asian mobile carriers early next year will provide traveling users data access for a flat daily fee.

The carriers call themselves the Conexus Mobile Alliance, and include Hong Kong's Hutchison, Indonesia's Indosat, Japan's NTT DoCoMo, the Philippines' Smart, Singapore's StarHub, South Korea's KT Freetel, India's Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Manager Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL) and Taiwan's Far EasTone. The alliance covers 11 territories and 160 million consumers.

All the carriers use the Wideband Code Division Multiple Access data standard operating faster than 3G.

Some of the carriers already have deployed high-speed downlink packet access (HSDPA), supporting speeds up to 1.8 Mbps. NTT DoCoMo already offers 3.6Mbps, and plans to launch a 7.2M bps service early next year.

The carriers hope the new alliance will boost data usage within Asia.

Major Reform of EU Telecom?

In a major revamp of its rules on wholesale access to optical loops, the European Commission executive branch has decided that, where competition is weak, incumbents must create separate “wholesale access” companies that sell services to all service providers.

Known as “structural separation,” the model resembles that current in the U.K. market, where BT and all other wireline providers buy access services from a wholesale OpenReach company.

The plan still must be ratified by member nations, and opposition is expected. National regulators are happy to be given more powers, but do not want the EU executive to be allowed to overrule their decisions and insist that they do not need an EU watchdog.

The European Commission says the new rules could be applied by the end of 2009, but observers expect EU states such as Germany, France and Spain to water them down.

If ratified, however, the decision essentially means competitors will have wholesale access to incumbent fiber-to-home facilities. The decision stands in stark contrast to rules in the U.S. market, where cable and telco providers are not required to lease such facilities to competitors.

To Disrupt, Generative AI has to be More Like the Internet Was

The cost of acquiring and using a generative artificial intelligence model matters, both for model suppliers and users of such models, as is...