So much respect for Christopher Nolan who has it exactly right. He knows not to rely on gimmicks:
Although he’s all in favor of new technologies, he’s hesitant to adapt or use anything before it’s time tested – in a theater for certain and ideally in front of audiences.
New technology “has to cede what comes before that, and it hasn’t done that yet.”
There is obviously nothing wrong in following trends. We would be lying if we said we did not. But we have objects and artifacts around us that we still like to associate ourselves with. We recognize work that is still cool. Maybe they remain timeless because they do not let a trend be their sole identity.
After a year of designing wearable interfaces, I wanted to write down some of my thoughts. What does a device need to do for people to want to wear it? Provide them with genuine utility.
Some things to keep in mind while mass producing them:
In terms of utility, current hardware is very exploratory, and a playground for enthusiasts. They are not compelling enough to warrant being given the label ‘consumer electronics’. At the very least, a consumer wearable device needs to understand context. We do not want more displays giving us the same information. We want, instead, for them to work in unison to give us only the most useful information. They have the chance to minimize our interaction with other devices. Bruce Tog gives a good rundown of use cases for wearables. There is also opportunity provided by their low access time: we could use them to conserve the energy we spend on micro-interactions and the manual activation of individual services at home, at work, during travel, and leisure. Built into them needs to be a sense of awareness that allows acceptable levels of automation in these environments. All that matters for them to be successful is for real user needs to be met.
Writing my statement of purpose while applying to graduate schools in the US, a solid piece of advice I got was to question every bit of my writing and learn to ask “So What?”. When someone else is reading anything you write, they are not conscious about the context under which you think it matters. There’s so much content for them to go through, why should they handpick what you have written and choose to understand why it is something worth caring about? Good writing makes them want to care.
I think I do this very often now, since content on the internet becomes permanent – whether you like it or not. It may and will most likely be cached in a corner you do not have the ability to change. There’s no harm in maintaining good judgement of what you want associated with your name forever. You don’t want to make a harmless post seem like excess baggage (like ‘claim chowder’, memes, and other labels that carry a negative connotation) some time later.
I was reminded of this by a recent comment on a research paper I wrote that got accepted and will be presented in a conference soon. The approval note recommends some edits: “we know this is important, let’s make it matter for the world”.