Monthly Archives: November 2010

2020 Visions – Automotive innovations

I feel very fortunate and grateful to have followed a career path that has enabled me to work on a wide variety of projects across many different organisation types and markets. In the past, I’ve described myself as a bit of a ‘corporate gypsy’ which has taken on more significance recently after some research into part of my family does in fact show I share some Romany heritage with the actor Bob Hoskins – so maybe my desire to roam around in different places, soaking up new experiences and ideas is in the blood. Anyway, in the last few years I’ve roamed from software to cookware and from household appliances to automotive electronics. At any point I have been equally fascinated by the application of agile versus waterfall product development techniques, the material sciences that go into making a superior frying pan to how the design of a kitchen machine blade can make all the difference in mixing a smoothie. Right now, I am immersed in how smartphone technologies can be integrated safely into vehicle control and audio systems – a current growing concern in road safety. This last year working in the automotive industry has confirmed my earlier beliefs that it is ripe for some very fundamental invention and innovation. Our transport infrastructure continues to creak and groan under relentlessly growing demands and our over-reliance on fossil fuels looks more and more precarious as these resources become harder and harder to find, extract and process. In a flight of fancy that took off around this time last year I started to explore 3 potential routes of innovation that could help to address growing issues…

  • Making single person journeys less wasteful and more efficient
  • Modular and integrated transport solutions
  • Harvesting and trading energy through the transport infrastructure

A year on, I’ve spent some time looking at the concepts and innovations that are being explored in these areas and it’s clear that a great deal of thinking and experimentation is happenning, which hopefully will lead to some significant breakthroughs and fundamental changes. (note:– here is an interesting video from January 2011 illustrating some of the ideas of future transportation being explored) The established automotive giants keep playing with ideas…

Audi’s Snook Concept
General Motors City Car concept
Suzuki Mobility Concept

Most of the major car manufacturers have conceptual programmes underway for ‘city car’ designs.  With the US car manufacturers trying to regain some kudos for innovative, energy conscious thinking, GM has been pushing it’s experimental partnership with Segway with its development of the PUMA a semi-autonomous low footprint city vehicle. This side of the pond, another GM (F1 designer Gordon Murray) opened a few eyes earlier in the year with the T25/27 city car designs which rather unbelievably are said to be able to carry up to 3 people in a space that is 1/3rd the size of conventional cars. It was good to see Gordon Murray’s ideas win the 2010 SMMT innovation award and awards at the very successful Future Car Challenge. Although these unconventional ideas and experiments are often knocked by commentators I think it is encouraging that they are gaining coverage and recognition. Town planners dream of less congestion…

Integrated transport in Melbourne GM/Segway’s City Car Vision The GM stackable car concept

A couple of city engineering concepts I have seen recently have been pursuing the idea of integrating smaller transport units into other infrastructure. Some illustrations of an Australian concept show a tram type system that incorporates single wheeled/single person units that can join and leave the main vehicle at various points. Discovery Channel’s Mega Engineering, which looks at the potential massive build projects of the future, has examined personal pod projects underway at Heathrow Airport and an ambitious conceptual idea for Washington DC – described here in this Death of the Automobile clip. Mega Engineering shows an excellent example of potential transport robotics with amazing clips of Kiva Robots in action. Saving valuable space on roads and in parking areas…

The Mo Du Lo concept The EU ‘HOST’ Concept of modular vehicle systems

Projections of population growth, vehicle ownership and land restraints illustrate that the way we currently travel by personal transport is increasingly unsustainable. If we think traffic congestion is bad in the UK, particularly in the south – it’s nothing compared to the massive traffic jams that have been experienced in China this year.  So… it is understandable that concepts designed to automate traffic flows and reduce the physical footprint of vehicles on the road and in parking environments are gathering pace. Exploiting renewable energy resources in the transport infrastructure

An MX5 Solar Conversion Project Solar Collection Concept

The many millions of acres of car parking space and many hours that cars are parked in them seems like a criminally wasted opportunity to harness renewable energy. And because these vehicles then move from location to location there must be many an opportunity to trade the energy they collect in an ecosystem that rewards the generation of low carbon power. The Open Source Concept The most inspiring idea I have come across in the last year is Riversimple’s ‘Open Source’ Hydrogen Powered car project. The statement they have made on their FAQ’s about the importance of taking an ‘Open Source’ approach to their ideas I believe is fundamental to how we will address the challenges currently presented by the triple whammy of climate change, energy demands and population growth. It is encapsulated very well in this quote…

A window of opportunity has opened now that the flaws in our current model are self-evident and the need for a step change in our transport technology is widely recognised. We must seize this opportunity to establish new vehicle technology standards that are designed to optimise energy efficiency, because if zero emission but energy intensive vehicles establish themselves, it will be much harder ever again to question the basic architecture of cars.

I've been conned – and I don't like it

Usually my bullshit detector works pretty well. Many years in marketing has honed it into sniffing out the majority of dodgy deals. So, I’m feeling pretty hacked off that I’ve fallen for such a cheap trick – that with the benefit of hindsight wasn’t that cheap for me.

In my defence, I was pretty exhausted and off guard when it happened but none the less I am irritated. It happened recently in the dying hours of an exhibition at the NEC where I had spent 4 long, long days running a stand for the company I’m currently working for.

I was taking a break from stand duty and wandering around the other exhibits when I stopped to watch a demonstration of something called ‘The Pink Stick’. I had glanced down the aisleways at other times during the show and seen the crowds gathering around this company’s stands and I did think it quite strange that they had two separate stand locations in the same area of the exhibition hall.

The stands had mature ‘trustworthy’ looking men and women demonstrating this ‘revolutionary’ anti-fogging solution. Behind each of them was a mirror, suspended above a tray of boiling water that was giving off steam continually. The bottom half of the mirror was completely fogged with condensation and the upper half absolutely crystal clear – and I mean gleaming clear – not a single bit of misting, drop or dribble of water.

The demonstrators were all American and expounding the amazing properties of ‘The Pink Stick’ while doing hands-on demos including other mirrors, bits of plastic and pairs of glasses by holding them over more steaming trays at the front of the stands. Each time, the results looked impressive – untreated section fully steamed – treated section gleaming clear.

As I stood there watching this, my brain took the following journey…

hmm – I leave for work early in the morning; the winter is setting in now; my windows are always very steamed up; my aircon is a bit crap and takes a while to clear the windows or I have to keep wiping them when I first start my journey; this could save a lot of time and effort; £6 for one ‘miracle solution’ seems reasonable – £10 for two seems like a bargain!

Perhaps I should have been a little more questioning when I was given three ‘Pink Sticks’ for £10 rather than the advertised two – but I assumed that as it was the last afternoon of the show and the aisles were getting quieter they just wanted to offload stock rather than have to repack it. Off I went feeling pleased that I’d got more for my money and thinking how many more condensation free mornings and evenings I was likely to enjoy.

So… a few days later, I was parked up in my car at lunchtime and decided to use a bit of downtime to give my windows their first ‘Pink Stick’ treatment. I undid the container and the Pink Stick stunk. It’s a sort of waxy chemical type smell but I took that as a good sign – probably the secret ingredient that delivers the miracle I thought. I applied it to a cloth and set about coating my windscreen, side windows and mirrors with the stuff. First impressions were not great as it was like scrawling on your windows with a soft wax crayon and then trying to rub it off. The waxy sheen took quite a bit of effort to clear but my windows did look pretty clear after all the effort.

Anyway, I returned to the office, finished the day’s work and then returned to my car for the commute home. It was a cold evening and typically my windows would be steaming up a few minutes after starting the car but today was different. Miracle of miracles, the windows stayed clear and condensation free – the car was still full of horrible Pink Stick fumes but at least I could see out and begin my journey home immediately – feeling pretty chuffed with the investment I’d made.

The following morning was equally cold and wintery but after the previous evening’s experience I was relishing the thought that I could just start the car up and drive off without any condensation hassles. Then came the horrible realisation that I’d been conned.

This stuff is literally a ‘one hit wonder’. I’ve now experimented a few times with it and it absolutely only works for one application meaning you need to reapply it every time you want a morning or evening of clear windows. Then I twigged why the exhibition demos are so impressive – they are reapplying the stuff continually, day in, day out. However, for anyone using it in everyday life, it is no more useful than just using a plain cloth – in fact it’s harder work as it’s a bugger to wipe completely clean particularly on an area the size of a windscreen.

After the disappointment of the product not working as implied,I then looked at it a bit closer. It’s a lump of pink waxy substance that I wouldn’t be surprised is the waste residue from some horrible  industrial process which has had a fetching shade of pink dye added to it.  It is presented in what looks like (and I’m sure probably is) the type of container you typically provide a urine sample in and it has a very badly photocopied A5 size piece of paper tucked into the container that provides virtually no useful or informative details of the product itself or its usage. I’m guessing the unit cost is no more than about 10 pence. So… £6 for a single stick is going to be a pretty hefty profit.

Obviously, this type of sale requires the impulse buying decision triggered by the impressive demo and air of ‘exclusivity’, which explains why they had more than one stand operating in the same exhibition area and why they had targeted the high flow aisles. They need a good supply of suckers over a four day period to cover the space costs and turn a good profit before high-tailing it back to their nondescript and possibly non-existent offices in Hawaii.

Anyway – my learning from this experience is new confirmation that ‘if it looks too good to be true – it usually is’ and also that ‘The Pink Stick’ stinks – literally and metaphorically.

You have been warned…

Warning! License violation!

Swedish Police rounding up violators

If someone was to ask me what the difference is between EPiServer Content Management System Versions 4, 5 and 6, the three words in this post’s headline stand out the most. I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many ‘license violation’ warnings on a software install than our recent roll-out of EPiServer 6 and its associated add-on modules. At times, I’ve half expected the Swedish police to come crashing through the doors and windows as the latest black on yellow warning notice flashes up 😉

As commented by John Goode on Twitter and in his recent ‘Profit Imperative’ blog post, the reason for EPiServer’s significant changes to its licence model earlier this year became clear, with its acquisition earlier this month by IK Investments.

This prompted me to look back at previous comments I’ve made relating to EPiServer in this blog over the last couple of years that started following a visit to Stockholm. In doing so, the following comment, written after attending the 2009 UK Customer Day stood out…

As with many activities and tools where you spend a fair amount of your working life, ‘familiarity can breed contempt’ and I think the real test for me will be EPiServer and its partner bases’ ability to recognise and address key pain points and bugs quickly. If developing the latest and greatest functionality comes at the expense of improving the core web content management capabilities that make for a reliable, productive and effective user experience, then EPiServer will risk turning off established and loyal customers who are its best advocates and often help to do the marketing job for them.

hmmm… so having selected EPiServer based on very positive experiences in two previous projects, I have to say I’m disappointed with the direction things have been going with things in the last six months or so.

Over the years I think I’ve developed a bit of a gut feel when it comes to evaluating software and whether it represents value for money and will deliver a Return On Investment.

When I first used EPiServer, it exceeded my expectations. It was a user friendly, adaptable and flexible solution that was a solid platform for consolidating multiple international websites into one environment. There seemed to be some flexibility in the licensing model that helped keep the product affordable for achieving ambitious global goals and adapting to changing marketing demands. I was also impressed with the speed of innovation and the ability of the company to deliver some big chunks of development such as the community and ecommerce capabilities through smart partner/community development, acquisition and partnership.

Having started to use and experiment with open source content technologies in recent years, I think what also appealed to me a lot about EPiServer, as an organisation, is that it seemed to be evolving into a potentially powerful hybrid of a well established and proven commercial developer that was increasingly adopting open source philosophies and best practices. As there is a growing trend within open source towards commercialised operations ie; Drupal/Acquia I think it’s healthy to see commercial operators heading for the middle ground from the other direction.

Sadly then, other than some largely cosmetic changes to the interface, the only difference I’ve really noticed with EPiServer 6 are repeated ‘license violation’ warnings popping up all over the place. Whereas in the past, I’ve felt keen to experiment and stretch the solution in new business and marketing scenarios, the frequency and prevalence of these license violation warnings make me feel extremely cautious about planning subsequent phases of development as I get the sense they are going to come with bigger and bigger price tags attached.

A year ago, I wrote a piece about the ‘future of Web Content Management’ in which I emphasised the importance of user experience. A classic example of this is the layer upon layer of dialog boxes that you have to click through to undertake core content management functions such as adding images and links. These are things that impact productivity and ease of use, particularly if you have to remember where to click to achieve a particular task. In that post, I linked to this article on the age of user experience and I’ve summarised the key points below…

1. More features isn’t better:
2. You can’t make things easier by adding to them:
3. Confusion is the ultimate deal breaker:
4. Style matters:
5. Only features that provide a good user experience will be used:
6. Any feature that requires learning will be adopted by only a small fraction of users:
7. Unused features are useless and diminish ease of use:
8. Users do not want to think about technology; what counts is what it does for them:
9. Forget about the killer feature: the new killer app is a killer user experience
10. Less is difficult; that’s why less is more.

I particularly like the explanation of point 10…

Do well what 80% percent of your users do all the time (and don’t worry about the other 20% who want to do more) and you create a good user experience.

I’ll finish this post with a link to another recent article by John Goode, which emphasises the importance of ‘customer advocacy’ in software development and provides further illustration of the points above.

Learning the art of Espionage

I’m delighted to say that the company I’m currently working for has wholeheartedly supported my desire to learn a skill often associated with undercover intelligence gathering and the murkier underworld of international espionage.

The skill I’m referring to is ‘lip reading’ – the ability to determine what somebody is saying without actually hearing the sounds they are making.

The majority of us lip read to certain extent even with good hearing. No doubt you can recall a time when you found it more difficult to hear someone because their face or mouth was covered. I’ve also heard some people say they hear better when they are wearing their glasses.

I’m now 8 weeks into a 30 week beginners class and it seems I have some apptitude for it. This is probably due to the fact that I put off wearing hearing aids until I couldn’t really function well without them so I imagine I’ve been compensating for poor hearing for quite a number of years by using my own efforts at lip reading.

At the end of 30 weeks I will gain a qualification and the option to move on to intermediate level. Despite the fact I clearly have some self-taught experience, learning to lip-read is not easy. It’s more appropriately called ‘speechreading’ as only 30-40% of words are visible on the lips and the rest of the comprehension of speech comes from  facial expression, body language and context.

So far, we have covered things like ‘confusion sounds’ (ie; p, b, m and ch, sh, j – that all make the same shape on the lips) and ‘homophenes’ – an expression I’d never heard before and raised a few eyebrows in the office but basically means words that look the same on the lips – such as ‘share’ and ‘chair’.

Based on the experience so far, this looks like being one of the hardest qualifications I’ve ever studied for. Hopefully once I’ve completed it I’ll open up new employment opportunities with the Secret Service. However, given all the complexities of trying to read lips, I’ll only be able to help if the people I’m lip reading speak English, in a regional accent I’m familiar with (Hampshire Carrot Cruncher), are only 3 to 6 feet away, are in good light, looking straight at me and not covering their mouths in any way. I reckon the work’s going to flood in 😉