Jeremy and Steve asked me to write something about the BumpTop desktop, which was introduced a while ago but shows a lot of promise (see the the video below). To be honest, I’m suffering a little from fanboy-fatigue, in that there is so much cool stuff coming out and I feel like I would just be repeating what everyone else has already said. Therefore, I’ll let you be the judge. Watch the video, and more words from me after that.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ]

I’m personally quite impressed by this, though the danger is really that it comes to look like Al Gore’s desktop, a problem some (including me) suffer from. Before writing this post, I did a little research on design, and particularly designing for interaction, as I think that is a vital ingredient software today is often missing. I mean, we really are generally stuck in a 2-dimensional environment and there doesn’t seem to be much useful innovation.

Note the ‘useful,’ as I think there is some innovation, but not all of it really makes a difference. The Compiz/Beryl looks very fluid, but so far fluidity in real life seems only useful in a shower and very messy in other situations. The Jeffrey Han-video is very hypnotic, with its cool Kruder and Dorfmeister-soundtrack, but equally hypnotic is the scene in star-wars, where Luke flies through the death-star trying to hit that one vulnerable spot. It’s cool, but is it useful? Note that I’m not even mentioning Windows or OSX. But maybe I’m over-sceptical.

Designing for interaction. An intriguing concept. According to Bruce Tognazzini, designer extraordinaire, there are a number of rules or rather principles that govern designing software that makes sense to a user. These are:

• Anticipation: of the needs of the users, rather than making him look for them
• Autonomy: to learn and create personalised environments
• Color Blindness: ca. 10% of people suffer from this
• Consistency: “Make objects consistent with their behavior. Make objects that act differently look different.”
• Defaults: preset behaviours, which can easily be changed to fit a user’s needs
• Efficiency of the User: “Look at the user’s productivity, not the computer’s”
• Explorable Interfaces: giving users the freedom to dig deep, while not forgetting the ‘undo’ function
• Fitts’ Law: “the time to acquire a target is a function of the distance to and size of the target.” More here.
• Human Interface Objects: which we as humans can understand, perceive, and interact with in a to-us logical way.
• Latency Reduction: because waiting sucks.
• Learnability: by creating functions both easy to understand and useful.
• Metaphors, Use of: are a good way to make complex operations understandable to the user.
• Protect Users’ Work: still not happening properly today.
• Readability: also for older people
• Track State: so that people who also live in the real world (everyone I hope) can come back to the same place they left off.
• Visible Navigation: reduce it to a minimum and make what is left clear and natural.

You can read the full, written in 2003, text here.

So does all this apply to the BumpTop desktop? Too early to say, and some of it will probably be out of the developers’ control. I still think, while holding my fanboy’ism back, that this is a step in the right direction: designing interfaces that are compatible with the way we interact with the real world.

What do you think, is BumpTop moving in the right direction? Would you like to see more or something entirely different? Let us know in the comments.

Like

Unlike

Felt like sharing some thoughts on SaaS with you today – those who already know something about SaaS won’t learn anything from me here – and I’m willing to learn if you’re in the mood to comment. But those who are discovering what Software as a Service is might find something to take away.

1) SaaS doesn’t equal ASP, and conversely

Many people, mostly entrepreneurs, use the expressions ‘ASP’ (application service provider) and ‘SaaS’ as if these 2 concepts meant similar things. Which isn’t the case actually.

• ASP is an IT infrastructure access mode that refers to accessing applications located on remote servers. In other words, ASP architectures are client – remote server architectures where the server is more distant to the client than in ‘usual‘ client – server configurations.

• SaaS is an entire new business model that can be assimilated to OnDemand, or pay-as-you-go software. Nothing to do with IT architecture stuff. With SaaS, one may either rent a service (a service based on a software) monthly or only when the service is being used, for instance.

In short, SaaS is a business model thing whilst ASP is an IT infrastructure architecture thing. Btw, I find the use of the term ASP obsolete whilst mentioning SaaS just rocks at the moment (see 5)).

2) Sell service, not software!

It’s hard for me to say so, I spend my time promoting software. But if you sell service, you’ll speak to functional executives and if your solution addresses a sound need – the you’ll close deals. If you just sell software, then it’s likely that you’ll get to talk with the CIO team and things might get a lot tougher for you if you’re not 100% clean on a number of things including accountability, traceability, confidentiality, accessibility and security issues. Functional execs meet with a handful of guys like you on a yearly basis whilst CIO teams meet hundreds so they’ll naturally be more selective.

In other words, SaaS sells better when presented like a service, so don’t mention software at all when selling to clients. Allow your clients to try your service for free with no down investment (low entry barriers) for a while, then pay when they’re satisfied, and leave if they find your service doesn’t match their expectations anymore (low exit barriers).

3) Treat your clients as partners, not clients – keeping in mind that some will be more equal than others…

Treat SaaS clients like partners: let them suggest new features for your product road map, and tell them you will integrate these features for all your customers without having clients pay more for it than they currently do.

4) Understand your client’ organization and adapt your pricing structure: target local P&L rather than global B/S

If your client is a decentralized organization, go for a pricing that involves all different entities (eg profit centers) so that you don’t impact the IT budget (no balance sheet investment) but all the local profit center expense accounts rather (billing demultiplication makes you invisible to corporate cost cutters in case of a downturn).

5) SaaS is a current VC buzz word

For something like 9 months now, venture capitalists have all become all crazy about SaaS. I, and they, know it’s just a buzz word, a cosmetic thing – but it works so what can I, they do? You’ll score points if you mention SaaS during your pitch – and loose them if you mention ASP as well in the same presentation.

Nota Bene: chart from Fred Chong’s top blog.

Like

Unlike