Borrowing
from the 1986 song The Boy In The Bubble written by Paul Simon and
Forere Mothoeloa, I declare:
These are
the days of wearables and wonders. This
is my smart-phone call. The way its
camera follows me in slo-mo; staccato signals of constant information, a loose
affiliation of millionaires and billionaires and baby, don’t cry, don’t cry.
These
seeming fragments are quite real. So
real, for those who have a stake in them; the corporations, mobile App
developers, thought leaders, entrepreneurs and least of all, those global
consumers for whom the Economics of wearables depends, fragmentation is perceived
to be the central hurdle, most especially in the realm of Data and Digital
Health.
In Barcelona, from February 24-27, 2014 The Mobile World Congress will convene and its attendees will take
on many of the perceived opportunities and issues presented by the worldwide
adoption and use of mobile-based products.
The event’s organizers assert that “Mobile is a catalyst of
change and innovation. Mobile is creating the next connected device that
transforms communication. Advancing the next payment system that alters
commerce. Launching the next must-have app that changes how we interact.”
Among these catalysts, changes, innovations and transformations are
concepts like connected living, data analytics, developing markets, intelligent
networks, identity and privacy, network economics and optimization. Each of
them will be a focus of discussion, debate and dissection in Barcelona. But most compelling is an afternoon session
scheduled on the last day of The Mobile
World Congress: “Redefining Reality with Screens, Storage & Wearables.”
While compelling, the session is also provocative and
presumptuous. A sojourn to Barcelona is
in fact, not a prerequisite for asking these fundamental questions: Whose reality will
be redefined? What values will be present in such re-engineering? How will our
relationship with our augmented bodies redefine
our expectations of Self?
Not long after smart-phones were introduced, I sought to
redefine my own reality by first
recognizing the implicit design limits of smart-phones. Their basic physicality; viewed as a function
of my biology, was an instance of the classic [and much discussed] tension of
form versus function.
Since my first prosthetic fitting at the pioneering Rusk Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine in New York City, I have spent most of my
life maneuvering objects, tools and tangible space with a prosthetic arm. Those daily negotiations are, to some degree,
self-imposed. It is my choice to augment
my body with a device as ancient as the Egyptians.
Some decline
prostheses for the very reasons some consumers decline to purchase smart-phones.
Neither is essential to one’s life. Cost
is another factor. There is lack of
demand by some would-be consumers owing to perceptions of value, need and
usefulness. Also, the requisite
learning unique to the mechanics and use of both, respectively, hinder their purchase
and adoption.
Viewed categorically,
prosthetics and smart-phones occupy a place among the disparate; cached among
the fragmentation of data and among the Internet of things. Their convergence, as I first became
conscious of it, was an opportunity to imagine a re-purposing; to lay claim to
an embodiment of a 21st
Century Self. Critical however, was
first acknowledging the limitations
of prosthetics and smart-phones when viewed as separate entities.
To associate smart-phones with ‘limitations’ runs counter to
their current and ever-growing predicted global demand, profit-schemas, cultural
and societal prevalence and marketing.
Such is the primary and unconscious native prejudice of a
two-handed marketplace!
The most expedient explanation of smart-phone ‘limitations’
relies on the verbiage used during their initial consumer introduction: Handhelds.
As a matter of design, holding the
device of one’s choosing in one’s hand and manipulating its interface is the universal
starting place. Having another hand to
anchor or stabilize the hand-held / smart-phone; while optional, is the
overwhelming default among users.
Their limits then, as viewed from a one-handed perspective,
are quite obvious. Layered upon this
‘scarcity’ of the body, are our Mobile
lives; often requiring us to hold our mobile devices in one hand and perform a
whole range of tasks with the presumed ‘other’ hand.
Re-purposing technology is sometimes pursued
collaboratively. In my case, it was a
requirement of breathing life into my vision of creating a hands-free
smart-phone —a wearable computer relevant not just as a solution to the problem
of scarcity but a design transferable to many different Mobile contexts and
users.
A complete re-making
of my prosthetic platform was prefaced by a design-based conversation with Dr.
Stephan Manucharian, Clinical Director at Othopedic Arts in New York City. Customization is never negotiated in the
fabrication of prosthetics or orthotics.
It is the de facto standard.
While
a one-size-fits-all approach is never a part of the manufacturing process [as
it is in many other manufacturing environments] there are certain mechanistic
and design features which are viewed as ‘standard.’ The socket, for example [pictured] is usually
rounded, not flattened.
All designs, as part of their chronology from idea to their practical
application, their usability, require testing.
Some refer to this as “proof of concept.” Nearly three years have elapsed since I began
my wearable trajectory; since taking on a relationship with what is both
ancient and new.
Taking my discoveries to scale will require additional
collaborations; perhaps most importantly, where self-powered mobile devices are
concerned. Indeed, powering our mobile-enhanced
lives is fundamental to our re-engineering. I view it as an especially exciting aspect of
my 21st Century embodiment.
“Wearable technology.
It’s an exploding product category in desperate need of a
category-defining product,” began Jon Phillips in his PC World piece titled: Wearable Tech at CES 2014: Prepare your body
parts for an onslaught of options.
Wearables require a category-defining product? My
re-defined reality is brimming with categorical evidence. Its embodiment is already here. And much of the data favors Digital Health.
I welcome these days
of wearables and wonders.
This is my smart-phone call.
No comments:
Post a Comment