Digital Cameras, iPhones, and Other Interfaces

Perception and Representation in Analog and Digital Cameras

The digital camera profoundly affects the way we perceive and represent the world around us on "film".

To start with, the user of the analog camera used to watch the world, however indirectly. All that stood between him and reality was the viewer of his apparatus. He recorded what he saw "out there".

In contrast, the user of the digital camera watches a representation of the world on a screen. He records what he sees on the screen of his gadget. He rarely glances up to gaze directly at his subject matter.

The digital camera is more forgiving and permissive. Errors can be instantly deleted. The whole experience is characterized by an urgency and immediacy that is absent from the analog equivalent. The digital camera allows its user to experiment with cost-free and, therefore, risk-free alternatives. It transforms the whole procedure of shooting pictures into a spontaneous, even irreverent, experience.

Environmental facts that used to serve as external constraints with the analog camera - the quantity and angle of light, for instance - are now compensated for by special settings in its digital successor. The typical gadget provides for preset "templates" that capture the moment in an optimal manner, removing obstacles and limitations posed by the photographer's physical surroundings.

The digital photo is never a finished product. It can be downloaded onto a storage device (a computer's hard disk, the Internet) and there edited with software applications. Reality is thus rendered tentative and negotiable, a declaration of intent rather than a final statement.

Note on the iPhone - Interview granted to san Jose Mercury Sun, June 2007

The iPhone is the culmination and reification of a few such trends and, to hazard a guess, will, indeed, be proven in hindsight to have been even more important than the iPod or even the Blackberry. But importance does not always translate to sales. In commercial terms, the iPhone is comparable to the Mac, not to the iPod. It is too geeky and nerdy to become a household staple. It will be supplanted by something simpler to operate, accessible, and less intimidating, not to mention less expensive and more universal (e.g., not pledged to one phone service provider, like AT&T).So, why is it important?Because, though severely limited by way of options and features, the iPhone embodies the seamless convergence of erstwhile separate appliances such as the digital camera, the MP player, the mobile phone, voicemail, and the PC. It is, therefore, the first true proponent of ubiquitous (anywhere) computing. Its connection to iTunes also makes it the first representative of a workable on-the-go infotainment center (though mobile phone are far from ideal venues as far as video goes).Doubtlessly, it will be succeeded by far more versatile and feature-rich versions. Undoubtedly, it will face stiff competition. But, whether like iPod, it will maintain a first mover advantage remain to be seen. I doubt it.

The history of technology is the history of interfaces - their successes and failures. The GUI (the Graphic User Interface), which replaced cumbersome and unwieldy text-based interfaces (DOS), became an integral part of the astounding success of the PC.

Yet, all computer interfaces hitherto share the same growth-stunting problems. They are:

1. Non-transparency - the workings of the hardware and software (the "plumbing") show through;

2. Non-ubiquity - the interface is connected to a specific machine or application and, thus, is non-transportable and non-transferrable;

3. Arcane user-unfriendliness (i.e., to operate, the interfaces require specific knowledge and the entry of sequences of commands using a specialized syntax).

Even the most "user-friendly" interface is way too complicated for the typical user. The average PC is hundreds of times more complex than your living-room TV. Even the VCR or DVD players - far less complex than the PC - are challenging. How many people use the full range of a VCR's options?The ultimate interface should be:

1. Self-assembling - it should reconstruct itself, from time to time, fluidly;

2. Self-recursive - it should be able to observe and analyze its own behavior;

3. Learning-capable - it should learn from its experience;

4. Self-modifying - it should modify itself according to its accumulated experience;

5. History-recording;

6. Media indifferent (it should span and encompass your hard disk, movable media, network, and the Web).

The interface of the future must possess a "picture of the world" (a-la artificial intelligence), preferably including itself, the user, and their cumulative interactions.

It must regard all other "intelligent" machines in its "world"  (the user being only one of them) as its "clients" and be able to communicate with them in a natural language.

Its universe must be seamless: the physical or virtual location of files or hardware or software or applets or servers or communication lines or information and so on must be irrelevant.

It will probably be peer-orientated (no hierarchy).

I call it "the intuitive universal interface".

The new media technologies were designed by engineers and programmers - not by marketing people and users. The interface of the future will reflect the needs, wishes, limitations, and skills of users. This is a revolutionary shift and a natural outcome of the takeover of the Internet by governments and bottom line orientated corporations. The interface of the future will seek to enhance usage and enrich the user's experience - not to win technological beauty contests. It is a welcome transition and long overdue.

APPENDIX - The Search Engines of the Future

The search engines of the future are likely to offer the following:

1. A seamless search of your hard disk, movable media, network, and the Web using a common interface and the same dialog.

2. Localized search results with relevant advertising using geolocation services.

3. Alerts in search results regarding HTML pages that execute malicious code (spyware, adware, Trojan downloaders) when you visit them (already available from Google and Yahoo).4. WHOIS records specific to the domains in search results.