Finally the iPad is available in Belgium and The Netherlands

I’ve spent the past few weeks feeling really bad traveling around Europe with my iPad. My friends and colleagues get to touch my iPad but can’t have one of their own – although several have threatened to prevent me leaving the building with it.

Fear not my friends… come next Friday you can have one of your own. :-

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Dating Audio & Video Recordings by Power Line Fluctuations

Via Bruce Schneier and not directly relevant to my day job of creating/preserving patent evidence but really interesting nonetheless… apparently the police can date recordings by matching up the fluctuating frequencies of power lines.

As anyone who has played with an oscilloscope knows, the 50Hz hum from mains power does show up at a low level pretty much anywhere and these make it through to the recording. It seems these fluctuations create a unique signature in time, and so they just keep a record of the power line frequency deviations over time. When they need to find out when a recording was made they can just match up the mains power fluctuations on the recording with what’s in their database.

Not majorly useful for our purposes, but a really interesting approach to authenticating evidence all the same.

Posted in Random | Leave a comment

A vendor’s internal organization often determines usability

Few (if any) scientific software vendors have the scale of companies like Apple and can poor millions of dollars into Usability testing – the market just isn’t large enough to support that, and even if we had the money I doubt we could find enough willing volunteers. Producing usable software in this market requires a somewhat different approach.

In an article on 52 weeks of UX, exploring “The Distance Between Maker and User” the following principle is espoused:

As the distance between the maker and user increases, so does the difficulty of designing a great user experience.

This is our approach to usability – we make sure the Geeks are never too far away from the end user, and we achieve this in the following fairly simple ways:

  • The people responsible for writing our products support them. We don’t have a support team – the guys helping our customers are the ones who you will speak to if you have a problem or need advice. This is probably the our effective way of increasing usability because not only do the developers get swift feedback on their decisions, they have an incentive to engineer out problems at source.
  • We regularly review the kinds of issues we’re getting and see if we can make them go away entirely. Sometimes this is a re-worded screen, sometimes it is removing a step or component completely. I appreciate lots of vendors do this as part of a standard quality process, although we tend to do it in fairly tight feedback loops.
  • We use the product internally. Did you know that PatentSafe makes an excellent financial records system? :-) . Not only does that mean we have internal customers who deliver feedback every day, but the developers (and managers!) interact with our products daily. You’d be surprised how many little tweaks come out of this, things that customers probably notice but don’t think it is worth bothering us with.
  • Our Sales, Development, Admin and Management teams are all co-located in the same office space, which means there’s lots of gentle interaction and sharing of context. It is interesting how often a problem in one area can be resolved in another. There are some problems with this because the different functions have different working styles (for example sales people switch context every 10 – 30 minutes, developers every few hours) but some simple informal rules make things easier.

Every time we bring someone new on board they are surprised that we aren’t more “formally” organised, but so far this setup has really helped us. It does mean we need to check that techies also have people skills, that our admin people need to be slightly more techie, and our sales people do need some involvement in the more geeky side of the shop. However it does seem to work very well for us, as demonstrated by the short training period that new users need to get up to speed with our ELN, and also the low volume of support calls we get (which apparently is very low compared to most software vendors).

Interestingly once new employees get over the initial shock of the proximity of roles, they really enjoy the richer environment it creates.

Having a small distance between the designers and developers is something that happened when we were a small startup, but I’ve come to view it as tremendously important for our ongoing success.

Posted in Amphora, ELN Design | Leave a comment

It isn’t about the features, it’s about the design

The iPad continues to provoke a whole load of interesting discussions about the fundamentals of computing and of course that causes us to reflect on our ELN on other platforms, not just the iPad.

I’m intrigued how using an iPad causes me to think differently about user experience, and perhaps raise my expectations of what is a possible and indeed necessary.

I was reminded of this post on the ACM talking about “Why Features Don’t Matter Anymore” from 2006, where Andreas Pfeiffer talks about “the age of user experience”. He gives 10 rules about user experience:

  1. More features isn’t better, it’s worse.
  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 only be adopted by a small fraction of users.
  7. Unused features are not only useless, they can slow you down and diminish ease of use.
  8. Users do not want to think about technology: what really counts is what it does for them.
  9. Forget about the killer feature. Welcome to the age of the killer user-experience.
  10. Less is difficult, that’s why less is more

We’ve just had one of our regular consultations with an Information Architect (IA) and even though we’ve attempted to keep PatentSafe as clean as possible, the results were enlightening. A fresh pair of eyes asking “Why are you bothering the user with that?” is always enlightening (and humbling!).

More features, especially when shoved in the user’s face, do not make for a better user experience. The user experience is one of the most important factors in the ability of any ELN project to deliver the return on investment it promised to stakeholders. That ability to deliver a return is a key aspect of any project’s success.

Interestingly we get two different reactions from customers when they look at our PatentSafe ELN.

  • In the sales process we often get asked “Is that it?” in a rather disappointed tone when we’ve demonstrated the product – of course it isn’t but we don’t overwhelm people with features in the Demo – we talk about the things relevant to to their business problem. PatentSafe is designed such that you don’t have to wrap your head around everything to understand the positive impact PatentSafe can have on your life.
  • Later when training, we get the same “Is that it?” but in a much happier way. Yes, with 15 minutes training and very little disruption to your existing workflow you can stop having to cut and stick, and move to a completely electronic world with all the benefits that brings.

One small anecdote might serve: We periodically survey our customers and one of the questions is “How long does it take to train your users”. One large pharma customer responded (slightly tongue in cheek I guess)

“45 minutes. 15 minutes to show them the system, and then another 30 minutes to convince them they already know everything they need to know”

Just because a product is powerful and can deliver a great ROI doesn’t mean it has to be complex. In fact, that’s the whole point of good design… I can’t claim we’re perfect but a good dose of Information Architecture really helps.

(most IAs work freelance – we are lucky to have worked with Karen Roles of Nidbe since we’ve started, and would highly recommend her to anyone. She delivers the sometimes painful medicine with a distinct charm… and you know it is doing you good)

Posted in ELN Design | Leave a comment

ELNs and Data Portability

I recall back in the late 90′s a lot of discussion at CENSA meetings about the need to move data between different systems, and of course from one ELN to another. From the customer’s perspective it is a really important issue although sadly one that doesn’t get enough attention until they are committed to a vendor – and of course it isn’t in the Vendor’s interest to allow you to take your data somewhere else… to a competing product for example. We even sponsored the development of CENSML (Collaborative Electronic Notebook Systems Markup Language) which was meant with complete apathy and interestingly no one else proposed anything similar.

So at this time the data portability situation in the ELN world is pretty awful. Which is a shame, and at some point people are going to start noticing – and perhaps the next round of ELN purchases will have open file formats as a purchasing consideration.

I came across the Data Portability project in this article on Tech Crunch which seems to be a really nice way of at least making the Data Portability issues obvious to consumers. They are starting off in the online web app area but clearly it is very relevant to any IT system, either cloud-based or on premises.

For the record, Amphora’s systems are completely open – our view is that it is your data and you should be able to take it where you want, when you want, without even having to involve us.

In addition, our focus on IP means we need to be able to reassure our customers that they can take a record out of our ELN and defend their IP long after their relationship with Amphora has come to a close – with a 50 or 100 year retention timescale, requiring the vendor to be around just isn’t acceptable (which is a big concern with services that claim to outsource IP protection, something I’ll blog on in due course).

We take this a step further in our Hosted/SaaS offerings, where customers can take a copy of their data (via rsync or similar) onto another server controlled by them every night. We also work with those customers to make sure they can spin up their own server as needed. This means that even where we’re Hosting them, they can tell us our services aren’t required and still have complete access to their data without any cooperation for us.

We believe that open data, neutral file formats, powerful APIs and above all a respectful policy to our customer’s IP are the cornerstone of any ELN vendor’s offering.

Our next web site refresh will contain our Data Portability policy. In the meantime I can only hope that as various advocacy groups get more vocal about the need for Facebook, Twitter and others to unlock your data, that will cause Data Portability to be given the consideration it deserves in the ELN world.

Posted in Industry, Records Management, SaaS | Leave a comment
Private
This website uses a Hackadelic PlugIn, Hackadelic Sliding Notes 1.6.4.