Apple Insider, others get it wrong: the story is the iPodCam, NOT the Bezel
Yesterday, my post EXCLUSIVE: New Apple Patent art I show you here may point to iPod with camera wentinto specific details about how the functionality described in the patent application seemed to point to an IPod-like device with camera functionality.Although I did note that other sites had this story first, I've decided to go back and review exactly how they treated this issue.
Although I did note that other sites had this story first, I've decided to go back and review exactly how they treated this issue.
From a read of the usually-accurate Apple Insider, it seems as though what is most important to them in this filing is the touch-sensitivity of the iPod being described and diagramed in the application.
Only after they and others (TechNewsWorld/McClatchy-Tribune News Service) go on and on about the Bezel do some talk about the fact that what appears to be described here is an integrated music player and camera.
While I think that the Bezel touch-sensitivity is cool, I don't think that what Apple Insider and other sites are writing is the point here.
I write a lot about handheld devices (I'm the lead blogger about BBHub) and I get to see what really matters to users.
And what matters to users is not so much the journey- i.e., the navigation and the controls- but what the device will do for you and how well it does it.
Like, for example, the ability of a user with a device that is described in the filing to take their iPod with them, shoot a few pix via the large number of controls included on the device, and then toggle over and play a few tunes. ITunes, that is.
When you are taking your pix or listening to your music - on the same device- you are not thinking about the navigation that got you there. You are thinking about the combined functionality of the device, and presumably, how cool it is.
Maybe I am missing a point here, but that's what the term "user experience" mostly means