The electro-bass voided, the rock and roll of the high-tide faded, the scene of holiday boaters and people dancing on boats for the sake of a three day weekend blurred into a distant background and suddenly my ears fell numb to all but the words “Finding these vulnerabilities, you can train a monkey to do it… But at the same time, hacking is about the path of least resistance. There’s no need to overly complicate things if a simple sequel injection can work.”
Those chilling words, spoken by Patrick Stoey, a key contributor to the Biggest Cyber Crime in History, were recanted in the June 10th issue of Rolling Stone. Albert Gonzalez, commonly hailed the “Capone” of Cyber Crime, enlisted Stoey and dozens of other hackers to execute some of the most sophisticated hacking heists of all time- targeting hundreds of high-profile companies like TJ Maxx, Barnes & Noble, and 7-11. The most pervasive of them all pirated the credit card numbers of over 130 million Heartland Payment Systems customers.
I put the magazine down for a minute to digest what I’d just read. As sympathetic for the victims as I naturally wanted to feel, my rationale classified both parties as naive. If a monkey had the brains to make off with hundreds of millions of credit cards and check out with millions in cash from a series of hacks that impacted an unquantifiable number of people, then “farming” money from 400 App Store Users seems like no-brainer to me.
Catching both stories simultaneously put a lens on the state of my own information security, pin-pointing it’s gaping holes and flimsy insulation and the more I sought to isolate my vulnerabilities, the more of myself the lens began to reveal. In a World boasting ease of access, we can quickly and efficiently maneuver into, out of, and between windows. So easily in fact, that we’ve begun treating them like the ones on our homes, leaving them open for a cool draft of cyber crime to circulate within and swiftly cash out. As the evolution of Web 2.0 has begun shaping the way we work, it has blindsidedly begun to shape the way we are.
Our everyday social behavior on Web 2.0 and mobile applications, can tell us a lot about our vulnerability to cyber crime because web applications and related technologies accounted for 82% of all security vulnerabilities on the web last year, according to a report released by Cenzic, a leader in web application security. More sobering than that, are the vulnerabilities themselves- Cyber Criminals not only capture our private data but our behavior as well. The top ten vulnerabilities on the web today fit seamlessly into the little things we do online everyday, living on the profiles of those we “add as a friend” but vaguely know at all, yet we trust to share our play-by-plays with and trust the info they share too. They patiently wade in the background of sidebar widgets on websites we trust enough to visit everyday. They hang out behind the buttons we so love… I mean “Like.” They dress themselves up as character limit-friendly little links and do all of the things we do on the websites we visit most
Using a scenario we commonly run into on Facebook as an example, the Flow Chart below demonstrates the ease of access a hacker has to execute the top ten types of attack mechanisms on the web today in one fell swoop.
On Wednesday, January 27, 2010, the tech world was abuzz. Apple had just announced their latest shiny new toy: the iPad.
For the weeks and months following, the announcement has been met with mixed reviews. In one camp, people have labeled it as just an oversized iPhone that was not quite phone, not quite computer. In another, it has been heralded as something that can be expected to revolutionize the gadget industry and way we interact with technology in ways we’ve seen Apple products do in the past. Within Critical Mass, we also had many discussions about the potential impact of Apple’s new iPad. Regardless of our discussions and each person’s opinion about the iPad, one thing was sure: There was a lot of excitement – especially at the prospect of designing some of the first iPad apps for our clients.
Rather than talk about the impact of the iPad on our industry and market (if you want a great read on the subject, see Neil Clemmon’s post here on Experience Matters), this post discusses some of the things we’ve learned about iPad app design and development through our own experience with some of our savvy clients. Through the course of our work with iPad apps, six main guiding principles have surfaced:
#1 – Realize that an iPad app does not equate to a scaled-up iPhone app.
This first principle is essential to embrace. From a logistical design and development perspective, the iPad app specs are obviously very different from an iPhone, and the effort required means the iPad design and development is essentially starting from scratch. It’s best to start with that assumption, rather than the assumption that the existing infrastructure of an iPhone app can be leveraged to shorten the iPad app production cycle. More importantly, an iPad should not be the equivalent to a scaled-up iPhone app from a philosophical perspective. Why? Read on.
#2 – Think customer usage.
The context of how, where, and when a customer will use an iPad, compared with how they would use an iPhone, a desktop or a laptop is essential to consider when designing an iPad app. This is one of the core reasons why iPad apps are not scaled-up iPhone apps. While a person may be highly mobile with their phone, using it everywhere and in spurts, they will likely be less mobile with their iPad. Similarly, they would be more mobile, casual, and spontaneous in their use of an iPad than with a desktop or laptop. So the apps designed for an iPad are ones that should suit that usage – casual, sit-down, spontaneous, but with more time for exploration and engagement than with an iPhone app. The other use case scenario that will be very powerful for iPad apps is in the realm of sales. Sales training, content, education, and product exploration. I’ll leave that with you to chew on.
#3 – Create utility.
The same principle in the creation of an iPhone app relates to the iPad app: utility. More specifically, customer utility. How will the app add value for a customer? Will it be functional, inspirational, educational, entertaining? Whatever the motivation, it needs to fill a niche in the lives of target customers to engage and encourage repeat use. We accomplish this by building an app that brings utility and value to a customer so they want to use it when they need and when they want. The key is providing an app that fills a need or generates a want.
It’s clear consumers are hungry for mobile applications, having downloaded more than 3 billion apps from the Apple app store as of March 2010, according to eMarketer. The growing popularity of this channel has led to an increased desire to find a way to market to our mobile consumers. In response to this, Apple has recently acquired Quattro Wireless (after having AdMob snatched up by Google) to create the iAd advertising platform that will launch with the iPhone 4G this summer. Now the question is, how will iAd change how brands approach marketing within mobile applications?
A common debate among the Critical Mass Experience Distribution team is whether there is a “correct approach” to mobile applications.
When do you recommend creating one?
What value will the mobile application serve vs. that of the mobile website?
How should we market this application?
How much money, time and effort should be put into it?
One might argue that building an application but not putting a marketing effort behind it is similar to the “if a tree falls in the forest but no one is there to hear it” concept. If we determine that we don’t have the money, resources or rationale to build and market our own application, do we sponsor a relevant existing app that another brand hasn’t gotten to first?
The launch of the iAd offers a new option. We will soon have the ability to build an experience as robust as an application and be able to syndicate it out as an ad within the application environment.
Let’s take a deeper look at what makes the iAd platform unique compared to other mobile platforms:
1. Dual Interaction
iAd allows users to interact with the rich media ad without losing the application that they had opened prior to engaging with the ad. This dual action was not possible before the launch of the iPhone 4G. Now consumers can click on ads with the reassurance that they will not lose what they were previously engaging with. This dual involvement will certainly lead to more mobile ad interaction.
2. More Robust
The ads that Apple is building for the mobile platform act more like applications or microsites than standard mobile advertisements. The ads are able to contain videos, games, content, images, etc. Users are able to expand the ads over any application, allowing the ad to take full screen. (Check out Jobs’ demo.)
Today, if there’s one thing FITC is known for, it’s inspiration. In less than a decade since its first incarnation as a Toronto-based festival celebrating Flash, FITC has spread around the world and broadened its scope. Now, there’s something for everyone: writers, designers, developers, or creative explorers. It’s that spark of inspiration that unifies the speakers and attendees. I’d like to think it’s that same spark that inspired the entrepreneurs to create Flash (FutureSplash Animator, at the time), and possibly the same spark that inspired the first flock of flashy individuals to come together and create this event.
As if the speakers, networking and parties weren’t enough to bring people together, each year the event is centered on a theme. This year’s “Playground” theme was most evident in the speaker introductions. Each introduction was pre-recorded (and edited) by event creator, Shawn Pucknell’s young daughters. And while it would have been funny, I’m glad they didn’t do this introduction for the “Cool Shit Hour”. Alternatively, they could have just called it the “Cool Stuff Hour”. But that doesn’t seem to have the same impact.
The “Cool Shit” presenters included myself, Chris Allen (blog.ff9900.org), Didier Brun (@didierbyte), Joa Ebert (@joa), & Mikko Haapoja (@MikkoH). And in spite of some technical difficulties, great work was shown. Didier got the whole room singing “Hey Jude” with his great audio analysis prototypes, Joa live-coded a music visualizer with his notorious keyless keyboard. Mikko showed his devotion to creative development with a 3D painting app created using the Voxel Engine/Fancy Engine. And Chris demoed an awesome Star Wars Trench Run game for the iPhone. With each of the 5 presenters getting roughly 10 minutes each, I’m glad there wasn’t enough time for any Apple/iPhone remarks.
It often takes months to develop a website or digital program. After tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, persona development, creative reviews, usability testing and some long nights, launch date is a huge milestone. But often times after a site goes live the client is ready to move on to the next project. However, it is in the post launch period that we can actually have the most impact and ensure that all the time and money we spent is paying off. Website optimization, the process of making continual improvements to the site in order to increase performance, can help make our clients, and ourselves, look like rock stars.
Part of website optimization comes from reporting. Every marketing initiative should have goals, and it is the Marketing Science Department’s job to define and track progress against these goals. Through reporting, we can identify underperforming areas and make recommendations for improvement. When we combine reporting with testing we can start to understand not only what is working, but why it is working as well.
Almost every aspect of a digital program can come under debate; page layouts, calls to action, image size and page colors are just a few things that can be contested.
A testing program could help settle these debates and optimize the experience to meet our marketing objectives and more importantly our customer’s goals.
In a nut shell, testing is the process by which we test different versions of a web page on the live site environment and then, through scientific methods, declare a winner of the test (the page that has best shown the ability to best convert visitors to do the actions that we want them to do).
The simplest form of testing is an A/B test. We pick a site goal, like conversion from a landing page, and then measure how different versions of this page perform against our goal. With tools like Omniture’s Test & Target or Google’s Website Optimizer we can serve up pages that have different images, copy or other treatments in real time and measure the results against a control page.
Page A is our control; it has not had any changes made to it. On page B, we can start to swap things out; it could be a new image or a different call to action. We run our test and find that visitors who saw page B had a 300% higher conversion rate than those who saw page A!
How many of your banners are running on x-rated sites?
How many are running below the fold?
Or running in countries outside the US?
Now the moment of truth: Does the network you’re partnering with even know the answer to these questions?
As networks and exchanges continue to expand, it becomes more difficult for them to provide the 100% transparency they promise. Recently we’ve seen companies, such as Double Verify, step into the vendor space and try to police it. Double Verify uses their detection technology to find: hidden iframes within network properties that lead to x-rated sites, banners running below the fold beyond what you were promised, or impressions that have been incorrectly geo-targeted. But can these ad verification companies really stop the corruption happening behind the scenes? The answer… Not really. As Brian Morrissey points out, “Misplaced ads aren’t a problem unique to the Internet, but the digital medium, with its millions of sites, magnifies the risk.”
These protection tools do a great job of crawling the web and finding fraud. Once fraud is discovered, the agency verifying tool and the network vendor discuss where the error occurred and what to provide in added-value to cover the mistake. But that’s really only solving the problem one brand at a time. Will this monitoring insert enough fear into the hearts of networks to begin their own process of weeding out bad site partners and poorly monitored targeting techniques? I think that’s something we’ll have to wait and see. As Morrissey reported from a source at Media Math, “The future is in the prevention technologies.”
In the meantime, tools like Double Verify can help regain impressions lost to banner fraud while keeping networks in check. But that is still one site negotiation at a time and it happens after the fact. For brand-driven clients, they need to demand more of networks and hold them accountable. To implement these crawlers (without a fee to the advertiser), verifying partners need to be alerted and fees need to be negotiated into each partnership insertion order to ensure that campaigns are tracked correctly. Or as a co-worker of mine put it, “It seems like agencies have to do double the work just to get an honest view of a campaign. Shouldn’t the networks do this for us?”
I suspect in time the advertising networks will start to feel the pressure of someone watching their every move and begin to implement more defenses on their own exchanges to prevent this type of fraud… or they might just sit at their desks with their doors closed and hope this whole verifying thing just blows over.
What should smart marketers do in the meantime? While the fraud tools aren’t perfect, they’re still a step in the right direction. Ensure that Double Verify (or a similar vendor like Cyveillance, Adsafe, or Collective Networks) is part of every network buy. If not for any of the reasons listed above, it will help show which networks are committing a higher level of fraud and help guide you to choosing correct network partnerships for future campaigns.
Anna Mer is a Media Manager out of the Chicago office.
There’s a lot being written about the iPad – reviews, new applications, the ongoing debate on Flash, what the device does and what it doesn’t do.
Beyond the device, however, there are some implications and the longer-term impact it will have as we create digital experiences. New devices and interfaces have a profound impact on consumer expectations, competitive moves, and the evolution of digital interfaces. The Wii ushered in new interface concepts and ideas. Same with xBox and xBox Live. The iPad will do the same in its influence on the conventions and expectations of our industry.
We have several of the Wifi iPads in our offices and have had a number of discussions with our team about its implications. Some see immediate opportunities for the iPad to ‘fit in’ to their lifestyles. Others are still debating if it replaces something or is a supplemental access and consumption device. It’s bigger than a phone with no ability to do more than SKYPE calls. But it’s not quite a notebook with all the file access and productivity tools – so the iPad makes compromises in both directions. The limitations will change in time as new applications, new peripherals, an updated OS, and improved connectivity come.
One thing the smartphone and iPad do is to force a focus on ‘what’s important’ versus ‘what’s possible.’ As sites or applications evolve, they become more bloated, more confusing, and lose the punch they can have. Redesigns of a site or an application can be liberating, in removing the old conventions. But invariably we worry about ‘moving the cheese’ of the habituated consumer and thus add rather than subtract in making experience design tradeoffs. This is where Apple and the developers of iPad apps demonstrated tremendous courage in leaving behind the conventional interfaces and tools. We need more courage to advance the customer experience.
What’s the take away after a week of using the iPad from an experience standpoint?
Here are the 7 Areas of Implications for digital marketers:
#1 – Fragmentation.
Josh Bernoff (Forrester) wrote about the Splinternet earlier this year. That theme is in full force on the iPad. Media and content fragmentation continue as new devices enable content consumption in new and different formats. Information ubiquity that started with the smartphone is further exacerbated with a new form factor. iPhone apps that are played on the iPad look OK, but you’re much more engaged by an iPad native app. The need for liquid experiences that adapt to the screen become even more important as we look at alternative form factors.
#2 – Development Challenges.
We have to think differently about how content and experiences are created, disseminated and maintained. Monolithic frameworks start to break down when there are hundreds of thousands of developers creating new experiences. And with Apple changing their developer terms and conditions, it looks like Apple will expect you to use their tools and frameworks, rather than many of the cross-platform frameworks. We have several clients working with Android, iPhone, Blackberry and other instances for applications. The iPad and follow-on products from other vendors based on Windows 7, Chrome, or Android tablets will further exacerbate the challenge of consistency and maintainability.
#3 – Personalization.
We’re at the early stages of more personal (and relevant) consumption of media – that means the customer is even more in control of the experience. Most will seek out an application rather than a web browser to consume their content where possible. Android, the iPhone OS, Windows Phone 7, Blackberry are all targeting what Mary Meeker with Morgan Stanley says will be a bigger market than the desktop PC market by 2014. The browser lives on at the desktop, but many of these new devices will take a very different approach to content and experience access. Remixing content from feeds, apps, alerts, and personalized experiences will become even more important. Add in the intersection of social to these experiences and you quickly see that use cases with these new devices will become even more personal.
3D’s popularity exploded in theatres last December with Avatar, the $600 million blockbuster filmed with new cameras and production technology developed specifically for the movie. TV manufacturers are now looking to cash in on the popularity with 3D-HDTVs that require special glasses ranging from $55-$150 per pair for the full 3D effect. Most sets are only bundled with two pairs, making for an expensive 3D Super Bowl party unless it’s BYO3D. Companies like Intel are working on glasses-free 3D but the technology is facing challenges in image quality and narrow viewing angles to see the effect.
A surprise play was recently made by Nintendo with the announcement of a new portable system that’s 3D-capable without the need for special glasses. The Nintendo 3DS will replace the DSi and DSi XL before March of next year. We don’t know how the 3DS displays image depth without glasses, but a puzzle game released for their current DSi system may give users a preview of what to expect. The game uses the built-in camera to track head movement adapting the angle based on user motion and giving the impression of peeking inside the game’s environment without the need for expensive display technology. If this is the technology behind the 3DS, it would be interesting to see this carried over to the world of 3D HDTV. Sony already has sets loaded with face- and motion-detecting technology and this could be an interesting feature as TVs become more aware of their environments.
Nintendo has pioneered “cheap tech” solutions that made the Wii a huge success, despite the lack of multimedia capabilities and HD video included with other systems. If Nintendo’s portable 3D solution is equally successful, we may see TV manufacturers borrow their process to ditch the dorky glasses necessary with today’s 3D TVs. I see current 3D sets as transitional, temporary solutions until more refined 3D technologies are perfected and the costs come down.
My antiquated 6-month-old Bravia won’t be going anywhere until 3D sets forego glasses. By then, I’m sure I’ll hold out for a hologram TVs that will be “a few months away.” As for the Nintendo 3DS, I’m considering one of these to hold me over until next March.
Alan is the business development/marketing coordinator from our Chicago office.
The buzz in the Critical Mass offices is reaching a feverish pitch. No it’s not about Duke v. Butler in the NCAA Championship game, the start of the Masters in Augusta, or the first day of MLB’s 2010 season. It’s bigger than that…much bigger (at least in our world: the digital world).
Today each of our offices around the globe is scheduled to receive a very special package: 2 Apple iPads—additions to our “hives,” digital playgrounds where we’re not only allowed, but encouraged, to play with new gadgets in order to learn, be inspired, and to use the new tech breakthroughs to create extraordinary experiences for our clients.
I know, the jury’s still out as to whether the iPad will live up to its hype. The deck’s stacked against them with the bar set by the current gold standard: the iPhone. In any event, we’ll be putting our own usability, tech and creative experts to work testing out the latest and greatest from the almighty Apple. (Watch for a full report later this week.)
The incessant buzz about the iPad—and pretty much all of Apple’s previous product launches before that—got me thinking: how could a brand be so powerful, so talked about, so admired, (and for competitors) so copied?
Sure their products are the quintessential fusion of function and form: beautiful, simple and easy to use. But beyond that, there’s a reason why Apple is Fortune’s “Most Admired Company” for the third year running. The ethos of the brand takes it far beyond the products themselves. Apple is about freedom, innovation, imagination, “thinking different.” To quote a Wired article on the “Cult of Mac,” Apple is “the archetypal emotional brand. It’s not just intimate with its customers; it is loved.”
Case in point: the recent headlines about unassuming consumers receiving emails from Steve Jobs have been astounding. Contrary to the advice we give most of our clients about embracing social media, Apple is a brand that doesn’t. There is nary a trace of “official” Apple speak on Facebook and Twitter. We hang on every word from Jobs in the most old school of media: the press conference. Leave it to him to top even that. Hallowed messages being delivered from above…via email (albeit from his iPad)!
The typical exchange goes something like this:
Joe Shmoe: ”Dear Mr. Jobs, will I be able to [insert question about a bug, software or service problem]?”
Steve Jobs: “No.”
Joe Shmoe: “Oh my God, I am never cleaning my in-box again.” (an actual quote from an Apple fan who got a little taste of divine intervention courtesy of Steve Jobs# )
People from all over the world are gaga, certainly with good news (for instance a “Yep” in response to a question about a software update), but they’re also swooning when they get the slap down (a terse, unequivocal “No.” to their requests).
The fact that Jobs is simply communicating at all, gracing them with his presence, is a heaven-sent to most Mac buffs. A strange, even bizarre phenomenon (and certainly not a sound strategy for most of us slogging it out far beneath the Apple ether) but, like them or hate them, there is no denying the power of a brand like Apple and a visionary like Steve Jobs.
If I had my chance to actually speak to Jobs Almighty, I wouldn’t talk about bug fixes, my constant iTunes/multiple device issues, or Entourage email problems, or even the dreaded name choice for the iPad. Sure, they’re all very real annoyances, yet they pale in comparison to the true joy I feel when I use my iPhone or MacBook Pro. For me, it’s undeniable: life is easier, my friendships are stronger, my experiences are richer, because of these devices.
So based on the articles I read, the email guidelines for writing to Steve Jobs with the best chance of a response are: keep it short, sweet, and to the point. Mine would go something like this:
[Subject:] “Are you there, Jobs? It’s me, Celia“
[Body:]
Dear Mr. Jobs,
Believe it or not, I don’t want anything from you. I just wanted to say thanks for expanding our minds, constantly reinventing the game, and always “thinking different.”
I’ve been a fan of college basketball since I was in sixth grade. And yes, it may have started because I thought Christian Laettner was cute, but it’s stuck with me. And thankfully, I’ve evolved into loving the game and not just the cute college boys.
College basketball (the tournament in particular) has been a way to bring people together. A connector. It gives my Dad and I something to bond over (he adopted my love for Duke back in sixth grade, although his reasoning was far more intelligent than mine), something for my office-mates to talk about and fodder for constant Facebook and Twitter updates. While the sport hasn’t changed all that much– it’s still as exciting as it was back in 1992 for that infamous Duke/Kentucky game the way we experience it certainly has. For me, it’s become extraordinary.
Take for example the office pool. Back in the day, the brackets would be set on a Sunday night, and printed in the newspaper on Monday. You’d cut out the bracket, and hand-write (yep- HAND-WRITE) your choices. You’d take it to the office, make a photocopy, and turn it in to the pool manager, keeping the original for yourself. That poor person would spend his/her weekends tallying (BY HAND) the scores and providing an update on Monday. Talk about a horrible way to spend the weekend. I promise- I would not have been the bracket manager if it involved doing math. Read the rest of this entry »
The launch of the iAd offers a new option. We will soon have the ability to build an experience as robust as an application and be able to syndicate it out as an ad within the application environment.
As networks and exchanges continue to expand, it becomes more difficult for them to provide the 100% transparency they promise. Recently we’ve seen companies, such as 
Entries (RSS)
Sign Up for Updates