> Now what exactly was stopping me from chosing the "Enter URL" link
> instead of the "I-mode menu" link, typing in a new URL, and going
> wherever I want to?
What might be stopping you is a lack of knowledge of how to do it.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who's told someone about a new site to check
out, and seen the person immediately go to the iMode menu first to find the
site.
A relevant excerpt from Steve Krug's "Don't Make Me Think" (a brief, useful
book on web usability)
"My favorite example [of people using things without understanding how they
work] is the people who will type a site's entire URL in the Yahoo search
box every time they want to go there. ... If you ask them about it, some of
them think that Yahoo _is_ the Internet, and this is the way you use it."
He mentions AOL users who "clearly think" AOL is the same.
Clearly some users wall themselves in.
(Yes, obviously this point is tangential to the debate but the relevance is
clear: Sites on the official menu do not need to take the extra step of
educating potential users in how to access the site. Official sites can
assume that users know how to access them -- go to the menu and muddle
through the categories; whether or not the user knew about the site
beforehand, they stand a chance of finding it. Non-official sites cannot
assume that users know how to access them. Non-official sites arguably need
to provide a two-step education: 1- find a way to let people know about the
site, 2- mention how to access it.)
> Oh, wait; maybe it was the billing system. When I go out on to the
> regular web, folks can bill me in a multitude of different ways;
> take my credit card, use PayPal, send me a bill, and so on. But
> nothing is stopping i-mode sites from doing exactly the same thing.
> Certainly the option of billing someone via their telephone bill
> doesn't exist on the web, but that doesn't close off any of the
> other avenues.
Billing through the phone bill is analogous to billing via the ISP bill,
isn't it.
If CNN.com started making content available only to those who subscribed via
an ISP billing service, you'd need to ensure that your ISP were in on this.
If only AOL were involved as an ISP biller, then you'd need an AOL account
to access CNN.com. If AOL contractually required CNN to only make this
service available to AOL users, I think that would qualify as a walled
garden. However, if any ISP in the world could affiliate themselves into the
program, then the wall would be less meaningful. (The "less meaningful" wall
image in mind is a wall that eventually comes to resemble those low stone
walls running through the woods in New England, built years and years ago by
farmers before the woods grew back in...yes, there's a wall, but no one
really notices it anymore.)
For now it's as Andrea wrote:
>> Only unofficial i-mode sites though, most official i-mode sites deny any
>> access that is not coming from an i-mode handset.
- Bill
PS about escalators:
> The JR folks just installed a new escalator in
> Shibuya station, and I can't imagine that it's earning them a lot
> of direct revenue. Yet, oddly enough, nobody's going around talking
> about whether escalators are a "success" or a "failure." Nor can
> I seem to find any references to the "escalator bubble"....
...and there's usually someone who'll just stand there blocking the
adventurous escalator walkers. What the hell are those blockers
thinking...can't they see that everyone in FRONT of them is walking, and
eventually the entire escalator on their side is empty to the top...another
example of users not knowing how to use the thing (e.g., stand to the left,
walk on right or whatever the local convention is)
</pet peeve>
Received on Sat Dec 29 18:52:51 2001