Although I didn’t have any notes as I knew everything I was going to say, I had some prompt questions to remember to explore within my presentation. Here they are:
Before I undertook any research, I wrote the exact question I was trying to answer, divided into six sub-topics along with a Hypothesis. I decided to write a Hypothesis as I thought it would be interesting to see if my predictions and perceptions of the Smartphones importance in current society were true or just a figment of my imagination. My initial question was, “Is the developing trend of the Smartphone overthrowing the staple piece of equipment - which is the home desktop computer?”, which I divided into six sub-topics.
Methods of Research
I decided to undertake these methods of research because
I thought it was effective because
I would have done this different
Is there a decline in the home computer?
Referring back to my hypothesis, I have proved that there is a decline in the home computer. Primarily through my primary research.
"I am a notroiously late adopter of technology. I almost enjoy the fact that I don’t have the latest kit. I can’t really explain it. I had a go on the smartphone and I didn’t really enjoy it, although I could see that it was good."
"I wasn’t good enough at using the keyboard, I just got really frustrated with it"
"I am also a pay as you go customer, so there is the whole expense thing as well."
"I have a home desktop computer for planning work for lessons"
"I’m sure the home desktop computer was a necessity for the household, about 10 years ago, it was the only way you could get on the internet. Now things like the smartphone and the ipad have bipassed that, so I beleive it is not anymore"
"Especially with he introduction of the smart TV, which now means you can have your TV and computer in one, has had an impact on the decline on the home computer"
"I like the portability of the ipad or similar product. As long as they have enough memory, and when they get a bit cheaper, I would definately consider buying one, although you could loose it"
"I can’t loose my home computer, it’s also less likely to get stolen"
"I like the idea that I can sit on my 3 hour train journey and use the ipad, I find Laptops too heavy"
"For me, phones are too small, I need a bigger screen. I wouldn’t consider replacing my home computer with a smartphone it would have to be an ipad or something similar to that"
"I really enjoy not being constantly connected to the internet. I don’t want to know everybodies waking thought. Im not interested"
"I don’t want constant feeds of things on the internet all the time. I like being able to turn it off with my desktop computer."
"I don’t think, as it is, there is a future for the desktop computer. I think it will turn into a home computer slash Smart TV. I do not think it will exist as it is, even in five years time, I do not think people will buy them anymore"
"i don’t feel the need, a phone is a phone" - Justyn Hollet
"My house is a bit tinny innit, it takes up room. If you get a computer you need a desk to put it on, a computer chair. With a laptop you can just put it on your lap, with a cup of tea in hand, easy" - Jerome Golding
"If your in your room and you want pizza hut you can just go on your phone and get the number. You ain’t gotta run downstairs and turn on the computer. It’s just nice and easy wherever I am" - Shaakira Fletcher
"It drains your battery life with Blackberry messanger through updates" - Jerome Golding
"With my phone it’s constantly trying to search for 3G internet which just drains my battery and is just long. And then when it does decide to work it’s just slow, so there is no point" - Sam Sullivan
"You don’t really ever turn off the internet with a computer as most people have Wifi now. With a Laptop it’s different as it’s a lot more addictive, probabaly because you are laying down, you know, that kind of thing" - Perpetual Brade
"I use my Blackberry for general information, facebook, looking up directions, so I spend my whole day on my Blackberry really" - Jerome Golding
"I don’t appriciate the size of the screen, I find it starts to hurt my eyes" - perpetual Brade
"Well I only use the computer now for doing coursework" - Jerome Golding
"You know what yeah Im on my smartphone from basically in the morning, till when I go to sleep at night, so let’s give it about 12 to 16 hours a day i’m actually on my Smartphone" - Sam Sullivan
"It’s like leaving your house without your oyster card. Leaving your house without your phone ruins your whole day" - Jerome Golding
"I used to be on the computer for ages, that was the only way you could go on Facebook, Youtube, MSN. Now the Smartphone does all of that, makes you cut out all the unnessary stuff, sometimes when you’re on the computer you drift off. Smartphones cut all that out, all the adverts and everything" - Jerome Golding
"Home computers are really crap and slow, I don’t see any new ones about really" - Sam Perry
"Tablet computers are trying to play catch up to the Smartphone" - Jerome Golding
"I think we are basically on the way to doing all that future stuff. Dell has that new laptop where you can change it into an ipad looking thing, but still has the keyboard. Which still isn’t that portable, this is where the ipad comes in. You can take it outside and do a lot more things with it, but does not have the keyboard practicality" - Sam Sullivan
"The computer will still be there for business and education purposes. The ipad dumbs down childrens learning, there going to just be tapping the letters, there is something that registers in your brain with a physical keyboard, so yeah, I think it is going to be about for a long time" - Perpetual Brade
Although it had a publish date of 05 January 2011, there was no author stamp. Reading through the article it was just statistic after statistic, with no source to where it is from, making it completely unreliable, and untrustworthy: “The research also found that ownership of basic mobile phones dropped from 79% in 2009 to 65% in 2010 while during the same period, ownership of smartphones quadrupled from 8 to 32%.” I had never heard of the website before, the article was biased, and nothing was backed up what so ever, making this source completely unreliable.
At first, I did not recognise this website what so ever, and it seemed a bit difficult to understand with adverts and a confusing table comparison. There is no author stamp or publish date, the only information we are given is that it is a “2011 compare best Smartphones” table. However, when you can begin to understand the layout of the table it is very informative and is easy to compare Smartphones with each other. It also has some information below the table about what to look for in a Smartphone for business: “In the past, business people were easily identifiable—they carried large briefcases, binder planners and perhaps a brick cell phone. The scene has changed and so has the way we conduct life and business. One of these devices stores important data and documents, offers a calendar planner, provides instant access to the internet and email and keeps you in touch with clients, coworkers, friends and family – anytime and anywhere.” I do not believe this source as I have never heard of this website before, there is no publish date and we also do not know who wrote it. Therefore, do we trust information from an unheard of website from someone we don’t even know? No, we do not!
Straight away I did not recognise the website, and after searching the page there was no author or date stamp. Instantly, I know I cannot trust this source as I have no idea who has written it, or how old it is. Despite this, the article is very interesting and explores the worries about the decline in computers: “Beyond these innovations, however, there are likely to be many, many more. One of the most important areas of research in the world of computers is that of artificial intelligence. When many people think of artificial intelligence, they may picture fully aware machines, complete with emotions, and the problems that can arise from them. Even though this remains the goal of many artificial intelligence researchers, in fact artificial intelligence technology is already in place and already serving the needs of humans everywhere.” As we have no idea who has written it or when it was written, or anything about the website, we cannot trust the source. There is no hyperlink to words or ideas referenced, nothing is backed up what so ever.
Although I did not recognise the website straight away, I instantly saw the date and author stamp. It was written by Mary K. Pratt, and published on March 16, 2009. The article is recent enough for the reliability to be trusted. The article explores this far fetched idea of a super computer of the future, compiling all features into one computer: “Think of a souped-up version of today’s smartphone, with a monitor that unrolls into a larger screen and a biometric security system that lets you access everything in your professional and personal life from anywhere, with all the data residing in the cloud. Wave it at your car to unlock the door. Order and pay for your morning coffee with a touch of a button. Plug it into a docking station and project that big presentation to your clients. Book a weekend getaway with just a few clicks.” This is a very reliable source as it has a date and time stamp, also it is a very interesting and intriguing piece. However, I must be careful in trusting everything this article says as I do believe it has potential to be biased as it is an opinionated article on far fetched event in the future, written with a journalistic approach.
Straight away the fact it is an article from PC World, increases its reliability. Also there is an author stamp of Jason Cross and a publish date of June 2009, 2010 2:00am. Reading through the article, references are hyperlinked and it is a very well devised source: “If you’re a corporate user who really needs to work on the go, you want a real laptop. A smartphone that lets you access your business contacts, calendar, and e-mail is a no-brainer, but it’s of no use when you have to update your presentation or fix a few cells in a massive, multipage spreadsheet. The best combination is a solid business-class laptop and an IT-friendly smartphone.” This is a trustworthy source, although as it is an article the fact it could be biased needs to be considered. However, the article is purely fact and describing the features and comparing the devised, as opposed to writing opinions on them.
Straight away I did not recognise the website but the title of the article caught my attention, “The ‘always-on’ world of Generation Y and what we can learn from it”. The article has a publish date of “September 11, 2009”, therefore it as not as recent as desired, but recent enough to be considered as reliable research. There is an author stamped as “Mike”, which is hyperlinked to another page, assuming his biography or something similar, although the hyperlink is broken and there is a problem opening the page. All quotes and sources referenced are hyperlinked back to their original source, making the article more reliable and more trustworthy. The article explores the issues surrounding being always connected to the internet with a Smartphone, merging into a Big Brother society: “it is clear there is something going on with huge numbers of people becoming ‘connected’ to the web while mobile during their every waking hour. But what does that really mean? Is this change really significant? What is this kind of ‘always-on’ / ‘always-on-me’ technology actually used for and what kind of impact is always-on going to have on the group that uses it?”. However, I do believe this article has the potential to be biased as the website is not as popular as other websites (wikipedia for example), also we cannot verify who wrote it, so the fact it could be one sided should be taken into consideration. Although, it is a very interesting article, divulging into some interesting views on theories on the Smartphone industry.
Instantly, the article can be trusted as it is from the BBC News website, a very reliable and reputable source which provides news from all over the world, to the world. There is a precise publish date of “15:46 GMT, Monday, 2 March 2009”, which isn’t that recent, but recent enough that it can be perceived as reliable. It also has an author stamp of Jason Palmer, so we know who wrote it and can research into his journalistic history if we desire. The article uses quotes and statistics to explore why there is a decline in the computer: “This time, both individuals and businesses are predicted to buy fewer PCs, hanging on to aging computers for longer as part of general belt-tightening.That means if your PC slows down, doesn’t work well, doesn’t do what you think it should do, you’ll live with it”. All in all, this is a reliable source as we know how recent it is, we know who wrote it, and the website it is published on has such a high reputation and standard that it would never dream of posting something with un-sourced and unreliable content. The only thing that can be questioned is its journalistic approach as it is an article, although, reading through the piece it is purely fact and statistics, little opinion, therefore increasing the reliability.
At first, I was a bit apprehensible about the website, as I had never heard of it before. However, it had an author stamp of Jim Johannasen, with a hyperlink where you could see a biography and previously written articles, backing up the reliability of the information in this article. Also, if you scroll down there is a publish date of “May 17th 2010”, making it very recent with changes in the ipad industry. The article is short and sweet, giving a brief overview to the ipad, enough for people who know nothing about it and want a brief insight into the critically acclaimed product: “However, you need to keep certain things in mind while buying an iPad. The configuration and the screen resolution need to be checked very carefully. It is better to use iPad inside your home, because using iPad in broad daylight can disturb the clarity of the picture. Many people have the tendency to read e-books under sunlight. This can be harmful for the iPad. Moreover, it is quite difficult to understand the writings and pictures of iPad screen under sun.” Again, the only thing I would question about this source is the website, as I have never heard of it before. Despite this, this is not a reason I should question it’s reliability as it may just be a more low-budget site as opposed to Wikipedia and similar sites.
This is from the same website as the previous article, as I trusted it before, I decided to look through it again. The article had an author stamp of Maxime Maximus, where you can click to see their profile and journalistic history, increasing the reliability of the article, seeing if they have written similar pieces before. It also has a publish date of “December 23, 2010”, making it only a few months old, extremely up to date with changes in technology, strengthening the reliability of the article. This article has to be the best I have come across through my research as it really divulges into the serious issue surrounding the death of the computer: “The problem with Microsoft was that it was unable to adapt beyond the original concept of a computer. Instead of changing its emphasis towards new technologies such as web based applications and diversified devices, it attempted to enforce its trademark against the competing forces by leveraging the power of its market penetration, a strategy which has served well over the previous years. But you cant resist the forces of evolution, ask the dinosaurs, therefore instead of spearheading the technological revolution, and molding its commercial shape for the future (much like it had at the onset of the personal computer), Microsoft was condemned to backtrack against its original strategy and model the technology of competitors once inferior, such as the graphical design of OS X for Windows Vista. Furthermore the company jumped on the web wagon too late, was unable to neutralize Google and is now stuck with Yahoo.” The only thing to question about this source is if it is biased, as it is written by a journalist, therefore giving it an opportunity to be written with a certain journalistic approach. However, reading through the article, most of it is fact and purely just information on the subject discussed.
Although I did not recognise this website straight away, I instantly saw that it had an author stamp, Ben Gross. When clicking on Ben Gross we are taken to a personal profile listing previous, similar work, increasing the reliability of this source as we know he has written similar articles. It also has a publish date of “August 20, 2009”, making the source about a year and a half old. The fact it is not very recent makes us question it’s reliability as it is not up to date with current changes in technology. Considering the article is about push notifications, the publish date is very important as Smartphone technology develops at least once a month. The author covers both advantages and disadvantages, arguing for both sides of the argument, not being biased: “In many ways, text messages/SMS messages delivered to mobile phones are the default for near real-time consumer notifications. The advantage of text messages is that they are fast, reliable, and nearly all Internet connected consumers have access to them, even when they are not at their computers. US consumers are catching up to the rest of the world in familiarity with text messages so people increasingly use them for everything from flight arrival information to bank balance notifications to Twitter updates. The problem is that SMS messages can be expensive for both businesses and consumers”. The only thing I would question about this article is it’s publish date. The fact it is a year and a half old talking about a subject which has developed momentarily over the past year, makes me question how relevant it is to my research. However, the fact the article explores the issues surrounding push notification in such depth and detail makes this a very reliable and honest source.
Straight away, we know this is a reliable source as it is from the Guardian website, which as a prestigious reputation. There is a publish date of “Friday 3 October 2008 14.02 BST”, making the article about 3 years old. Now we can question its reliability as a lot has progressed and changed in the Smartphone market since then. Surprisingly, there is no stamp to say who wrote it, or who devised the table, making us think, who actually wrote this and how reliable is this source. However, this table is remarkably informative, with a layout so that the user can compare the most popular Smartphones with each other, through their features. The table is called “How they compare: Nokia’s 5800 XpressMusic and N97, Google’s G1, Apple’s iPhone and the BlackBerry Storm”. As the Guardian is a journalistic website, it will have some sort of biased approach to what it writes, although, the fact there is no opinon, simply just a table of numbers and facts, we can trust this source.
This is an extremely detailed article, exploring the history of a Smartphone, and giving in depth definitions to each of it’s recognizable features. However, the reliability of Wikipedia has to be questioned, as anyone sitting from home can edit it, although it does have to be approved. It does have a publish date of “20 February 2011 at 08:48”, which is extremely up to date, adding reliability to the source as it is up to date with current information and developments. We do not know who has edited this, making us question the reliability again as how do we know the person who wrote this has any idea about the Smartphone industry? In retrospect, all of the quotes used are referenced to their original source, which makes the article more trustworthy and honest. The article gives an in depth look into the history of the Smartphone: “The first smartphone was called Simon; it was designed by IBM in 1992 and shown as a concept product that year at COMDEX, the computer industry trade show held in Las Vegas, Nevada. It was released to the public in 1993 and sold by BellSouth. Besides being a mobile phone, it also contained a calendar, address book, world clock, calculator, note pad, e-mail, send and receive fax, and games. It had no physical buttons to dial with. Instead customers used a touchscreen to select telephone numbers with a finger or create facsimiles and memos with an optional stylus.” The only thing I would question about this article is who it is written by, as Wikipedia can be edited by anybody. Although, I would still class it as a reliable source as the content has to be approved by a Wikipedia employee as it has a high reputation and all information has to be correct and relevant to what it is defining. As it is an article defining a Smartphone, there is no biased information as there are no opinions given.
This is a reliable source as it states an author, Liane Cassavoy. You can also click on the link to her name to view her portfolio, you can then see details on her education and career history, showing Cassavoy knows what she is writing about, therefore increasing the reliability of this article. About.com is a reliable website and is renowned within the World Wide Web for explaining terminology. The article breaks down the features of a Smartphone, and how to define one: “Operating System: In general, a smartphone will be based on an operating system that allows it to run productivity applications. BlackBerry Smartphones run the BlackBerry OS, while other devices run the Palm OS or Windows Mobile. There are smartphone OSes that are pared-down versions of desktop Linux, too.” The only thing I would question about this article is it’s publish date, as there is not one visible. Consequently, we cannot tell how recent this information is with changing trends in technology. There is no room for this article to be biased, as it is not an opinionated article, it is simply defining what a Smartphone is.
Smartphones, is this the death of the home computer?
This is my chosen topic for my project. Here are my 6 sub topics that I have divided it into:
What is a Smartphone? Indepth section on how to define a Smartphone, where they originated from, what was the first Smartphone and how long they have been on the market for
Comparing current Smartphones on the market - This section will compare current Smartphones on the market, comparing their features and prices, for example, megapixels of camera, type of internet, applications available, interface, touch screen, weight, screen (LED, retina) and the type of processor.
Can you ever get away from the internet with a Smartphone as you are always connected to 3G internet? - Some people find the idea of having a phone constantly connected to the 3G network, a bit stalker-ish. The fact that you can turn on push-notificiations so that when you recieve an e-mail, facebook notification etc the phone automatically tells you when it recieves it.
The decline in the home computer, is their a future for them? People are now able to have a device which includes everything a computer can offer, and the ability to use it as a mobile phone, these are called Smartphones. As these are available people now don’t necesserily feel the need to have a home computer, when it uses ecess electricity and costs a hell of a lot of money for a good one, with a good processor that won’t melt your harddrive.
The introduction of the IPAD - The introduction of the Ipad has ignited the downfall in the sale of the stationary computer. The Ipad, being a more effecient, increasingly portable and exceedingly sleek version of the laptop, sparked people to move on with advances in technology. This section will be a comparison of the IPad and the computer, concluding which is a better device overall, in the year of 2011.
The future for computers -This will be the last section, dicsussing the future for computers, if there is one.
Experiments - This is a good way of finding out a predicted result from a hypotheses. Also to find out factors you do not know about something,
Participant observation - This is when you are participating in a observation activity along with the people you are observing.
Historical research - The systematic collection and evaluation of data related to past occurrences in order to describe causes, effects, and trends of those events that may help explain present events and anticipate future events. Data is often archival-including newspaper clippings, photographs, etc.- and may include interviews. http://www.mc3edsupport.org/community/glossary/H-page-1.html
Comparative analysis - Item by item comparison of two or more comparable alternatives, processes, products, qualifications, sets of data, systems, etc. In accounting, for example, changes in a financial statement’s items over several accounting periods may be presented together to detect the emerging trends in the firm’s operations and results. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/comparative-analysis.html
Competitor analysis - Competitor analysis in marketing and strategic management is an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of current and potential competitors. This analysis provides both an offensive and defensive strategic context through which to identify opportunities and threats. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_analysis_(marketing)
Covert / Overt observation - Overt observation (usually teamed with participant observation, where the researcher participates in the experiment), is the observation where the social unit being studied has complete awareness and has agreed to be observed. Although this is perceived as complying with human rights, it can produce a thing called the Hawthorne Effect. This is a sociological term which defines the outcome which can happen when people know they are being observed. For example, the social unit will change their behaviour either on purpose or uncontrollably to change the outcome of the observation. Covert observation is where the social unit does not know they are being observed. Conventionally, this results in a more authentic and real result as the Hawthorne Effect can not go into effect. However, some argue this is going against their human rights and some people may feel they have had their privacy invaded.
I chose to analyse SoundCloud.com and Getsigned.com. I had to analyse the:
Links and labels
Search and search results
I found this technique of research worked extraordinarily well, although it was somewhat tedious and I lost my concentration half way through. If you are using this form of research in a focus group for a company I would suggest that it is made more interesting, as it is the most effective form of research for websites, although it needs to be more interactive so that participants put 100% of their concentration into the task.
Also, I believe the rating system was too restricted. Only being able to rate the websites on a scale of 1-5 was too vague, rating them on a scale of 1 - 10, being able to use .5’s of a number will be more specific and beneficial to the companies in aiding their research.
I feel that I should of been given at least 45 minutes to do the task, it was a very simple task although it took a long time to gather information and put it into words in the table. If companies are trying to gather behavioral habits in correspondence with music promotion websites this task will be useless as it is simply just opinions on paper, lacking detail.
All in all I did enjoy the task, it was interesting being able to browse through music promotions websites, segragating the terrible and the hidious from the interesting and exciting. It did work well, and will be a good way of researching in a focus group, analysing websites that are at competition with a company.
Miss Tomlinson's very average audience research questionnaire - what is wrong with it?
Question 1: Needing to know the name of the participant is irrelevant. More importantly you need to know the age and gender of the questionee, this will help to divide your research. Also, where in the country they are from, you may see a trend or pattern appear in certain parts of the UK. This question does not ask any relevant demographics.This should be a closed question.
Question 2: There is not enough choice on this question, or there should be at least a space where the participant can write their own answer, if their chosen answer is not there for them to select. There should be an option to write an open answer.
Question 3: Again, there is not enough choice on this question, or a space to write your own answer.
Question 4: Is this question relevant? Will people understand the question if there is no tick box, some participants may just write “my computer”. This could be a closed question, with a tick box approach highlighting the most popular programs people use to store downloads, then an open answer option if their program is not listed.
Question 5: Again, there should be more choice to answer this question, including a space so that the participant can write their own answer, if not listed.
Question 6: Should be a quantitative question, need a tick box. When going to collect your research, putting it in tables or graphs, it will be difficult as the original question was too open.
Question 7: Biased, the question imposes that you should feel guilty. When you come to collecting your research it will be hard to put it into a table, qualitative, quantitative. Correspondingly, your research will be biased as the question lacks objectivity, resulting in biased answers from your participants.
Question 8: This is the only question about streaming. How often, why, it is not a developed question, it does not go nowhere. This should be a quantitative question, with a tick box approach. There is no option to select no, you should highlight the most popular streaming sites, then leave a blank space so that the participant can write their own answer, if it is not available (instructions should be provided so that the questionee acknowledges this).
Question 9: This question lacks objectivity, it is swaying from the original point to the questionnaire, what are you actually trying to find out. It doesn’t collect data which offers a view on demographics, this will be difficult when it comes to collating your data.
Question 10: Options are too limited, there is no options if you do not share downloads. Also, the ‘who with’ section is too specific, there needs to be more options or at least a space so that the participant can write their own answer.
The Freebie: Not ethically correct, bribery to complete questionnaire. Participants reasons to complete the questionnaire will be swayed, they may complete it in a hurry as all they are thinking about is their freebie, resulting in incorrect data.
NB: There needs to be some form of instructions at the beginning of a questionnaire, how are they to fill this out. What the data will be used for and that you will keep the participants anonymity.
To add: How much would you be willing to pay? What would change their habits in the future? All in all, this questionnaire massively lacks objectivity, the questions are too broad, and some are biased, consequently the questionnaire will deliver biased results. The appearance, not attractive, will people be ‘put off’ by the exterior?