On the news today, I found out that there is an experimental hydrogen fuel cell powered aircraft on show at this years Farnborough Airshow. As you might imagine the Boeing FCDA (fuel cell demonstration aircraft) is not the most powerful of aircraft, but it has flown for over 20 minutes entirely under fuel cell power and it’s only emissions are water and heat. If you’d like to see it in action, here is some video from youtube. Although fuel cells are now commercially available (the fuel cells in this plane come from the UK), it will be a while before fuel cells will be used to power anything but the smallest aircraft. Even so, it does seem to be a pretty cool direction for a more sustainable future.

Fujitsu have recently announced a new form of biometric device which uses a near-infrared camera that captures each person’s unique palm vein pattern, or template. First applications include patient identification in US healthcare and customer identification in Japanese Banks.

The device, resembling a small black cube uses a vascular pattern recognition system to accurately identify people while they hold their palm just above the cube. The scan, requiring less than a second, captures the unique branching pattern of blood veins and instantly converts key data points into a numerical code that can be compared with other palm scans to identify matches. The miniaturized device can plug into a laptop computer via a USB port, while an alternative version released last year incorporates the palm scanner into a computer mouse to facilitate secure logins.

Beyond security, the palm-reader and associated software boast another advantage: not having to remember multiple passwords for starting Windows sessions and password-protected applications. The new technology is said to have a low “false acceptance ratio” that yields less than one incorrect match per every million tries which is far better than fingerprint recognition techology. Although iris scanning is still seen as the most reliable biometric identification method, it is less convenient for the user and requires careful set up. This biometric technology could be one to watch and might well find a place as part of many future “sweet spot” systems.

�

I recently picked up an article on the knowledge at Wharton website about the topic of bridging the chasm between the computer and TV. There are a number of players targeting this transition and what is clear is that all three elements of the “sweet spot” strategy are being explored, business, market and technology. Companies such as Netfix and Amazon.com are looking at their current businesses and have realised that the need to start looking to the next generation of media format. They both see potential for increased revenues and profits through the switch from DVD rental by mail to digital media direct to consumers homes. Other players, such as HP, are looking at the opportunity from the hardware and technology side. On June 10th Hewlett-Packard unveiled a $349 digital receiver that brings video and audio content from the PC or Internet to any high-definition television set.

 

In May Netflix unveiled a $99 set-top box that directs movies and TV shows from the Internet to its subscribers’ TVs. Meanwhile, Apple has been building out the services connected to its Apple TV product, signing a deal with HBO in May to bring shows like “The Sopranos” from its iTunes store to widescreen televisions. Companies such as Netflix, Disney, Amazon.com and Apple are expanding the digital distribution of media.

Right now there is some serious debate going on about the likelihood of convergence of the compute, on-lin digital media and the TV. David Hsu, a management professor at Wharton, says “Theoretically, it should be the case that there’s a lot of convergence between the PC and TV and content evolution. But on the demand side, it’s unclear what consumers want.” Hsu thinks the solution is to try many different business models. Wharton marketing professor Peter Fader says the digital living room analogy is off-base in many respects. “The whole digital living room idea misses the point. A nice analogy is, ‘What am I going to do for dinner tonight?’ I can go to a fancy restaurant. Or just get a burrito. It’s all about convenience and control. The microwave burrito is watching video on your PC. The fancy restaurant is the big screen in your living room and the immersive experience. You’ll do both.” There seems to be evidence of some serious techno-push as well. “Everyone is too beholden to their boxes,” Fader notes. “Companies are a little more fixated on the technology and gadgets than the services when they should instead be focusing on making it easier to consume content on any device.” At the moment a lot of the services being offered are closed, that is you buy the box and you only get one specific content. People seem to be following the Apple iPod/iTunes model. One reason these digital living room technologies are closed to each other is because companies are trying to reproduce Apple’s so-called “halo effect,” where one device or service stokes demand for other products from the same company. There is still a lot of experimentation going on in the area as the different companies focus on find the “sweet spot”.

“The value for companies will emerge when they come up with something that cannot be replicated by Comcasts in the world. Netflix has made some strides here by allowing subscribers to manage their movie queue online. But I would say it has to go beyond that,” says Hsu.

For now, however, companies targeting the digital living room are more often than not emulating what the cable companies already do. The more successful models are subscription based or pay-per-view and involve a set-top box. “The rationale for all these set-top boxes is that consumers want to interact with devices in a way they already know,” Hsu notes.

Indeed, one of the biggest hurdles for these new entertainment delivery business models is consumer behavior, he adds. Consumers are not used to combining the functions of a TV and PC and sharing content between them. Hsu expects more innovation and experimentation to come. “Technology is getting sophisticated and there will be some meld of the PC, TV and Internet. But what’s going to get people to switch over to interacting with these appliances and machines? There will have to be something that’s fundamentally different than what’s on TV.”

Of course there are other issues facing these innovators, on top of potential proliferation of set top boxes, the thorny issue of bandwidth rears it’s head. “Most of these set-top boxes use cable broadband as a separate distribution channel, but it’s not quite as separate as it seems because it’s all coming over a cable modem,” Faulhaber says. “This could become an issue if Internet TV really takes off. If streaming video over broadband networks becomes popular, there may be limitations placed on it because the networks may not be able to carry it all. Some accommodation will have to be made because there will be 20 pounds of content in a three-pound bag. When we start pushing TV down the broadband channel, there will be issues.”

Interesting article, demonstrating the struggle companies often have when a logical emerging technology theme (in this case very much in line with the TRIZ evolution law of transition to the super-system, following the mon-bi-poly line) is not sufficeintly rooted in business model of market value.

Personally I think it will come. In the UK we already have something called BBC iPlayer. This new free service provides on-line access to BBC programs from the last 7 days. It has been phenomenally successful, with more that 1 million downloads per day, so much so that the UK internet providers have started to restrict iPlayer bandwidth at certain times of the day. Although downloading can be a real pain, I’ll put up with it because I can get great content for free. The only remaining problem I have is that I have to watch it on the PC, when I’d really like to watch it on the TV. So the demand is already there. If the process could be made faster and easier I reckon it could even start to make a lot of money for the right company. In the UK, Sky television make an absolute fortune out of their Sky+ system already and while that is good, a decent PC based system with context sensitive background information, could provide a far more involving multi-media service.   

�

I am often asked to cite examples of where TRIZ has helped to identify Market Breakthrough Products. Obviously, even when TRIZ is used, it often only plays a small but critical part in the total implementation of the product. So with that caveat, here are a few examples where I’ve heard that TRIZ played a critical part in identifying the final concept:

P&G White Strips

This is a revolutionary tooth whitening product. The non-dissolving strip format holds a whitening gel in close contact with the teeth throughout the recommended whitening time of 30 minutes. This one has been a major success for P&G

 

P&G Swiffer

This one is another big hit for P&G. This time it’s a floor cleaning product. The way it works is that as you sweep it across the floor, an electrostatic charge develops on the cloth, attracting dirt to the cloth. The cloth is designed to retain the dirt until it removed and disposed of at the end of the cleaning. The basic principle has now spawned a whole host of variants

 

Sanyo detergent-free washing machine

This washing machine makes use of an ultrasonic field to remove dirt on clothing and an electrolytic action to create a short lived antibacterial and antifungal effect. This product has been very successful in Japan but has yet to transition into the west. With the increasing emphasis on the environment, there are signs that this or something similar will make inroads into the western market too, Look out Tide!

 

One factor which unites these products, apart from the use of TRIZ, is the profound nature of their impact in their respective markets. True Market Breakthrough.

�

I thought it would be interesting to get some feedback on subjects for future blog posts so I asked a question on Linkedin, as you do. So far, the relevant points I’ve got are:

From Siamack Salari – “Understanding the difference between innovation and evolution. Also, unarticulated needs – where do you even begin to disentangle those from everyday life behaviour?” I’ll need to get some clarification on the innovation vs evolution point, but the second point about unarticulated needs is crystal clear and really relevant to targeted technology innovation. Expect some stuff on this.

From Reut Schwartz-Hebron: “Innovation is not just about having a great idea– it’s about implementation and buy in. I think one of the topics technology innovators need are around:
- motivating people to adopt change
- how learning is a teacher’s job (in other words what change facilitators can do to increase learning)”

I think the subject of innovation and change are very closely linked together. Often market breakthrough product implementation first of all requires a mindset shift within the organisation before the end product can be successful. More on this in later posts.

From Brian Cambell: “Why doesn’t TRIZ sell? Why does UK plc pay lip service to innovation? Why do innovation consultants ignore TRIZ?” All good questions, I reckon there should be some good posting to come on this lot. I’ve already had some good debate on the first TRIZ point in comments on my previous post on TRIZ certification.

Finally, from Ellen Domb: “Why “Technology Innovation?” I see lots of situations where it is innovation in marketing or packaging or business processes (be innovative about who the customer could be, rather than the technology of the product.) Technology innovation is a very small % of successful innovation, but it gets a lot of attention already.”

I agree with some of this, in that innovations in marketing, business process or packaging design on their own can deliver significant market impact. There is a place for this type of innovation – for example in the UK the P&G brand Ariel was positioned as an innovative 30 degree Centigrade washing powder even though the product remained unchanged. Suddenly it was very good for saving Polar Bears with nothing more than a new marketing message and packaging design.  In P&G speak, I think this is known as Commercial Innovation. However, while there is a place for this type of innovation, this blog is not that place! This blog is about creating market breakthrough products through targeted technology innovation. What do I mean by targeted? Building on insightful business strategy, combinations of new business models and deep market understanding to scope and direct a systematic process to eliminate the shortfall in today’s technology. This final bit can be done pretty well through combinations of advanced TRIZ thinking, Open Innovation and good old fashioned networking, but there is room for improvement and this is where this blog comes in. This blog is about learning how to target and deliver breakthrough innovation better, with more repeatability and greater vision. In my view this is the sort of innovation which doesn’t get the attention it deserves.

I was just cruising the Philips Applied technology website when I came across this rather interesting development, exploiting Philips expertise in thin film flexible displays and smart card controller chips. It’s a smart card with a display on it.

Philips have set up a start-up Flexible Display Solutions to commercialise the concept, key benefits for the user are increased security and information feedback. Strangely, the original display was a flexible LCD, which, according to another article I read on flexible displays is usually big trouble but now Philips are targeting an electrophoretic display instead because it is bi-stable – it only needs a signal to switch it = less power consumption. The card is 0.5mm thick and, in addition to the display, contains a control chip and battery.

With rapid development in the area of OLEDs and thermoplastic semiconductors, flexible displays are expected to play an increasing important role in our lives over the next few years as displays become cheap enough to be incorporated into clothing and packaging.

 

�

Just off TechCrunch is a new option for the iPhone, nrme (near me) provides a 9 block radius running update on things happening nearby. Users write in a short message about stuff they see happening and this is broadcast to other nrme users in the 9 block radius. While there is an option for chats ans instant messaging in nrme, what this package is about is getting the latest updates on stuff happening in walking distance. Maybe a bar is getting full or a new product has just come into the shops. The business model requires local based, time specific advertising on top of the feed.

Some issues still need ironing out, like browsing through random conversations between two people just because they are local to you. The system will probably require some further context sensitive adjustments before it really works, oh yes, and enough people using it.

If the issues can be resolved this could well be one more step towards an ambient intelligence future.

I found this on MSNBC today and it got me thinking how people might be controlling mobile devices (should they still exist) in the coming years. The article talks about eye movement control of mobile phones and portable music players being researched by engineers at NTT DoMoCo is Japan.

The experimental system uses sensors and chips that detect electrical current produced by movements of the wearer’s eyeballs. NTT DoCoMo believes wearable control technology will be adapted for mobile devices that download music, play video games and allow users to shop online and keep up with their e-mail. The new technology may also enable cell phone cameras to read bar codes used in Japan to get product information, download music and coupons when the user simply looks at the codes, researchers said.

Also on show was a new minimalist phone system is the form of a ring. To listen to it you stick your finger in your ear and the vibrations travel through your bones to and from the ear piece. Looks to be a bit clonky right now but I guess it’s only a prototype.

Finally there was a device shaped like a wrist watch which you tap to control other devices.

There is an interesting trend in technologies to interface with various devices right now, be it in surgery, aerospace, gaming or mobile telecoms. I’m not sure if the above options will ever make it to market but they do point the way to a future sitation where mobile devices become more “ideal” and, in time, a situation where they cease to exist totally, while their functions remain or are even enhanced.

�

If you have tried to text someone on your iPhone you will know that the lack of tactile feedback makes it harder to use, even though the whizzy touch screen looks nice. You make more mistakes and you type more slowly than with a normal phone. The need to create tactile feedback was also highlighted for larger screens in my recent post on new display technologies. Now Stephen Brewster and colleagues at the University of Glasgow in the UK say they can banish these problems by using actuators like those that make cellphones vibrate to replicate the feel of a keyboard.

To create the required feedback his group strung together combinations of different vibrations. A single pulse 30 milliseconds long gives the feeling of a button being clicked, while sliding a finger from one button to another prompts a half-second long buzz, providing a “rough” feeling that tells the user they’ve strayed to another key. Sliding the finger across a button causes the buzz to be ramped up and then down, giving the feel of a round button.

The team found that users’ typing speed and accuracy were significantly closer to results they achieved using a real keyboard, compared with when the haptics were disabled.

This technology represents an efficient use of resources, in that the vibrator is already present in the phone, while significantly enhancing the experience for the phone user.

If a similar technology to this could be combined with the display technology I discussed in my earlier post on new display technologies, there could be significant potential for even more engaging consumer experiences at point of sale or brand interaction in future.

Over the last few years, there has been an explosion in the number of portable or semi-portable devices we all carry around with us, laptop PCs, mobile phones, iPods, Palms, sat navs and more. One big issue which cuts through this whole area is getting power to these devices conveniently. If your home is like mine, you now have a number on mutually incompatible chargers around you and when your phone runs out of juice you can spend many minutes trying to find the right charger to plug in. Using the simple TRIZ tool of intensification, as the number or devices increases and the distribution of these devices becomes more complex, the number of chargers increases massively and the cmplexity of getting power to them all becomes a major headache and probably a key limitation. Wouldn’t it be great if you could get your power wirelessly and simply? Well, there are some interesting emerging technologies which could make this possible.

One of my favourite technology sites is Philips Research. Right on the front page is a feature on wireless charging. Philps propose a wireless charging pad which transfers power to the devices by magnetic induction – induction coils in the pad induce current in charging coils in the devices, recharging their batteries. The magnetic induction principle is already used in the Philips electric toothbrush.

   

The encouraging thing about this technology is that Philips are working with the other device manufacturers to agree a standard so that the charging interface can be universal, taking away the problem of which charger is for which device.

Another company on the same trail is Splashpower. Once again their system is based on the principle of magnetic induction, giving the ability to transmit high power levels quckly and using a compact design. Splashpower also talk about charging applications in your car which seems like a great idea.

Both these developments will help to make ownership of mobile devices far easier in future. This sort of technology could well support the first steps to a further proliferation of mobile and embedded devices, taking us one step towards the ambient intelleigence vision of users being able to access personalised, context sensitive invisible intelligence in a seamless way.