And the time to explore it

I see Laurie Orlov was also posting about phones the other day, (http://www.ageinplacetech.com/blog/cell-phones-older-individuals-more-features-fewer-features-or-smarter) and she has a great quote from a woman who loves her smartphone but notes "I've been retired for seven years so I have the time and patience to play with all the stuff on the phone." This brought up two thoughts related to my Nexus/iPhone post.

First, the quote seems to reinforce that the affection for "all the stuff" came after the purchase of the phone and was discovered because she had the time to play around. The phone is a source of entertainment. I've noticed for years that those of us in the middle, heavily involved in our work lives, are the ones who are the least adept at our gadgets because we have the least time and inclination to explore.

And this reminded me of a trend in the adoption of digital photography. Even before digital cameras became mainstream, consumer photo quality scanners and inkjet printers and related software applications made their way to the affordable end of the market. And, it was commonly the grandparents who adopted the technology first. They began to use them to make calendars, albums and cards using their travel pics and particularly pictures of the grandkids. It was the 50+ crowd that was often at the forefront this adoption cycle, with many of the rest of us only adopting once it had gone mainstream and one was built into every phone.

So, to temper my last post, perhaps time is a factor here--will we see a rapid uptake in more user friendly smartphones not because of specific applications, but because the abundance of apps is inherently an entertainment and relaxation opportunity for those with the time to play with it?

And, once they become mainstream in this way, will they start to serve more age specific purposes like monitoring, fall alert, etc?

Google Nexus and Apple iPhone—assistive tech?

I was following the hoopla about the new Google Nexus phone and happened to notice the image on the Google site—this phone’s user appears to be “helping Grandpa get his tech on.” (It's down next to the weather icon.) It got me thinking, are these new generations of phones particular well suited to the aging among us? Could Google even be targeting the new phone for such users?



ElderGadget (http://www.eldergadget.com/) has posted several related articles on Elder Friendly iPhone and iTouch apps. I like what I see in that most of the applications are not things designed just for “old people” but rather are apps intended to be mainstream but with particular application or pertinence for seniors. Brain Games, for example, are stimulation exercises that can benefit anyone, but brain stimulation does have particular merit for seniors. While the original post fell into the trap of focusing primarily on health and emergency related apps, later posts have branched out to include apps for relaxation and mood lifting.

But, don’t I really have to be an iPhone user before I would experience these apps and find them useful? I’m not sure that many seniors would adopt the iPhone form factor in order to get the apps. The would adopt the iPhone for the same reasons people of any age will—because it is fun, interesting, engaging, well marketed and “cool.” But if there is anything about the iPhone, Nexus or their emerging ilk that does anything inherently to be more age appropriate and “help grandpa get his tech on” is that they have larger screens and single touch, icon driven operation rather than the small keypads and screens of more traditional cell phone offerings. It’s the basic design that provides the real benefit.

The Wii has generated widespread adoption in senior communities because the interface and opened up a whole world of virtual activities that seniors can easily adopt. I’m not sure that the touch screen interface of the newest phones has married to the software to the same degree.

Cooking Safety

Laurie Orlov (http://www.ageinplacetech.com/ )was kind enough to provide a link for a home safety device in a comment to my last post. I thought I would add it here to ensure it gets noticed. This is an aftermarket device that can be added to improve safety for electric ranges. It is the latest generation of a type of product that has been on the market for awhile and certainly is something to consider.

However, a point I was trying to make is that features like this are more effective and generally more functional when they are designed into the product in the first place. The nice thing about the fire fighting faucet is that the technology is integrated so it looks better and works continuously in the background. Similarly, more faucets could be designed that inherently limit the scald risk. And devices like stove could have better safety features built in--is it this type of technical advancement I'm hoping to see (at affordable levels)

Until then, the aftermarket solutions will have to do.

http://www.cookstop.com/

Smart technology that protects everyone

I came across this article in the NY Times today about a faucet that fights fires. Seems that the faucet is linked to a fire alarm. When the alarm trips, a special valve opens and a pump under the sink produces high pressure jets of fine mist. This mist immediately turns to steam around the fire and robs it of oxygen, putting the fire out.

I would love to see (read that as I have been WAITING to see)technology built into stoves that can sense when a pot gets too hot or when one has been left unattended for too long and lowers the temperature. That would be a better first line of defense. But having seen the effects of fires caused by overheated pots and pans or even unattended air poppers and other countertop appliances, this device will be a nice, non-intrusive approach to solving one of the worst after effects of "a senior moment."

http://tinyurl.com/y9zxxu8

Body Dryer

This product made its way through my e-mail scanners--I rarely pay attention to those messages, but this appears to be another product coming over from the UK/Europe where product design for bathing accessibility seems to be ahead of what we have over here. It is a full body dryer, making it easier for someone to dry off after a shower without bending or assistance. The claim is that cost to operate is about the same as laundering towels--suppose that depends on how often you wash your towels tho.

Can't vouch for how well it works yet, but seems an ideal product for lots of folks.

http://www.tornadobodydryer.com/featuresandfaqs.html

Designs that are great for everyone.

To follow up on the last posts a bit, let's talk about the Moen Digital IO series of electronic shower valves and controls. These new valves put all the plumbing behind the wall except for a small control panel that can be placed anywhere in the shower area.

When we remodel showers, we often bring the shower controls to the front of the enclosure, so they are easier to reach for a caregiver or someone with a balance issue, or moving them to the back wall where they are convenient for a seated bather. This electronic controller would eliminate the need to all that additional plumbing, helping to reduce the complexity of the install (and offset some of the cost of the device.)

But you can even get them with a remote control. Moen says that it would allow you to turn on the shower from across the room, however I suspect that few people have such an open floor plan for that to make a lot of sense. However, it totally eliminates any concern about where the controls are placed. Someone with balance problems can start the shower without having to reach in, and no one needs to risk getting hit with a cold spray of water--you stand safely outside the shower, use the remote to turn it on, and step comfortably in. Whereas my old solution of locating the controls in the location that best fit the user with a limitation meant that the shower was only optimized for a single person. Now, inherent in the design is that it is optimal for every user.

This principle is taken further with the fact that the controls have 4 preset temperatures--one for each member of the family. Especially useful, for example, if you have MS and need to have a cooling shower. But it is a feature that is of wide use--my wife prefers much hotter showers than I do. While we have a thermostatic valve, with this device I would not have to readjust it every time I get in, I just hit the button corresponding to my setting.

There is even a pause function--which uses the universal "II" symbol that we see on video and music players.

I haven't spoken to the folks at Moen to see what their motivation for this design was. But to me it speaks of a innovation that is targeted to provide comfort and ease for all shower uses, and it just so happens that it will have an enormous impact on the ease with which a lot of folks who are less mobile than they used to be or who have a disability manage their ADLs.

Prices on these electronic controls have continued to decline, and while the Digital IO line is still a premium over a standard valve, it is much closer to the range at which it becomes affordable. As prices drop further, I think we will see such systems as the smart standard for our shower remodels.

Design evolution

Another set of thoughts on this theme is that as technologies and design evolve and mature, often this leads to a convergence that makes them more accessible to a wider variety of people. Certainly costs tend to decrease, making the designs more accessible. But abilities and general acceptability tend to expand as well, widening the appeal of newer iterations of a technology.

A case in point may be the evolution of what are now being called Personal Mobility Vehicles or PMVs. Today a PMV might be a scooter chair, a golf cart, or a Segway for the more adventurous. These devices are becoming ever more popular forms of transportation, either for those who lack the mobility to walk distances or for alternative forms of transport. In many retirement communities golf carts are a de facto alternative to a car. In fact, I recently read that about half the injuries on golf carts (they are rather unsafe vehicles) occur off the golf course.

Scooter chairs, on the other hand, are slower and therefore safer, but certainly have a stigma, are not always easy to manuever, and their size and limitations can sometimes make them a frustrating experience for both the rider and for ambulatory people who are sharing the sidewalk, common space, or kitchen.

Enter the modern PMV. One prototype is the Toyota i-swing. http://tinyurl.com/nv5zjz Read how it was described when displayed at the 2005 Toyota Motor Show: The single-person vehicle package boasts an individual design with a “wearable” feeling. Its low-resistance urethane body is covered in cloth to soften any impact while operating near people, and an LED illumination panel can be customized to display an image to suit your mood.When traveling in a bustling street full of people, the i-swing can operate in a two-wheeled mode that takes up little space, so that it is possible to travel while keeping pace and talking with someone on foot. When there is a need to move quickly, the i-swing can change to a three-wheeled mode, which is fun to travel in. In addition to the stick control, a pedal control can be used to provide a fresh cornering feeling, as you shift your body weight as if you were on skis.The i-swing proposes the concept of using A.I. communication to enable it to grow, learning the habits and preferences of users by storing relevant data about them.

Here, in one device, we have customization, adaptability for the user and compensatory systems (collision avoidance) so that I do not have to master a joystick to navigate safely. I have a design that is tolerant of the errors I make and sensitive to those around me.

This is another example of where application of smart design and UD principles result in a design that would be a better solution for wide range of people and applications than any of the current technologies. It's all just a prototype now, but clearly moving in a better direction, evolving the technology.

Design for the universe or the user?

I've had several good responses to my recent post on Universal Design. In particular Bill Shackleford made some good points about the derivative effects of design for accommodation.

I don't disagree that designs and technologies which start with the intent to accommodate limitations to abilities often spawn solutions providing much wider benefits. Nor am I saying that we should not try to design solutions for to help accommodate specific limitations. In fact, I have been working on a theoretical framework and typology for assistive technology that address just this dynamic. My goal is that if we better understand that at some level all technology is assistive and that its benefits can be leveraged to the greater good, we can make progress more quickly and efficiently.

But I was making a different point in my original blog. Foremost, I was saying that we do Universal Design a disservice when we only present it as a way of dealing with disabilities. When presented in the fashion, many in the mainstream will marginalize the message. And that works against creating a world with fewer barriers.

Second, Bill says:

There are many (MANY!) other examples of well designed products and systems in mainstream use that appear to have been 'universally designed', but in fact were initially targeted for persons with disabilities - to 'accommodate' them.

Certainly there are. But that is a statement of current reality, not necessarily the ideal process. If from the start we had addressed the needs that Bills examples address with an orientation toward how the solution could more widely benefit, we might have gotten to that end state sooner. And I would be willing to bet that there are many things designed to accommodate a disability that have fallen by the wayside because they were obviated by better designed, more universal solutions.

Scott Rains pointed out a term "inclusive design" and I like the phrase "user centered design" which is one that resonates with Bill's comment that he begins his design process thinking about his users, not design principles. But this points to an inherent tension--are we designing for a specific user, or users in general? If we are talking about a product where a person has a range of options or the ability to customize, I think that user centered design is the way to go. Or when it is a group of people for whom you have a clear insight about common usage patterns or abilities. However if we are talking about multi-use situations and public spaces or common areas, UD principles are undoubtedly something that should guide the process from the beginning.

All of this off course flows into what motivates people to actually innovate or design--maybe the best designs will always come from the individual desire to create something that solves a personal need or desire. But nothing in that is hurt by increasing an awareness that the best designs are at some level universally applicable.

Universal Design is not just about disabilities.

Blogger Shyamala is an industrial designer. In her recent post (http://pshyama.wordpress.com/) she does a nice job of illustrating a number of universal design principles through the thoughtful creation of three personas with disabilities. It’s well done, but does seem to miss one of the key aspects of universal design. UD is not simply about making things useful/usable by people with disabilities. Really excellent examples of UD improve usage for all people. From a picture of the Toyota prototype that she shows it is obvious that this would be a more usable design for someone with mobility issues. But I am 6’ 4” tall and am forever sitting down in a front seat, not realizing that my wife has moved the seat forward and banging my knees and twisting my back in the process. Sure, it would be nice if I learned, but I don't, and sometimes I have to say that it's not apparent that the seat is forward from a quick glance early in the morning. Also, this design looks like it would provide easier access to the back seat—something that full sized adults or school kids with heavy backpacks would benefit from. I can relate how this would be helpful to folks with impairments—I’m thinking of the times I’ve thrown my back out, when getting into a traditional front seat is a nightmare—but a good design like this is helpful for a much wider audience.

As Shyamala points out “Universal design is the concept or approach to be more precise, of making any design accessible and usable by as many people as possible, irrespective of the age, situation and ability.“ However, typically this gets relegated in practice to “designs that are good for people with impairments or disabilities.” When this happens, we all miss out and the UD message is weakened.

The reality is that many designs are what they are because of historical technological limits or for no better reason than a lack of comprehensive thought being applied during the design process. Also at play is the consumer preference for low price over quality of design and construction, even thought the two are not inherently in conflict. I think affordability should be the eigth UD principle.

When we focus only on accommodation, rather than universal benefit, we unfortunately undermine the full promise of UD. As unpleasant as it is, the reality is that things that are seen solely as accommodations for those with disabilities will wind up being marginalized by a large proportion of the population. On the other hand, if the same designs are seen simply as “easier to use” they will get wider appeal and acceptance. Best to think of UD as a movement to create a more functional, flexible, intuitive and forgiving environment for all of us. If that were achieved, the need to make physical modifications to homes would be greatly decreased.

What's that box? Senior social networking??

What's that box to the left here, the one with the vintage photo of a guy scratching his chin? Its a Twitter gadget, showing my tweets. Might sond abit personal, but so it is, believe it or not.


I'm still not sure that Web 2.0 apps like Twitter will ever amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world (other than to make it crazier) but then again, they may be just the ticket.


Check out this article in the NY Times about social networking for the senior set.


http://tinyurl.com/lczw2n


I foresee tweets from the cruise ship. Tweeting family to say that all is well. A Twitter based device that sends an alert tweet if I don't press it on a regular basis. At least the grand kids would know about it.


Actually, while I expect Twitter won't last in its current form, and that little Twitter box over there will go away someday, I am a strong believer that technology will ease many of the burdens of age, and psychological isolation is certainly one of them. It's certainly not a panacea, but internet based socialization can certainly be a great boon for those who have limited ability to connect in other ways. Indeed, just like some youths and younger adults find it more easy to connect in a virtual world than a real one, there are probaby a lot of seniors who would sit isolated in a room full of people but who find that they have youthful, renewed ability on the social network.

Mama said they were magic shoes. They could take me anywhere.

Forrest Gump might not be quite the right image to toss out here, but the promise of Forrest’s Mama seems to be getting closer to reality. I’ve often said that technology will someday reduce the need to modify homes by helping people extend their abilities. Currently, for example, there are power chairs that stand and go upstairs. However they are cumbersome and according to one user I’ve met can be a bit frightening. The engineers at Honda keeps pushing this sort of technology forward and recently announced their prototype of robot legs. The legs are designed to be a “power assist” for people who are losing leg strength. For those of us old enough to remember, remember manual steering in a car? Think of this as power steering for your feet. It doesn’t change what we do, it just makes doing it easier and safer.

At first I wondered how you sit down, then I realized that you ARE sitting down. Technology like this might cause us to rethink a lot of things. While the prototype probably has a ways to go before it becomes practical for people who are infirm (how do you take the legs on and off?) this sort of technology has the promise of keeping people active and fitter longer. We tend to think of assistive devices as things for people who are already disabled. But as we boomers age, a large market will emerge in helping people prolong relatively normal activity. I met a man using a Segway for this purpose. Games to improve cognitive function are another example of this application of technology. Could robot arms to reach those things on the top shelf be next?

As Forrest said, “From that day on, if I was ever going somewhere, I was running!”

http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/future-tech/honda-uses-asimo-robot-legs-to-help-the-infirm-325930

When it comes to assistive technology, expect convenenience and benefit to win out.

At the National Aging In Place Council (NAIPC) regional meeting in Denver this week I heard Nathan Colburn of Accessible Solutions in Denver give a good discussion of assistive technology. Like us, Nathan feels that increasingly many needs can be met by technology rather than remodeling. But until the worst happens, and sometimes after, there are few people who will proactive seek out assistive technology.

The catch is that if you think about it, we all use “assistive technology” everyday. What about the television remote control? While it may not always be the easiest thing to master, there are not many people these days who get up and change the channels manually. (When I was a kid, kids were the assistive technology—I can still hear mom directing me to get up and change the channel for her. Young knees and all that.)

Another great example, the garage door opener—everyone in the audience who had a garage also had an automatic opener. Even simple things like eyeglasses and cell phones can be categorized as assistive technology. How about artificial joints? And all of them met with resistance and had their share of new technology issues, but we eventually embraced them because of the obvious benefits they offer. Convenience, safety, status--you name it. As we begin to embrace assistive technology for aging, the “mature market” will increasing experience the benefits. And that will lead to more widespread acceptance which will yield benefits for all.