UNIVERSITY OF OSLO
`Department of informatics
`
`Contactless Payment with
`Near Field Communication
`
`An Empirical Study in
`Ubiquitous Computing Context
`
`Master thesis
`60 credits
`
`Ummear Ahmad Khan
`
`2 May 2006
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 1 of 109
`
`

`

`II II
`
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 2 of 109
`
`GOOG-1032
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 2 of 109
`
`

`

`Foreword
`
`This thesis is the result of a research study as a part of the Masters degree in Information
`Technology at the Department of Informatics.
`
` I
`
` would like to thank my internal supervisor Jo Herstad at the Department of Informatics
`for motivating and constructive guidance with the theoretical and methodical framework,
`and external supervisor Juan Carlos López Calvet at Telenor R&D for technical guidance
`and access to Telenor’s research lab and equipment for the research.
`
` I
`
` am grateful for the time and effort from the participants in the user study, for the
`valuable feedback from co-students at University of Oslo, and the inspiring ideas I got
`from the researchers at Telenor R&D.
`
`Special thanks go to Saeeda for proof reading and commenting the thesis. Thanks to
`Vibeke for the design for menu and manuals. I would also like to thank my fiancé,
`Nimra, and my family who supported me throughout the process.
`
` A
`
` final thank goes to fellow students and friends at Lekestue study room. Thomas,
`Thommy, Tor Eric, Petter, Lena; without your humor, company and intellectual food for
`thought, the last weeks wouldn’t have been so motivating and inspiring.
`
`
`Oslo, 2 May 2006
`
`
`Ummear Ahmad Khan
`
`
`
`III
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 3 of 109
`
`

`

`IV
`IV
`
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 4 of 109
`
`GOOG-1032
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 4 of 109
`
`

`

`Abstract
`
`This master thesis focuses on the use of NFC payment in Ubiquitous Computing context.
`NFC payment and the possibilities that emerge from this technology have been described.
`A case study has been conducted on the use of NFC payment with two user groups with
`different backgrounds. Knowledge from both of the previous mentioned work has been
`used to discuss how NFC payment appears as visible or invisible for the users.
`
`The problem statements are:
`
`
`- Describe the possibilities that emerge with NFC as a payment method.
`- Conduct a user study of NFC as a payment method
`- Discuss how NFC payment appears as visible or invisible technology for the
`users in the user study.
`
`
`Twelve different users participated in this study. The focus has been on the NFC phone
`that can bee used for payments. The NFC phone was used in the user study which was
`specially designed to observe the users experience and reactions when the NFC phone
`shifted between visible and invisible context. The results from the study are presented in
`this thesis.
`
`The theoretical framework has been Ubiquitous Computing and related theories. Main
`concepts have been invisibility vs. visibility, center and periphery of attention and routine
`invisibility to mention some.
`
`The study showed that the users approached and related differently towards NFC
`payment technology. This was evident through the different reactions and experiences the
`users expressed through surveys and interviews. It was not possible to sum up with a
`concluding remark on how NFC payment appears as visible or invisible technology for
`the users in the user study.
`
`
`V
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 5 of 109
`
`

`

`VI VI
`
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 6 of 109
`
`GOOG-1032
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 6 of 109
`
`

`

`Sammendrag
`
`Denne masteroppgaven fokuserer på bruk av NFC-betalingsløsning i Ubiquitous
`Computing kontekst. NFC-betalingsløsning og mulighetene den frembringer med denne
`teknologien har blitt beskrevet. En case studie har blitt gjennomført om NFC-
`betalingsløsning med to brukergrupper med forskjellig bakgrunn. Kunnskap fra begge
`forgående arbeidene har blitt brukt til å diskutere hvordan NFC-betalingsløsning framtrer
`som synlig og usynlig for brukerne.
`
`Problemstillingene er:
`
`
`- Beskriv muligheter som fremtrer med NFC som betalingsløsning.
`- Gjør en brukerstudie av NFC som betalingsløsning.
`- Diskuter hvordan NFC betalingsløsning fremstår som synlig og usynlig
`teknologi for brukerne i studien.
`
`
`Tolv forskjellige brukere deltok i studien. Fokuset har vært på NFC-telefoner som kan bli
`brukt ved betaling. NFC-telefoner ble brukt i brukerstudien som var spesielt konstruert
`for å observerer brukerne erfaringer og reaksjoner da NFC-telefonen skiftet fra synlig til
`usynlig kontekst. Resultatet fra studien er presentert i denne masteroppgaven.
`
`Det teoretiske rammeverket har vært Ubiquitous Computing og relaterte teorier.
`Hovedkonsepter har vært usynlighet vs. synlighet, senter og periferi for oppmerksomhet
`og rutinemessig usynlighet for å nevne noen.
`
`Studien har vist at brukerne tilnærmet seg og reagerte forskjellige på NFC-
`betalingteknologi. Dette var tydelig gjennom forskjellige reaksjoner og erfaringer som
`brukerne gav uttrykk for gjennom undersøkelser og intervjuer. Det var ikke mulig å
`oppsummere med neon konkluderende kommentar om hvordan NFC-betalingsløsning
`fremtrer som synlig og usynlig teknologi for brukerne i brukerstudien.
`
`VII
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 7 of 109
`
`

`

`VIII VIII
`
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 8 of 109
`
`GOOG-1032
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 8 of 109
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1
`1.1.
`BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION ................................................................................................ 1
`1.2.
`PROBLEM DEFINITION.................................................................................................................. 3
`1.3.
`TARGET GROUP ............................................................................................................................ 4
`1.4.
`RESEARCH METHOD IN BRIEF ...................................................................................................... 4
`1.5.
`STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ......................................................................................................... 5
`THEORETICAL FOCUS AND RELATED LITERATURE ......................................................... 6
`2.1.
`THE INVISIBLE COMPUTER........................................................................................................... 6
`2.2.
`UBIQUITOUS COMPUTING............................................................................................................. 8
`2.3.
`CALM COMPUTING..................................................................................................................... 10
`2.4.
`UNREMARKABLE COMPUTING.................................................................................................... 13
`2.5.
`TANGIBLE COMPUTING .............................................................................................................. 15
`2.6.
`AMBIENT INTELLIGENCE............................................................................................................ 16
`2.7.
`CONTEXT-AWARE COMPUTING.................................................................................................. 17
`2.8.
`SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................. 18
`TECHNICAL FOCUS – NFC.......................................................................................................... 19
`3.1.
`UBIQUITOUS COMPUTING AND NFC .......................................................................................... 19
`3.2.
`NFC - NEAR FIELD COMMUNICATION........................................................................................ 19
`3.3.
`OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................. 19
`3.4.
`TECHNICAL – HOW IT WORKS.................................................................................................... 20
`3.5.
`RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION (RFID)............................................................................. 22
`3.6.
`CONTACTLESS AND MOBILE PAYMENT METHODS TODAY......................................................... 22
`3.7.
`STANDARDS ............................................................................................................................... 24
`3.8.
`MARKET..................................................................................................................................... 24
`3.9.
`FIELD TRIALS............................................................................................................................. 25
`3.10.
`SECURITY ISSUES ....................................................................................................................... 27
`3.11.
`SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................. 27
`4. METHOD .......................................................................................................................................... 29
`4.1.
`DIFFERENT RESEARCH METHODS .............................................................................................. 29
`4.2.
`QUALITATIVE RESEARCH........................................................................................................... 30
`4.3.
`RESEARCH APPROACH USED IN THE THESIS ............................................................................... 36
`4.4.
`SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................. 38
`5. USER STUDY WITH NFC PAYMENT......................................................................................... 39
`5.1.
`USER STUDY .............................................................................................................................. 39
`5.2.
`PRELIMINARY FIELD STUDY....................................................................................................... 39
`5.3.
`HOW I PLANNED TO CONDUCT THE USER STUDY ........................................................................ 40
`5.4.
`USER STUDY DESIGN ................................................................................................................. 40
`5.5.
`INFORMANTS.............................................................................................................................. 41
`5.6.
`HOW I ACTUALLY CARRIED OUT THE USER STUDY ..................................................................... 42
`5.7.
`NFC IN USE – NOKIA 3220......................................................................................................... 44
`5.8.
`SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................. 47
`USER STUDY...........................................................................FEIL! BOKMERKE ER IKKE DEFINERT.
`6.
`FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 48
`6.1.
`SURVEY 1 - INFORMANTS’ BACKGROUNDS AND MOBILE PHONE USAGE ..................................... 48
`6.2.
`OBSERVATIONS AFTER TASK 1................................................................................................... 50
`6.3.
`OBSERVATIONS AFTER TASK 2................................................................................................... 51
`6.4.
`SURVEY 2 – THOUGHTS AND IDEAS AFTER TASK 1..................................................................... 52
`
`3.
`
`IX
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 9 of 109
`
`

`

`SURVEY 3 – THOUGHTS AND IDEA AFTER TASK 2 ...................................................................... 57
`6.5.
`INTERVIEWS ............................................................................................................................... 61
`6.6.
`SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................. 66
`6.7.
`7. DISCUSSION.................................................................................................................................... 67
`7.1.
`DIFFERENCE IN USER EXPERIENCE............................................................................................. 67
`7.2.
`VISIBLE IN USE VS. INVISIBLE IN USE.......................................................................................... 71
`8. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. 78
`REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 80
`APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................................................I
`APPENDIX B............................................................................................................................................... II
`APPENDIX C ...............................................................................................................................................V
`APPENDIX D ............................................................................................................................................... 8
`APPENDIX E.............................................................................................................................................. 10
`
`
`X
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 10 of 109
`
`

`

`
`Figures
`
`FIGURE 1 EARLY ADOPTERS ........................................................................................................................... 7
`FIGURE 2PRAGMATIC ADOPTERS .................................................................................................................... 7
`FIGURE 3: LATE ADOPTERS............................................................................................................................. 7
`FIGURE 4: THE MAJOR TRENDS IN COMPUTING ............................................................................................ 11
`FIGURE 5: DIFFERENT USES OF NFC.............................................................................................................. 20
`FIGURE 6: EXAMPLES OF NFC (FELICA) USE................................................................................................ 21
`FIGURE 7: NFC AND OTHER STANDARDS....................................................................................................... 24
`FIGURE 8: NOKIA 3220 WITH NFC SHELL INTERACTING WITH VISA-SENSOR............................................... 26
`FIGURE 9: DIFFERENT RESEARCH METHODS .................................................................................................. 30
`FIGURE 10: UNDERLYING EPISTEMOLOGY..................................................................................................... 32
`FIGURE 11: PROFESSIONALS VS. STUDENTS .................................................................................................. 49
`FIGURE 12: FORGETTING THE MOBILE PHONE AT HOME............................................................................... 50
`FIGURE 13: PROBLEMS – SWIPING THE NFC PHONE...................................................................................... 53
`FIGURE 14: HOW DID THE NFC PHONE KNOW WHICH ITEM YOU WANTED?.................................................. 54
`FIGURE 15: VIEWPOINTS FOR USING NFC PAYMENT..................................................................................... 55
`FIGURE 16: THEIR OWN DESCRIPTION OF THIS PAYMENT METHOD............................................................... 56
`FIGURE 17: TIME-SAVING OR TIME-CONSUMING? ......................................................................................... 57
`FIGURE 18: EXPERIENCE OF USING NFC-PAYMENT NOW .............................................................................. 58
`FIGURE 19: COMMENTS ABOUT THE MENU ................................................................................................... 58
`FIGURE 20: CONCERNS AFTER SURVEY 2...................................................................................................... 60
`FIGURE 21: CONCERNS AFTER SURVEY 3...................................................................................................... 60
`FIGURE 22: IMPORTANT DIMENSIONS FOR GROUP 1 AND GROUP 2................................................................ 69
`
`
`XI
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 11 of 109
`
`

`

`XII XII
`
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 12 of 109
`
`GOOG-1032
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 12 of 109
`
`

`

` List of Acronyms
`
`
`NFC Near Field Communication
`RFID Radio Frquency Identification
`SMS Short Message Service
`WAP Wireless Application Protocol
`HCI Human Computer Interaction
`
`
`XIII
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 13 of 109
`
`

`

`XIV XIV
`
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 14 of 109
`
`GOOG-1032
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 14 of 109
`
`

`

`1. Introduction
`
`
`1. Introduction
`
`
`
`
`“..Ubiquitous Computing will help overcome the problem of information
`overload. There is more information available at out fingertips during a walk in
`the wood than in any computer system, yet people find a walk among tree relaxing
`and computers frustrating.
`Machines that fit the human environment, instead of forcing humans to enter
`theirs, will make using a computer as refreshing as taking a walk in the woods.”
`-- Mark Weiser (1991)
`
`
`
`Background and Motivation
`1.1.
`Humans and computing technology have always been fascinating to me. It’s refreshing to
`get to know new and different people, and it’s refreshing to try out new technological
`inventions. Interactions between these two “creatures” has become an interesting and not
`to mention important subject of research the past decades. New technology gets
`developed all the time, thus research has to be done continuously. Some computing
`technologies help people in their daily life, while other computing devices become
`themselves an important part of people’s daily life. Technology industry rules the world.
`If all computing devices vanished today, half of the world would stop. Humans users
`have become depended on the computing technology.
`
`Some researchers are sceptical to the technological influence on our lives and would
`prefer it to vanish. Other researchers would like the computers to be everywhere and do
`all the work in our daily lives. Another group of researchers have another kind of
`approach:
`- Let the technology vanish when we don’t need it, and let it appear when we need it!
`The message has been something like this the past decade from some research
`communities.
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 15 of 109
`
`

`

`1. Introduction
`
`
`
`
`Mark Weiser has been a central figure in this socio-technical approach towards
`technology. There is a need to understand how human best can benefit from the
`interactions with the computers. Donald Norman calls for the computing industry to
`understand human’s, the user’s needs when it comes to computing technology. His
`conclusions are also in the same path as Weiser: “Computers should be invisible”.
`
`As said earlier, new technologies emerge all the time. One emerging technology today is
`Near Field Communication (NFC). One domain of use for this technology is contactless
`payment via mobile phone. This is a good example of a Ubiquitous Computing device.
`Mobile phones are everywhere, in almost every human’s hand in the developed countries.
`NFC is a technology hidden under the hood of the mobile phone. NFC enabled mobile
`phones will let you contactlessly and electronically pay for a product. International
`newspapers write regularly that electronic payment via credit cards or internet is
`increasing steadily. Payment with NFC enabled mobile phones has already become an
`important trend in Japan. A study of these user trends should be of great importance for
`the technology industry and socio-technical researchers. Yet still very few field studies,
`even less user studies, have been conducted so far. In Europe such studies are still in their
`early stages.
`
`Based on the above mentioned motivations it should be enriching to study this new
`emerging NFC technology closer, which could help us with the daily payment process.
`Nevertheless it would be highly valuable to gain understanding on the human’s
`interaction with this emerging, ubiquitous technology that could change our everyday
`life.
`
`To sum up, the objective of this thesis is to contribute to the knowledge of the emerging
`possibilities with NFC payment and how people relate to them.
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 16 of 109
`
`

`

`1. Introduction
`
`
`
`
`
`Problem Definition
`1.2.
`The problem definition has its main focus on the NFC payment technology and the user
`experience in a Ubiquitous Computing context. Three problem statements were
`constructed to explore the above mentioned focus of the problem definition:
`
`
`- Describe the possibilities that emerge with NFC as a payment method.
`- Conduct a user study of NFC as a payment method.
`- Discuss how NFC payment appears as visible or invisible technology for the
`users in the user study.
`
`
`The first problem statement will be answered through the chapter with technical
`background of NFC technology and the possibilities it produces. The second problem
`statement will be explored through a user case. The last problems statement will be
`answered through a discussion on the theory in relation to the findings.
`
`The underlying perception for the last problem statement is that there will be difference
`in use and experience for users with different age and background. It is expected that this
`difference will appear in the user study which is designed in consideration of visibility
`and invisibility in Ubiquitous Computing. The idea is that a technology is at its best when
`it’s faded into the background when it’s not needed. It will be in the periphery of our
`attention even if it still is there, but it would not interfere with our daily life and thus it
`will remain invisible. On the other hand, in the moment it is needed and activated by us,
`it will move to the foreground, to the centre of our attention, and hence it now will be
`visible. Various researchers in the field of Ubiquitous Computing believe that people
`prefer invisible computing devices. It will be interesting to see how the different users in
`this research study will react to this issue; if they react in the same way or differently
`when some elements with the NFC payment first will appear as invisible and later as
`visible.
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 17 of 109
`
`

`

`1. Introduction
`
`
`
`
`
`Target group
`1.3.
`The research in this thesis is mainly addressed towards the field of Information Systems
`at University of Oslo. But it should also be of interest for various students, researchers
`and interested readers with at least basic academic knowledge of the interaction between
`humans and computers.
`
`
`Research Method in Brief
`1.4.
`The problem domain was little known to me before the research was started. NFC
`technology was still fairly new. One thing that was clear to me was that I wanted to study
`users’ behavior and reactions of using a contactless payment method like NFC payment.
`The human aspect was important in the investigation of this new technology. It felt
`natural to choose a research method that focuses on understanding people in a given
`context. Qualitative research was chosen:
`
` “Qualitative research methods are designed to help researchers understand
`people and the social and cultural contexts within which they live” (Myers, 1997).
`
` A
`
` case study research was conducted. This way of research helps investigate
`contemporary phenomenon:
`
`“A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary
`phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between
`phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Myers, 1997).
`
`
`Research skills that were used for data collection were interviews, observations and
`qualitative surveys. In addition a literature study was done which was used as a base in
`the case and problem definition.
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 18 of 109
`
`

`

`1. Introduction
`
`
`
`
`
`Structure of the report
`1.5.
`The thesis is structured in the following way:
`
`Chapter 1 introduces the background and motivation for the thesis and presents the
`problem definition. In addition to this the research methods used to study NFC payment,
`are presented.
`
`Chapter 2 presents the theoretical concepts and research on Ubiquitous Computing
`related issues, which will be used to shed light upon the empirical findings.
`
`Chapter 3 introduces NFC and the possibility of contactless payment it brings.
`
`Chapter 4 describes some relevant research approaches, which methods were chosen and
`how they were applied.
`
`Chapter 5 presents the user study that was conducted, the design of the user study and
`the equipment used.
`
`Chapter 6 describes the empirical findings. Main findings will be presented and there
`will be referred to situations and feedback from observations and surveys, and results
`from the interviews.
`
`Chapter 7 discusses the findings based on the theory. The chapter discusses the user
`groups’ experiences with NFC payment with visible and invisible elements.
`
`Chapter 8 sums up the problem definition and its statements, shows how they are
`answered through chapters of theory, NFC technology, findings and discussion. Further
`work is also described.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 19 of 109
`
`

`

`2. Theoretical Focus And Related Literature
`
`
`
`
`2. Theoretical Focus and Related Literature
`In this chapter theories based on existing research will be introduced. The focus is on
`Ubiquitous Computing, Calm Computing, Ambient Intelligence, Tangible Bits,
`Unremarkable Computing. The book by Donald A. Norman “The Invisible Computer”,
`has also been used, as a reference and inspiration. Some other related theories are also
`reviewed. All the theories are related to what impact computing has to people; thus the
`focus is mainly on the interaction between humans and computers.
`
`
`The Invisible Computer
`2.1.
`Donald A. Norman says in his book, “The Invisible Computer” (Norman, 1998), that
`customers are ready for products that offer convenience, ease of use and pleasure. The
`technology should be invisible, hidden from sight. He says that companies must change
`the way they develop products:
`
`
`“They need to start with an understanding of people: user needs first, technology
`last – the opposite of how things are done now. Companies need human-centered
`development process, even if it means reorganizing the entire company.”
`
`Norman’s view is that the customer’s real needs are productivity, ease of use, getting the
`job done. These are the dimensions that should be focused on. He has observed that in
`our world with extensive use of technology, everything seems to be difficult to use. It
`seems like there is a general perception among people that the best technology is the
`technology that is most complicated and overwhelming. His conclusion seems to be
`simply this: the emphasis tends to be on technology, rather than the user.
`
`The term “technology” could have different meanings for different people in different
`contexts. Norman discusses that in everyday speech we refer to “technology” as things
`that are new. Especially electronic devices we use in the daily life, or what we think we
`want to use in the daily life, are what we often refer to as “technology”. A special feature
`
`6
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 20 of 109
`
`

`

`2. Theoretical Focus And Related Literature
`
`
`
`
`with technologies is that they often are taken for granted. We often tend to forget that
`everyday tools like pencil, paper, paper clips, pins and so on are actually commonplace
`technologies. We use them and rely on them everyday without giving them a single
`thought. The idea is that when we start assuming that the technological features are
`reliable and robust, we tend to ignore them or take them for granted.
`
`Norman talks about three main kinds of users/customers in the context of a technology’s
`life cycle.
`
`
`1. Early Adopters:
`- Early days of technology
`- People who buy new technology because they are in love with technology and
`the functions.
`Important dimensions: New cutting edge technology, new functions.
`-
`- They will buy almost any new item, or whose needs for the newly developed
`functions are so great that they are willing to put up with any other problems.
`Figure 1 Early Adopters
`
`
`2. Pragmatic Adopters:
`- Adolescent stage of technology
`- People who wait until they see whether the new technology stabilized, whether
`it can actually deliver its promises.
`Important dimensions: Reliability, maintenance, cost.
`-
`- Everyone has comparable technology: Technology is taken for granted.
`Figure 2Pragmatic Adopters
`
`
`3. Late Adopters:
`- Adulthood/mature days of technology
`- People who wants this from the technology: “Turn it on, use it, and forget it”
`Important dimensions: cost, appearance & convenience
`-
`- Taken for granted: functionality & reliability
`- Product provides real value
`- Technology move to the background
`Figure 3: Late Adopters
`
`In other words, Norman divides the technology in the three stages; early days with the
`early adopters, adolescent stage with the pragmatic adopters and adulthood with the late
`adopters. To generalize we can say that the early adopters focus on the new cutting edge
`technology and the new functionalities. We can say that the pragmatic adopters focus
`more on reliability. But the last group, the late adopters focus on both the functionality
`
`7
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 21 of 109
`
`

`

`2. Theoretical Focus And Related Literature
`
`
`
`
`and reliability. It is in the adolescent stage with the pragmatics adopters that we can see
`the pattern that everyone has compatible technology, hence it is taken for granted. In the
`adulthood stage of the technology with the conservative late adopters Norman talks about
`product providing new value and hence technology moves to the background.
`
`To sum up, the majority wants convenience, ease of use and reliability. They want
`solutions that simplify their lives, not technology that complicate them. As we have seen
`Norman also discusses that good technologies are “invisible” or “taken for granted”,
`never the less: “technology should move to the background”.
`
`Being inspired by these visions of Donald Norman and “The Invisible Computer”, I
`started to dig a bit deeper in this path of Human Computer Interaction. In the following
`chapters some of the above stated issues will be discussed more deeply, while other
`issues will be discussed a bit indirectly. Different researchers have different meaning to
`these issues, but there seems to be a uniform understanding of that these issues are
`important in the discussion of developing useful and user centric technologies and
`computers. We will see that the theories about Ubiquitous Computing by Mark Weiser in
`many ways conform to Norman’s views. Mark Weiser’s theories laid also the
`groundwork for many of the later theories in Human Computer Interaction (HCI).
`
`
`2.2.
`
`Ubiquitous Computing
`
`
`
`“The most profound technologies are those that disappear. They weave
`themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from
`it.”
`
`-- Mark Weiser (Weiser, 1991)
`
`
`Historical Background
`Ubiquitous Computing is a computing paradigm first articulated by Mark Weiser at
`Xerox PARC in 1991 and proposed as paradigm with an article in the American Scientist:
`
`8
`
`
`
`GOOG-1032
`GOOGLE LLC v. RFCYBER CORP. / Page 22 of 109
`
`

`

`2. Theoretical Focus And Related Literatu