In my previous post about QR codes I made a couple of points which, after receiving some interesting comments, I’d like to expand on.
“I see them [QR codes] occasionally on blogs/web-pages but I just don’t much see the point of that”
Shortly after making this point, I suggested on a UKOLN internal mailing list that it might make more sense to include a QR code in a cascading style sheet provided for printing, rather than viewing on the screen. If I want to link my blog/post/webpage to some other web resource, I include a hyperlink (which might be displayed as a title, rather than the raw URL, and so occluded on the screen). If I want to link a print-out of my blog/post/webpage to some other web resource, I can include a hyperlink, being careful to display the actual URL, or I can present a QR code. Or both. Tony Hirst also made the point about CSS for printing in a follow-up post to his original.
“I see QR codes as an interim technology, but a potentially useful one, which bridges the gap between paper-based and digital information.”
Some context: QR has been around for a while, and is well established in some industrial contexts. However, the aspects of their usage (or of their potential usage) which is of interest to Mia, Tony, Andy as well as Lawrie, Jon and Mike who all commented on my previous post stems from the possibility of wide-spread use by consumers with mobile devices, typically phones.
It seems to me there are two, different, aspects to this:
- giving users an easy way of jumping to a virtual resource while they are not immersed in a virtual context
- connecting the physical and the virtual worlds
QR codes seem to satisfy the former to some extent. In a comment, Jon mentioned that:
City AM (a free London daily business newspaper) use QR codes printed on the frontpage to drive visitors to their mobile site. It’s a simple idea that does actually work really well. There is clearly great potential for this in any number of marketing/promo activities.
Leaving aside the clunkiness of the iPhone as a QR-reading client device, the user is still required to actively scan the barcode with a handheld camera/scanner. The user must know that they want to, in this case, ‘go’ to the website. I find it hard to imagine that this will ever drive huge volumes of users to such webpages, but I guess that isn’t the point – it’s just ink after all and costs almost nothing…. there’s nothing to lose for the publisher. And even on an iPhone, scanning a QR code to input a URL is still probably quicker and more convenient than typing in a URL read off a piece of paper. As a way of encoding a URL in a machine scannable and readable way on paper, QR codes have the virtue of relative simplicity, very low cost, and a growing capacity among users to exploit them. And having thought more about Tony’s idea for QR codes in the margins of learning materials linking to video clips which supplement the content, I’m now persuaded that this could be worth doing.
In my previous post, I mentioned in passing how it might be interesting to use QR codes in a museum context:
Imagine walking around a museum – scan a QR code attached to an exhibit, load the URL and get a commentary played on the iPhone without needing to supply/hire those dedicated units some institutions supply to visitors.
Now imagine that, rather than having to scan a QR code, my phone automatically knows that it is near a particular exhibit. When I enter the physical space of the museum, I load the virtual space into the browser on my phone. As I stand in front of the physical exhibit, my device orientates me in the virtual space as well. There are are existing technologies which might help get us to this point, such as RFID & GPS. Imagine linking this with something like Graffitio for the iPhone….
Lawrie picked up on my point about ‘bridging the gap’, and Mike said:
It seems to me that the ways in which we begin to bridge the gap between virtual and real is something that is pretty permanent…
I agree with Mike’s sentiment absolutely. How virtual and physical worlds interact, and how technology and people mediate between these ‘places’ is already becoming fascinating. However, I think the fact that we’ve all jumped on the ‘bridge’ metaphor is revealing. A bridge is a narrow, limiting connection between two larger places. The bridge represented by QR codes is, furthermore, one way. We need bi-directional connections…. but that’s another blog post.
In the meantime, and coming down to earth, it’s difficult to see how information from QR codes can ever be pushed to the user. And that, I think, is why in many contexts it can only be an interim solution.
[...] viewing on the screen. If I want to link my blog/post/webpage to some ot View original here: One-way bridges and interim solutions Bookmark to: Hide Sites « Sonos adds free iPhone app, Last.fm, expanded [...]
Although I’m interested in this idea of ‘bridging’, and think it is potentially powerful, I don’t agree that ‘clunkiness’ is not an issue, and would disagree that (on an iPhone) “scanning a QR code to input a URL is still probably quicker and more convenient than typing in a URL”
In general it would be quicker and more convenient for me to type in a tinyurl or equivalent (especially with a nice app that filled in the start of the URL for me). If all you are doing is providing me with a URL, QR has got to be quicker than typing in the URL – doing a quick comparison of going to http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com using QR or TinyURL I found that typing the TinyURL was approx 15 secs quicker to get a web browser and loading the web page – not v scientific, but I’m convinced TinyURL will win this everytime. So if QR is going to beat typing, it has to be easy to use – from what others have said, it seems likely that on Nokia handsets this is the case – while it remains clunky on the iPhone then I can’t see me using it unless I have to.
If I were to speculate (and why not) I would also guess that doing text recognition on a URL would not be a huge challenge at this point? (perhaps even via Webservice or email?)
So for me, the first, best, step that physical resources could offer would be to come with a TinyURL or equivalent. I’m often frustrated when reading the Guardian that the articles don’t come with URL at the end, as I often want to send them on to people, and end up having to find the article online to do so.
I agree that there is a lot more potential for bridging the gap between virtual and physical worlds – and offering services based on proximity is something that is already available – but perhaps not to a fine enough resolution to offer what you are suggesting yet – but we are starting to see experimentation with RFID to provide this kind of interaction (e.g. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/sep/15/privacy.advertising, http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/oct/16/internet-of-things-ipv6), and there has been work on integrating RFID readers with phone handsets for sometime (e.g. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/emergingtech/0,1000000183,39172457,00.htm).
To clarify: I do believe that clunkiness is an issue – I just wanted to point out that there are other issues.
In terms of speed of entry with a QR code scan versus typing in a URL, I had in mind a long URL such as might be used to identify an item in a collection…. not a very readable URL, with a long identifying number for example. I accept that a Tiny URL could be entered more quickly with the current state of the art of iPhone hardware and QR software for it.
Paul
The best possible solution IMO was something I wanted us to consider at the Science Museum and uses the medium that phones (and people..) are best at – voice. You could easily build something using a service like Spinvox (http://www.spinvox.com/) which allowed people to phone in a code. This would then convert your code to text and do whatever you wanted with it – send a link back to phone, bookmark, play a voice recording, whatever.
The next best thing – again, IMO – is still SMS (not just banging the http://www.stufflinker.com drum, honest!) – ubiquitous, easy to use, familiar, known cost model, etc..
Hi guys,
I think QR Codes really are an excellent way to get from print to digital information. The concept itself is proven in Asia and, as you already said, many industrial applications. You cannot only scan a Code from paper, but also from Video screens, which might have advertisements on them etc. etc.
A very nice “side-effect” of using QR Codes is also the ability for the content owners to track how many people accessed their content via scanning the code. This is exciting news for them as they really get hard numbers with this technology, whereas they traditionally only have a guessed amount of viewers/readers. “You distribute 2000 flyers, but how many people are actually looking at them?? How many people are visiting the website noted on the flyer??” – With a QR Code as link, you can get some numbers and make the math for the total viewers. Maybe the QR Code links to a Drink-Coupon for the bar, or driving directions, a video, …
Owen, compared to entering URLs, scanning a QR Code is way more efficient when looking at the overall volume of people accessing the online content. You may be faster on a BlackBerry when entering a 12 digit URL, but the purpose of QR Codes is to be scanned with all kinds of devices – all you need is a camera – for any kind of content. So the 12digit URL is just one use-case. There are many people who encode their business card in form of a vCard in plain text into QR. With this, there is not even an online communication going on. (src: http://www.matez.de/?page_id=7)
Personally I am thrilled about using 2D Barcodes to promote online content in the physical world. And that’s not only because I work in that area but also because I see an added value for both, the publishers and consumers. And until we all have downloadable virtual worlds, GPS, NFC on our handsets and all the necessary technology to use it ‘in the fields’ it will be some time. And even then a print is still cheaper than integrating an RFID chip.
Cheers,
Philip
[...] 30 Oct 2008 blog.paulwalk.net One-way bridges and interim solutions [...]