Do You Find Your iPhone Sexy?

See Google.

Sexy has recently become a word used to describe new gadgets and cool web applications.  Let’s examine the word Sexy.

Sexy implies sexual arousal on the part of the observer and suggestiveness on the part of the thing being observed. The thing being observed is suggesting sex. It is creating associations in the observers mind related to sexual pleasure, excitement and the promise of gratification. 

Although I’ve been somewhat grossed out hearing people associate sex and the suggestion of sex with an iPhone or the latest gadget, the more I think about it, the less surprised I am.

Look at the iPhone. It’s curvy and sleek. It responds instantly to your fingertips. I’ll bet it generates a small amount of warmth when you hold it to your face.

But what are we really saying when we call an iPhone sexy?

Do we mean we might stand in line all night just to have one in our lives?

Do we mean we want to take it with us wherever we go?

Do we mean that it physically excites us to hold one and makes us think of sex?

Apple has been humanizing and personalizing technology ever since that little smiling Mac icon first appeared on startup. And Apple is just the best at it.  We know that people become attached to, and identify themselves with the products they own, but the portability and interactivity of cell phones, mp3 players and lap tops brings this into a different realm. They are always with you and always respond to you. And before you get bored of this one, you are already being promised the next one.

Essentially, that promise is a sexual one. It is the promise of delayed gratification that can only be satiated by the object of your desire.

So, maybe sexy is the right word for an iPhone.

I want mine in Pink.

In-context Procedural Instructions

People always have a lot to say when you tell them you write instructions, especially software instructions. And I always sympathize.

Last weekend, I elicited a group groan from some of my friends when I brought up the annoying fact that, in most software, if you try to follow along with the procedures, they disappear as soon as you click back on the application.

Tom Johnson’s post today on using graphics and screenshots highlights the user perspective on procedural documentation. Pitcures are more important than words.

Perhaps the problem isn’t that people need more pictures, it’s that they need procedural help to be more integrated into the task they are performing. 

Why would you open another window to show a picture of a screen that you already have open? It’s all so post-modern!

The latest version of Fullshot has a nice solution to this. Little callouts popup that point to the next button to click and guide you through the process of taking a screen capture.

When procedures appear one step at a time, there is only one step to read.

I think in the technical writing field there is a lot of questions about the utility of the work we do. In my opinion, a lot of that has to do with not what we write, but the way people get access it. 

When Words Lose Their Meaning

Structurally deficient. Functionally obsolete.

Which one of these words mean that a bridge will collapse?

In 2001, this is how the I35W bridge in Minneapolis was described by a technical writer.

Holly Harkness wrote a short post that points the finger at unresponsive politicians, but I think, as technical writers, we have to think about the effects of the language we use.

We are taught not to use jargon. But, as we regularly speak to people with extensive knowledge in a field and learn more about the subjects we document, we adopt the language of our industry.

We begin to speak, think and write like the people we were hired to translate into plain english.

In the least, this results in poor documentation. In the worst, people don’t understand the significance of a situation because the words we use diffuse the meaning of what we are trying to say.

I am not blaming the techncial writer for this tragedy. In cases like this there are major factors like millions of dollars in public money, law suits, politics and bureaucracy that add up to a collapsing bridge being described as “structurally deficient” and “functionally obsolete”.

I do think, as technical writers we have a responsibility to stand up for language and words and do our best to make sure that a collapsing bridge is described as what it is: a collapsing bridge.