Vendor announcements may help lower the technological barriers

By Sam Driver and Erica Driver.

The year 2009 has been marked by rapid-fire advancements in the immersive software market. Every time we attend a meeting or briefing in the latest release of one of the products we cover, we see noticeable changes. These improvements are important because many of the barriers to adoption we identified in our recent report, “Crossing the Chasm, One Implementation at a Time,” are technology-related.

Building on the trend we’ve been witnessing all year, in the second half of September alone, vendors made announcements — some timed to coincide with the 3DTLC conference — about improvements in:

• System integration. ProtonMedia announced a new add-on to ProtoSphere, called SharePoint Media Carousel, which enables collaborative viewing and editing of documents that reside within Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007. Forterra Systems’ OLIVE 2.3 supports a variety of additional enterprise authentication mechanisms beyond those it supported before, provides telephony integration, and integrates out of the box with the Drupal Web content management (WCM) system. It provides APIs for additional WCM systems and for artificial intelligence (AI) system that can be used to create clerks, doctors, officers, customers, or other characters for use in immersive learning environments.
• Scalability and performance. Scalability and performance play a very important role in the user experience. Altadyn 3DXplorer 5.0 includes a wider range of avatar options than previous releases. The new avatars take up fewer system resources so more avatars can fit into a single environment. Teleplace (formerly Qwaq) announced Teleplace 3.0, which now has dynamic load balancing and cluster expansion.
• Features that make the software easier to use. Teleplace 3.0 provides tools to make the job of meeting leaders easier, like gathering participants automatically, moderating Q&A, and conducting visual polling. Teleplace 3.0 also supports live streaming of activities taking place in the immersive environment out to desktop media players. Forterra OLIVE 2.3 has a new custom content installer for easier download and installation by end users. It also has improved support for streaming media and 2D content display (e.g., documents and Web pages) within the environment.

Pragmatic technology buyers will require immersive software to expose and document APIs and provide out-of-box interfaces to enterprise apps, information worker tools, and back-end systems. Pragmatic end users will demand that applications perform as expected and are easy to use, even for the first time. They will shy away from applications that cause frustration. Given these realities, these announcements coming out of the vendor community indicate steady movement in the right direction.

© 2009 ThinkBalm. All rights reserved.

To cross the chasm, we must close the language gap

by Erica Driver and Sam Driver.

One of the themes of the 3DTLC conference last week was language. This was a recurring topic from the April, 2009 3DTLC conference, but the focus has shifted. Half a year ago the discussion was about whether we should use the term “virtual worlds” or something else. Last week, it became clear from the presentations and conversations that the next wave of adopters — the pragmatists — speak a different language from the early adopters. This language gap is a barrier to adoption of immersive technologies in the workplace; it’s a facet of facing “the chasm,” to use the terminology of Geoffrey Moore (see the book, Crossing the Chasm). (For more insights on how to overcome barriers to adoption see the Sept. 23, 2009 ThinkBalm report, Crossing the Chasm, One Implementation at a Time.)

Immersive Internet technology marketers, advocates, and implementers who are successful at closing this language gap will be competitively positioned to cross the chasm. The way to accomplish this is to speak the vernacular of target business sponsors, stakeholders, and users. As an example, Kevyn Renner, senior technology consultant at Chevron, said it well in his presentation at 3DTLC. When talking with people about the refinery asset virtual environment (“RAVE”) his team is piloting, he describes it using the terminology of the oil refinery — not Web 2.0 or 3D Internet language.

While Kevyn’s example is industry-specific, we can also change the way we talk about immersive technologies in a generalized way. The words we use should convey what people at work can do with the technology, more than describe the technology itself. For example, when talking with business decision makers we use the term email, not SMTP traffic crossing the Internet. We talk about instant messaging, not real-time extensible communication protocols. Likewise, to successfully communicate about immersive technologies to pragmatists we should be talking about collaboration spaces, operations centers, and building blocks rather than virtual worlds and prims.

Below, we offer suggestions to serve as a starting point for discussion. Included are generic terms intended to appeal to business decision makers. We recommend leaving behind terminology that commonly draws negative associations and words that arose out of science fiction. Of course, if your audience is in IT, it’s okay to talk tech — but remember that even IT pros will not likely be familiar with virtual worlds-specific terms. If your audience is a hospital administrator, HR manager, or sales manager, speak the language of their business and job function. In the end, the specific language you choose should depend on your target audience. 

Immersive Internet terminology map

Terms to avoid	Suggested alternatives
Virtual world Holodeck Holoscene Metaverse	Collaboration space Studio Practice room Interview room Meeting room Conference center Control room Operations center Bridge[1]
Virtual (when used in opposition to “real”)	Virtual, as distinguished from physical Immersive
Non-player character (NPC) Artificial intelligence (AI) Bot	Clerk, doctor, officer, customer, or whatever role the non-player character /AI / bot in the environment represents.
Prim	Building block Object Part
Texture (when used to describe an uploaded image)	Image Picture
In-world	Online In the immersive environment
In real life (“RL”) Real-world Real (as distinguished from virtual)	In the flesh In the physical workplace In-person Physical (as distinguished from virtual)
Simulation Game	Practice tool Rehearsal environment Interactive scenario
Terraform	Create Design Construct Build Model
Rez	Resolve Paint Appear Create
Teleport (“TP”)	Move Go Transition Navigate
Machinima	Video

 

[1] For more information about the concept of a bridge (based on the bridge on a ship) see the August 14, 2009 ThinkBalm Innovation Community video “The Bridge.”

© 2009 ThinkBalm. All rights reserved.

New ThinkBalm analyst report: Crossing the Chasm, One Implementation at a Time

by Erica Driver and Sam Driver.

Today ThinkBalm published a new research report: “Crossing the Chasm, One Implementation at a Time.”  We timed the research and release of this report to coincide with our opening keynote presentation at the 3DTLC conference in San Jose. To view or download a PDF of this report, click this link or the image of the report cover below.

The core question we set out to answer is, “How are early adopters overcoming barriers to adoption of immersive technology in the workplace?” To build upon the research we conducted for the ThinkBalm Immersive Internet Business Value Study, Q2 2009, in August of 2009 we conducted in-depth interviews with 16 highly-qualified Immersive Internet advocates and implementers who work for organizations like AT Kearney, Blended Solutions, City of Geneva (Illinois, USA), e426.org, groupVision AG, IBM, Microsoft, Preferred Family Healthcare, SAIC, San Diego State University, The Coaches Center, The Maids, University of Denver, and World2Worlds, along with some that wished not to be named.

In this report we provide insights into the barriers early adopters face — technological, people-related (especially time and perception-related), and financial — and offer a set of recommendations for “springboards” that can help project teams leap over the barriers.

© 2009 ThinkBalm. All rights reserved.

New ThinkBalm Innovation Community video: “The Innovation Un-Lecture”

by Erica Driver and Sam Driver.

Today ThinkBalm published a new ThinkBalm Innovation Community work product: a six-minute video titled The Innovation Un-Lecture: A ThinkBalm Innovation Community event. This video is about an un-lecture held on September 11^th, 2009. An un-lecture is an event format consisting of four ten-minute presentations, demos, or tours about work-related use of immersive technologies, held in an immersive environment. The theme of the Sept. 11th event turned out to be innovation.

This video describes presentations by:

• Charlie Herbek. Charlie Herbek is a senior Manager with CSC, which is a $16 billion company that provides technology-enabled business solutions and services. The company recently celebrated its 50^th anniversary with a series of immersive events. More than 2,000 of the company’s 92,000 employees participated in some way. Moving forward, CSC plans to use its immersive environment to reinforce the company culture. The company is very focused on innovation and sees immersive technology as a means of propagating an innovative culture. The bottom line? Ultimately, increased revenues.
• Leon Cych. Leon Cych is director at Learn4Life, an eLearning consulting company in the UK. Leon talked about a new collaborative innovation project he is launching, called Virtual Bletchley Park. Leon is assembling a team of volunteers to build a replica of Bletchley Park in the virtual world of ReactionGrid. The goal?  Assemble a group of people from academia, corporations, and government, put them together to work on something, and see what happens. The culture Leon is trying to establish will be based on John Seely Brown’s notion of “creation nets.” His goal is to demonstrate that the collaborative innovation process, as applied to projects conducted in a virtual world, really works.
• Janalee Redmond. Janalee Redmond is director at the Epoch Institute and innovator at IMMERSION:tools:jam. Her vocation is teaching. She’s a dressage instructor and has a background in training doctors how to use computers, in particular Windows applications. At the Epoch Institute she offers training sessions to help professionals become comfortable working in an immersive environment. Janalee Redmond also helps run the IMMERSION:tools:jam, which is a community of practice that meets three times a week in Second Life. The group experiments with, and share learnings related to, 3D collaboration, communication, and learning tools.
• Cynthia Calongne. Cynthia Calongne is a professor in the Institute of Advanced Studies at Colorado Technical University, where she teaches advanced game design. Cynthia gave an intro to a gaming education kit she designed with members of the faculty at the US Air Force Air University. This serious game was designed to reinforce leadership and teamwork, and teach communication skills, in the context of a scenario: a hostage rescue operation. The target students for this learning experience are Air Force academy cadets, war college students, and faculty.

© 2009 ThinkBalm. All rights reserved.

How to write a business case for immersive tech investments

by Erica Driver and Sam Driver.

Today ThinkBalm published a new report titled, ”How to Write a Business Case for Immersive Technology Investments.” Hats off to the six ThinkBalm Innovation Community members who contributed to this issue of the ThinkBalm Immersive Internet Storytelling Series: James Stallings, Jeff Lowe, Lara Blanch, Peter Finn, Philippe Barreaud, and Trevor Meister. To download a PDF copy of the 13-page report click this link.

To build up and share a store of good practices for writing a business case for immersive technology, the ThinkBalm Innovation Community held a fast-paced, multichannel, hour-long brainstorming session on August 28, 2009. A diverse group of participants from around the world gathered in the virtual world of ReactionGrid. Our objective was to develop a series of recommendations to help lone advocates build a strong case for immersive technology investments in their organizations. For insights into how to write the business case, including choosing your words, designing your pitch, and safeguarding your efforts, download the report.

© 2009 ThinkBalm. All rights reserved.

What makes a virtual environment immersive?

by Erica Driver and Sam Driver.

What makes a virtual world or campus, immersive learning environment, or 3D business application immersive? Immersiveness isn’t all or nothing. It’s not determined by whether the software used is a Web browser or thick client. Instead, it’s a continuum that is determined by 1) the degree to which the user’s senses are engaged, and 2) the desirability and meaningfulness of the activity in which the user is participating. Below is a description of factors that make virtual environments or experiences more or less immersive: visual, tactile, auditory, and collaboration and interactivity (see Fig. 1). A virtual environment doesn’t need to score high in all of these areas to be immersive, but the more “highs” it gets, the more immersive it is (see Fig. 2).

 

Fig 2: The Immersiveness Continuum

Factor	Low Immersiveness	High Immersiveness
Visual
Rich graphics	The environment looks cartoony or avatars look strange or move in a disconcerting way.	Realistic-looking lighting, shapes, textures, avatars, plants, etc. At the high end, graphics are photorealistic. Or, for abstract experiences (e.g., chemistry and mathematics) the visuals contain a high level of detailed information.
Avatars	Users do not have graphical representations of themselves in the environment.	Users have configurable or customizable avatars with which they identify.
3D environment	Much or all of the environment comprises 2D images.	The environment uses three-dimensional representations of geometric data. Avatars and objects take up and can move in 3D space.
Ability to control viewpoint	The user’s viewpoint into the environment is static or limited to a few pre-selected perspectives.	The user has full control over their visual focus in the environment. They can zoom and pan in all directions.
Physics	No physics engine, or a very basic one	A sophisticated physics engine that simulates properties like mass, velocity, gravity, friction, and wind resistance. The environment weather and collision detection.
Size of display	The display fills only part of the user’s computer screen	The display fills the user’s entire computer screen
Tactile
Haptics	No support for haptic devices	The user experiences the environment through the sense of touch, via a controller or input device. Through a handheld device, glove, etc. the user feels vibrations, forces, pressure, or motion. An example of this is the Wii controller.
Auditory
Voice	No built-in voice over IP. Or if the system has VoIP, it is not spatialized; instead, it sounds similar to a phone call.	Spatialized, 3D audio. When an avatar is standing to your avatar’s left, you hear that person’s voice in your left speaker. Voices of those whose avatars are closer to yours are louder than those who are farther away. At the high end, voice colorization allows users to modify the way others’ voices sound to make it easier to differentiate among speakers.
Non-voice sounds	Sound is mono.	Sounds are stereo and spatialized.
Collaboration and Interactivity
Integrated collaboration, communication, and productivity tools	The environment lacks functionality like built-in voice, screen sharing, collaborative document editing, etc., requiring people to leave the environment (e.g., using the ALT-TAB key combination on a PC to switch applications) to get their work done.	Within the environment participants can communicate with each other via public or private voice chat, local or group or private text chat, messaging, document and object sharing, screen sharing, etc. The applications and information the user needs to complete a task (e.g., have a meeting, deliver a presentation, collaborate on a model) are accessible from and can be displayed within the virtual environment (e.g., via screen sharing or real-time document editing).
Gesture and emotion	Avatars do not lip sync. Ability to express emotion visually is limited. Gestures are basic.	Avatars lip sync while users are talking. Users can express emotion visually through their avatars. Today this usually is done by clicking on a menu of icons but in the future it will become more natural through the use of cameras, which will project the user’s movements and expressions onto an avatar.
Interactivity	Objects in the environment are static.	Using the mouse or other input device, the user can click on an object to display an item or change the way an item behaves). The user can flip switches to rev up a turbine, sit in the driver’s seat and operate a vehicle, etc.

 

© 2009 ThinkBalm. All rights reserved.