People have a problem finding your URL. You post a QR Code. Now they have 2 problems. Or more:
- They see a chunk of robot barf on your poster, and have to realise it isn't a crossword puzzle, but a QR code.
- They need to take a digital photograph of it with their phone. If they have a laptop, even with a camera, this requires physical contortions
- They need an application on their phone that can make sense of a QR code.
- They need a lot of patience as they fiddle with it.
- They need a working network connection to resolve it.
Conversely, with a URL they could type it in, take a photograph of it and type it in later, or if they have the right app, it will recognise the URL text from the image and make it clickable.
That is the irony of this. QR Codes ignore years of research and culture on how to communicate meaning in symbolic form designed to be captured by image processing tools behind a lens. We have this technology. It is called writing.
Written language has a set of symbols that are relatively unambiguous, that are formed of curves rather than hard edges making them resilient to noise, and have been market-tested for milennia. QR Codes don't just ignore this, they ignore the relative success of one dimensional barcodes. Notice something about a barcode? It has the number printed on it as well, so you can type it in if the scan fails. QR Codes don't do this, so it's far too easy to put the wrong one in, or fail to replace a mockup. Which is why so many QR codes link to Justin's site instead.
The only place you should use QR codes is if you have a dedicated reader for them, like a classic barcode scanner, and a workflow that is designed for this that actually saves time. If you do empirical research on using QR codes for the public, you'll likely see 80% worse performance than text like this museum did. By all means try the experiment and report your results. Put up a QR code and a printed URL and see which gets the most usage.
Or listen to others:
a majority of our respondents knew more or less what they were for, very few (n=2, or around 7%) were successfully able to use QR codes to resolve a URL, even when coached by a knowledgeable researcher.[..] A strong theme that emerged — which we certainly found entirely unsurprising, but which ought to give genuine pause to the cleverer sort of marketers — is that, even where respondents displayed sufficient awareness and understanding of QR codes to make use of them, virtually no one expressed any interest in actually doing so.
Is it really faster and better to use a QR code that will direct you to part of a marketing campaign rather than getting a broader sweep of information by simply using the browser that you already use all the time on your phone? In the instant cost-benefit analysis I do every time I see a QR code, it has yet to make sense for me to fire up the decoder app I have installed on my phone.
QR code at the bus stop to get time of next bus. Really useful in the dark. Not. yfrog.com/mgicpqj
— Martin Geddes (@martingeddes) January 27, 2012
25 comments:
Here's the thing: a QR code is just a hyperlink. That's the best and worst thing about it.
Ideally, it's a link to something that couldn't just be typed in on your phone faster or with better accuracy - which, with knowledge of the right programs, means pretty much anything that doesn't end in a .com is ripe for this technique.
This idea that QR codes are something the average person doesn't get is ridiculous. Okay, the FIRST time a person sees this, they're going to have questions. BUT once they know what it is, and have the right app on their phone (Google Goggles for Android works best for me!), things speed up and become much faster.
The real problem is how they are IMPLEMENTED by designers, not received by users. Maybe avoiding them is best for dumb designers, but that doesn't mean they're still not useful -- just that they can't be used without some better judgement.
While QR codes are often clunky and hard to use now, I imagine that will change. Once it gets to the point where 95% of cell phone owners can point their phones at a code, hit one button, and get to the content instantly -- as opposed to going through the far too many steps I have to go through to scan a code with my phone now -- they'll be a lot more useful.
But image processing is good enough nowadays that there's really no point to having QR codes anymore. If you can pull out your camera & snap a photo of a QR code, you can pull out your camera & snap a photo of a URL.
It should be pretty straightforward to write an application that looks for what appears to be a URL (whether in alphanumeric, or straight numeric IP address format) and asks you if you'd like to view the result in your web-browser.
So, any value (other than possible aesthetics) that comes from using QR codes could just as easily be gained through image processing of URLs.
QR codes are problematic in some ways, I'll agree with that. There are limitations, and some of the promotional applications of the codes are incredibly short sighted. QR codes at the bus shelter was a classic example. Having said that, my kids know what they are, and clammer to scan them when we see one. Regardless of the subject matter.
In addition, as a teacher, I've found them to be very handy. I'm currently using them with a new resource I've built with for my students www.feedbackbadges.com ... it's an experiment in their usefulness, as well as encouragement and motivational awards. Kids love them.
So I do think they have their limitations, but they ARE eye catching, inspire some inquiry, and in the classroom engagement.
Finally, they have been around for years now, and show no sign of disappearing. Clearly, they are working in some applications.
Cheers
Martin Jorgensen
www.martinjorgensen.com
@mnjorgensen
QR codes are not just for URLs - you can include other details in them like contact details etc or a text "more info" explanation neither of which do you need a network connection for.
If you're just using them for a URL, sur include the URL as text too.
No reason to slate this as a "bad" innovation.
I think the point of a QR Code is being missed here. Outside of commercial uses (product tracking etc.) QR Codes are powerful marketing tools that are squarely aimed at the smartphone generation. QR apps such as QR Pal create a diary of codes scanned, so they can either link straight to the page or choose to be stored for the user to call up later. Most QR code readers are also much quicker than an app that needs to use optical character recognition to decipher text and then automatically recognise it as a URL.
Used in the correct context, I think QR Codes are hugely valuable marketing tools. In my business, the bottom of our menu says in clear text "visit our Facebook page at ... or use your smartphone to scan this QR code and check in to let us know you're here."
Clearly, different users are going to view such tools in different ways. The next generation of adults are smartphone-centric and QR codes will be second nature to them, but marketers still need to be mindful of the users who don't have such devices or who don't understand the technology and ensure there is a clear marketing message for them, too.
I've added some comments and links on this G+ post. https://plus.google.com/u/0/109581870574956225297/posts/AA7zwime4qn
I think every single one of your points is either a blatant mis-statement or the QR code isn't any worse than your proposed human-readble URL.
And now, there's QR Codes that are malicious. QR Malware of one sort or another was inevitable, considering smartphones still usually fail to bundle a QR Code reader in them.
I love the idea of QR Codes, but ultimately, like the late lamented CueCat they are a brilliant solution in search of a problem for which other reasonable solutions already exist.
They are terrible.
I have seen them squashed on beer mats, University prospectuses, the side of buses...As Rachel says in the first comment, they are just a hyperlink. Companies have been designing their place for years - a QR code is a bigger, uglier, less recognisable version.
They are completely without merit.
As a marketing tool, I think they're pointless. I've never once bothered to spend 10 seconds looking for the app, finding out I deleted it because I never see nor care about them.
People communicate with language, not binary matrices.
Like all technologies it is only effective applications that will drive long-term use. I have been working on some at:
www.q-action.appspot.com
QR codes have solved the media transfer issue efficiently--at least for now. What other technology takes a user from print to the web so quickly and directly?
What other technology takes a user from print to the web so quickly and directly?: "aol keywords", "google us", "find us on facebook", "www.example.com" are all quicker and direct. and the experience of QR Code implementors bears this out.
Until the default cameras on most phones have a built in message about "you are looking at a QR code, want to go to $URL?" built in, dedicated QR Code apps will be necessary.
Requiring users to download a new app to decode your url is no good.
For me, it comes down to trust of the folks who created the message that contains the QR code.
If I look up the company for myself, I get to mediate that flow of information, in my own way. If I scan a QR code and it opens my browser for me, I've just let some marketing creep pick the exact information that I receive.
Cute idea, but I think that ultimately they'll be relegated in history next to the "splash page" on web sites.
I had similar thoughts recently - they really do look like robotic vomit.
http://cianclarke.com/blog/?p=74
Hilarious: http://wtfqrcodes.com/
Google Chrome has an extension that will open QR codes without the use of a camera. . .I am sure other web browsers will follow.
Only actual "use" I ever got out of QR codes was a treasure hunt for the kids I set up. That has to be non-obvious and deciphery, so the obscurocity is a feature, not a bug, in that case.
Other than that, there is nothing a QR code can do that e.g. a bit.ly link can't do better.
/Z
Kind of ironic that the quoted text is in a somewhat unreadable font (ESPECIALLY the 'Q', which is vaguely but not exactly like a handwritten Q).
If there is more than a single step to using a QR code, they are a non-starter. My 15 years of software design tells me that if it two clicks or more, only the geekiest will even try it. It doesn't matter how cool your ideas are if no one wants to bother using your app.
Katherine Michel: favorited this.
via twitter.com
Eric Viljoen: mentioned this in I couldn't agree with this mor....
via plus.google.com
Thomas Baekdal: mentioned this in I couldn't agree with this mor....
via plus.google.com
Post a Comment