I'm back!

I read "The Whereabouts Clock: Early Testing of a Situated Awareness Device" published by Microsoft Research members. I found this paper very interesting(which is good as it's my project!). The whereabouts clock is basically a device that shows where certain people are, in this case using a 19 inch LCD touch screen, by using location based services (LBS) and situated displays.
The motivation behind this idea seems to be based on peace of mind for the customer in knowing where their workers/family members are, a "sense of reassurance."
Harry Potter is mentioned and accredited with the concept of a clock that displays where people are although there are differences, the whereabouts clock uses icons rather than hands pointing to the people and of course the obvious one of relying "on technology rather than wizardry to make the clock work!"
I liked the idea of peoples faces "fading" on the display when they were out of range/had the application switched off and when they were using the application their faces would "appear bright and also animated(appearing to float slightly)". The main difference with this project and mine is how people are being located, this project used mobile phones with SMS while i'll be using laptops to obtain IP addresses or the nearest wireless access point depending on whether the person is in one place or in transit. The nearest cell tower was used to get a location of the person but what if the person had no coverage on their phone or switched their phone off? Then there would be no way to trace that person which defeats the purpose of the clock in my opinion. Updates would be sent by SMS which to me seems very costly and i know i would be put off because of this. The customer can also select activities from a menu and using SMS transfer this information, that's more money being spent again.
The early field trial that was carried out had very encouraging results, and i liked the fact that it was tested early on as they would get an idea if it was useful or if anyone even used it. 14 people were involved in the trial which i think is quite a big number for an office and the feedback gained would be more than sufficient to get an idea of the need for this clock. In the office trial it was beneficial as if you were working at home or in a meeting, not everyone has to be told individually, it's right there displayed on the clock. The drawbacks the field trial came up with was that sometimes people wanted to convey more, for example if their computer was not working or they'd be in the office after lunch, a location wasn't enough. This problem was addressed and the notion of touching a person's face to find out more information was said. I don't like this idea, I feel it's a bit too invasive but I suppose you only give the information you are comfortable giving.
The volunteers described the "wonder" of the clock and it was also described as "visual enchantment." To me this sums up the entire idea and why I think it would be well received, it's almost magical. The location was not the only important issue/aspect, where someone is going next, what they are doing and why seemed to be significant at times and then the clock would not just be about location it's making a person more real, you're in their personal life. The next step of this project is to add layers and make it touch screen so you can find out more information about an individual, then it's not a "clock" which the researchers recognise. This trial was for office use, the next trial will be in the home.
Overall the researchers seemed to find no negative areas only constructive criticism and room for improvement which is no real surprise as it's a paper written by microsoft about their own product.