Comments from Stephen Fry on the new Blackberry Storm appear to have received a lot of attention recently, as discussed on the BBC technology blog. The question of one person's influence over the success or failure of a new gadget is believed by some to be a real threat and in this case, Stephen Fry's negative review on the usability of the new Storm. It is quite possible that this one very well known man could influence others and convince some people not to buy.
Stephen Fry's own response to such a notion was interesting in that he plays down his expertise and knowledge on such topics as that of "an enthusiastic, passionate amateur". This attitude is not dissimilar to those participating in usability testing who I find often blame themselves for the difficulties they encounter, citing inexperience or stupidity. This could not be further from the case.
There seems to be an expectation that reviews of new gadgets should be conducted by experts who have an extensive knowledge and understanding of the latest technology. I disagree. I believe that those people who are likely to use the Blackberry every day and represent the common user, like Stephen Fry, should be the ones to road test and review it. This is likely to provide the most honest and accurate account on how the technology will fare when released. After all, if one person has a problem with the text input, the chances are so will someone else.
If more people were to base their decision to buy from the comments of enthusiasts such as Stephen Fry, then perhaps this will result in companies refining future generations of the device and improving on them. A poor performance in Blackberry Storm sales might be bad for the company but reinforces the importance of user-testing during the design phase and not just post-launch, something I'm sure RIM are very aware of.
