Category Archives: Presentation Skills

Did you catch the TED talk given last month, and posted just recently, by Temple Grandin, left?

I first came across her life and work several years ago in a documentary, and since then have listened to her being interviewed several times whenever she has published a new book.

In her TED talk, Temple pleads for her audience present, and those of us watching via the TED site, to consider the many different learning styles students bring to the learning environment. She invokes her own Autism Spectrum Disorder, which was once referred to as “Infantile Schizophrenia” and hopeless to treat, requiring institutional care, as the exemplar.

If you haven’t see her TED talk, here it is, below. Either watch it first, and come back, or continue with this blog entry, and view the 20 min video in your own time.

There are two principle points I want to make about this video, and Temple’s work.

Firstly, Temple in eventually acknowledging her being “different”, found a place in the world by focussing on how to make those differences work for her, and make a difference in the world. To that extent, she reminds me of Apple’s Steve Jobs, whose self-professed desires for technologies his company brings to the marketplace is that they make a difference, rather than “we have to be in this market because our competitors are”, implying a company’s value is dependent on having high market share. Instead, he wants to leave a legacy of changing how people use technologies, from listening to music and watching video, to interacting with the printed word, to enriching our knowledge through interacting with the web and creating our own media.

For Temple, if you read her work, you will see her animal activism acknowledges that humans consume animal meat and make animals work for us, but her desire is that it be done respectfully and without pain and suffering, even when an animal is to be slaughtered for its meat. To do that, she has attempted over several decades to adopt an animal-centric view of the world when it comes to animal management and husbandry. For her this comes easy, as her TED talk tells us, because she thinks in pictures, not language, a function of her autism.

To that end, it’s her belief she is much more empathic towards animal’s views of the world than she is to human’s, as if her brain’s “empathy centre” was diminished, but her visual pattern detection systems grew as a compensation.

Her ability to see the world, in particular cattle yards and slaughterhouses, through cattle eyes has seen her take very important roles in US meat production through better design of these areas, reducing the stress the animals experience, and this improving the quality of the meat while reducing cattle loss through accidents and injury in crowded pens.

So something in the chutes the animals would move through to be vaccinated for instance might be overlooked by human eyes as a perfectly normal thing, such as a waving flag nearby, or a shadow cast across the floor, but to a cow it could cause fear to be experienced, thus releasing adrenaline and cortisol, affecting the meat.

Screenshot from TED talk, illustrating the animal's viewpoint

For presenters, it’s a way to remind us all that we need to take an audience-centric view when we construct our presentations. That when we sit down in front of our computers and construct our slides,  there is an audience to whom they will eventually be shown, and it is their engagement we seek, not our time at the microphone.

The second point Temple states directly, is that there are different learning styles and these need to be acknowledged. For some, the big picture is what they wish to hear described, for others, it’s the small details and the story we build up using these details before we get to the bigger picture. For Temple, these are natural differences, accentuated by clinical conditions such as autism. For a presenter, it’s important to acknowledge that disengagement comes not because our stories are uninteresting, but because we overuse one method of story telling, and leave out others.

An example would be a 30 minute scientific presentation featuring text-only slides, now commonly referred to as Death by Powerpoint. But just showing movie after movie in say Apple’s Keynote would also be disengaging in some contexts, unless the presenter pauses between, makes the point, and then uses the next video to further embellish the story or highlight some subtle but important elements.

The task of the presenter is to keep their audience engaged by means now well understood but too often ignored about the brain’s attentional systems. We need variety, we need to ascertain difference as much as sameness, we need surprise amidst predictability. This goes for our voice as much as it does our slide construction. With more and more books and websites devoting themselves to better slide construction to do away with Death by Powerpoint, the final frontier will in fact be the first frontier – the telling of stories using our voices to help audiences modulate their arousal and engagement.

My prediction is that 2010 will be the year we hear lots more about Attention and Engagement, and it’s been one of the themes in my Presentation Magic workshops and talks these past three years. If the previous Ages we lived in could be described by the tools we used – The Stone Age, the Brass Age, The Industrial Age, The Knowledge economy – the age in which we now find ourselves could be described as the Age of Attention and Connectivity. These are the tools of the internet, where websites compete for our attention, their underlying technologies helping connect us to like minded people and groups we ordinarily would not meet face to face.

And yet because of the advantages these technologies bring, we are left with a missing element, and that is who do we trust to give us the information we crave. Basic Trust is the first of the generational needs psychologists talk about, and it is a theme that stays with us throughout our lives. Clinical psychologists like me often meet patients whose lives have never possessed basic trust, or where trust has been shattered through life events, whether they be earthquakes or war or being fired after twenty years loyal employment.

I take my presentation giving, training and receiving very seriously because I take the issues of trust and authority seriously. I want those who come to a presentation to have faith that the trust they have given me by their attendance has been reciprocated by my efforts to keep them engaged by my storytelling, both narrative and visual. I take pride in my ability to take complex ideas and transform them into understandable and actionable slides and stories to help make a difference. This is the same reason we go to see movies with known film “stars” who we trust to align themselves with entertaining products, but on whom we can round if they turn in too many stinkers, so called box-office “poison” (Think Nicole Kidman and Kevin Costner).

When you go about thinking about your next presentation, think about the difference you wish to make for your audience. Think like Temple Grandin or Steve Jobs about each presentation being a time capsule, a legacy of your thinking, that makes a difference for someone. If you’re a scientist, engineer or medico, don’t just get up at a conference and put into bullet points a summary of your latest publication complete with mandatory graphs, as is if that’s all that’s expected of you. Take the opportunity offered by the conference organisers to reciprocate the faith placed in you to keep their audience engaged by doing just that: transform your printed article into something special, using slides and graphs if you want to, or simply using the oral tradition to create a “theatre of the mind” to help audiences understand the importance of your work for them, their patients or clients or subjects, or for the institutes for whom they work. Don’t just treat it as another entry on your CV – sooner or later, that kind of thinking in the years to come, will come back to bite you, hard.

Finally, if you get a chance to locate the biopic of Temple Grandin she refers to in her TED talk, shown in February on HBO, do so. You will be thinking about its effects on you for days afterwards, and will want to share its story with friends and family.

Screenshot from Temple's TED talk, for her HBO movie biopic

In my next post, I’ll focus on how the educational system is failing our students by relying on outdated and traditional teaching methods, far removed from how young people seek information for themselves. And how presentation skills can make a world of difference.

We are approaching the end of March, three months into the new year, and a few weeks before the release of the first iPad variants in the US.

This is fifteen months out from the last iWork upgrade, taking one of its apps, Keynote, from version 4 to version 5. And we know that version 6 is waiting in the wings, if its showing at the iPad formal release this past January 27 in the hands of its most famous “beta tester” Steve Jobs can be relied upon, left.

Keynote has a special place I think in Jobs’ heart, given his use of Keynote and its ancestors in the NeXT days of exile, and since 2003 when he began to use it publicly in his keynotes. Each public display had Keynote aficionados like myself watching for new transitions and builds.

We saw a few this past January, confirming the likelihood of not just a minor upgrade but a major one. In the past, when Apple has updated Keynote in point form, e.g. 5.0 to 5.0.1, it referenced only minor bug fixes, but no new functionality such as MagicMove when transiting from Keynote 4 to Keynote 5. (Some of these new builds are below.)

A new build, dropping a value with dustcloud

A new text build out or transition - got a great laugh from the iPad announcement audience

$499 pounds the pundits $999 expected pricing into the ground, with fallout!

I am aware that the iWork team, particularly the Keynote team, are working to a deadline to have the iWork apps ready for sale on the iTunes App store in time for the official delivery of the launch iPad Wifi-only units April 3. The apps contain familiar elements from the desktop iWork applications, although with respect to Keynote, it only contains twelve familiar “themes”. While video of the iPad shows some variation from the desktop applications, keen users ought to have little difficulty adapting to the iPad’s ways.

One wonders if third party themes will be allowed to be included – here’s a way Apple can “contain” those themes it doesn’t like because they perhaps contain background animations which will, I predict, become very popular, but which Apple doesn’t like. If it did, Apple would have done them themselves by now, but clearly the current Apple hardware and software doesn’t play nice quite yet, not allowing smooth reliable transitions from one background animation to another. See the YouTube video I created below to see what happens even when you use no transition through a slow dissolve and one other transition.

In fact, I had to use a screen movie maker (Screenflow) to make this video, as Keynote fell over everytime I tried to export it to Quicktime, below.

The Keynote app. also contains some new elements not yet seen in desktop Keynote, and makes the iPad an ideal small group standalone demonstration tool, as well as a great presentation assistant when attached (by cable or wireless variant) to a data projector. Note the screen shots from this TidBits video showing new highlighting tools and “laser” call out tools, below, recorded at the iPad official announcement, January 27.

I’m going to predict that while we know a new version of Keynote exists and has been demonstrated to us, the likely time for its release is just before or at the time of iPads being delivered into users’ hands, April 3. It makes sense to have compatibility between Keynote App and Keynote Desktop. We have seen unique elements displayed for each, so a synchronisation with a Keynote desktop update to allow files created on either platform to be shared is a no-brainer.

There are two questions to be asked then: Will the release of the Keynote Desktop application be timed to coincide with the iPad’s delivery date (along with the other iWork apps.), and what other new elements, many of which have been asked by Keynote users for many years (myself included) might be included?

I think we’ll only have to wait a few weeks to find out. It’s especially important it happen soon, with the release of a much beefed up Powerpoint 10 only nine weeks away.

Just a brief update about the Presentation Magic workshop at Macworld this past week; evaluations are in and it looks after talking to Macworld MD Paul Kent that we’ll be back in 2011, January 25-29 for Macworld 2011.

Here’s a brief Fox News report broadcast February 9 featuring a glimpse of the Presentation Magic Day 1 session, plus an interview about Macworld 2010 without Apple.

Next week when I return to Australia, I’ll give a lengthier entry with thoughts about the Macworld experience.

I’m preparing a rather lengthy (even for me) blog post about the iPad which I’ll publish once I complete my Presentation Magic workshop at Macworld next week.

Curiously, the dust has yet to settle on the iPad, even though more than a week has passed. Can you recall a product in this class which has garnered as much pre-release hype and guesswork, and one where the punditry continues the discussion long after?

I’ll keep this blog entry short and sweet, prompted by deadlines to prepare my workshop yet inspired by some great comments on the muledesign blog following an article called, The failure of empathy, looking at how geek designers perhaps fail to understand (or are even contemptuous of) the end user. The blog, written by Mike Monteiru (linked to from John Gruber), extols the virtue of the iPad.

Here are two of the blog comments which I relate to given my workshop next week:

(My own blog about the iPad keynote will focus once more on how Jobs tells the iPad “reason for being story” and plays it as hero against the villainous cheap, slow and “clunky old PC software” netbooks.)

The second comment that caught my attention:

Someone truly gets it. In this context, it’s in support of the argument that there is a torrent of people who couldn’t care less about a computer’s operating system, or how to drill down as a root user to make something magical happen for them, perhaps forbidden or obscured by the original designer. No, these are people who just want to do stuff, perhaps basic as in reading a novel or newspaper, or perhaps composing a letter to the editor of said newspaper and emailing it, or creating a more formal response in Pages for snail mailing.

It won’t come as a surprise that many people not of the computing world but of other domains I inhabit (but who know of my faux geekiness) have had one of two things to say to me about the iPad:

1. “I think I’m going to get one. It’ll be only the second Apple product I’ve owned (following an iPod or iPhone) and I think our household might be turning Apple” (usually from friends steeped in Microsoftiness, meaning they don’t care what computer they use as long as it’s cheap);

2. Les, are you getting one?

Now, amongst my Apple owning friends, it’s well known that I’m not necessarily an early adopter of its hardware, while I often rush to buy software. New hardware products from Apple have had a history of suffering version 1.0 issues (hardware quality issues in Macbooks and iMacs, and missing functions in iPhones), and my purchase of a Titanium Powerbook G4 in 2001 taught me some valuable lessons.

Such purchases are big ticket items, expected to last at least three years (or so my accountant informs me), and function as mission-critical items, or ought to have such reliability.

But – and I’m wondering how many others will feel this way – we know the iPad is at the beginning or genesis of its being a revolutionary product. It’s truly a version 1 product, whereas my Powerbook G4 was a version 1.0 evolutionary product. This is one reason there continues to be so much post-keynote discussion, given how many people wish to keep reminding the geeks who wanted everything and more in the iPad that they need not judge the iPad’s success or failure as a genre leader by this first model.

So given the outrageous pricing (compared to the $1000 expectations rumoured or leaked for mass consumption), how much can one lose by now being an early adopter? I’d worry more about sunk costs if I’d just purchased the latest Kindle while being receptive to all those tablet rumours previously circulating.

No, at the price of US$499, without the 3G, or $130 more with it – and without having to be on contract which I presume will also be the case outside of the US – it’s a small and possibly short-lived (maybe a year) investment in learning a new way of interacting with data. When the new model comes out in 2011, what’s the bet thousands of first buyers will hand it up or down, or donate it to schools, or somehow pass it on. My 84 year old mother has played with my iPhone (she still uses a decade old Nokia phone) but sees no reason to change. With an iPad and a few lessons from me, she’ll be reading even more than the five books a week she borrows from the local library.

What I’ll conclude with is that even some people’s usual ways of interacting with Apple products (I’ll wait until version 2) no longer needs to hold given its relative cost of entry to a new paradigm.

On the eve of the Apple special event, and considerably more information dribbling out from sources that we are looking at a tablet-format device, spare a moment for those naysayers asking why the world “needs” another tablet, when the models before (powered by flavours of Windows) have all but failed to make an impact, except for very highly specialised fields, such as medicine and logistics.

My reading of their assertions, usually anonymously posted in the comments sections of mainstream IT or Apple websites and blogs, has all the echoes of past attributions about previous Apple breakthrough devices, specifically the iPod and the iPhone. (Most of the commenters are too young, judging by the grammar and spelling, to be around when the other breakthrough device, the Macintosh was released in 1984.)

Others of a more erudite nature are asking what solution the tablet is seeking to address, which is a reasonable question to ask of any technology. But they forget the history of technologies in human development, as I usually elaborate upon in my workshops on Technologies and Society. (I am often asked by professional colleagues to address fellow psychologists who wish to be updated on technology trends and how to better incorporate changes into their practices. I always start by giving a potted history of mankind’s relationship with technology).

Technologies like the tablet always bring a curious mixture of hope, doubt, powerlessness, and empowerment to those who spend time considering how a new technology might impact them. Change, not of your own decision-making, is hard. IT departments in large enterprises know that about 50% of IT projects fail in their implementation, either because it was the wrong solution for the estimated problem, there are cost overruns, loss of significant project personnel at a critical time sees the project delayed, there is political interference should a merger take place simultaneously, and finally, the end user – the data entry staff – reject the new technology because it is a poor match for what they do, they are so accustomed to how to do things, or their training has been poorly managed.

But like most things Apple, this new device is not aimed at taking over the enterprise market place. I’m sure Apple is very content to leave that to the likes of Microsoft and Oracle for instance. Big profits, but big headaches too, with Windows Vista being a good example of the latter, and not the former.

In these introductory minutes I spend with workshop groups, I attest to how technologies have been used down the ages: as tools to enable, extend, augment, and connect humans and their innate abilities. The best technologies, those that have the most impact for the most people, do all four. These technologies often leave previous technologies that bear a faint resemblance to their purpose, as archival pieces, to be studied in history class, or to be repurposed.

Those who believe the tablet will be just another computer but in a different, but hitherto unsuccessful  physical form, and thus doomed to failure, are dooming themselves to repeat history: that of misunderstanding how technology progresses, and in particular how Apple conceives of technology and its place in human-computer interaction.

You only need to recall the negativity when rumours of an Apple cell phone began in earnest in 2006: “.. the market is too mature for an outsider like Apple to enter” was the gist of one type of message heard. “What does Apple know about making phones…?” was another, utterly forgetting that Apple is a hardware company as well as a software developer. Given the “maturity” of the cellphone market, meaning the stuff that makes them operate was now so ubiquitous and cheap that the cost of entry to the cellphone market was not the issue – it was how to differentiate oneself from the usual suspects.

And this is where Apple’s design superiority and integration caught the senior citizens of telephony flatfooted, locked as they were into seeing hardware as the differentiator (how many models does Nokia have at any one time – dozens if not scores. Makes choosing just the right one easy, right? Wrong!), rather than software.

Apple saw that universal access to the internet (web, email, file sharing etc) was the next bold step for a portable device to take, and its mobile Safari browser was at the time the best reproduction of a desktop browser available, compared to the poor excuse for internet connectivity of other phones.

As the iPhone went through generational improvements (in Australia we got the 3G version to start us off) it became clear to many users that the phone had much of the functionality of their laptop computer, albeit restricted to the connectivity aspects. But in other respects, the iPhone, via the innovativeness of its ecosystem of developers, exceeded the functions of a laptop. Ask a long term user of the iPhone how often they now feel naked if they leave home without their laptop…

Witness such new endeavours as SquareUp, (left) with its e-commerce abilities, and hardware addons. Or in the medical field, what a company called AirStrip Technologies is doing with the iPhone.

Did Apple envision the iPhone performing these tasks in 2004 or 2005, when Steve Jobs is said to have moved Apple towards a cellphone business? Who knows, but it’s clear Apple does not wait for others to lead the way forward with respect to human-technology interaction. It waits until the hardware components have sufficiently matured (i.e., small enough, reliable enough, cheap enough) to then apply its software and design savvy to new solutions to the same old problems of the big four: “enable, extend, augment, and connect humans and their innate abilities.”

It’s true other technology companies often enter a field earlier than Apple, but too often their technologies are too big, too unreliable and too clumsy to use other than for specialist needs and where there is very limited competition. And thus also too expensive to break out of the enterprise and into the consumer world.

Apple takes the reverse path, designing for the masses (yes, those in the mass who can afford and appreciate well-designed and built equipment). Later, those early adopters bring it (e.g., the iPhone) into the enterprise, where IT staff are made to kick and scream in protest that it’s all too much and their expertise – and importance – is being challenged by those who don’t understand the role of enterprise level IT. Go here to read what I’m sure has to be a tongue in cheek apocalyptic blog entry from an IT specialist).

So, the lesson is that Apple releases groundbreaking devices that change how we both think about and interact with digital technologies, usually in fields already explored but not exploited by other companies, and does it in a compelling fashion not for IT geeks, but for those who want something better than “good enough“.

When the tablet is unveiled, you’ll see a combination of gasps and disappointments. Some will immediately see the road ahead, especially developers who can see how to extend their product line and reach new audiences, and who have learnt from the iPhone’s introduction to look beyond the initial release product and roadmap. And the disappointment will be from those who expected some miracle device in a version 1.0 product without understanding how Apple operates.

They’ll stick as long as they can with their Kindles, looking for reasons why its one pony show is a great solution for that problem; or they’ll stay with a Windows 7 powered tablet so they can exercise their minds with Microsoft Office in a tablet format, as if somehow that’s better than a desktop or netbook or laptop solution.

But for those who gasp, who get what Apple’s doing yet again with familiar but newly thought through technologies, they will be very anxious to change how they conduct their lives on a day to day basis, for the better.

I was having lunch last Friday with the guys at Connecting Point, a Melbourne Apple reseller with a large customer roll within the educational sector, from primary (elementary) through to college (university). It also makes sales to individuals, and I have referred a number of switchers to them over the last year or so.

I was booked to see Avatar for the second time at the iMax cinema not far from the Connecting Point Friday lunch get together, last week including an Apple engineer, so dropped in to discuss my preparation for Macworld, and of course rumours over the tablet. I jokingly offered that joining Steve Jobs on stage would be none other than Rupert Murdoch, whose parent company News Corp. has multiple media interests ranging from Fox Studios, through to the Wall Street Journal, and publishing houses such as HarperCollins.

Rupert, known in his Aussie homeland and especially the UK as “the dirty digger” for his union busting activities, has been outspoken about how users must eventually pay for quality journalism, even though critics of his publications such as the New York Post and the Fox cable network might question the meaning of “quality” in this context.

But Murdoch now owns the Wall Street Journal which in recent years has obtained accurate leaks of forthcoming Apple products, so we can assume that News Corp. and Apple may well have reached a deal, even if Murdoch and Jobs’ politics diverge considerably. Both are huge business risk takers and surround themselves with highly competent and trusted senior executives. Both share a love and passion for how their respective products and services are world-changers, and so there is a business synergy between the two. Whether they would share a stage together to make a compelling announcement is up for grabs, but I fully expect a News Corp (or one of subsidiaries) rep. to be up on stage at some point on January 27. If it is Murdoch or a senior News Corp. exec., it will cause other publishers to sit up and really pay attention to what Apple’s doing in the publishing world. I should also note the long term connection between Murdoch and Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, from the Saudi Royal family, who has major media interests in the Middle East and who is also a long time significant Apple shareholder.

Who else then? (Assuming Steve himself does the heavy lifting for most of the keynote. I wonder if he will show the Amazon Kindle, as he did with the “usual suspects” smartphones in 2007’s iPhone launch, and make a comparison between it, its target market and what the tablet will do?)

No doubt, Phil Schiller will play some role as Senior VP of Worldwide Marketing on stage, demonstrating some Knowledge Navigator-type of function of the tablet. We’ve already seen Jobs and Schiller do something like this when showing new competencies of iWork 09, as well as a three-way conversation when Jobs introduced the iPhone in 2007. I don’t expect Phil to do a demo on his own as he has done in the past with desktop Macs (do you remember Photoshop bakeoffs comparing Macs to Dells in previous Macworld keynotes?). If the tablet includes a webcam (perhaps using the screen itself as the camera, based on patents going back several years), then perhaps we will see a video conference with Phil take place.

Scott Forstall, Senior VP of iPhone development will get the stage to himself to demonstrate the next iPhone software, version 4.0, especially if this is also what powers the tablet. If it doesn’t, then Bertrand Serlet, Senior VP of Software Engineering may do the duties. At an outside chance, they may share some time on stage demonstrating how iPhone 4.0 can allow OS X apps like iWork/iLife to be modded to work on the tablet and sync with your Macbook or iMac. And of course speak of the roadmap for iPhone 4.0 developers and when they can expect to get their new software underway.

I don’t predict we will see Jonathan Ive live on stage, but he will be featured in a lengthy promotional video discussing in his passionate way the design philosophy of the tablet, plus the engineering challenges Apple spent years overcoming, which will leave its competitors dumbfounded in their efforts to match the Apple solutions Ive and his design team have developed. In the same video, I would expect to see interviews with other Apple senior engineers, well known within the company but without the fame the others mentioned so far have garnered over the years.

Naturally the same video will also include providers of third party services discussing the impact the tablet will have on their business and how Apple offered them unique solutions no one else had the foresight to conceive. And we’ll say video of famous faces being “amazed” at what the tablet can perform.

Up on stage again, I am fully expecting a New York Times senior staffer or family owner to meet and greet Steve, then discuss how the NYT sees the tablet as the right step forward for its pay-per-download subscription model, something it tried and failed with previously for its elite content, such as Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman’s columns.

From there, it will be time for the select few app. developers to show their wares, including how their current apps can be resized, but also how they’ve developed new apps especially to take advantage of the tablet’s special features. I’d include here comic developers for whom the tablet seems an ideal platform to reach new audiences.

Also expect one or two major gaming production studios to present, then some highly specialised domains to show how they intend to use the tablet. Something medical is a certainty, whether it be a hospital staffer showing new imaging software, Johnson and Johnson once more showing blood pressure or glucose measuring addons, or a less well known but highly innovative specialist company showing how the tablet has a place in the hospital setting, say in radiology.

Who else?

Clearly, those who will team with Apple to place the tablet into its own niche, and own it. Perhaps it will be a 3G cellphone CEO (but which one?), a major recording industry partner, or a rep. from Disney who will demo the downloading on demand of its products using a new version of iTunes, which Jobs himself will give a more full featured demo for when showing how the tablet integrates with other domestic appliances, including AppleTV and perhaps other set top devices.

And then there’s one more thing… I can’t even speculate on this, and frankly don’t want to. Like most others who follow Apple closely, I enjoy being delighted by surprises even after I spend time tracking Apple’s history which allows for the guesswork I’ve made in today’s post.

Like most predictions about Apple, there will be many who will see the tablet as a weak solution to a non-problem, just as many predicted after the iPod’s release in 2001 that it was a brick going nowhere, or that Apple would fail with its iPhone because that technological domain was already mature. What these soothsayers focussed on was the hardware, not the ecosystem that is Apple’s ownership of the entire widget, starting with its ability to harness its software prowess.

With the tablet, Apple will enter into new fields of publishing with new partners, where once again the hardware is a mere conduit to content which is either too expensive or hard to access (I’m thinking here of specialised journals and literature), as well as new twists on familiar domains such as music and video, which a much larger screen with new user interface will leave us entranced. As Jeff Goldblum famously said in the first advertisement for the titanium Powerbook G4 in 2001, “you’re gonna so want one”.