I think this boils down to the basic rule: don't disrespect your audience.
I keep going to meetings where people suggest using QR codes to advertise a product. And I ask the obvious question: when have you ever scanned a QR code and learned about/bought something? No one can ever answer. But there's a vague sense that somewhere, out there, "those people" are using QR codes.
What's funny is no one seems to know who this is. Among the hip, young, techy people at a startup, it is assumed QR codes are for technically-illiterate old people who don't know what a URL is. Among well-dressed, professional adults, it is assumed they are for all the young, hip people with their smartphone addictions.
I assume someone uses QR codes, but I don't know who, and I don't see why they are popping up in so many places.
I think QR codes have a place. But I don't think advertisers know where that place is yet. QR codes on products I may buy -> bad, terrible, everything this comic describes.
But if it happens to be an event (free concert in the park, grand opening of awesome new store, whatever) and it's on a poster somewhere about town, I like this, cuz maybe I'll be like, "hmm, blues fest sounds like fun, lemme just scan this in, and I'll have all the deets for it on my phone.
If it's a QR code on my bottled water, well that's just a waste of space.
Disclaimer: This is tangential to the scope of what the comic was complaining about.
Bottled water may be a waste because water is pretty indistinguishable from its competitors outside of visual design of the product container, but not everything is so generic. I bought a bag of granola the other day that had a QR code on the back that I thought worked well.
As I idly sat at my breakfast table last week, I was reading the back of the bag and thought "this stuff is pretty damn good, I wonder what their QR code does?" I scanned it and was sent to their site where they displayed their entire product line, leading me to discover a different variety of their product I wanted to try (and have since purchased). Since I was groggy and not feeling very interactive at 6am, the bag of granola probably couldn't have convinced me to type in a URL into my phone no matter how tasty their product was, so I'd say their QR code worked (typing URLs is comparatively a lot of work compared to two taps of my phone to scan QRs)
As a product discovery mechanism I think they're probably ok, especially for existing customers that may like your brand but may not know everything about you. I don't think they'd be great on billboards or television ads, but as part of a product label design, I think it's a great way to provide more information to the consumer than would otherwise fit in that space.
when have you ever scanned a QR code and learned about/bought something?
Shopping for dishwashers in-store, even after doing lots of online research. The in-store display tags have very minimal info. Best Buy has/had a QRCode on each product that took you to a webpage for that item with a lot more info, reviews, etc. It was one of the main reasons I actually bought a dishwasher AT Best Buy instead of elsewhere.
That is a good use for them. Recently I saw one on a company's van which just baffled my mind. I don't know if they wanted somebody to come up while the van was parked and scan the QR code but it was just stupid and goes in line with what the article is saying.
My favorite New York subway ad (besides Zizmor) is something like "Have bedbugs?" and it offers you some "bedbugs apps" if you scan it, which is great because:
1. I've recently been looking for a good way to let a crowded train know that I probably have bedbugs on my clothing.
They never learn... Some time ago (early/mid 90s I think) there was a particular problem with pickpockets in the Kings Cross area so an awareness campaign was started with similar posters. The problem got worse. Why? Often people walking past the posters would, consciously or otherwise, check the pockets their wallet or other valuables were in - this helped improve an observant pick-pocket's hit rate.
I know what I'm going to do in Chicago! I'll buy an ad like that near one of the CTA platforms and stand around it and as people come by and try to scan it, I'll pick their wallets.
yeah, I work with text messaging, i.e. "text XXXX to #####" and while I love seeing it places, when I see it on the train I say wtf? But I guess people can draft the message and send it when they go above ground? I wonder if that is the same for QR codes on the train....
If you have a reader app on your phone scanning the QR code is a bit faster than typing in a url, especially if your doing repeatedly for multiple products.
I still think they are overused, but they can offer a little extra connivence, as long as they aren't taking up too much space.
Not really because then I have to type a bunch of characters instead of just clicking a button.
QR Codes are nice macros, in the right places. They don't necessarily belong on every uncovered surface, but in many cases they can transfer a relatively large amount of data quickly and easily.
I think we're still figuring out QR Codes and the proper applications of them. I remember usenet discussions in 1996 asking "Why did Ford put a URL in their commercial? Why do I need/want that? What do I do with it?"...
I think there should just be a font and border standard that is easily isolated and orc'd. That would make the human readable url and the device scannable URL one in the the same.
But I realized something about QR codes. Though they can contain any text, the vast majority of the time they're URLs. But they're not just base URLs. They contain query variables that people couldn't be bothered to type in, but which let the advertiser know which exact code (or which print run at least) was scanned.
usually this is for tracking and/or to redirect the page to a different url if their are changes. it is always best to use QR code management and tracking software than to use a direct link in the ad, because if you've printed 10,000 copies or are in national print ads and the site changes, you could be screwed....
No, it won't. NFC is (and will be) more expensive than just printing a label. It also gives no benefit to the user compared to scanning a code. User has to take the phone, and get it close to the reader, just as with NFC.
1. My understanding is that the user won't have to fumble to launch a reader app (and then aim the phone at, as with QR codes), as proximity to the NFC tag will trigger an event on the phone.
2. NFC tags won't be as efficient if you are tagging individual devices (e.g. all inventory on a store shelf), but for tagging stationary things (e.g. the appliance displays at Best Buy) they will work better, even if they cost a bit more.
URL: Turn on phone, swipe right to unlock, press search button, type url, press enter.
QR: Turn on phone, swipe up to open QR reader, point phone.
Yes, I'm one of those rare people who not only scans QR codes, but does it enough to bother making it one of the three actions he can take from his lockscreen (Camera, QR, Unlock)
But that's not an example of using QR codes for advertising. It's an actual, useful application of them, yes, but it is so precisely because they're not being used for marketing.
I've seen a lot of replies to this of the form "how about they use [URLs/NFC/etc.]", but how are those options at all better than printing out all the product specs?
Surely having the specifications printed out and mounted in an emplacement next to the product is better than having to scan/touch/type some sort of digital tag.
If it is about paper use, how about they stop using flip books full of paper numbers set next to each other to display prices before worrying about replacing some measly product spec sheets with QR codes.
(EDIT: reviews are definitely a fair use of this sort of thing, and I had forgotten that they were a thing while replying.)
That is exactly how they should be used: to give more detail once the user decides they want/need that detail.
They are used all over the place in Japan (where IIRC the QR code's popularity started) for non-sales related information like bus timetables as well as for access to detailed product information in shops. In both these use cases the QR code directing to a web page with up-to-date information is a benefit to the user rather than an advertising gimmick.
QR codes are done wrong in a great many adverts.
I've seen adverts with QR codes where is isn't entirely obvious what is even being advertised: sorry, I'm not wasting my time waiting for your information to come down what could be a slow mobile connection unless there is a good chance I'm going to care. You advert should make me want more detail, not expect me to make an effort to get basic detail.
The two times I bothered scan a QR code on an advert were failures from the advertisers PoV. One went to a page that was simply not useable on a small mobile device (remember: there are plenty of phones out there with QVGA screens and that site was unusable at half VGA) and would have taken an age to download if the user was stuck on a GPRS link due to lack of 3G+ reception. I closed the browser and thought nothing more of it. The other time I was taken to a registration page where I was asked for some of my details in order to get the data - if I scan a QR code I expect to go direct to relevant information, not to be asked for my personal details (I could have oput in fake details easily, but I should not have to go to even that effort). If you must have a registration form on the page, put it below the detail the user is expecting to find.
> When have you ever scanned a QR code and learned about/bought something?
Saturday I used a QR code when I was in a store, trying to get more details on a grill I was thinking of buying. I guess it worked, because I got more information and got the grill.
I laughed when QR codes came out, but can think of more than just that instance when I started using them. QR codes are ugly, but their success relies on them being a path to information that has real value to the target audience.
I agree that's a nice use case (to get details about a grill in a store), but it's not an example of advertising.
Even for that use case, QR codes seem like an interim solution, while we wait for better recognition apps (photo [of object or tag] -> recognition software -> search -> detailed info about object). An example of this is the Google Goggles app (which is not to be confused with Google Glass):
That's a good point. There's not much real use for a QR code being on a billboard/or vehicle. Also, I think QR codes will have their day, then be replaced by superior technology.
It's really just a warehouse where I could pick up my merchandise.
> Was there no knowledgeable staff?
No, and That's certainly not the trend these days. I did ask an associate if I could just take the assembled grill to the cash register (and I could).
Your comment made me think about the real purpose of brick-and-mortar stores in the age of Amazon. In this case, the big-box retailer served as merely a display room for me to physically inspect the product and a place for me to take immediate delivery of the product. All the information gathering can be done by me, using the information on the box, or through my mobile device (with the QR code being the relevant portion of this discussion).
> No product flyers/labels?
If used properly, a QR code (or whatever vector allows me to find information online) can provide much more information than labels or flyers.
Every time I am in a meeting about QR codes I share this: http://wtfqrcodes.com/ We all have a good laugh and then somehow, no one wants to suggest QR codes anymore.
Well, just a few days ago I was trying the new system in our apartment complex where we can use a credit card to add value to the smart card that is used in the local washer and drier systems. I had to type in the url to get it going. Well, I used the smartphone keyboard and got it in with a minimal number of typos which I quickly corrected, but you know what? If they had a QR code that I could scan, it would be just a couple of taps and a couple of seconds and much, much more convenient.
I assume someone uses QR codes, but I don't know who, and I don't see why they are popping up in so many places.
They live in Japan. QRs are very old news there. I couldn't really tell more (I've never been to Japan) but this must be it. Anyone with ground level expertise?
I can confirm this, they are everywhere and people seem to like them.
Eg, I was handed a flyer for a random nightclub with a QR code on it for cheap entry. You just scanned the QR code then showed your mobile at the door for a discount. This was 5 years ago too (Tokyo, Shinjuku/Shibuya).
Westside Rentals uses them on their displays in LA and I've often used the QR code to check out the details of the listing when walking by in Santa Monica.
Poster in my train station: "Our timetables are being updated. Scan these QR codes to download them to your phone."
Below that were eight pictures of timetables, showing their color-coded covers so you could identify them from the paper timetable you might already have, with a QR code on each one. Below those were instructions on how to download a QR code reader if you didn't have one already.
Well, I don't think QR codes are inherently offensive, and if some people use them, why not? I would only say that it's a bad idea if the only point of ref on it is a QR code, but if a typed out website name is included, what could it hurt? I'm also solely talking about QR codes in advertising.
I feel like this article is backwards. QR codes are still the best way to transfer from print to phone. The problem is most people are still transferring from print ad to phone ad.
My theater company uses it to send people from our poster to our ticket buying site (and let you know where the QR code goes). There's genuine utility here.
Don't throw out the useful application because so many are doing it wrong.
Especially the QR-codes that aren't QR codes. I honestly tried to scan a new style barcode that wasn't QR, that literally said below it "Please download the SomethingCode app to read this barcode."
Never have I sworn out loud so fervently at a magazine, or so quickly sworn off purchasing from that (rather large) company.
This seems like it would be an actual good use of a QR code, if it was specifically labeled as "Scan this to see how to install this product."
On the other hand, I just got a bill from my exterminator service. And lo and behold right there next to their address block on the invoice was their URL and an unlabeled QR code. Why in the heck would I ever bother scanning that? Having it there just screams "the owner's kid nephew said that QR codes are all the rage so we had better get one on our invoice."
If every Android, Blackberry, and iPhone came with a universal QR code reader it MIGHT be worth it, but none of them do, so you have to provide printed material or a url anyways so there is no real reason to use them now.
But if it comes down to typing a long ass url in my phone, or pushing a button to scan a code, guess which one I'll pick. Don't impede technological progress just because "not everybody has it"
If the price I have to pay is that people like you think I'm an idiot, I'm sure I'll manage.
I am curious though, how do you distinguish between people "talking out loud to their phones", and people talking out loud to other people using their phones (ie making a phone call).
There are a lot of situations where people talking on the phone to other people is annoying and rude. I expect there's substantial overlap with the situations where people talking out loud to Siri is annoying and rude.
But if I'm scanning a QR code in a store next to some product or on a poster about an event, I don't want to know what Siri knows about it, or to read some non-specific page online about it. I want to know what the store or poster wants me to know.
Definitely. The first and only time I tried to scan a QR code I took a picture of it on my iPhone, realized a few seconds later that I had to install an app for it, then walked away shocked that anyone actually uses them.
1) Open camera from lock screen
2) Take photo
3) If QR code is detected, offer to open it.
4) Later when browsing photos, remember it's a QR code, offer the link again, so that we can come back to it later.
5) If no QR code is detected, treat it as a normal photo.
> If every Android, Blackberry, and iPhone came with a
> universal QR code reader it MIGHT be worth it, but
> none of them do, ...
My phone has a built-in QR reader, and it's one of the ones you've mentioned, so that statement is wrong.
> ... you have to provide printed material or a url
> anyways so there is no real reason to use them now.
Except that for those who do have a reader, you've reduced the friction for them. And it sounds like you're saying we shouldn't use new technologies just because some people don't have them yet. That's in interesting idea - it means web developers shouldn't use HTML5, or canvas, for example. Perhaps this is a good idea. Not everyone has Flash capable browsers, so we could finally kill that.
Oh, and never write something for the iPhone, because not everyone has one of those, either.
Why is is so cool to hate on QR codes lately? I've heard Merlin Mann and Marco Arment rag on them pretty often on their podcasts. I don't get it. No matter how ugly, it's still a better way for me to get to your website/app from a physical item (bottle of wine, print ad, whatever) than having me type out a URL....sure they are stuck a bunch of places that make them ugly or inconvenient to actually read....but so are URLs and phone numbers. I'm way more likely to scan a code than open a browser and type out a URL or even worse make a note/take a picture to remember to look something up later, there's pretty much no chance at all that I will call a phone number if that's all that is listed. The code (when implemented properly) takes me directly to what I want with almost zero effort on my part.
But I may be some kind of weirdo, I think think QR codes are kinda cool looking anyway, at least more so than (800)-999-9999 or http://www.foo.bar
ComScore releases a lot of stats about QR code usage and people actually do use them quite a bit. I find them useful, especially when the alternative is typing in a URL that's 100 characters long.
Once something becomes ubiquitous, the complaints about it being overused or misused become similarly common - and as someone has already pointed out you can always get upvotes/likes/what-ever if people agree or just if you moan in an amusing manner.
I feel the same about those silly "Pin it", "Follow me" icons on every webpage. I cannot say that it has never helped any site get more traffic but for the most part it is just monkey copying monkeys all the way down. They do nothing except make all pages look generic and cluttered. The biggest example of just doing it for the sake of it is the porn sites that use these share icons too (who in the world shares a xxx video they watched on their facebook timeline?)
Japan has been using QR codes respectfully, and usefully, for years now.
People don't scan them in the US because most people don't seem to have a clue what they are. If we spend any freaking time educating the public about what they are and how to use them ( and stopped using those damn proprietary variants) then we'd see a lot of value come out of them.
You don't like QR codes? Fine, then give me some %#$%@$ alternative that allows me to get people from the print version of my stuff to the online version without them having to type in some long string of characters on a weeeee little phone keyboard that everyone makes typos on constantly.
Until someone comes up with a better alternative, maybe we should stop railing against them and start learning how to use them intelligently and respectfully, while making it easy for our audience to consume them.
Telling a spectacular story, as the comic suggests, wouldn't get people to my site nearly as well as a button on the paper that they could reach down and push.
QR codes aren't doing a great job of getting people their either, because instead of educating people about how useful they are and what to do with them, we're letting marketers use them without a freaking clue, while the clueful sit around bitching about them without offering any good alternative.
"If we spend any freaking time educating the public about what they are and how to use them"
The problem is that people will not learn a new technology to engage with an ad.
If Facebook has been started with a ton brands and no people, and the advertisers kept putting 'hey like us on facebook!' in their ads, no one would have ever joined Facebook. Instead brands came to Facebook because that's what people were already using.
If there was some utility to QR codes that got people using them outside of ads, then they might also work on ads. But right now, ads are basically the only place they appear, so no one is going to go through the effort to learn about them.
> then give me some %#$%@$ alternative that allows me to get people from the print version of my stuff to the online version
I think a plain URL printed with some agreed OCR-friendly font would do the job much better than the ugly, unfriendly, redundant and unintuitive QR bars.
I think the problem is that for people that have problems navigating the web to start with, using QR codes will be tougher than just suing the search bar on their iPhone etc
Here in Chile, Nike put a QR code in an ad for a 10k run. It took you to a site with some information... unfortunately it was in flash so iPhones couldn't view it.
Number one missed opportunity for QR-codes: "For Sale/Rent" signs. It actively annoys me that I don't have a super-low-friction way to take a closer look at a for-sale house I'm walking by.
They are starting to show up on realtor for-sale signs. There's one I drive by on my way to/from work that scanned a while back. I landed on the realtor's page about the house (which, BTW, was way out of my price range).
My last attempt to scan one of those took me to the search page not optimized for iPhone/Android on the realtor's personal site... and no clue as to how to find the house I was standing next to.
I scanned a "more info" QR code once on a commercial building rental advertisement and was amused that the result was a direct link to a PDF file that had the floor plan of the building and nothing else.
I scan QR codes regularly and find them incredibly useful. Poster about something I might be interested in? Instead of typing error-prone-fully on my stupid tiny keyboard, I point, scan, check the URL looks sane, then go to the web site. Sometimes I take a photo and deal with it later.
Please, don't take away features I like and use just because you think no one uses them.
Instead of hating on them so much, show how genuinely clever you are and figure a way to make use of the technology, otherwise you're just like a eunuch in a harem, pointing, observing, and criticizing, without actually being able to do anything.
I think a lot of hate comes from the fact that I've never encountered a QR code where I couldn't have typed in the URL on my stupid-tiny keyboard faster than the time it took for the QR app to scan the code.
I'm curious if this means my phone has a terrible camera or if yours has a terrible keyboard. Probably both.
It's the error-pronedness - clicks are far easier. Can you always type a lengthy URL without any mistakes or having to make corrections?
Plus, I can't read a poster and a phone without constantly changing whether I'm looking through glasses or not. I type pretty well, but the scan wins every time.
Added in edit: I really, really don't understand the downvotes. I'm offering a point of view as to why QR codes are easier for me. Is your downvote saying that I'm wrong? Is your downvote saying that it's irrelevant? Is your downvote saying that only people who hate QR codes can be tolerated? Is your downvote saying your mind is closed to other points of view? Help me to understand!
It took me 28 seconds to type in this sentence on my cell phone. I didn't use auto-correct, so it's a pretty good match for typing a url, if a little long. That time did include going back through to correct for errors. Comparatively, I've never seen a QR code scan in under a minute, either on my own phone or on one from my friends, family, and coworkers.
Running a timer on my desktop, I've just timed pulling my phone from my pocket and scanned a bar code, one handed. Including getting the phone out it took 19 seconds, without any possibility of getting it wrong.
And yes, the glasses thing is a pain, one of the disadvantages of getting old. 8-(
I just did it again - yes - 19 seconds. This time I was more leisurely, but already had my phone "home page" open. Click on apps, open menu, scan to bottom, up one, click. Point, focus, open.
Think about how much time it takes to find the app, download the app, learn the app, remember the app and use the app. My guess is 100x longer than all of the times you will ever use QR codes put together.
It's on my phone in an obvious place, and I use it a lot. I couldn't type URLs in sub 30 seconds, so it's saving me much more tham a few seconds every time.
And it's error free.
So no, that's not my problem, and I'd take it kindly if people would stopp telling me I'm wrong for finding useful something they don't agree with. Do you bother to listen to your users? Or do you just tell them they're wrong?
I think I was misinterpreted. I meant that's the problem in a general sense.
That unless QR codes are substantially quicker than manually typing a URL it will never take off. Because the fact is that people aren't typing in URLs every day.
>I've never seen a QR code scan in under a minute,
How is it taking you that long to scan QR codes?
I'm using a free barcode scanner with a fairly slow phone (LG Optimus) and I just pulled up a bunch of QR codes to scan.
Every one is done in under a second.
It takes the same amount of time for me to pull up either the keyboard or the barcode scanner, and I definitely can't type a url in under 1 second, so the scanner beats it hands down.
I suspect he's not talking of the time to actually scan the code, but the total time, given one code, of picking up the phone, finding the app, activating the scanner, checking the URL that it brings up, and then hitting "Go".
As I say, I do all that in about 20 seconds. Once the app is open, individual scans are very quick.
I just timed myself, from phone off on the table, to having my phone's browser loading the page in a QR code I displayed on screen. 7 seconds. Pretty much the same amount of time it would take to open the browser at all.
Just tried again after I finally bothered to set my browser as the default link handler (so I don't have to pick from a list) and set my QR app to automatically open links I scan (so I don't have to tap the link) now it's 5 seconds.
Granted, I've found myself using QR codes frequently enough that I can get from my lock screen directly to scanning a QR code by swiping up instead of right (which unlocks the phone normally). So what I actually did was press power, swipe up, point at QR code, and that's it.
That still introduces the problem of surprise, but with the space saved by not posting the QR code, you can provide context about what the URL does provide.
And riddle me: why can't your phone to OCR on a legibly-presented URL any better than it can read a QR code (yes, I know, redundancy and all that, but still).
You've said it yourself - with a shortener I've got no idea where it's going, and now I also have to type a weird, meaning-free string of upper, lower and digits.
And I don't have a reliable OCR app, and OCR doesn't have redundancy.
So it doesn't work, it's hard to type, and I don't know where it takes me. How is that better?
And at least scanning the QR code shows me the URL before opening it.
The QR code takes up enough space that context is precluded. With a short URL, there's at least the option. Mind: marketers providing context generally doesn't happen.
I suppose, client side, you've got the option of previewing the destination URL before going to it either way. Again, not that a naked URL tells you a whole lot, but at least I can see if it's a PDF, HTML doc, or EXE downloadable off the top.
QR codes are a medium of transportation and a digitalization of analog information. However, if what's at the end of that trail isn't something people are interested in, then it doesn't matter if that trail is the yellow brick road, they're not going to follow it.
The reason why QR codes are used is that they're cheap, dirt cheap. But most vendors are simply adding them without thinking about adding value. When you start adding value like convenience, discounts, promotions and other means to hook an audience, that's when the ability to interact with print becomes validated. Until vendors start doing this, posts and comics like the above will exist...
A stored called John Lewis in the UK had a really big QR code as part of a window-covering display I think was to advertise online shopping. What struck me, even as someone who knows what they are, was how visually menacing this huge QR code looked. They must be extremely visually unwelcoming to the uninitiated, which strikes me as the unfortunate old aura of technology which has only recently been shook off.
I'm not going to scan a QR code that doesn't tell me upfront what it does (e.g. get a discount, view more info on this product, etc). QR code + verb summary: helpful. QR code on its own: ignored.
I predict that a few years from now we will not be seeing QR codes. I dislike them because they are ugly and their abuse seems to be widespread and growing, but I can see many reasons, some of which are posted here, why they would be useful. But why does it have to be an ugly code? Getting the data (link?) into the phone is the general problem. Seems like image search is getting to the point where you can scan in a logo, or take a photo of it, and plug that into a search to get to the product/web site etc. The point being that it doesn't have to be an ugly black and while mishmash. How about OCR on the URL?
Seems like image search is getting to the point where you can scan in a logo, or take a photo of it, and plug that into a search to get to the product/web site etc.
1) The recognition is less reliable
2) It depends on another service which might be unavailable, slow, not have the logo in its database or have it associated with a different URL.
3) It's limited to products that have their own logos, which are a small minority.
4) It can't support different URLs for the same service or product, losing context.
5) As ugly as they are, QRCodes are identifiable as a link, logos aren't.
How about OCR on the URL?
OCR in real world conditions, using camera phones (not everyone has a 4S or similar) at widely different angles and distances and on the outdoors doesn't work that well. There's a reason why QR Codes where invented, and it was not just to offend people's aesthetic senses.
They have those big squares to detect the distortion, extra bits using Reed-Solomon for error-correction, they're much more compact and immediately identifiable.
QR codes ceased to be useful or necessary when smartphones apps for reading and opening plain-text URLs became available, which was a historical blink of an eye after the advent of QR codes.
My company went to a trade show recently, and instead of brochures, we made up a little business card with some summary information on the front, and a big QR code on the back. When you scan the QR code, it puts the summary and contact information into your phone as a contact. (It's labeled, so people know that scanning the code will transfer the card's information to their phone's contact list). I think this is pretty darn useful. It's nice to have something physical to hand to someone, but nobody wants to re-key contact info. And we want to make it easy to get the info from the card into their phone. You can use vcard or MECARD format.
http://code.google.com/p/zxing/wiki/BarcodeContents
I don't know why more people don't use the scan-to-transfer aspect of QR codes.
The problem is that 'me not wanting to ever see your ad again' is NOT quantifiable. Marketers can see the positive impact of QR codes but not the negative.
Thus by their metrics the more prominent the QR code, the more people who swipe it and the 'better' the ad performs. But it's very expensive to quantify the negative impact of the QR code. Advertisers would need to run focus groups, ask people if they saw the ad, what they remembered about it, what their impression was, etc.
So we find ourselves seeing more, bigger QR codes, even though people don't really seem to care for them.
151 comments
[ 1723 ms ] story [ 2380 ms ] threadI keep going to meetings where people suggest using QR codes to advertise a product. And I ask the obvious question: when have you ever scanned a QR code and learned about/bought something? No one can ever answer. But there's a vague sense that somewhere, out there, "those people" are using QR codes.
What's funny is no one seems to know who this is. Among the hip, young, techy people at a startup, it is assumed QR codes are for technically-illiterate old people who don't know what a URL is. Among well-dressed, professional adults, it is assumed they are for all the young, hip people with their smartphone addictions.
I assume someone uses QR codes, but I don't know who, and I don't see why they are popping up in so many places.
But if it happens to be an event (free concert in the park, grand opening of awesome new store, whatever) and it's on a poster somewhere about town, I like this, cuz maybe I'll be like, "hmm, blues fest sounds like fun, lemme just scan this in, and I'll have all the deets for it on my phone.
If it's a QR code on my bottled water, well that's just a waste of space.
Bottled water may be a waste because water is pretty indistinguishable from its competitors outside of visual design of the product container, but not everything is so generic. I bought a bag of granola the other day that had a QR code on the back that I thought worked well.
As I idly sat at my breakfast table last week, I was reading the back of the bag and thought "this stuff is pretty damn good, I wonder what their QR code does?" I scanned it and was sent to their site where they displayed their entire product line, leading me to discover a different variety of their product I wanted to try (and have since purchased). Since I was groggy and not feeling very interactive at 6am, the bag of granola probably couldn't have convinced me to type in a URL into my phone no matter how tasty their product was, so I'd say their QR code worked (typing URLs is comparatively a lot of work compared to two taps of my phone to scan QRs)
As a product discovery mechanism I think they're probably ok, especially for existing customers that may like your brand but may not know everything about you. I don't think they'd be great on billboards or television ads, but as part of a product label design, I think it's a great way to provide more information to the consumer than would otherwise fit in that space.
Shopping for dishwashers in-store, even after doing lots of online research. The in-store display tags have very minimal info. Best Buy has/had a QRCode on each product that took you to a webpage for that item with a lot more info, reviews, etc. It was one of the main reasons I actually bought a dishwasher AT Best Buy instead of elsewhere.
1. I've recently been looking for a good way to let a crowded train know that I probably have bedbugs on my clothing.
2. Internet access is really good underground.
http://bestbuy.com/12345 on the label.
I still think they are overused, but they can offer a little extra connivence, as long as they aren't taking up too much space.
QR Codes are nice macros, in the right places. They don't necessarily belong on every uncovered surface, but in many cases they can transfer a relatively large amount of data quickly and easily.
I think we're still figuring out QR Codes and the proper applications of them. I remember usenet discussions in 1996 asking "Why did Ford put a URL in their commercial? Why do I need/want that? What do I do with it?"...
But I realized something about QR codes. Though they can contain any text, the vast majority of the time they're URLs. But they're not just base URLs. They contain query variables that people couldn't be bothered to type in, but which let the advertiser know which exact code (or which print run at least) was scanned.
2. NFC tags won't be as efficient if you are tagging individual devices (e.g. all inventory on a store shelf), but for tagging stationary things (e.g. the appliance displays at Best Buy) they will work better, even if they cost a bit more.
URL: Turn on phone, swipe right to unlock, press search button, type url, press enter.
QR: Turn on phone, swipe up to open QR reader, point phone.
Yes, I'm one of those rare people who not only scans QR codes, but does it enough to bother making it one of the three actions he can take from his lockscreen (Camera, QR, Unlock)
Surely having the specifications printed out and mounted in an emplacement next to the product is better than having to scan/touch/type some sort of digital tag.
If it is about paper use, how about they stop using flip books full of paper numbers set next to each other to display prices before worrying about replacing some measly product spec sheets with QR codes.
(EDIT: reviews are definitely a fair use of this sort of thing, and I had forgotten that they were a thing while replying.)
They are used all over the place in Japan (where IIRC the QR code's popularity started) for non-sales related information like bus timetables as well as for access to detailed product information in shops. In both these use cases the QR code directing to a web page with up-to-date information is a benefit to the user rather than an advertising gimmick.
QR codes are done wrong in a great many adverts.
I've seen adverts with QR codes where is isn't entirely obvious what is even being advertised: sorry, I'm not wasting my time waiting for your information to come down what could be a slow mobile connection unless there is a good chance I'm going to care. You advert should make me want more detail, not expect me to make an effort to get basic detail.
The two times I bothered scan a QR code on an advert were failures from the advertisers PoV. One went to a page that was simply not useable on a small mobile device (remember: there are plenty of phones out there with QVGA screens and that site was unusable at half VGA) and would have taken an age to download if the user was stuck on a GPRS link due to lack of 3G+ reception. I closed the browser and thought nothing more of it. The other time I was taken to a registration page where I was asked for some of my details in order to get the data - if I scan a QR code I expect to go direct to relevant information, not to be asked for my personal details (I could have oput in fake details easily, but I should not have to go to even that effort). If you must have a registration form on the page, put it below the detail the user is expecting to find.
Saturday I used a QR code when I was in a store, trying to get more details on a grill I was thinking of buying. I guess it worked, because I got more information and got the grill.
I laughed when QR codes came out, but can think of more than just that instance when I started using them. QR codes are ugly, but their success relies on them being a path to information that has real value to the target audience.
Even for that use case, QR codes seem like an interim solution, while we wait for better recognition apps (photo [of object or tag] -> recognition software -> search -> detailed info about object). An example of this is the Google Goggles app (which is not to be confused with Google Glass):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Goggles
Was there no knowledgeable staff? No product flyers/labels?
It's really just a warehouse where I could pick up my merchandise.
> Was there no knowledgeable staff?
No, and That's certainly not the trend these days. I did ask an associate if I could just take the assembled grill to the cash register (and I could).
Your comment made me think about the real purpose of brick-and-mortar stores in the age of Amazon. In this case, the big-box retailer served as merely a display room for me to physically inspect the product and a place for me to take immediate delivery of the product. All the information gathering can be done by me, using the information on the box, or through my mobile device (with the QR code being the relevant portion of this discussion).
> No product flyers/labels?
If used properly, a QR code (or whatever vector allows me to find information online) can provide much more information than labels or flyers.
They live in Japan. QRs are very old news there. I couldn't really tell more (I've never been to Japan) but this must be it. Anyone with ground level expertise?
Eg, I was handed a flyer for a random nightclub with a QR code on it for cheap entry. You just scanned the QR code then showed your mobile at the door for a discount. This was 5 years ago too (Tokyo, Shinjuku/Shibuya).
Below that were eight pictures of timetables, showing their color-coded covers so you could identify them from the paper timetable you might already have, with a QR code on each one. Below those were instructions on how to download a QR code reader if you didn't have one already.
QR codes for info are awesome.
My personal favorite was when I found one on a banana sticker. I didn't try it, though.
People do scan them, though.
I have no idea how to scan these. Well, maybe if I use a DSLR but not with the average smartphone.
My theater company uses it to send people from our poster to our ticket buying site (and let you know where the QR code goes). There's genuine utility here.
Don't throw out the useful application because so many are doing it wrong.
Most implementations are unlabeled, no indication what it does or why I should bother.
Can you share any numbers as to their effectiveness in real life?
Never have I sworn out loud so fervently at a magazine, or so quickly sworn off purchasing from that (rather large) company.
Wow. Perhaps consider anger management classes?
On the other hand, I just got a bill from my exterminator service. And lo and behold right there next to their address block on the invoice was their URL and an unlabeled QR code. Why in the heck would I ever bother scanning that? Having it there just screams "the owner's kid nephew said that QR codes are all the rage so we had better get one on our invoice."
Long home button press.
<beep>
"Siri (or Android version, or WP12 version) , search for <whatever the thing is>"
<beep>
<Here are your search results>
To me, people talking out loud to their phones in public is akin to bluetooth headsets.
The technology might provide an easier way to let you do something, but you look like an idiot.
I am curious though, how do you distinguish between people "talking out loud to their phones", and people talking out loud to other people using their phones (ie making a phone call).
Note that I think QR codes are great for things like airline tickets or baggage tracking tags.
1) Open camera from lock screen 2) Take photo 3) If QR code is detected, offer to open it. 4) Later when browsing photos, remember it's a QR code, offer the link again, so that we can come back to it later. 5) If no QR code is detected, treat it as a normal photo.
Oh, and never write something for the iPhone, because not everyone has one of those, either.
But I may be some kind of weirdo, I think think QR codes are kinda cool looking anyway, at least more so than (800)-999-9999 or http://www.foo.bar
ComScore releases a lot of stats about QR code usage and people actually do use them quite a bit. I find them useful, especially when the alternative is typing in a URL that's 100 characters long.
People don't scan them in the US because most people don't seem to have a clue what they are. If we spend any freaking time educating the public about what they are and how to use them ( and stopped using those damn proprietary variants) then we'd see a lot of value come out of them.
You don't like QR codes? Fine, then give me some %#$%@$ alternative that allows me to get people from the print version of my stuff to the online version without them having to type in some long string of characters on a weeeee little phone keyboard that everyone makes typos on constantly.
Until someone comes up with a better alternative, maybe we should stop railing against them and start learning how to use them intelligently and respectfully, while making it easy for our audience to consume them.
Telling a spectacular story, as the comic suggests, wouldn't get people to my site nearly as well as a button on the paper that they could reach down and push.
QR codes aren't doing a great job of getting people their either, because instead of educating people about how useful they are and what to do with them, we're letting marketers use them without a freaking clue, while the clueful sit around bitching about them without offering any good alternative.
In the US (so far) they have been used for crap - "scan this to see MORE advertising from us!!!!"
The problem is that people will not learn a new technology to engage with an ad.
If Facebook has been started with a ton brands and no people, and the advertisers kept putting 'hey like us on facebook!' in their ads, no one would have ever joined Facebook. Instead brands came to Facebook because that's what people were already using.
If there was some utility to QR codes that got people using them outside of ads, then they might also work on ads. But right now, ads are basically the only place they appear, so no one is going to go through the effort to learn about them.
I think a plain URL printed with some agreed OCR-friendly font would do the job much better than the ugly, unfriendly, redundant and unintuitive QR bars.
I think the problem is that for people that have problems navigating the web to start with, using QR codes will be tougher than just suing the search bar on their iPhone etc
I guess I should have been happy that at least it wasn't a link to Justinsomnia. ( http://justinsomnia.org/2011/03/why-does-that-qr-code-take-m... )
Please, don't take away features I like and use just because you think no one uses them.
Instead of hating on them so much, show how genuinely clever you are and figure a way to make use of the technology, otherwise you're just like a eunuch in a harem, pointing, observing, and criticizing, without actually being able to do anything.
I'm curious if this means my phone has a terrible camera or if yours has a terrible keyboard. Probably both.
Plus, I can't read a poster and a phone without constantly changing whether I'm looking through glasses or not. I type pretty well, but the scan wins every time.
Added in edit: I really, really don't understand the downvotes. I'm offering a point of view as to why QR codes are easier for me. Is your downvote saying that I'm wrong? Is your downvote saying that it's irrelevant? Is your downvote saying that only people who hate QR codes can be tolerated? Is your downvote saying your mind is closed to other points of view? Help me to understand!
I could see the glasses thing being a pain.
And yes, the glasses thing is a pain, one of the disadvantages of getting old. 8-(
Start: Mon Jun 18 23:18:19 BST 2012
End: Mon Jun 18 23:18:38 BST 2012
Think about how much time it takes to find the app, download the app, learn the app, remember the app and use the app. My guess is 100x longer than all of the times you will ever use QR codes put together.
That right there is your problem.
And it's error free.
So no, that's not my problem, and I'd take it kindly if people would stopp telling me I'm wrong for finding useful something they don't agree with. Do you bother to listen to your users? Or do you just tell them they're wrong?
That unless QR codes are substantially quicker than manually typing a URL it will never take off. Because the fact is that people aren't typing in URLs every day.
How is it taking you that long to scan QR codes?
I'm using a free barcode scanner with a fairly slow phone (LG Optimus) and I just pulled up a bunch of QR codes to scan.
Every one is done in under a second.
It takes the same amount of time for me to pull up either the keyboard or the barcode scanner, and I definitely can't type a url in under 1 second, so the scanner beats it hands down.
As I say, I do all that in about 20 seconds. Once the app is open, individual scans are very quick.
Just tried again after I finally bothered to set my browser as the default link handler (so I don't have to pick from a list) and set my QR app to automatically open links I scan (so I don't have to tap the link) now it's 5 seconds.
Granted, I've found myself using QR codes frequently enough that I can get from my lock screen directly to scanning a QR code by swiping up instead of right (which unlocks the phone normally). So what I actually did was press power, swipe up, point at QR code, and that's it.
That still introduces the problem of surprise, but with the space saved by not posting the QR code, you can provide context about what the URL does provide.
And riddle me: why can't your phone to OCR on a legibly-presented URL any better than it can read a QR code (yes, I know, redundancy and all that, but still).
And I don't have a reliable OCR app, and OCR doesn't have redundancy.
So it doesn't work, it's hard to type, and I don't know where it takes me. How is that better?
And at least scanning the QR code shows me the URL before opening it.
I suppose, client side, you've got the option of previewing the destination URL before going to it either way. Again, not that a naked URL tells you a whole lot, but at least I can see if it's a PDF, HTML doc, or EXE downloadable off the top.
QR codes are a medium of transportation and a digitalization of analog information. However, if what's at the end of that trail isn't something people are interested in, then it doesn't matter if that trail is the yellow brick road, they're not going to follow it.
The reason why QR codes are used is that they're cheap, dirt cheap. But most vendors are simply adding them without thinking about adding value. When you start adding value like convenience, discounts, promotions and other means to hook an audience, that's when the ability to interact with print becomes validated. Until vendors start doing this, posts and comics like the above will exist...
1) The recognition is less reliable
2) It depends on another service which might be unavailable, slow, not have the logo in its database or have it associated with a different URL.
3) It's limited to products that have their own logos, which are a small minority.
4) It can't support different URLs for the same service or product, losing context.
5) As ugly as they are, QRCodes are identifiable as a link, logos aren't.
How about OCR on the URL?
OCR in real world conditions, using camera phones (not everyone has a 4S or similar) at widely different angles and distances and on the outdoors doesn't work that well. There's a reason why QR Codes where invented, and it was not just to offend people's aesthetic senses.
They have those big squares to detect the distortion, extra bits using Reed-Solomon for error-correction, they're much more compact and immediately identifiable.
I don't know why more people don't use the scan-to-transfer aspect of QR codes.
Thus by their metrics the more prominent the QR code, the more people who swipe it and the 'better' the ad performs. But it's very expensive to quantify the negative impact of the QR code. Advertisers would need to run focus groups, ask people if they saw the ad, what they remembered about it, what their impression was, etc.
So we find ourselves seeing more, bigger QR codes, even though people don't really seem to care for them.
Which, mind, is not to say that it can't be correct or insightful, and it's certainly amusing, but... I'm just confused.
In fact, the only thing I keep hearing about QR codes is how stupid they are and how they should be obliterated from the face of the earth.