Observing individuals during site navigation can be critical to determining the usability of your site. Although according to recent data complied by and sponsored by Autonomy there many barriers that can be attributed to websites failing to engage in multivariate testing. The number one reason at 58.9% is lack of time, specifically the study participants stated that they were "Too Busy with other stuff", followed by "Don't know enough about the technology", and "Don't have the internal expertise."

Taking time to test a website for usability should be obvious, so I will only address the latter response. Multivariate testing includes several technologies. The most common practices are 1) Eye Tracking and, 2) Video Play Back Sessions .

Eye tracking includes hardware and software usually in the form of a sophisticated LCD screen that monitors eye gazes. Our eye tracker of choice is the Tobii T60XL.

Video play back sessions provide site visitor anonymity, and a larger self selected sample of users. Two leading companies providing solutions for video playback are ClickTale and Userfly.

Is your company currently using multivariate testing? If so how? If not why?

The announcement of the Tablet Mac, including rumors of release dates and integrations, have been going on for some time now.  As an illustrator, I am very excited about the technology, but as a copywriter, I am immediately deterred, as should any individual looking to use this product for anything beyond presentations and graphic design.
Along with a good majority of people, I get excited about the next big advancement in technology.  Tablets are nothing new, but Apple always finds a way to make any technology more sleek and efficient.  In this case, they have created what is essentially a glorified 13-inch iPhone, that uses a Wacom-style pen to navigate and operate the tablet.  Entirely screen with no keyboard (other than the one that populates on the screen), this creation allows one to write and draw with “ease”, but that’s about it.  The best function of this tablet from my perspective is that it gives the drawing capabilities onscreen (as opposed to on a secondary tablet) with the Mac operating system and sleek design and display.  However, if one thinks this will be great for taking notes at the next business meeting or completing an email to a client, the suggestion of this writer is to keep your laptop!
As with tablets of the past, the company attempts to boast writing recognition software, in which a journal-like program onscreen converts your writing into a typeface in another window.  This is a nice feature, but do not be fooled into thinking it is as easy to write on a screen as on paper.  I have seen many individuals be excited about this feature, but get far too frustrated in attempting to implement it effectively in the personal or business environment.  By the time you find yourself slightly efficient with this software, you will see the benefit of simply typing your document or writing it on paper, making this once exciting technology obsolete to your needs.
Having made those statements, I haven’t tried the software/hardware for myself, but based on what I’ve seen, I would assume the same issues that come with other tablets will apply here, except that the Tablet Mac does not have a keyboard attached, and a secondary keyboard would most likely be needed.  The physical layout of the tablet is great, a very efficient use of space, and still has plenty of functionality.  But I still don’t see much benefit for any individual beyond those who do a lot of graphic design implementing digital illustration, and would love the ability to draw onscreen as opposed to on a separate tablet.  But illustrators beware as well, for as it is a difficult transition from paper to screen for writing, you can have the same difficulty from a drawing perspective.
When push comes to shove, you need to try it for yourself, but I definitely suggest you consider my advice that you try the product before an impulsive purchase based on excitement.

It would be easy to imagine that even the most automobile-savvy of individuals would have a difficult time in this generation to name the make and model of every car out there based merely on its body design.  While we are occasionally blessed with an impressive design in the car world (entirely based on opinion, but the Lotus, for example), such awe is few and far between in this day and age.  With the coming of retro designs from the H2 Hummers (which are more of a family-version of the original Hummer than a retro version) to the new Mustangs and Camaros, it is apparent that car designers are either becoming lazy or running out of ideas.
When the best idea in a board room of directors and designers is to modify a design from the early seventies, you are concerned whether anything new will ever come out of the woodwork (or metalwork).  The economically-sound car was never meant to be anything special, but there was still a time when you could tell them apart from one another.  Now that same problem has befallen our sports and utility vehicles, where it would seem one would have to buy a $200,000 Italian or a gas-guzzler that sits six feet off the ground just to stand out on the road. 
Creating generic copies of what was in the past is never as much fun as creating the future.  A car design used to be an art form, a uniqueness that stood out on the road.  If somebody tried to sell you a Van Gogh that was reworked in Photoshop for thousands of dollars, you couldn’t help but laugh.  A car design should be daring, breaking the boundaries of what is expected, and showing the world something it hasn’t seen without being concerned about the consequences.  That may be a bit extreme, but car shows that boast amazing new designs always seem to quickly fall to the wayside, when it is some of those impressive designs many Americans would like to see on the roads.