What is wrong with High Tech kids who never grow up The following article is illustrative of perpetual immaturity. It may also be indicative of a serious problem of perception within the computer industry, namely, inability to understand much of anything beyond the whim-world of techies and professional geeks. Who, but idiots, thinks that talking is superior to typing when composing text, when "writing an article" or even a book? Not that the simple-minded cannot put together an article via dictaphone, so to speak, but you can be sure that compared with an article actually written by someone at a desk will be far better in terms of research, depth of analysis, conception, thoroughness, and execution. Not to mention style. To take the view that text-via-spoken word will replace actual writing only shows us how superficial anyone is who seriously suggests that this is "the future" and that the PC is therefore doomed. Granted, not everyone does research. Not everyone is a serious writer. And a lot of people really are superficial thinkers. That should say that the market for portable or other non-desktop devices is assured for many years into the future. However, there simply is no substitute for actual writing and research and, therefore, for some version of desktops, also for many years into the future. Clarke's rule of futuristics always applies: The past persists because the past remains useful, OR because new uses for old inventions arise that have importance. Indeed, part of the process of invention itself is inventing new uses for old inventions. To use an example that I have cited before, never in the history of the world have there been as many sailboats. Steam did not end sailing, nor have gasoline motors or turbines, or anything else. In cases an invention only survives in pieces, such that, while the typewriter is now fading into history, keyboards are ubiquitous and are used by more people than at any time in the past. Typewriters, in case you don't know, "fathered" keyboards. Hence it is safe enough to predict that automobiles will be with us forever, doubtless with new power systems, doubtless with new features like an option to let an onboard computer do some of the driving, but investing in Ford or GM or Chrysler, in any long run, will pay off. Not that there aren't problems with PCs, but what ought to result in not only their survival but a renaissance, would be re-engineering for the purpose of ease of use. High tech people still don't seem to get it. They (many of them, most of them) are feature-obsessed, driven by gadget mentality, and are in love with themselves and with their own love for tech obsession. Hence they don't give a damn for ease of use inasmuch as they thrive on greater and greater complexity -and more and more gizmos as the key to salvation. The first company to change its priorities, to focus on ease of use, on how researchers actually use computers, not how geeks use computers, really ought to do quite well in the marketplace of the future. My humble opinion, anyway Billy ============================================ Xconomy The End of Personal Computers _Nathaniel Borenstein_ (http://www.xconomy.com/author/nborenstein/) (http://www.xconomy.com/archives/?xyear=2013&month=10&xday=1)
Lately, we’ve been hearing a lot about the idea that we are witnessing “ the end of personal computers,” the “post-PC era,” or, as Microsoft would have it, the “PC-plus era.” The difference in terminology is telling, revealing the intense commercial competition and staggering financial stakes that underlie this transition. For those who have been in the computing industry for decades, it’s natural to guess that the transition has been overblown. It’s also tempting to predict continuing swings between centralization (in the form of cloud computing) and decentralization (in the form of more powerful PCs). After all, that ’s what we’ve seen in the past. But I don’t think that’s what will happen. My guess is that we finally have enough power and the right architectures, on both tiny devices and massive servers, to ensure that the swinging is mostly finished, with future evolution tending to increase power both at the user’s location and at the centralized servers. That very power, however, is what is bringing the PC era as we know it to an end. A PC, irrespective of which operating system it runs, is fundamentally a huge compromise—powerful enough to do necessary tasks, but small enough to fit next to a desk in an office. First the PC shrank to fit under a desk, then to fit on top of a desk, then to fit on your lap, all without requiring any fundamental change to the PC paradigm in which workers were assumed to be more or less chained to their desks and the corporate network. Now, the technology has gotten small enough to be used in ways never envisioned for PCs. Smartphones are the most obvious example, but there are also wearable computers like Google Glass or even the Samsung Galaxy Gear, distributed sensors, powerful computers embedded in mobile robots, and, ultimately, body-implantable computers and “smart dust.” None of these are scenarios conducive to the interface of a traditional PC and all of them may be even harder for an enterprise to manage than PCs. Worse still for the PC paradigm, these new devices are slowly undercutting the most basic assumptions of the PC world. As smartphones become better and better at recognizing speech and handwriting, it won’t be long until a new generation expects similar functionality on a PC. Although, once you have voice controls on a PC, do you really need a keyboard? If you remove the keyboard, doesn’t that make it a tablet now? As Microsoft has inadvertently demonstrated, the user interface of a keyboard device like the PC and any touch screen device are radically and incompatibly different. No one thinks of their smartphone or tablet as a PC. Increasingly, computing devices will have a variety of shapes and forms, sharing only a common tendency to store and interact with long-term information on centralized cloud services. This is why cloud computing isn’t a fad, or even another pendulum swing. It makes this future possible. Advancement in user interaction will take place on the devices, while applications will rely on increasingly sophisticated cloud-based services to perform virtually all non-interactive functions. In short, all the services that require “hands on” maintenance today are moving to the cloud, while individuals are moving away from PCs to more specialized interaction devices. Twenty years from now, when a child sees a PC in a computer museum, he will be flummoxed by the lack of a touch screen, the bulky keyboard and mouse, and the lack of speech or handwriting interaction. This, he will be told, is what they called a PC, and if he’s taking notes, he’ll do it by whispering into his phone, or sub-audibly verbalizing to his wearable computer (or perhaps by wiggling his fingers to manipulate a virtual keyboard only he can see). He’ll be interacting with a computing unit built into his clothing or implanted on his body, person connected to the cloud—a far more “personal” computer than any we’ve known to date. Ultimately, what we’ve known as the personal computer for the last 30 years will be viewed as the first historical example of a type of personal computer—and a long-outdated type that is considered anything but personal to children in 2033. -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
