Billy,

 

Back in the pre-PC era I once had a secretary (an obsolete profession) who
took excellent dictation.  I dictated some things, but preferred to write
important documents by hand on a yellow tablet.  Now that I can (and do) use
the voice recognition feature of my smartphone, I still look at serious
writing like you do... it takes time and thought.  In other words, a legal
pad or a keyboard.  I will use voice recognition for a quick text message or
to look up something on Google, but not for writing.

 

Chris

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 9:13 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [RC] What is wrong with High Tech kids who never grow up

 

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/> 


 

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] <mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]> .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

-- 
-- 
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.

Reply via email to