A bunch of these (optical disc, hard drives, fax and so on) are shooting fish in a barrel, technologies that are already in their death throws.
Others I'm sceptical about though - movie theaters as the main one. My dad worked in the film industry and predicted it's demise time and time again over 40 years (though has stopped now) but I think there's something about the shared experience of sitting in a room with a bunch of people, away from (your own) kids and (hopefully) phones and other distractions.
It's not about widescreen TVs, it's about a dedicated environment for doing something and a sense of occasion. I've got a large flat screen, surround sound, blue ray and all which is great, but I still loved going to the cinema this Saturday night.
A bunch of the other things can be summarised in a single point - the death of the single use device whether it be a remote control, a camera, a phone (because landline phone will exist, it'll be over the cable to your house but won't terminate in a dedicated handset, it will route to a smartphone or computer).
I agree, but for a different reason. "Movie Theaters" and "Prime Time Television" are much less "technologies" and more like entertainment business models.
That's completely it - it's a commercial and cultural thing, rather than a technical thing.
Much of the technology involved in a cinema today is a world apart from how things were 50 years ago, but at the heart of it it's the same experience - a big picture on a big screen being shown to a load of people sitting in comfy chairs who are getting aware from their normal lives for a few hours.
Do what you want with the technology, that sounds like a great experience to me and something I'll want to do for a lot longer.
Optical disc in computers are on their way out, but I think (hope?) BluRay is here to stay for a while at least. I know there is iTunes, I know there is Netflix, but the data rates in both are wildly inferior...
Interestingly Apple recently said that they're really not getting requests for Blu-ray discs in machines any more.
I think Blu-ray is around for a while but I think it's the last mass market optical format. The on-line services are currently limited by bandwidth but I think your view on how long Blu-ray survives and how quickly bandwidth improves should probably be pretty heavily linked.
See, that doesn't surprise me in the slightest; Blu-ray makes the most sense when it is connected to your TV.
I see nothing wrong with Blu-ray being used for your TV, and not at all for your computer.
I agree that one day bandwidth may be great enough to supersede Blu-ray, and I agree bandwidth improvements are tied to the end of Blu-ray. However, as Blu-ray offers 36Mbps data rate, that time is certainly not now.
Oh, and if the oft-dreamt-of switch to 4K in the living room happens, that time will be pushed even further out. You might even see one more format.
Part of my scepticism about something beyond Bluray is whether there's a commercial driver for it.
VHS to DVD was a massive jump that was an improvement for anyone. DVD to HD / Bluray is certainly an improvement but I know a lot of people who have been pretty lukewarm about it because while DVD isn't as good, it's good enough for them (certainly given the price differential).
I wonder if Bluray to something else will suffer the same problem amplified - an improvement but not one that many people are willing to put their hand in their pockets for. Yes I'm sure there's some market for it among home cinema fans but is it enough to make it viable? Or will most people be happy just streaming 1080p?
Admittedly if you don't understand the physical limitations of wireless, it's the obvious conclusion one makes (everything seems to be going wireless, and LTE is FAST!). There is a chance we innovate in this area and work out how to make infinitely scalable wireless... But maybe I'm just being overly optimistic.
Good call. This is one of the reasons why I currently prefer the government in Australia over the opposition. They are rolling out a national FTTH network [0], rather than the opposition which seems to think that wireless broadband is the way to get fast internet into homes.
As an example of the attitude of the opposition (from 2009, but their views are the same as far as I'm aware) [1]:
"What they are proposing is the effective re-nationalisation of the fixed line network in this country ... But it certainly should not please the rest of Australia to have the re-nationalisation of a fixed line network in this way, particularly when there will be some $20 billion at least of taxpayers’ money put at risk in an investment in a particular fixed line technology which many have noted will take another 10 years to roll out. And by then we have no idea what the capacity and possibilities will be with alternative communications technologies—most particularly, of course, mobile and wireless. There is a massive flight from fixed line to mobile and wireless broadband going on right now. What will it be like in 10 years time when this thing is finally built? I suspect this will be one of the all-time great white elephants this country has seen."
The main problem with this being the limited bandwidth of the "air", correct? In other words, wireless works fine and dandy right now precisely because everybody isn't using it as a cable replacement.
It's already replaced the "last few feet" of most Internet connections already, though!
Fiber solves "the last mile", but wireless is handy that last little bit of the way. I think that today's "wired to the home, wireless devices" will remain the most common option.
Yes but replacing the last dozen feet at a customer's discretion is a lot different than having the majority of internet users connecting via something like 4G/WiMax
Is anyone else getting tired of the endless predictions of the doom of the PC as tablets take over?
Tablets are wonderful for "consumers": People who want to use apps, read web pages, etc. They just aren't useful for actual WORK: If you want to so much as write a letter, you'll long for a real keyboard if all you have to hand is a tablet.
If you want to sit down and code.. well, I can't see xmonad and vim going touchscreen-based any time soon :)
Tablets don't preclude keyboards (see the Microsoft surface pro for their take on the problem). Also tablets don't preclude attaching to a 30" monitor and your external keyboard and mouse combo of choice. I suspect that in two-three years time I'll be running xmonad and vim on a tablet more powerful than most current laptops and with a choice of keyboard solutions every bit as good as the one on my macbook.
The Senna documentary last year cost me £12 in central London, around $19 at current rates - I can't imagine it has changed massively. I was as surprised as Axel Foley: "I could get blown for 12 bucks!"
29 comments
[ 6.7 ms ] story [ 158 ms ] threadOthers I'm sceptical about though - movie theaters as the main one. My dad worked in the film industry and predicted it's demise time and time again over 40 years (though has stopped now) but I think there's something about the shared experience of sitting in a room with a bunch of people, away from (your own) kids and (hopefully) phones and other distractions.
It's not about widescreen TVs, it's about a dedicated environment for doing something and a sense of occasion. I've got a large flat screen, surround sound, blue ray and all which is great, but I still loved going to the cinema this Saturday night.
A bunch of the other things can be summarised in a single point - the death of the single use device whether it be a remote control, a camera, a phone (because landline phone will exist, it'll be over the cable to your house but won't terminate in a dedicated handset, it will route to a smartphone or computer).
Much of the technology involved in a cinema today is a world apart from how things were 50 years ago, but at the heart of it it's the same experience - a big picture on a big screen being shown to a load of people sitting in comfy chairs who are getting aware from their normal lives for a few hours.
Do what you want with the technology, that sounds like a great experience to me and something I'll want to do for a lot longer.
I think Blu-ray is around for a while but I think it's the last mass market optical format. The on-line services are currently limited by bandwidth but I think your view on how long Blu-ray survives and how quickly bandwidth improves should probably be pretty heavily linked.
I see nothing wrong with Blu-ray being used for your TV, and not at all for your computer.
I agree that one day bandwidth may be great enough to supersede Blu-ray, and I agree bandwidth improvements are tied to the end of Blu-ray. However, as Blu-ray offers 36Mbps data rate, that time is certainly not now.
Oh, and if the oft-dreamt-of switch to 4K in the living room happens, that time will be pushed even further out. You might even see one more format.
VHS to DVD was a massive jump that was an improvement for anyone. DVD to HD / Bluray is certainly an improvement but I know a lot of people who have been pretty lukewarm about it because while DVD isn't as good, it's good enough for them (certainly given the price differential).
I wonder if Bluray to something else will suffer the same problem amplified - an improvement but not one that many people are willing to put their hand in their pockets for. Yes I'm sure there's some market for it among home cinema fans but is it enough to make it viable? Or will most people be happy just streaming 1080p?
Admittedly if you don't understand the physical limitations of wireless, it's the obvious conclusion one makes (everything seems to be going wireless, and LTE is FAST!). There is a chance we innovate in this area and work out how to make infinitely scalable wireless... But maybe I'm just being overly optimistic.
Few paragraphs down, he mentions how tape units use magnetic platter technology same as hard drives.
As an example of the attitude of the opposition (from 2009, but their views are the same as far as I'm aware) [1]:
"What they are proposing is the effective re-nationalisation of the fixed line network in this country ... But it certainly should not please the rest of Australia to have the re-nationalisation of a fixed line network in this way, particularly when there will be some $20 billion at least of taxpayers’ money put at risk in an investment in a particular fixed line technology which many have noted will take another 10 years to roll out. And by then we have no idea what the capacity and possibilities will be with alternative communications technologies—most particularly, of course, mobile and wireless. There is a massive flight from fixed line to mobile and wireless broadband going on right now. What will it be like in 10 years time when this thing is finally built? I suspect this will be one of the all-time great white elephants this country has seen."
[0] - http://nbnco.com.au/
[1] - http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2009-05-12.77.1&...
Fiber solves "the last mile", but wireless is handy that last little bit of the way. I think that today's "wired to the home, wireless devices" will remain the most common option.
Tablets are wonderful for "consumers": People who want to use apps, read web pages, etc. They just aren't useful for actual WORK: If you want to so much as write a letter, you'll long for a real keyboard if all you have to hand is a tablet.
If you want to sit down and code.. well, I can't see xmonad and vim going touchscreen-based any time soon :)
That's cheap! I pay $ 14-18 here in Sweden. And there are still new theaters being built.
(OK, that's not a technology. I think there's a fair chance that children born this year will not need to learn how to drive just to use a car.)