3 ms·

I think you make a good argument, but miss the mark on one important point. The specialization/generalization you're talking about seems to apply to apps, not t

I think you make a good argument, but miss the mark on one important point. The specialization/generalization you're talking about seems to apply to apps, not the devices themselves. Devices like the iPhone and iPad replace a lot of things; the examples of glasses really wasn't a strong one. Consider this list of things being replaced: phone, mp3 player, GPS, maps, compass, books, wrist watch, stop watch, alarm, photo album, voice recorder, notepad + pen, calculator. From now on, most people with a tablet device will use that instead of anything on the list most of the time (except probably notepad + pen). These things will just never be nearly as popular as they once were, and the list is very incomplete. It's just too convenient to have all those things condensed into one easy-to-use device, and in many (but certainly not all) cases the tablet is better than the device it's replacing.

Retric 16y ago
An iPod makes a terrible compass, wrist watch, photo album, notepad, calculator and or camera. The advantage is a bad X is better than no X. So, while most people may end up using their cell phone as a stopwatch, people that need a good stopwatch will still buy it.
Chris_Newton 16y ago
If I were to pick a word for what is generic, I think I would choose "platform". As I see it, the distinction is not really about either a particular device or a particular app, it's about whether the combination of hardware and software is dedicated to a specific purpose, or whether it provides a foundation with a range of specific capabilities but relying on another layer of software on top to provide end user functionality, which is where things like Web or mobile apps come in. In terms of handheld/mobile devices, I suspect you're being a little optimistic with your list of dedicated tools that can be replaced effectively by building on the more general platform. For example, digital photo frames are great, but you probably have several of them around your home if you use them. Those devices don't each need to come with an accelerometer, a GPS system, and audio connectors, and all those useless (in this context) extras push up the cost. Books are an interesting case, where I can see technology improving and converging to the point where tablets really do take over, but I expect it will be quite some time before this becomes the norm. I wouldn't be surprised to see a passive, full colour, high resolution screen inside the next five years, but there is much more to this issue than just the technology. I personally believe that reconciling the various commercial, social, logistical and ethical issues is going to be the hard part, and a lot of these probably won't even enter popular debate until the tech is ready to do the job. Perhaps the underlying theme here is that even if the technology in a mobile device is capable of replacing many other tools, whether it can do so effectively is a different question, and one that has to take into account factors like cost-effectiveness as well as techhnical capability.

Retric 16y ago

An iPod makes a terrible compass, wrist watch, photo album, notepad, calculator and or camera. The advantage is a bad X is better than no X. So, while most people may end up using their cell phone as a stopwatch, people that need a good stopwatch will still buy it.

Chris_Newton 16y ago

If I were to pick a word for what is generic, I think I would choose "platform". As I see it, the distinction is not really about either a particular device or a particular app, it's about whether the combination of hardware and software is dedicated to a specific purpose, or whether it provides a foundation with a range of specific capabilities but relying on another layer of software on top to provide end user functionality, which is where things like Web or mobile apps come in. In terms of handheld/mobile devices, I suspect you're being a little optimistic with your list of dedicated tools that can be replaced effectively by building on the more general platform. For example, digital photo frames are great, but you probably have several of them around your home if you use them. Those devices don't each need to come with an accelerometer, a GPS system, and audio connectors, and all those useless (in this context) extras push up the cost. Books are an interesting case, where I can see technology improving and converging to the point where tablets really do take over, but I expect it will be quite some time before this becomes the norm. I wouldn't be surprised to see a passive, full colour, high resolution screen inside the next five years, but there is much more to this issue than just the technology. I personally believe that reconciling the various commercial, social, logistical and ethical issues is going to be the hard part, and a lot of these probably won't even enter popular debate until the tech is ready to do the job. Perhaps the underlying theme here is that even if the technology in a mobile device is capable of replacing many other tools, whether it can do so effectively is a different question, and one that has to take into account factors like cost-effectiveness as well as techhnical capability.