5 ms·

"You see, we are almost certainly moving towards a world where the only computer we own will be wearable, or simply a smartphone." I just don't think that's tr

by allenp 15y ago

"You see, we are almost certainly moving towards a world where the only computer we own will be wearable, or simply a smartphone." I just don't think that's true any time soon. Anyone that needs to type out a paper for school, for example, might need something more than a smartphone. Or someone that likes to read on screens larger than 4". Maybe the author is counting on holographic projection or the like?

mrsebastian 15y ago
Read the next few sentences! The whole point is that Thunderbolt will let you plug your smartphone into a keyboard (to write that paper), or a projector, video camera (FireWire), or an external RAID array (eSATA/PCIe) for that matter. As soon as the Thunderbolt/Light Peak socket gets a little thinner, anyway :)
- glhaynes 15y ago
  But is that really what people want? I don't want my phone being tied up being a CPU. I want to be able to pick it up (without unhooking any wires) at any time and make a phone call, walk around, etc. Or check Twitter on it while I'm working on my big screen. Just because it'll have enough processing power/storage capacity to be my "computer" doesn't mean I'd want it to - I still want both form factors.
  - mrsebastian 15y ago
    Yes, multiple form factors will exist. As you say in your other comment, there are different use cases -- you don't want to read a book on a display the size of a wristwatch, for example :) I mean, it's impossible to say what we'll be doing in a few years, let alone 10 or 20, but if we still spend a lot of time moving around and interacting with the physical universe then I think smartphones will beat out tablets. You might have a tablet at home or at the office, but I suspect it will just be a dumb display. Admittedly you wouldn't want to use a Thunderbolt cable in that case -- you'd want a wireless solution of some kind. There are wireless solutions that support extension of the PCIe bus, though, like the upcoming WiGig thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Gigabit_Alliance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Gigabit_Alliance
    - glhaynes 15y ago
      Definitely agree it's impossible to say. :) Why do you think the tablet would become a dumb display? It's hard for me to imagine there being much cost savings there - you could remove some smarts but you'd have to replace them with almost-equivalent-costing smarts because you still have to handle networking, presentation of remotely-generated video and audio, receiving and transmitting user inputs, etc. Guess you could save a bit on flash storage, too. But compared to the extra latency, added dependence, etc, it doesn't seem a win to me at all.
      - mrsebastian 15y ago
        Hrm, good question. I guess I just don't see us using 10 discrete computers to interact with the cloud. I don't see us having a TV computer, a tablet computer, a smartphone, a desktop, an office machine -- I see us having one computer (with a secure link to the cloud) that then interfaces with our surroundings. I agree, the cost difference wouldn't be that significant between a normal tablet and a dumb tablet, but I don't think it will come down to costs. It will come down to security, flexibility, customizability...
        glhaynes 15y ago
        I expect there'll be options for this, but I also expect they won't become very popular for a number of reasons. The biggest that springs to mind is that this puts a lot more strain on the battery of the phone, the device that you most want to stay charged. No doubt this will be mitigated by lower-power electronics and better battery technology, but I think we're still many years from people having tons of battery capacity to spare on their phones. Anyway, I hope systems like this will be built, in part because I like to see all the evolutionary options explored! But I don't see anything functionality-wise that appeals to me personally from systems like the Atrix, while the disadvantages seems pretty clear. EDIT: I should say that there is one clear benefit of an "all-in-one" system: having all your data with you all the time. But cloud-storage with automatic push of documents and media allows a similar benefit.
- jokermatt999 15y ago
  So basically the Motorola Atrix? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Atrix_4G http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Atrix_4G
  - wmf 15y ago
    Except the "webtop" mode is garbage.
    - sukuriant 15y ago
      Could you expound upon that? Except for my understanding that it uses tethering bytes instead of phone bytes, I thought that they webtop mode would be sufficiently cool to be useful for emailing, more verbose texting, some web-browsing and ssh sessions. Is it really that bad?
- jarek 15y ago
  Back in my days, the future involved wireless keyboard and file access... But why do it with Bluetooth when you can do it shinier with Thunderbolt?
glhaynes 15y ago
I agree that we're not moving to a world with only wearable/smartphone computers — why would we? Why would we not want tablets or laptops any more? And why would we want our devices to depend on each other (like a tablet or laptop that draws its processing power from one's wearable computer)? We'll continue to have devices in a variety of form factors (meeting a variety of human interface needs), but our data will be synced up via the cloud.
- ianterrell 15y ago
  The author, however clumsily, is noting that computing and interface are separate concerns. We don't want "laptops," we want a clamshell keyboard and display for ergonomic reasons. Similarly, we don't want desktops, we want a keyboard and a large monitor. We don't want tablets, we want a medium sized interactive touch screen. But I'd be no less happy if the actual computing was done in my pocket by my smartphone while I sat the dumb keyboard/display clamshell on my lap (it'd be lighter and cooler, too, I expect), or held the interactive screen in my hand, or typed on the keyboard resting on my desk. In fact, I'd be much happier, because all the data would stay with my physically 24/7, like my phone already does. All of my separate form-factor input/output peripherals would be working with the same versions of apps and code. On the other hand, if I lost it, I'd cry myself to sleep, so cloud backed up everything would be required. This makes it a not-ok choice for many people for many reasons (privacy, etc), but it's great for the average user doing average things. I see it as a very real possibility that the smartphone will be the CPU, and all the other devices we have will get dumber and dumber.
  - mrsebastian 15y ago
    I'm the author -- and yes, you got it in one :)
  - Hyena 15y ago
    I'd think that world would be a long ways off for a lot of people. I can't play large games from my phone. There's not even a port of Dwarf Fortress. Sad times.
riobard 15y ago
“Anyone that needs to type out a paper for school, for example, might need something more than a smartphone.” This might sound awkward, but it's actually doable on an iPad with the bluetooth keyboard connected for typing. Maybe not for complex math papers, but for English essays the setup is definitely very usable. I've tried.

by allenp 15y ago

mrsebastian 15y ago

Read the next few sentences! The whole point is that Thunderbolt will let you plug your smartphone into a keyboard (to write that paper), or a projector, video camera (FireWire), or an external RAID array (eSATA/PCIe) for that matter. As soon as the Thunderbolt/Light Peak socket gets a little thinner, anyway :)

glhaynes 15y ago
But is that really what people want? I don't want my phone being tied up being a CPU. I want to be able to pick it up (without unhooking any wires) at any time and make a phone call, walk around, etc. Or check Twitter on it while I'm working on my big screen. Just because it'll have enough processing power/storage capacity to be my "computer" doesn't mean I'd want it to - I still want both form factors.
- mrsebastian 15y ago
  Yes, multiple form factors will exist. As you say in your other comment, there are different use cases -- you don't want to read a book on a display the size of a wristwatch, for example :) I mean, it's impossible to say what we'll be doing in a few years, let alone 10 or 20, but if we still spend a lot of time moving around and interacting with the physical universe then I think smartphones will beat out tablets. You might have a tablet at home or at the office, but I suspect it will just be a dumb display. Admittedly you wouldn't want to use a Thunderbolt cable in that case -- you'd want a wireless solution of some kind. There are wireless solutions that support extension of the PCIe bus, though, like the upcoming WiGig thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Gigabit_Alliance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Gigabit_Alliance
  - glhaynes 15y ago
    Definitely agree it's impossible to say. :) Why do you think the tablet would become a dumb display? It's hard for me to imagine there being much cost savings there - you could remove some smarts but you'd have to replace them with almost-equivalent-costing smarts because you still have to handle networking, presentation of remotely-generated video and audio, receiving and transmitting user inputs, etc. Guess you could save a bit on flash storage, too. But compared to the extra latency, added dependence, etc, it doesn't seem a win to me at all.
    - mrsebastian 15y ago
      Hrm, good question. I guess I just don't see us using 10 discrete computers to interact with the cloud. I don't see us having a TV computer, a tablet computer, a smartphone, a desktop, an office machine -- I see us having one computer (with a secure link to the cloud) that then interfaces with our surroundings. I agree, the cost difference wouldn't be that significant between a normal tablet and a dumb tablet, but I don't think it will come down to costs. It will come down to security, flexibility, customizability...
      - glhaynes 15y ago
        I expect there'll be options for this, but I also expect they won't become very popular for a number of reasons. The biggest that springs to mind is that this puts a lot more strain on the battery of the phone, the device that you most want to stay charged. No doubt this will be mitigated by lower-power electronics and better battery technology, but I think we're still many years from people having tons of battery capacity to spare on their phones. Anyway, I hope systems like this will be built, in part because I like to see all the evolutionary options explored! But I don't see anything functionality-wise that appeals to me personally from systems like the Atrix, while the disadvantages seems pretty clear. EDIT: I should say that there is one clear benefit of an "all-in-one" system: having all your data with you all the time. But cloud-storage with automatic push of documents and media allows a similar benefit.
jokermatt999 15y ago
So basically the Motorola Atrix? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Atrix_4G http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Atrix_4G
- wmf 15y ago
  Except the "webtop" mode is garbage.
  - sukuriant 15y ago
    Could you expound upon that? Except for my understanding that it uses tethering bytes instead of phone bytes, I thought that they webtop mode would be sufficiently cool to be useful for emailing, more verbose texting, some web-browsing and ssh sessions. Is it really that bad?
jarek 15y ago
Back in my days, the future involved wireless keyboard and file access... But why do it with Bluetooth when you can do it shinier with Thunderbolt?

glhaynes 15y ago

I agree that we're not moving to a world with only wearable/smartphone computers — why would we? Why would we not want tablets or laptops any more? And why would we want our devices to depend on each other (like a tablet or laptop that draws its processing power from one's wearable computer)? We'll continue to have devices in a variety of form factors (meeting a variety of human interface needs), but our data will be synced up via the cloud.

ianterrell 15y ago
The author, however clumsily, is noting that computing and interface are separate concerns. We don't want "laptops," we want a clamshell keyboard and display for ergonomic reasons. Similarly, we don't want desktops, we want a keyboard and a large monitor. We don't want tablets, we want a medium sized interactive touch screen. But I'd be no less happy if the actual computing was done in my pocket by my smartphone while I sat the dumb keyboard/display clamshell on my lap (it'd be lighter and cooler, too, I expect), or held the interactive screen in my hand, or typed on the keyboard resting on my desk. In fact, I'd be much happier, because all the data would stay with my physically 24/7, like my phone already does. All of my separate form-factor input/output peripherals would be working with the same versions of apps and code. On the other hand, if I lost it, I'd cry myself to sleep, so cloud backed up everything would be required. This makes it a not-ok choice for many people for many reasons (privacy, etc), but it's great for the average user doing average things. I see it as a very real possibility that the smartphone will be the CPU, and all the other devices we have will get dumber and dumber.
- mrsebastian 15y ago
  I'm the author -- and yes, you got it in one :)
- Hyena 15y ago
  I'd think that world would be a long ways off for a lot of people. I can't play large games from my phone. There's not even a port of Dwarf Fortress. Sad times.

riobard 15y ago

“Anyone that needs to type out a paper for school, for example, might need something more than a smartphone.” This might sound awkward, but it's actually doable on an iPad with the bluetooth keyboard connected for typing. Maybe not for complex math papers, but for English essays the setup is definitely very usable. I've tried.