9 ms·

The Type of Companies That Publish Future Concept Videos

142 points by llambda 15y ago

jordank 15y ago
Publishing videos to the world may have issues, but these sorts of videos can have extreme internal value (the OP mentions this). I've worked on quite of a few of these — they've turned out to be useful tools in securing budgets and coordinating teams. These concept videos can also be useful when an ingredient brand wants to push other players in their industry forward. When company A needs company B to buy into building new types of hardware, far-out concept videos can go a long way. By publishing concept videos, firms can essentially create reference designs for the future.
- pohl 15y ago
  When company A needs company B to buy into building new types of hardware, far-out concept videos can go a long way. Compare this to how far (and how fast) one can get by letting your purchasing power do the talking, rather than a concept video. I like concept videos, personally. They are techno-lust candy to me. If this is a big part of how they move other players in their industry forward, however, then this is an inherent weakness in their business model. Industry players respond much more quickly when you're handing them money.
  - dpark 15y ago
    > Compare this to how far (and how fast) one can get by letting your purchasing power do the talking, rather than a concept video. This makes a lot of sense when you're Apple, and very little when you're Microsoft. Going to Samsung and saying "I'll buy 10MM units, guaranteed" isn't very fiscally responsible if you don't sell hardware. Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft
    - pohl 15y ago
      Exactly. That is the weakness in your business model to which I referred. I'm not saying that it's a failing in your business model. Clearly you're doing fine despite it. But it is a relative weakness against Apple's integrated model.
      - dpark 15y ago
        Historically it's been a strength. Apple's resurgence is a pretty recent thing, and most hardware+software companies have not done well. Look at Sun and see how well the hardware+software model worked for them. For that matter, look at Android, which is following the software-only model and has overtaken the iPhone in most areas now.
        Tloewald 15y ago
        Or you could simply point out that a lot of companies failed because Microsoft sucked the air out of the OS market after IBM foolishly licensed DOS from them under non-exclusive terms. If IBM had bought DOS outright (or bought CP/M) the IBM PC would probably have been a successful integrated hardware+software business (actually it was, but it would probably have lasted longer) like so many others. Even without owning DOS, IBM tried to block clones, but its BIOS was too small a barrier to entry. It's actually Microsoft that's the big exception.
        dpark 15y ago
        I don't really follow. How did Microsoft suck the air out of the OS market? By being successful? That seems like a rather convenient definition for you. You blame the failure of hardware+software on the success of Microsoft's software-only approach. It actually seems we agree on the facts. You just somehow cast this in a negative light. I could likewise argue that Apple has "sucked the air" out of the smartphone market. That didn't stop Android from taking the lead from Apple.
        Tloewald 15y ago
        No, I point out that hardware+software worked before Microsoft and works well now. And if IBM had licensed DOS exclusively, it would have worked well for IBM. Android represents an example of dumping – taking a loss on a product using subsidies. It's fairly easy to be "successful" if you spend a lot on a product and then give it away.
  - jordank 15y ago
    Sometimes the products that companies need to buy aren't yet being made (and can't yet be purchased as components). In this case there is some financial risk associated with producing a new product — videos and other materials can help convince this player to take that risk.
- OpenAmazing 15y ago
  "useful tools in securing budgets and coordinating teams" This is exactly what Gruber is referring to. If crazy videos like this are being used to determine budgets, then the company is being led by fools. Any manager that would watch this video and then declare "Yes! Build me that!" doesn't understand how products get made and should not be let anywhere near the Product team.
  - chaz 15y ago
    Not everyone's a product visionary, but you need a way to manifest your vision to get everyone on board or rally the troops. Sometimes it's an email, presentation, speech, or prototype. For a company with over 100 corporate executives listed and over 10,000 employees attending its global sales conference, it's not unreasonable for Microsoft to be using video. Large orgs are as much about politics as they are about products, and you need to champion your idea to others.
InclinedPlane 15y ago
Concept videos are ill-founded in general. Indeed, I'd say it's better to have a vague, handwaving long-term goal than a crisp, sharply focused, highly detailed concept like these videos. The basic fallacy at play is the idea that it's possible to predict the future so far in advance. In reality this is only possible if your products are boring and mundane. When you make products that transform people's lives and the way the world works then it becomes impossible to predict how people will use them and how society, industry, and the economy will change as a consequence. That's true even from generation to generation of a device or piece of software, making it utterly useless to try to predict anything several generations ahead. Worse yet, concept videos make it all too easy to fall into the trap of working to make a product that looks cool in a demo but in reality is either hugely impractical to make or use or simply not very useful. For example, you could make a demo video of people commuting to and from work via rocket powered skateboard. And it would look awesome, and after watching the video everyone would want to commute to work via rocket powered skateboard. But in reality it's not practical, and possibly not even as fun as it may seem (after the first 100 times the novelty would wear off, and then you're just riding a death trap and getting rained on and stuck in rocket-powered-skateboard traffic ... ok, it still sounds awesome, nevertheless...). When you skip so many intermediate steps you can generate a false sense of what's possible, or even mislead yourself on what you're working on. Eventually smartphones are going to have no bezel and be super thin, so what? That's cool, but what does it have to do with what you are doing in the mean time to make smartphones better? It's easy to make a demo about voice control but the hard part is making it work in the here and now, how do you do that?
- JEVLON 15y ago
  Concept videos are important. They are not saying 2019 will be exactly like this, but they are looking at potential use cases for various interfaces etcetera. When they come up with a idea they particularly like, they don't sit on their hands for ten years. They look at their idea of the future, then they start taking the best parts of that idea and implementing it in the products they are creating. Since that video they have released or announced two products with the metro interface (Windows 8 & Windows Phone 7). Microsoft also has announced a version of the metro interface for the game console (Xbox 360). The part of the video where the guy takes a photo of the display and transfers it to a page is already possible in a less exciting capacity on WP. Take a photo of something, and it instantly shows up on your skydrive account. The children communicating through the wall display is a possibility today, but less impressive, with the use of a Kinect and a projector/screen. Microsoft actually has developed wall displays in their research division. They also announced yesterday that they will be partnering with a bunch of companies to provide the Kinect in enterprise environments. Every good microsoft product already has implementations of an idea that is in their concept videos. The average person doesn't go watch their concept videos, so it has no negative effect on their image. Also, thinking of the future does not have to be a distraction from the present. Why is Apple doing better than Microsoft with consumers? They are not associated with viruses, IT departments, ugly products, and office suites. Microsoft = Painful & Not-Cool. Apple also gives their employees more freedom and they push products out when the market is ready, but only when they are ready for them. If Windows Phone came out instead of the iPhone, when it was announced and released, WP would have failed completely.
mindstab 15y ago
Nokia did it too with the Nokia Morph http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX-gTobCJHs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX-gTobCJHs Doesn't seem they are doing too well now either? Nokia Windows Morph phone 7 anyone?
2arrs2ells 15y ago
Has anyone else been in the Microsoft "Future Home" and "Future Office" in Redmond? They're similar to this concept video, but actually have some working features (although you quickly realize they're mostly staged). They're more private than the video (used only by internal staff/guests/partners), but a much bigger waste of money.
- jeffclark 15y ago
  Wouldn't this be in the same vein as a private MVP for your family or investors?
- bornon5 15y ago
  When I was an intern at Microsoft, they let us walk around the Future Home. One of the features was a countertop screen that displayed information like the time and date. I asked the tour guide about how the countertop screen worked, since it didn't look or feel like an LCD - the images were much too dim and the surface felt like acrylic. She laughed and said that they hadn't known what to do, so the night before it was supposed to be finished, someone ran out to the department store and bought some translucent plastic, and then installed a video projector underneath the counter, pointing up. Sure enough, the cabinet was glued shut, so as not to ruin the illusion. Everything else felt similar. Standard (and awesome) futuristic concepts, but executed cheaply, and not really usable beyond the staged usage scenario. It was like showing off a flying car that can only fly a foot off the ground and by the way you're not allowed to look underneath.
- lambda 15y ago
  I was at the Microsoft office in Cambridge (MA, US) the other day, and they had a Surface there. It was much the same; a neat toy, but ultimately a distraction. They spent serious engineering resources on it, and it amounts to something that will sell a handful for companies to put in lobbies as a something fun to play with. Given the wear patterns on it, it looked like it was mostly used for playing checkers. Now, the Surface could actually be a neat product. If it were affordable enough for any small office, or for people to use in their home, it would probably sell well. If they actually developed only one tablet platform, that scaled up from their phones to the Surface with only minor modifications to UI, they'd have a serious contender for a touch based platform. But with something that's just a toy for companies with extra money to spend entertaining their guests, with its own APIs so that software isn't portable between it and other products, and no real significant tablet offerings to fill in the gap between the phone and the Surface, it just doesn't make that much sense. I doubt that they can be making much money on it.
mrbgty 15y ago
Surprised the car in the beginning wasn't a self-driving car
- ctdonath 15y ago
  Speaking of cars, reading the article I was thinking of automotive "prototypes" featured in magazines and trade shows, but nigh unto never on the road. Cars or computers or phones, stop wasting time giving us lofty promises and prototypes of a future that won't happen, give us tangible purchaseable incremental and revolutionary improvements of real products NOW.
rjd 15y ago
I've worked for a few companies over the years, and there is a type of manager I run into a lot. I can summarize them by a statement they make "Just get it done." The thing about these managers are they are delivery focused, not product focused. The have no imagination, and no emotional attachment to the product. They are there to make sure the books balance and revenue increases, thats it. These people have always frightened me a bit because they just don't understand what the people who work under them do. You can't sit in a meeting and explain a new concept to them, you have to completely design a working product and walk them through it step by step. A verbal explanation will only confuse them, and often they get agitated... because they don't understand. I'm sure most of us have been in a meeting where every single person understands the speaker except for person who has the authority to approve or deny the work... and all they can say is "I don't get it" (and you are going holy crap 20 other people get it, I can see them rolling there eyes and smirking). I wouldn't mind betting that these videos are a sign of delivery managers being brought into R&D departments. These videos are made so that the delivery manager can understand what the people around him are doing, and so he can explain it to the bean counters. Its a sign you have put the wrong people into positions of authority. EDIT: I just realized that the character Veronica on "Better off Ted" is exactly what I'm describing. I recommend watching it if you've never seen it.
- ctdonath 15y ago
  Great point. Concept videos are for people who don't get - as in grok - the concept already. These people should not be in positions of power. Contrast this with the recent thread about "for a successful presentation to Jeff Bezos, delete every third paragraph - he'll fill in the gaps and still figure out on the spot what you missed and how your bleeding-edge new idea can be improved." Bezos and his kind don't need concept videos.
- DLWormwood 15y ago
  > The thing about these managers are they are delivery focused, not product focused. The have no imagination, and no emotional attachment to the product. They are there to make sure the books balance and revenue increases, thats it. Interestingly enough, I recently saw a video giving a more sympathetic view of such a mind set... http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/so-you-want-to-be-a-producer http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/so-you-want-to-be-a-pro... Keep in mind that the makers of this video series have spent more time on the creative end than the production end, and the viewpoint becomes even more surprising.
cateye 15y ago
With the same logic, how about BMW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTYiEkQYhWY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTYiEkQYhWY
- MaxGabriel 15y ago
  When I first watched the BMW video, I thought you had a good point, but then I watched the Microsoft video. The difference is that BMW is innovating on an actual product they can make now and learn from. Microsoft's video envisions translucent, credit card size touchscreen phones and people interacting with holograms. There's some value in Microsoft's video, but given the unnecessary production costs, acting, etc., all of which is divorced from the engineering team[1], it sounds like their time would be better spent taking an approach more like BMW's.
- aeturnum 15y ago
  It seems that BMW actually built a prototype, which lets the company test out specific ideas about how to change something (in this case the surface of the car). That's very different from asking people to imagine how things will be 10 years from now. BMW Page on the GINA: http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/AllBMWs/ConceptVehicles/GINA/ http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/AllBMWs/ConceptVehicl...
joebadmo 15y ago
Apple is obviously doing very well. But that doesn't mean everything Apple does is right, or that everyone should do things the way Apple does. I love when companies do this kind of concept video, and if anything, I think these don't look far enough in the future. I've never seen these as predictions of the future. More like sci-fi vignettes. I think it's great that big tech companies allot resources to look beyond the next product, out to the horizon of imagination and inspiration.
pnathan 15y ago
I see a concept video as something that would serve as the unifying vision for a company. Something that delineates something along the lines of this kind of template: We are going to work on creating a set of products X, which will enable these ways of living and working Y, which in turn will spawn these associated needs Z, and here is a scenario acted out where we can make a case that this is a vision that we should go for. When designing our products, this video is the high level reference point for the product world we are moving towards.
ryanwaggoner 15y ago
I can think of at least one potentially valuable use of concept videos: customer validation. Dropbox used this to great effect, as I recall. I could be wrong, but I thought that the video Drew launched (here on HN) was of a product that didn't fully exist yet. But I could be mistaken. Either way, I think there's tremendous value in being able to sell (or get a verbal commitment of a sale) a product before you have to build it. Just make sure you can build it. EDIT: Here's the thread where Drew showed Dropbox to HN. Video is long gone though... http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863
- InclinedPlane 15y ago
  There's a difference between a concept which addresses an obvious, immediate need and a concept which just shows a bunch of vaguely cool stuff happening. The problem isn't that videos of not-yet-existing products are universally bad. The problem is that when you use fiction to portray a concept the farther away it is from the here and now the easier it is to go astray.
protomyth 15y ago
A long time back, I knew a group of consultants that were big into Shockwave. They were the types that would throw parties with their animations projected on the walls. They would use Shockwave professionally to visualize the interactions of a business workflow. It was really a animated use case when you get right down to it. They had a lot of success and it was easy to get people onboard with a new process because they could "see it". Really not sure what happened to them. I can see using a concept video like this as an internal "Does this make sense?" and "Prototype Modeling", but I am at a loss as to why you would release it the public. You aren't selling it now so you cannot profit off it, and various critics will point out the flaws in usage inside the video. Plus, Gruber is right, it does take away headlines that could be about your now and selling. The worst part is having a obviously struggling and clueless competitor decide they too need a video.
Tichy 15y ago
At the very least I thought the design in the video was pretty cool (the fonts, colors and what not on the various screens). I haven't followed Mango or whatever, so I am not sure if that was just an interpolation of the Mango theme or something new. Also, I totally suck at design, so I am easily awestruck by people who can do it. In any case, I wouldn't think too much about it. MS is a really big company, and they probably pay for something like that from their pocket change. Whatever. Also I like reading science fiction, and isn't a video like that also a kind of science fiction? I didn't think the video was "creepy", but it made me think: it showed essentially how people are being pushed from location to location by their devices. I guess that is an interpolation of the life of office workers today, who are dominated by Outlook. But it struck me that in the end humans might become merely processes executing the program their devices and management software sets up for them. I doubt that is what humans really desire, so I suppose MS got it wrong in the video. But it was sufficient to evoke some thoughts.
ethank 15y ago
I saw this video at HP in 1992 or 1993 or so called HP 1995 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPKX5iuBvZg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPKX5iuBvZg I was 13 or 14 at the time and to me it was a bit of a "wow" moment. Not because I related to the topic (mostly this was manufacturing) but because of the interfaces and the speed of information dispersal. I remember seeing other concept videos (the famous AT&T ones, Apple's, Adobe, etc) and they were likewise inspiring. I know reality is often the best thing to market, and Apple and the like have made reality as inspiring as a far future concept lately. But concept videos from the late 80's -> mid 90's had a huge impact on why I'm in technology today.
- tezmc 15y ago
  I had a similar experience at around the same age. In my case it was Douglas Adam's 1990 documentary for the BBC called Hyperland. All about the Internet and the web before I'd even heard of such things. I remember thinking at the time that the stuff in the documentary would never happen in my lifetime. Luckily it's on Youtube so I can reminisce. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOsPKjbMvxY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOsPKjbMvxY
- DavidSJ 15y ago
  As a kid, Star Trek was my concept video.
mgunes 15y ago
"Real artists ship, dabblers create concept products" -- http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/ http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
MatthewPhillips 15y ago
Is Daring Fireball a technology blog or a business-strategy blog?
- DavidSJ 15y ago
  Both.
fuzionmonkey 15y ago
Apparently in the future, we use lots of Gotham.
dredmorbius 15y ago
"You Will" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZb0avfQme8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZb0avfQme8 The company that brought it to me wasn't AT&T.
bane 15y ago
Maybe a good time to show these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PJcABbtvtA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PJcABbtvtA
trout 15y ago
I think there's some value to them. Sure, apple doesn't do them - but apple operates in a shroud of mystery and nobody knows their next move, so no surprise there. Apple has had the ability to nail technology inflection points and truly innovate so they don't need to. Apple doesn't write the rules for companies in different positions. Gruber argues that this is lost attention on the Windows phone, but is it really? Would there be conversations about the video and would it have this type of debate and conversation about a video about the Windows phone? How does one criticize both science fiction that isn't daring enough, not inspiring enough, and corporate future concept videos that are too futuristic and unrealistic? Is it that both sit in the unimaginative future, or is it insulting when a company attempts to claim credit for generic futuristic visions? I think if you take a look at most big tech companies they have these visions, will talk about it, put it in slideware, and slip some into their advertising. Making a video is taking it one more step. The videos are probably not for the HN crowd, but instead those that haven't seen or thought of similar things and have now painted that company as the innovator.
UjjwolL 15y ago
I think there needs to be distinction between concept videos and advertisement. Concept videos which are glamours like advertisement are not "concept videos" because it not practicality of the concept they are showing but how can we market and make this product cool "if we make this." There is fundamental problem with this. As Gruber said, concept videos are the sign of warnings that you are not doing anything.
DodgyEggplant 15y ago
The actual real competition to Apple is Samsung-Android. As business insider pointed out, Android caught up with the software, than the hardware, than the single big manufacturer.
AccordionGuy 15y ago
As the author of the article to which Gruber is referring, I think I'll simply say "Well played, Mr. Gruber, well played."
jamesrcole 15y ago
“Knowledge Navigator” didn’t help Apple in any way. Apple never made such a product. It didn’t bring Siri to us any sooner than if that video had never been made. It only served to distract from and diminish Apple’s then-current actual products. For all I know he could be 100% right about this (I'm not claiming he's wrong), but he just asserts it without giving any explanation or justification.
guelo 15y ago
I'm pissed at HN for wasting my time with this article. A rant against concept videos is not only totally useless information to me it is completely boring. I guess it could supposedly be useful to "visionaries" at giant companies or their marketing department but, fuck, are we going to be analyzing their brochures next? Who cares!?
- dextorious 15y ago
  1) Nobody wasted your time with this article, and surely not HN (which is just a posting engine). People chose to vote on it, and you chose to read it. 2) Who cares? The people who voted for it on HN maybe? What part of "social news website" don't you understand? (rhetorical question: the "social" part of course)
Andi 15y ago
With this video you demonstrate the will to create something, but to deliver is a completely different challenge! Keep quiet, keep informed about your field, focus!
Andi 15y ago
With this videos you demonstrate the will to create something, but delivering is a completely different challenge! Keep quiet, keep informed about your field, focus!
teyc 15y ago
there is nothing wrong with concept videos as long as they are proof of concept. Otherwise, it is no better than watching CSI.
jrodgers 15y ago
I think a concept video, as long as it isn't too outrageous, is a decent way to inspire people. Some people watched minority report and said "I want to build that" -- concept videos could achieve the same. At the end of the article he mentions RIM's videos. I would say those are totally different as I think most of the basic components of that world are in the device or rumoured to be coming soon. That is cool. If someone can grab their latest device and make one of those workflows happen how good will they feel and what could come next? Yes there are bad videos and they may have an unclear purpose but I think it is all about the context of the video.

142 points by llambda 15y ago

Publishing videos to the world may have issues, but these sorts of videos can have extreme internal value (the OP mentions this). I've worked on quite of a few of these — they've turned out to be useful tools in securing budgets and coordinating teams. These concept videos can also be useful when an ingredient brand wants to push other players in their industry forward. When company A needs company B to buy into building new types of hardware, far-out concept videos can go a long way. By publishing concept videos, firms can essentially create reference designs for the future.

pohl 15y ago
When company A needs company B to buy into building new types of hardware, far-out concept videos can go a long way. Compare this to how far (and how fast) one can get by letting your purchasing power do the talking, rather than a concept video. I like concept videos, personally. They are techno-lust candy to me. If this is a big part of how they move other players in their industry forward, however, then this is an inherent weakness in their business model. Industry players respond much more quickly when you're handing them money.
- dpark 15y ago
  > Compare this to how far (and how fast) one can get by letting your purchasing power do the talking, rather than a concept video. This makes a lot of sense when you're Apple, and very little when you're Microsoft. Going to Samsung and saying "I'll buy 10MM units, guaranteed" isn't very fiscally responsible if you don't sell hardware. Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft
  - pohl 15y ago
    Exactly. That is the weakness in your business model to which I referred. I'm not saying that it's a failing in your business model. Clearly you're doing fine despite it. But it is a relative weakness against Apple's integrated model.
    - dpark 15y ago
      Historically it's been a strength. Apple's resurgence is a pretty recent thing, and most hardware+software companies have not done well. Look at Sun and see how well the hardware+software model worked for them. For that matter, look at Android, which is following the software-only model and has overtaken the iPhone in most areas now.
      - Tloewald 15y ago
        Or you could simply point out that a lot of companies failed because Microsoft sucked the air out of the OS market after IBM foolishly licensed DOS from them under non-exclusive terms. If IBM had bought DOS outright (or bought CP/M) the IBM PC would probably have been a successful integrated hardware+software business (actually it was, but it would probably have lasted longer) like so many others. Even without owning DOS, IBM tried to block clones, but its BIOS was too small a barrier to entry. It's actually Microsoft that's the big exception.
        dpark 15y ago
        I don't really follow. How did Microsoft suck the air out of the OS market? By being successful? That seems like a rather convenient definition for you. You blame the failure of hardware+software on the success of Microsoft's software-only approach. It actually seems we agree on the facts. You just somehow cast this in a negative light. I could likewise argue that Apple has "sucked the air" out of the smartphone market. That didn't stop Android from taking the lead from Apple.
        Tloewald 15y ago
        No, I point out that hardware+software worked before Microsoft and works well now. And if IBM had licensed DOS exclusively, it would have worked well for IBM. Android represents an example of dumping – taking a loss on a product using subsidies. It's fairly easy to be "successful" if you spend a lot on a product and then give it away.
- jordank 15y ago
  Sometimes the products that companies need to buy aren't yet being made (and can't yet be purchased as components). In this case there is some financial risk associated with producing a new product — videos and other materials can help convince this player to take that risk.
OpenAmazing 15y ago
"useful tools in securing budgets and coordinating teams" This is exactly what Gruber is referring to. If crazy videos like this are being used to determine budgets, then the company is being led by fools. Any manager that would watch this video and then declare "Yes! Build me that!" doesn't understand how products get made and should not be let anywhere near the Product team.
- chaz 15y ago
  Not everyone's a product visionary, but you need a way to manifest your vision to get everyone on board or rally the troops. Sometimes it's an email, presentation, speech, or prototype. For a company with over 100 corporate executives listed and over 10,000 employees attending its global sales conference, it's not unreasonable for Microsoft to be using video. Large orgs are as much about politics as they are about products, and you need to champion your idea to others.

InclinedPlane 15y ago

Concept videos are ill-founded in general. Indeed, I'd say it's better to have a vague, handwaving long-term goal than a crisp, sharply focused, highly detailed concept like these videos. The basic fallacy at play is the idea that it's possible to predict the future so far in advance. In reality this is only possible if your products are boring and mundane. When you make products that transform people's lives and the way the world works then it becomes impossible to predict how people will use them and how society, industry, and the economy will change as a consequence. That's true even from generation to generation of a device or piece of software, making it utterly useless to try to predict anything several generations ahead. Worse yet, concept videos make it all too easy to fall into the trap of working to make a product that looks cool in a demo but in reality is either hugely impractical to make or use or simply not very useful. For example, you could make a demo video of people commuting to and from work via rocket powered skateboard. And it would look awesome, and after watching the video everyone would want to commute to work via rocket powered skateboard. But in reality it's not practical, and possibly not even as fun as it may seem (after the first 100 times the novelty would wear off, and then you're just riding a death trap and getting rained on and stuck in rocket-powered-skateboard traffic ... ok, it still sounds awesome, nevertheless...). When you skip so many intermediate steps you can generate a false sense of what's possible, or even mislead yourself on what you're working on. Eventually smartphones are going to have no bezel and be super thin, so what? That's cool, but what does it have to do with what you are doing in the mean time to make smartphones better? It's easy to make a demo about voice control but the hard part is making it work in the here and now, how do you do that?

JEVLON 15y ago
Concept videos are important. They are not saying 2019 will be exactly like this, but they are looking at potential use cases for various interfaces etcetera. When they come up with a idea they particularly like, they don't sit on their hands for ten years. They look at their idea of the future, then they start taking the best parts of that idea and implementing it in the products they are creating. Since that video they have released or announced two products with the metro interface (Windows 8 & Windows Phone 7). Microsoft also has announced a version of the metro interface for the game console (Xbox 360). The part of the video where the guy takes a photo of the display and transfers it to a page is already possible in a less exciting capacity on WP. Take a photo of something, and it instantly shows up on your skydrive account. The children communicating through the wall display is a possibility today, but less impressive, with the use of a Kinect and a projector/screen. Microsoft actually has developed wall displays in their research division. They also announced yesterday that they will be partnering with a bunch of companies to provide the Kinect in enterprise environments. Every good microsoft product already has implementations of an idea that is in their concept videos. The average person doesn't go watch their concept videos, so it has no negative effect on their image. Also, thinking of the future does not have to be a distraction from the present. Why is Apple doing better than Microsoft with consumers? They are not associated with viruses, IT departments, ugly products, and office suites. Microsoft = Painful & Not-Cool. Apple also gives their employees more freedom and they push products out when the market is ready, but only when they are ready for them. If Windows Phone came out instead of the iPhone, when it was announced and released, WP would have failed completely.

mindstab 15y ago

Nokia did it too with the Nokia Morph http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX-gTobCJHs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX-gTobCJHs Doesn't seem they are doing too well now either? Nokia Windows Morph phone 7 anyone?

2arrs2ells 15y ago

Has anyone else been in the Microsoft "Future Home" and "Future Office" in Redmond? They're similar to this concept video, but actually have some working features (although you quickly realize they're mostly staged). They're more private than the video (used only by internal staff/guests/partners), but a much bigger waste of money.

jeffclark 15y ago
Wouldn't this be in the same vein as a private MVP for your family or investors?
bornon5 15y ago
When I was an intern at Microsoft, they let us walk around the Future Home. One of the features was a countertop screen that displayed information like the time and date. I asked the tour guide about how the countertop screen worked, since it didn't look or feel like an LCD - the images were much too dim and the surface felt like acrylic. She laughed and said that they hadn't known what to do, so the night before it was supposed to be finished, someone ran out to the department store and bought some translucent plastic, and then installed a video projector underneath the counter, pointing up. Sure enough, the cabinet was glued shut, so as not to ruin the illusion. Everything else felt similar. Standard (and awesome) futuristic concepts, but executed cheaply, and not really usable beyond the staged usage scenario. It was like showing off a flying car that can only fly a foot off the ground and by the way you're not allowed to look underneath.
lambda 15y ago
I was at the Microsoft office in Cambridge (MA, US) the other day, and they had a Surface there. It was much the same; a neat toy, but ultimately a distraction. They spent serious engineering resources on it, and it amounts to something that will sell a handful for companies to put in lobbies as a something fun to play with. Given the wear patterns on it, it looked like it was mostly used for playing checkers. Now, the Surface could actually be a neat product. If it were affordable enough for any small office, or for people to use in their home, it would probably sell well. If they actually developed only one tablet platform, that scaled up from their phones to the Surface with only minor modifications to UI, they'd have a serious contender for a touch based platform. But with something that's just a toy for companies with extra money to spend entertaining their guests, with its own APIs so that software isn't portable between it and other products, and no real significant tablet offerings to fill in the gap between the phone and the Surface, it just doesn't make that much sense. I doubt that they can be making much money on it.

mrbgty 15y ago

Surprised the car in the beginning wasn't a self-driving car

ctdonath 15y ago
Speaking of cars, reading the article I was thinking of automotive "prototypes" featured in magazines and trade shows, but nigh unto never on the road. Cars or computers or phones, stop wasting time giving us lofty promises and prototypes of a future that won't happen, give us tangible purchaseable incremental and revolutionary improvements of real products NOW.

rjd 15y ago

I've worked for a few companies over the years, and there is a type of manager I run into a lot. I can summarize them by a statement they make "Just get it done." The thing about these managers are they are delivery focused, not product focused. The have no imagination, and no emotional attachment to the product. They are there to make sure the books balance and revenue increases, thats it. These people have always frightened me a bit because they just don't understand what the people who work under them do. You can't sit in a meeting and explain a new concept to them, you have to completely design a working product and walk them through it step by step. A verbal explanation will only confuse them, and often they get agitated... because they don't understand. I'm sure most of us have been in a meeting where every single person understands the speaker except for person who has the authority to approve or deny the work... and all they can say is "I don't get it" (and you are going holy crap 20 other people get it, I can see them rolling there eyes and smirking). I wouldn't mind betting that these videos are a sign of delivery managers being brought into R&D departments. These videos are made so that the delivery manager can understand what the people around him are doing, and so he can explain it to the bean counters. Its a sign you have put the wrong people into positions of authority. EDIT: I just realized that the character Veronica on "Better off Ted" is exactly what I'm describing. I recommend watching it if you've never seen it.

ctdonath 15y ago
Great point. Concept videos are for people who don't get - as in grok - the concept already. These people should not be in positions of power. Contrast this with the recent thread about "for a successful presentation to Jeff Bezos, delete every third paragraph - he'll fill in the gaps and still figure out on the spot what you missed and how your bleeding-edge new idea can be improved." Bezos and his kind don't need concept videos.
DLWormwood 15y ago
> The thing about these managers are they are delivery focused, not product focused. The have no imagination, and no emotional attachment to the product. They are there to make sure the books balance and revenue increases, thats it. Interestingly enough, I recently saw a video giving a more sympathetic view of such a mind set... http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/so-you-want-to-be-a-producer http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/so-you-want-to-be-a-pro... Keep in mind that the makers of this video series have spent more time on the creative end than the production end, and the viewpoint becomes even more surprising.

cateye 15y ago

With the same logic, how about BMW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTYiEkQYhWY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTYiEkQYhWY

MaxGabriel 15y ago
When I first watched the BMW video, I thought you had a good point, but then I watched the Microsoft video. The difference is that BMW is innovating on an actual product they can make now and learn from. Microsoft's video envisions translucent, credit card size touchscreen phones and people interacting with holograms. There's some value in Microsoft's video, but given the unnecessary production costs, acting, etc., all of which is divorced from the engineering team[1], it sounds like their time would be better spent taking an approach more like BMW's.
aeturnum 15y ago
It seems that BMW actually built a prototype, which lets the company test out specific ideas about how to change something (in this case the surface of the car). That's very different from asking people to imagine how things will be 10 years from now. BMW Page on the GINA: http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/AllBMWs/ConceptVehicles/GINA/ http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/AllBMWs/ConceptVehicl...

joebadmo 15y ago

Apple is obviously doing very well. But that doesn't mean everything Apple does is right, or that everyone should do things the way Apple does. I love when companies do this kind of concept video, and if anything, I think these don't look far enough in the future. I've never seen these as predictions of the future. More like sci-fi vignettes. I think it's great that big tech companies allot resources to look beyond the next product, out to the horizon of imagination and inspiration.

pnathan 15y ago

I see a concept video as something that would serve as the unifying vision for a company. Something that delineates something along the lines of this kind of template: We are going to work on creating a set of products X, which will enable these ways of living and working Y, which in turn will spawn these associated needs Z, and here is a scenario acted out where we can make a case that this is a vision that we should go for. When designing our products, this video is the high level reference point for the product world we are moving towards.

ryanwaggoner 15y ago

I can think of at least one potentially valuable use of concept videos: customer validation. Dropbox used this to great effect, as I recall. I could be wrong, but I thought that the video Drew launched (here on HN) was of a product that didn't fully exist yet. But I could be mistaken. Either way, I think there's tremendous value in being able to sell (or get a verbal commitment of a sale) a product before you have to build it. Just make sure you can build it. EDIT: Here's the thread where Drew showed Dropbox to HN. Video is long gone though... http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863

InclinedPlane 15y ago
There's a difference between a concept which addresses an obvious, immediate need and a concept which just shows a bunch of vaguely cool stuff happening. The problem isn't that videos of not-yet-existing products are universally bad. The problem is that when you use fiction to portray a concept the farther away it is from the here and now the easier it is to go astray.

protomyth 15y ago

A long time back, I knew a group of consultants that were big into Shockwave. They were the types that would throw parties with their animations projected on the walls. They would use Shockwave professionally to visualize the interactions of a business workflow. It was really a animated use case when you get right down to it. They had a lot of success and it was easy to get people onboard with a new process because they could "see it". Really not sure what happened to them. I can see using a concept video like this as an internal "Does this make sense?" and "Prototype Modeling", but I am at a loss as to why you would release it the public. You aren't selling it now so you cannot profit off it, and various critics will point out the flaws in usage inside the video. Plus, Gruber is right, it does take away headlines that could be about your now and selling. The worst part is having a obviously struggling and clueless competitor decide they too need a video.

Tichy 15y ago

At the very least I thought the design in the video was pretty cool (the fonts, colors and what not on the various screens). I haven't followed Mango or whatever, so I am not sure if that was just an interpolation of the Mango theme or something new. Also, I totally suck at design, so I am easily awestruck by people who can do it. In any case, I wouldn't think too much about it. MS is a really big company, and they probably pay for something like that from their pocket change. Whatever. Also I like reading science fiction, and isn't a video like that also a kind of science fiction? I didn't think the video was "creepy", but it made me think: it showed essentially how people are being pushed from location to location by their devices. I guess that is an interpolation of the life of office workers today, who are dominated by Outlook. But it struck me that in the end humans might become merely processes executing the program their devices and management software sets up for them. I doubt that is what humans really desire, so I suppose MS got it wrong in the video. But it was sufficient to evoke some thoughts.

ethank 15y ago

I saw this video at HP in 1992 or 1993 or so called HP 1995 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPKX5iuBvZg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPKX5iuBvZg I was 13 or 14 at the time and to me it was a bit of a "wow" moment. Not because I related to the topic (mostly this was manufacturing) but because of the interfaces and the speed of information dispersal. I remember seeing other concept videos (the famous AT&T ones, Apple's, Adobe, etc) and they were likewise inspiring. I know reality is often the best thing to market, and Apple and the like have made reality as inspiring as a far future concept lately. But concept videos from the late 80's -> mid 90's had a huge impact on why I'm in technology today.

tezmc 15y ago
I had a similar experience at around the same age. In my case it was Douglas Adam's 1990 documentary for the BBC called Hyperland. All about the Internet and the web before I'd even heard of such things. I remember thinking at the time that the stuff in the documentary would never happen in my lifetime. Luckily it's on Youtube so I can reminisce. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOsPKjbMvxY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOsPKjbMvxY
DavidSJ 15y ago
As a kid, Star Trek was my concept video.

mgunes 15y ago

"Real artists ship, dabblers create concept products" -- http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/ http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

MatthewPhillips 15y ago

Is Daring Fireball a technology blog or a business-strategy blog?

DavidSJ 15y ago
Both.

fuzionmonkey 15y ago

Apparently in the future, we use lots of Gotham.

dredmorbius 15y ago

"You Will" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZb0avfQme8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZb0avfQme8 The company that brought it to me wasn't AT&T.

bane 15y ago

Maybe a good time to show these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PJcABbtvtA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PJcABbtvtA

trout 15y ago

I think there's some value to them. Sure, apple doesn't do them - but apple operates in a shroud of mystery and nobody knows their next move, so no surprise there. Apple has had the ability to nail technology inflection points and truly innovate so they don't need to. Apple doesn't write the rules for companies in different positions. Gruber argues that this is lost attention on the Windows phone, but is it really? Would there be conversations about the video and would it have this type of debate and conversation about a video about the Windows phone? How does one criticize both science fiction that isn't daring enough, not inspiring enough, and corporate future concept videos that are too futuristic and unrealistic? Is it that both sit in the unimaginative future, or is it insulting when a company attempts to claim credit for generic futuristic visions? I think if you take a look at most big tech companies they have these visions, will talk about it, put it in slideware, and slip some into their advertising. Making a video is taking it one more step. The videos are probably not for the HN crowd, but instead those that haven't seen or thought of similar things and have now painted that company as the innovator.

UjjwolL 15y ago

I think there needs to be distinction between concept videos and advertisement. Concept videos which are glamours like advertisement are not "concept videos" because it not practicality of the concept they are showing but how can we market and make this product cool "if we make this." There is fundamental problem with this. As Gruber said, concept videos are the sign of warnings that you are not doing anything.

DodgyEggplant 15y ago

The actual real competition to Apple is Samsung-Android. As business insider pointed out, Android caught up with the software, than the hardware, than the single big manufacturer.

AccordionGuy 15y ago

As the author of the article to which Gruber is referring, I think I'll simply say "Well played, Mr. Gruber, well played."

jamesrcole 15y ago

“Knowledge Navigator” didn’t help Apple in any way. Apple never made such a product. It didn’t bring Siri to us any sooner than if that video had never been made. It only served to distract from and diminish Apple’s then-current actual products. For all I know he could be 100% right about this (I'm not claiming he's wrong), but he just asserts it without giving any explanation or justification.

guelo 15y ago

I'm pissed at HN for wasting my time with this article. A rant against concept videos is not only totally useless information to me it is completely boring. I guess it could supposedly be useful to "visionaries" at giant companies or their marketing department but, fuck, are we going to be analyzing their brochures next? Who cares!?

dextorious 15y ago
1) Nobody wasted your time with this article, and surely not HN (which is just a posting engine). People chose to vote on it, and you chose to read it. 2) Who cares? The people who voted for it on HN maybe? What part of "social news website" don't you understand? (rhetorical question: the "social" part of course)

Andi 15y ago

With this video you demonstrate the will to create something, but to deliver is a completely different challenge! Keep quiet, keep informed about your field, focus!

Andi 15y ago

With this videos you demonstrate the will to create something, but delivering is a completely different challenge! Keep quiet, keep informed about your field, focus!

teyc 15y ago

there is nothing wrong with concept videos as long as they are proof of concept. Otherwise, it is no better than watching CSI.

jrodgers 15y ago

I think a concept video, as long as it isn't too outrageous, is a decent way to inspire people. Some people watched minority report and said "I want to build that" -- concept videos could achieve the same. At the end of the article he mentions RIM's videos. I would say those are totally different as I think most of the basic components of that world are in the device or rumoured to be coming soon. That is cool. If someone can grab their latest device and make one of those workflows happen how good will they feel and what could come next? Yes there are bad videos and they may have an unclear purpose but I think it is all about the context of the video.