Articles like this are so aggravating to read[1]. I want to skim and get to the point where they actually start to discuss the actual idea, so that I can determ

Articles like this are so aggravating to read[1]. I want to skim and get to the point where they actually start to discuss the actual idea, so that I can determine if it's worth it to me to read it. But they want to build up to it as if I'm reading some god damn novel. Also, the author addresses his readers as if we're some kind of touch-screen natives who uses our phones and other touch-screen devices to accomplish everything in our lives, and we could never conceive of anything else[2]. Am I the only one who was never enamoured with actually using smart phones? They are a pain to write messages on, they are a slightly less of a pain to browse with, and they are passable to good for everything else. And the fact that it takes many steps to do something with your phone is supposed to be surprising? It's practically inevitable: one entry point (swipe to unlock etc.) to do all your tasks, equipped with a 5" screen. Good luck. Thankfully, it turns out that the author's point was more novel than something silly like "What if we didn't use smart phone interfaces, but some other interface instead? WOW...". I hadn't considered a solution like Siemens'. I don't know if it is preferable to my key that already has a remote attached, but it's very interesting. [1] Yes, I know it's a chapter from his book. But it's published as an article so I will judge it as such. [2] "Don’t let your emotions blind you" - How about "don't talk down to me"? ★★★ Side note: He has a point about 'everything has to be an app', though. I'm supposed to be using some form of identification, and they used to send out a piece of paper and a little "this is valid for this time period" thing to attach to your card. Now, they have phased that out for an app. An app. To replace a piece of paper and a card. No, I don't think it even replaces the card since you use it to access certain places.