Interesting Excerpt from the Sydney Morning Herald today

[amey01]

"Households with stereo systems dropped from 78 per cent in 2005 to 59 per cent in 2008 to 41 per cent in 2011."

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/laptops-take-over-the-desk-20111024-1mgde.html

I wonder exactly what the definition of "Stereo System" actually is? I wonder if it includes iPods and/or other rubbish, and conversely, I wonder if it used to include boom boxes, etc?

 

[tsv_1]

Good question. They need to define stereo for it to have any meaning.

The article also made mention of laptops taking over the desk. Funny as we held our yearly sales conference last week (I work for a large semicon company that sells chips into essentially anything that moves or processes data - including CE gadgets of all varieties). One of the more interesting sessions was from our CIO who, paraphrasing info he pulled from various analyst sources, suggested that while both laptop and desktop trends are slowing over time (desktops trending down faster which jives with your article)... and in fact, the prediction is that within just 3 to 5 years, desktops and laptops will be in the vast minority, wildly overun by modible devices (tablets and smartphones) and augmented by "connected" TVs. Heck, I bought my wife a new iMac not 4 months ago. I came home from the conference and noticed her wifi wasn't working properly. I asked if she had had trouble with broadband speed, surfing, email, etc... she said "Not sure... I hardly used it last week. Did all my texting, facebook, email, and videos on my iPad". Sure, my wife alone is a pretty small sample size but I don't think this is an isolated instance. I guess we'll see what happens with these trends, but with tools like Siri making for improved user interface experience, and other gadgets to help with device I/O, I tend to think there will indeed continue to be momentum toward more mobile device usage (versus desk/laptop). Sure, there will be exceptions. Heck, some people still have CRT based TVs... but the trend signs are pretty compelling.

 

[bzr]

All your personal info & the intelligence of the net on the go is hard to beat in my book. Once the shear size of the terabit is put into a platform like the tablet & is stable, well,... thats room for your music too.:drool:

 

[tsv_1]

All your personal info & the intelligence of the net on the go is hard to beat in my book. Once the shear size of the terabit is put into a platform like the tablet & is stable, well,... thats room for your music too.:drool:

In-device memory will begin to be less important as the cloud ramps up.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Hey Todd,

I still have one of those CRT TV's. Also, I refuse to have a cell phone. Given what I do, there is no value although I do realize that may vary depending on one's occupation. And am unlikely to buy an ipad. Absent my addiction to music, I am a tech dinosaur.

GG

PS: What's everyones take on having all these devices that allow one to multi-task and be "connected"? Within the context of a work environment, does it make you more productive or does it bog you down due to information overload and distractions?

My personal feeling is that one can only do one thing at one time and switching back and forth, between various tasks, requires the individual time to "ramp back up / get up to speed mentally" to the issue at hand to be effective. Hence the possibility of being connected may actually make one disconnected and less productive.

And then there's the social phenomena. People seem to treat their devices, especially a cell phone, similar to the religious equivalent of "rosary beads". Constantly fondling and looking at the device. As if it's their sole connection to the outside world while ignoring the value and beauty of the moment (whatever that is) and just being there.

Sorry Adam for taking your thread a bit off course but I do believe it's relevant.

 

[amey01]

Within the context of a work environment, does it make you more productive or does it bog you down due to information overload and distractions?

My personal take is both. They certainly are overloading and distracting. But they also provide benefits. The problem comes in some people (I like to think I am not amongst them) cannot manage the benefit and allow them to become distracting.

Case in point - it is fantastic to be able to check email and engage in work activities when I am away from the office - eg. If I need to leave early. Where a problem starts is if you can't manage this benefit and start checking emails at 11PM in bed.

Sorry Adam for taking your thread a bit off course but I do believe it's relevant.

No, it's interesting!

 

[Gordon Gray]

Or texting / talking on ones cell phone while driving.

Thanks for understanding. I think it is interesting and somewhat frightening.

As far as the decrease in stereos, it's another activity that takes a time commitment on the part of the individual versus another activity that is merely in the background of the myriad of all the other activities people can choose as a result of technology.

 

[tsv_1]

Agree with Adam... it's really about how you manage the various taps and influx of information. It's also about your occupation. I would be SCREWED without my iPhone because my "office" absolutely needs to be wherever I am... I travel a fair amount.

I limped along before the iPhone with a blackberry, and before that with an almost useless (but still essential) Treo.

As for multi-tasking... yep... one thing at a time (well, minor issues like breathing and maintaining a heartbeat aside)... but again, it's in how the input is managed. I can easily filter distractions and concentrate on work issues when needed. Those distractions are always there waiting for me and I address them when time allows.

BTW, Gordon, tech-dinosaurs aren't good for my company's stock price... we need you swimming in connectivity

If part of your apprehension (or maybe that's not the right word)... if part of your non-inclination towards tech is because it all just seems like too much and mostly unnecassary, then I can understand that. For example, I don't do facebook. I don't see the need and it's a massive time-sink for most people. However, I would not own CLX or even be on this forum if it weren't for my job in this industry... and the one thing I love about this company is that, like Apple, we're always looking to improve the end-user's experience.

The one thing that will create the next knee (on the curve) in terms of tech adoption will be smart interfacing. The end user will no longer need to know how to set up a router, or run that new connected TV, or figure out that new smart-phone (and look for this to aggressively spread to home appliances, automobiles, heating/cooling and many other areas as well). The interface will work for you. Not the other way around. If you haven't yet demo'd an iPhone 4S with Siri... go into a local ATT or Verizon store and just ask for a demo.

As an example you just say "schedule a meeting with Todd at 4pm next tuesday"... that's it. The phone will create a calendar entry and remind you when the time comes. Or you can say "what's the square root of 144?"... boom, the answer is displayed in your hand. The examples are endless. and if the phone doesn't know the answer, it will serach the web automatically to find the answer.

This is where it's all headed. Machines working for humans... not the reverse. Until of course they become self-aware... then we'll all be reduced to bartering for food and water with ammunition.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Todd,

How did we all function, without this stuff, say 10 or 20 years ago? Did we, as a society, feel deprived and lacking? I think not.

Interfaces are needed because of the deluge of information the tech world has imposed on us.

If people like machines working for humans, so be it. Frankly, I see the opposite given the obsession this society has for wanting to be distracted from reality.

I asked a friend and parent when their children expected to have a cell phone. The answer was 10 to 12 years old.

For what purpose? To text? To view videos? Because it's cool and the expected norm? Other than insuring that the kids can stay in touch with their parents for the obvious reasons (parents can give them their cell phone for this specific reason), what positive purpose does this serve?

Sorry but I really don't get it.

GG

 

[tsv_1]

Todd,

How did we all function, without this stuff, say 10 or 20 years ago? Did we, as a society, feel deprived and lacking? I think not.

Interfaces are needed because of the deluge of information the tech world has imposed on us.

If people like machines working for humans, so be it. Frankly, I see the opposite given the obsession this society has for wanting to be distracted from reality.

I asked a friend and parent when their children expected to have a cell phone. The answer was 10 to 12 years old.

For what purpose? To text? To view videos? Because it's cool and the expected norm? Other than insuring that the kids can stay in touch with their parents for the obvious reasons (parents can give them their cell phone for this specific reason), what positive purpose does this serve?

Sorry but I really don't get it.

GG

Hi Gordon,

Look at it another way. Technology marches on whether we like it or not. There is literally no stopping it (short of all-out global catastrophe on a major scale). In fact, technology is increasing in complexity and reach at an accelerating rate... some say exponential. Read almost anything by Ray Kurzweil to better understand the trend.

Humanity is racing toward a demarcation point... after which time, there will be two classes of people - those that are technically augmented in one way or another, and those who are not. Guess who will excel in that post-post-modern world (assuming the infrastructure stays in tact)?

In 2009 when the economy tanked, our company did unbelievably well... beyond reason even. I had a chat with my boss at the time as we tried to rationalize how we could be maintaining big revenue numbers when average people were living paycheck to paycheck to survive (those that were lucky enough to have paychecks). The answer is that mobile connectivity (primarily smart phones) has become one of the new basic necessities. People want to be connected - period. It's not about "cool"... how can it be cool if everyone has one? For the younger kids... yes, it's generally parents who want to be able to reach their kids when they're not at home. Gone are the days (and I remember them well) when a kid took off into the neighborhood at 9am and didn't come home till 9pm without ever once contacting the parents. That generation is simply gone. Some folks wax poetic... some political parties DREAM of reverting the US to some pastel non-reality of the 1950s... ain't gonna happen. Ever.

Still, we have our basic freedoms and folks can choose to avoid whatever "craziness" they wish. Though I strongly suspect those days are numbered. If you think smart-phones are superfluous now, wait till they become your primary means for buying items, your primary identification, your primary knowledge portal... it will only get more maddening for folks like yourself who pine for simpler times. And I understand that... which is why IMO, if there's no stopping the freight-train, at least we can strive to make interaction with our silicon-based friends much, much easier... and improve our chances of not being laid to waste on the far-reaching tracks of technological progress.

 

[bzr]

When do we get our silicon chip implanted? I guess if we refuse we won't be able to travel international. Damn hollywood!!!!

 

[tsv_1]

When do we get our silicon chip implanted? I guess if we refuse we won't be able to travel international. Damn hollywood!!!!

That option's been around for a while via passive RFID. Too scary for society though - Thanks Hollywood.

 

[Nutshell]

This is an interesting discussion. Although I still have a CRT tv, I also have an iPad. And it is this iPad that makes it a lot easier and more comfortable for me to listen to music and read on this forum. I like to read a lot, and I always combine reading and serious listening (some of you may say that serious listening can only be done with your eyes closed, but this is the way I like it).
Before I had my iPad, I always had a book in my lap and a computer screen at the other side of the room blinking at me. But now I simply read a book or read whatever I find on the screen on my iPad while sitting in an easy chair. What I mean to say is, that it is not the device that steals our attention, or makes the attention span shorter... It is the way we deal with it. Are we the masters of our devices, or are we the servants?

 

[bzr]

That option's been around for a while via passive RFID. Too scary for society though - Thanks Hollywood.

Tell that to our dogs. It's a fineable offense in the state that I live in when your dog isn't "chipped". For humans I'm not so sure about "big brother".
I was aware of the new technology, someone was showing me on their iphone just the other day at work with what they could achieve sitting 100 ks away from their pc, storage,etc. I embrace technology but only to the point where I consider it to benefit my lifestyle, as for the rest I remain blissfully unaware.

 

[Gordon Gray]

HI Todd,

Let's look at it this way.

Talking / texting on a cell phone, while driving, is the equivalent to driving drunk. But it's legal. Additional highway deaths have occurred as a direct result of cell phone technology.

Kids are clearly loosing socialization skills and the ability to spell / use correct grammar as a result of texting. And then there's the whole phenomena of kids being addicted to video games and other electronic devices.

Will our current teenage kids give cell phones to their kids when they are, say, seven years old, because that is the social norm?

I'm not blaming you and I realize that technology marches on but who's watching, and guarding against, the incremental negative impacts that these devices inflict on society in general?

The answer is obviously no one.

Gordon

 

[tsv_1]

HI Todd,

Let's look at it this way.

Talking / texting on a cell phone, while driving, is the equivalent to driving drunk. But it's legal. Additional highway deaths have occurred as a direct result of cell phone technology.

Kids are clearly loosing socialization skills and the ability to spell / use correct grammar as a result of texting. And then there's the whole phenomena of kids being addicted to video games and other electronic devices.

Will our current teenage kids give cell phones to their kids when they are, say, seven years old, because that is the social norm?

I'm not blaming you and I realize that technology marches on but who's watching, and guarding against, the incremental negative impacts that these devices inflict on society in general?

The answer is obviously no one.

Gordon

I'm glad you're not blaming me

Your concerns are certainly valid, if somewhat focused on the negative. Look at the entire picture. Cell phones have saved a boatload of lives, they've afforded many people a comfortable living, and they are here to stay in one form or another. They also spark real scientific "gee-whiz" kind of interest in the next generation. My son is as enamoured with computers and cell phones as I was with transistor radios back in the day. Heck, he started a side-business modifiying game controllers. I love that he's found a passion so early... one that will lead to a good education and, hopefully, a rewarding job in high-tech. This goes for many of his friends too. And last I looked, kids are still required to write with a writing implement, know how to spell, and do long-hand division in school. These things may shift over time... but I guess I'm a little less worried that no one's watching the store. Good parents keep their kid's interests and activities well balanced. It's not easy with all the distractions, but it's what loving parents do.

My 2 and hope you have a great weekend!

Cheers

 

[amey01]

Talking / texting on a cell phone, while driving, is the equivalent to driving drunk. But it's legal.

Gordon

Not here it ain't. You can be fined for "using a handheld phone" ......makes for an interesting conundrum if you're using it for navigation or some other non-conventional purpose, but that's the law.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Todd,

Thanks for humoring me. All of your statements are very valid. In the end and assuming proper use of technology, I agree that there are certainly more benefits than negative impacts.

Adam, I'm glad one country has figured that out.

Gordon

 

[amey01]

Gordon - pertinent article to your aforementioned comments, appeared in today's Courier Mail......

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...behind-the-wheel/story-e6freoof-1226192370566

 

[Gordon Gray]

Adam,

Thanks again for the info and the fact that your country recognizes the danger that people, engaged in a cell phone conversation while driving, is the equivalent of driving drunk.

GG