This week we look back on 30 years of the Macintosh. It's an essential celebration, great for reminding us how we got here, instructing us in our relationship to technology and inspiring us for more. And along those lines, what will the next 30 years be like?
____________________________
When I think about the future of computing, I see linkages, technical spans that lead from from one phase to another combined with social upheavals at every step.
For example, the first Macintosh introduced the mouse, a totally new concept in computing. It was so novel, Apple left cursor keys off the keyboard in order to fan the flames of adoption. There was initial resistance, but we soon learned its advantages. In a similar fashion, the way we touch and handle a modern tablet departs from the legacy, physical keyboard. (At least for companies other than Microsoft.)
I think there's a tendency to assume that future revolutions will be benign and fun instead of painful at first. So, when we cry out for innovation, we have to be careful what we wish for.
Wearable Computing. Soon, that will be just a euphemism for computational devices that integrate closely with, perhaps inside our bodies. Smart watches that we wear externally will eventually be tied into our minds and body chemistry. It won't take too long for capsules with wireless communications to reside in our bloodstream and digestive system and relay information about our state of being to our visual field.
In turn, that will precipitate a war between advertisers and the makers of the hardware. The donut store flags us visually as we drive by and the sensors suggest our blood sugar is low. Then the health app kicks in and reminds us that we better not do that. It's just the next version of TV ads for pizza causing late night runs to the refrigerator. Today, our mental watchdog cries out, "Don't do it!" Who (what) will do that in the future? Will renegades operate with jailbroken minds?
The Visual Field. I don't think it will be too much longer before the need for physical display devices goes away. The next step beyond Google Glass is to generate signals from a small device that our optic nerves pick up and then overlay that information on our visual field. The need for handheld display devices and giant 60-inch pieces of heavy TV hardware will go away. Sit back, relax in a recliner, close your eyes and watch Star Wars XV with all the resolution your brain can absorb. Alternatively, call mom and her image will be floating in your visual field, a kind of super FaceTime. Your eyeball is your camera, recording everything.
The Work Force. The ability of talented people, with the aids above, to plug into the cloud of humanity, correlate data, create new things, weave visual stories, build ads and adventure games, will lead to some uncomfortable new metaphors and challenges. Not everyone will have the talent to operate in the new cyberspace, and they will resist it. Modern governments, of course, want everyone operating there so citizens can be monitored and a life history recorded on exabyte storage. Anyone who resists on religious grounds will be suspect, and they'll find it hard to find profitable work.
Right now, we're in the early stages of being made very much aware of what other people are experiencing in weather and other calamities via Internet tools like Twitter. In the future, the social integration will become an even stronger force, and the consequences for social change and government can only be imagined. I imagine, someday, I'll look up and to the right and see a pulsing blue light: one of my readers is desperate to open a video stream and chat about my latest article. (Please, I'm having lunch now.)
The upshot is that technological advances in health, vision, entertainment and interpersonal communication will benefit us, but they won't come without pain and acclimation. Young people will grow up knowing nothing else. The rest of us, mostly writers, will probably grumble on as we hunt around in dusty antique stores trying to replace our old and broken but beloved Apple keyboard.
__________________________________________________________________
Tech News Debris for the Week of January 20
One of the most enduring memes in the Apple world is the notion, by journalists, of what Apple must do to survive. As I recall, one of the things that got me started in this business of writing about Apple was MacWeek, a weekly tabloid from the 1990s. I admired Don Crabb (rest in peace Don) and Henry Knorr, but it always irked me when they insisted that they knew what Apple just had to do -- or disaster would ensue. (Hey, sometimes they were right.)
And so I was greatly pleased to see this accounting by Harry McCracken of all the things we told Apple it just had to do. It's a great read. " 'Apple Must...': A Brief History of People Instructing the Company to Do Things ...and why it rarely does."
I have never been a big fan of Yahoo. It always seemed to me that there were other more important places to be and things to do than hang around Yahoo. But I also assumed it has a loyal following, and so I just moved on, letting other people do their thing. But then I saw Brian S. Hall speaking the unspeakable, and I have to give him some credit for saying the Yahoo King has no clothes, at least in my view. "Is Yahoo Even Worth Trying To Save?" What do you think?
I think a corollary to the sometimes painful transitions into future technology mentioned in the preamble above is to think deeply about what technology can do to seduce us. For example, it's all too easy to text and drive because carriers make money when we text, and so it's heavily promoted. (Even though the carriers must formally tell us not to drive and text.)
How and where we exploit technology is actually a serious decision. For example, how and why would we wear Google Glass? By that, I mean it's assumed that we always make conscious decisions about how we use technology and what the consequences might be. But what happens when we don't? Sad tales, that's what. This is very instructive: "CONFIRMED: Man Interrogated By The Feds For Wearing Prescription Google Glass At The Movies."
The demo. Your experience may vary.
Can one extrapolate that the days of coaxial TV cables and satellite dishes will go the way of morning milk trucks, typewriters and Betamaxes? It think a good case can be made for that, and it's only a matter of time before all TV is delivered wirelessly or on the Internet. "The race is on to launch an internet TV service in the US."
In full science fiction mode, I playfully ask, how would you like to receive your Amazon package before you order it? Ah, not possible you say. Let's be more modest. Perhaps it can merely be shipped before you order it. Ah, now that's doable. "Amazon Wants to Ship Your Package Before You Buy It."
Will it be possible for security protocols on the Internet to evolve faster than the Internet itself is evolving? Assuming they can be designed and paid for? Stacey Higginbotham inquires, "The internet of things needs a new security model. Which one will win?"
Jonny Evans just keeps cranking out the good stuff. You'll smile as he recounts the myriad of times observers have declared Apple to be road kill. Have fun with, "Apple's Macintosh: 30 years doomed."
Finally, Leander Kahney has provided a magnificent article on the early days of iPhone development. This is must reading for Particle Debris fans. "The Birth of the iPhone." It's an excerpt from Mr. Kahney's book "Jony Ive: The Genius Behind Apple's Greatest Products." I can't wait to read it. On my iPad Air, of course.
_______________________________
Digital eye and virtual touchscreen via Shutterstock.
