It’s a crazy time.

Cellphones today can:

  • Tell exactly where you are.
  • Determine their orientation, as well as how you shake or move them
  • Project onto the wall with tiny, powerful projectors
  • Take still photos or video, with sound
  • Communicate wirelessly with other devices
  • Pay for things (in Japan)
  • Access the internet for IM, high speed web browsing, and location-aware software
  • Near-infinite storage with SD cards
  • Open, programmable software such as Android, along with Flash capability so anyone can design an app
  • New user interfaces, including multi-touch that can be useful in a keyboard-less world
  • High-Definition graphics

Add it all up. We don’t have a phone yet that incorporates every one of these things, but the day isn’t far off, as there are a few that have most.

Add in a few parallel technologies like flexible circuitry, new battery options, solar power advances, and video glasses that with circuitry small enough that you don’t look like a total LaForge. You have some hotness, right there.

The upshot:

It won’t be terribly long before I’ll be able to sit down at a coffee shop, tap my glasses and use a pair of gloves, set of rings, or wristwatch (that detects finger movement through the muscles) to access my cell PC. I don’t need to worry about a mic – it’s woven into my jacket or shirt, fully washable.

A few more technology generations, and you could see:

  • Serious location-based gaming, a real-life WoW-type MMO
  • Actual point-of-interest detection (based on GPS location, direction, and camera view
  • Direction-mapping, with arrows laid out on the street or in the air, like the glowing lines in football on TV
  • A three-dimensional menu system with access to movies, music and your favorite productivity apps

Frankly, almost all of these things are easily possible now. No one has created a unified, easy-to-understand system that does anything you need quickly and intuitively. Some mad genius (with an eye for design) needs to create something that is obviously more productive and workable – small when you need it small and deep when you need it deep (kind of like the LG NV2 closed-shell menu vs open-shell menu).

This is a ridiculously exciting time for mobile awesomeness.

~ by Skennedy on February 17, 2009.

Posted in Uncategorized

18 Responses to “It’s a crazy time.”

  1. It’s definitely getting to the point where some of the augmented reality concepts that have been languishing in research labs may actually get some real world exposure and application. Heartening to see for my kind of geek :-)

    morbid_curious said this on February 17, 2009 at 4:50 pm

  2. Isn’t living in the future cool?

    cjtremlett said this on February 17, 2009 at 4:51 pm

  3. Do we name it HAL?

    aliendial said this on February 17, 2009 at 5:03 pm

  4. The final story in METAtropolis was about a MMORPG that was done as an “overlay” over the real world with the help of glasses and earbuds. It turned the “real world” into a steampunky victorian age. It seemed really, really cool.

    aiela said this on February 17, 2009 at 5:28 pm

  5. I still see absolutely no reason whatsoever to shell out my hard-earned cash on one of those stupid iPhones until and unless the technology is perfected which allows me to use it to clean my bathroom and walk the dog for me on those freezing-cold mornings when I can’t be arsed to get out of bed.

    ozy_y2k said this on February 17, 2009 at 5:33 pm

  6. I am still not convinced that any pseudo-3D UI displayed on a 2D screen will ever be more efficient than a 2D UI.

    c0nsumer said this on February 17, 2009 at 5:57 pm

    • Somehow, I knew you’d have a cynical comment to make.

      Efficiency is relative to task, I believe. The vast majority of tasks would not require 3 dimensions, but I think there are plenty of ways to add additional detail via those 3 dimensions. Also, assuming we’re talking about semi-transparent 2-dimensional displays that move their location-sensitive content as you turn your head or move … what’s the difference between that and true 3-D display?

      atdt1991 said this on February 17, 2009 at 6:12 pm

      • I always have something cynical to say whenever someone thinks that artificial 3D is going to go anywhere.

        With regards to turning one’s head or moving, that’s terrible UI. It’s very inefficient for one to have to move a large, massive part of their body in order to adjust the content on the page. The mouse and keyboard are radically successful simply because they allow a large amount of control with very little exertion.

        If one has to move their head or the device in order to see around something (and what is behind it) they are quickly going to just rearrange things so they can see it all, or build stacks they can toggle through. Furthermore, if there is content on an unviewable (without rotation) side 3D object, they will soon unfold that object so that all the content is then viewable. Thus we’re back to 2D interfaces.

        c0nsumer said this on February 17, 2009 at 6:21 pm

        • Whoa, we’re talking about two different things, here. I’m talking about location-aware information – an overlay that shows you detail on actual physical objects, shows directions that change as you move, and games that use actual physical objects as starting points for a graphic overlay.

          I can agree with you that browsing the web or navigating a menu by moving your head is just silly.

          That’s what the finger inputs (rings or a watch) are for!

          atdt1991 said this on February 17, 2009 at 6:38 pm

          • I understand that part, but what I was commenting on was this:

            A three-dimensional menu system with access to movies, music and your favorite productivity apps

            This is what I don’t see being good, nor useful, without a real 3D interface. Anything presented on any sort of 2D display (even if it is stereoscopic) is not real 3D.

            c0nsumer said this on February 17, 2009 at 6:40 pm

          • Hmmm. I see your point there, but does it matter whether the display is a true three dimensional display as long as the interface itself is three-dimensional? In other words, if you can manipulate things using your hands in a three-dimensional manner, and your display behaves as if it were three-dimensional, would the difference be important?

            Obviously, there is a conceptual difference between The Lawnmower Man and The Holodeck, but is there an operational difference?

            atdt1991 said this on February 17, 2009 at 6:46 pm

          • Yes, because if the display is 2D the manipulation cannot actually be 3D without some sort of disconnect. Simulated input just doesn’t work as well, because one loses all the tactile nuances.

            c0nsumer said this on February 17, 2009 at 6:48 pm

  7. You’ve seen the video of the MIT Students using a cell phone and projector to create a “sixth sense” at TED, right? Interesting stuff. Check especially the 2nd video on wearable computing. Not too far off, with what you listed above.

    cjfringe said this on February 17, 2009 at 7:42 pm

  8. I want one with a built-in
    phaser
    so that I’m never without a means of self-defence when I’m carrying my cell.

    …on the other hand, maybe I don’t. Can you imagine that going
    off in your pocket? *gzzzzownt!*

    shadowspar said this on February 17, 2009 at 10:07 pm

Comments are closed.