Unnecesary Keyboard

[rabidpoobear]

Motion control will never replace a good pair of thumbs. It's a nice gimmick if you wrap a decent game around it but that doesnt happen often.

+1.
Same thing applies to flying cars. We don't have them because NORMAL cars are
1) cheaper
2) safer for inexperienced people
3) safer for people who don't pay attention
4) not going to kill you if they malfunction
5) easier to fix / maintain

Whenever someone says a new technology is going to catch on, they hardly ever look at previous technologies and explain the MERITS of those technologies and how this new technology improves on THOSE, they just espouse the merits of the NEW invention. But obviously using the new invention precludes you from benefiting from the old technology.

Shit don't make no sense.

 

[bzar]

Isn't augmented reality the current "future user interface"?

 

[S-r-ex]

^Yeah, you have these things with GPS and such, but I'm NOT going to Machu Picchu just to get the Ultima Blade. But you can say that Pokemon HeartGold/SoulSilver did something by including a separate pedometer to "train" your pokemon, or at least give them exp for every step you take and have a chance to obtain new pokemon and items.

 

[Sugar_Kane]

According to Peter Molyneux, what we all want to do in the future is talk to small boys

 

[philly]

According to Peter Molyneux, what we all want to do in the future is talk to small boys

Yeah well fuck Peter... I wanna talk to tall ladies... or short ladies... infact most ladies... depending on my intake of alcohol :lol:

 

[Prometheus]

Whenever someone says a new technology is going to catch on, they hardly ever look at previous technologies and explain the MERITS of those technologies and how this new technology improves on THOSE, they just espouse the merits of the NEW invention. But obviously using the new invention precludes you from benefiting from the old technology.

This. (And this.)

 

[Oscaruzzo]

Well, while I agree that the keyboard does look UGLY, I really think it will be useful. You say OP shoud learn from the big? Well, the Nokia N770 did not have a keyboard; the N800 did not have a keyboard; and guess what? the N900 does have it. This should mean something.

 

[bzar]

This. (And this.)

Wow. I read the article you linked to and I have to say the writer makes a whole lot of baseless generalizations. The article first seemed interesting, then amusing, then frustrating and finally a bit offensive. I would count myself as "technocrati", but I don't agree with half the things that guy tries to put in my mouth. For example I'd count FSF/GNU people as "technocrati" (the author even uses linux as an example), but how many of those folk would want to take the consumers rights away? The article seems to lump every type of technology oriented people into one bin, and label it with all the things the author does not agree with, but some of those people do. I understand his point from a business perspective, but I resent his antagonizing tone. Also I find it odd that he thinks that technology never changes how humans work, only the other way around. As a thought experiment, take away all communication technology (from smoke signals to wireless internet) away from the modern society and see if people do things differently or do entirely different things.

Sorry for the rant, but that article really hit some nerves.

Signed, a proud technocrat

 

[Prometheus]

I must have missed the offensiveness and tone. :blink: (I just end up thinking of this article whenever someone tells me that such-and-such a technology will "change everything" - like HD televisions, which haven't. )

 

[bzar]

Yeah, I agree on that. But that's just the marketing squad speaking. Or people talking about something about to fail because of bad execution or something like that. Or someone just plain predicting wrong. This I agree on wholeheartedly. People make unnecessary (or unwarranted in hindsight) fuss over stuff. They see (or want to see... or are hired to see) possibilities in something that might fail for any number of reasons. But that author makes a whole lot bigger and broader statement, for which all this is just a logical effect of.