In class we always talk about ubiquitous computing as the foreseeable future, I think that is a pretty solid statement to support, but is the ‘Everyware’ in Greenfield’s book going to be that ubiquitous computing? I think not.
We have the processing power and the storage capabilities to deploy ubiquitous computing, yet it is still very far away from us. This does not make sense.. logically if we have the means to create this technology, it should be rolling off the shelves.
Looking to current next generation technology, such as high definition television & movies, gives a good example of how societies pick up new technologies. I know in my family many people still have CRT fat televisions, simply because they do not see the value in spending 3k on a new LCD or plasma TV. This amazing cost (to some) is just for a TV, ubiquitous computing would require EVERYTHING we had to be replaced eventually. I do not see many people being able to afford this future of technology, nor would they want to spend their money on special tile floors that will change the temperature, when they themselves have no issue walking to the thermostat.
Obviously some things will be implemented from this fictitious Everyware, such as super smart remotes that can control… everything (I hope) but vehicles, houses, offices, schools being completely entangled in a mess of computing seems like a distant hope.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Technology is expensive, but that's the price we have to pay for the conveniences that it gives us in order to spend time doing other things. I am absolutely for technology and making things more convenient, but that doesn't mean I am going to empty my bank account to do so. I still own a regular old 36" TV at home and as nice as plasma or LCD TV looks, I think I can deal with it. But it all boils down to what is important to you. I spend more time on a computer than I do in front of a TV so I am more likely to upgrade the computer aspect first. Sure, playing Guitar Hero on a plasma is nice, but it doesn't make me play the game any better. But a faster processor on my computer certainly makes my work move faster and my production level higher. I am pretty content with the status of how the computers are integrated in our daily life now. I'm not sure if I'm ready for it to be intertwined into my home and car like they plan on doing in the future.
I can personally say that I'm in no big hurry to greet everyware. I cannot deny the benifits associated with ubiquity among computing devices; in many ways ubiquitious computing has improved society in general, increasing efficiency across the board. But I still have no desire to become totally immersed in it, nor have its pervasive tendrils creep into every aspect of my life. I'm provincial in that respect, slow to accept change, and vocal about my displeasure in changing. I use my PC for email, school and googling things. I have an iPod I don't use (it was a gift)and my mobile phone is no longer produced. My TV is ten years old and I've no desire to get a new one. Most of the stuff we talk about in class is brand new to me, I just don't stay abreast of technology because for me its just not that important.
Given that, my provicial nature does hinder me in day to day life. Take class for example, its not hard but it is for me. Even frustrating at times.
So this is my hope: to stay afloat, keeping my head above the rising tide of the IT wave just enough to stay alive (in touch could be a better word). I don't think I'm alone in this hope. Yes, I'm definately part of a shrinking minority but the existence of this minority is telling. One might say it could be an indicator of just how feasible everyware is for the whole of society.
Well if we really are going towards a ubiquitous future then I am sure that it isn’t going to come all of a sudden, there will definatley be a slow development process. In fact, we are already in this process, taking baby steps with little devices using motion sensitivity like our video games. And yes we do have the technology, procersser speed and storage capability but I don’t think those are the variables keeping us from having a ubiquitous present, but like you said it will be very expensive and there will also be a fear from the public to accept this technology. Like every new huge shift of technology, we will question its relevence and be unsure whether it is necessary or just a luxury. I’m sure this is why our steps toward a Ubiquitous world are small, but still growing little by little.
One of the most important thing that we learned from the very first reading (about the pencil as technology) is that the adoption of technology is a slow process. The first group to adopt the technology is the rich and the scientists. A good example of this is Bill Gates. His house has been "Everyware" esque for the last few years, but he is rich. The average person can not afford to implement Everyware in their house yet, but once it becomes reasonable, it will be the thing to do. While everyone may not want Everyware at first, once a few of your neighbors get it you will see its benefits, and also you will just want to keep up, because it is greed for everyone else's stuff that drives the American Economy.
I mean these things will not be purchased until they can be lowered to a price reasonable for the average man to by. As we learned earlier in the year first the people with more money will be purchasing the new things and making them become more popular. As time passes I believe the price will go down. Maybe your parents dont have or need the new technolgy but I could list about 100 people I know who have spent over 1k on a television set. We have to also remember that as time goes on, a thousand dollars will become to appear as less and less money. 100 years ago a thousand dollar and you were "rich bitch!"
Post a Comment