Slashdot Mirror
How Much Digital Tool Convergence Is Possible?
webword asks: "There are many geek tools in the world, e.g., Palm Pilots, desktop computers, cell phones, cameras, digital watches. I've seen things recently like Samsung's cell phone camera and on Slashdot we've talked about the merger of cell phones and PDAs. Obviously, as time goes on, technology will improve so that these tools can talk to each other. However, it is entirely unclear how much physical merging can occur. There are screen limitations, human memory limitations, color limitations and so forth. So, just how much can our devices merge?"
Given the fact that to some extent for cameras and cell phones and even PDA's, form follows function and they have vastly different functions, trying to have one form that encompasses them all is foolish. You get something that is a jack of all trades and master of none. It's better to have devices that are optimized for complementary uses. The PDA is your generic data entry and display device. The cell phone is voice communication. The camera is to record visual data. The key is to make all of these specialists work together as a team.
Personally I wouldn't mind having a cell phone and a PDA but having the two of them talk to each other seamlessly. Indeed, I could see the PDA being bright enough to know that I have a cell phone and use it to do long range wireless, which would spread the load of work done across multiple batteries. And as for my electronic camera, if it can instantly transfer the photographs it takes over to my PDA, that would be fine and dandy. The PDA acts as the hub of my personal LAN, the brain controlling it, with cell phone and camera as periphials.
Come to think of it, that's the best analogy I can think of. Would you really want a personal computer with a printer and scanner built in? Or even a laptop that's built that way? It can be done and you could argue there's an all-in-one utility factor, but even for a laptop people tend to back down from that. The personal computer industry could have converged but didn't. They realized (consciously or not) that it was better to have those periphials separated from the main box. The iMac or laptops are the limit for integration there.
And so I think we're going to see the same thing on the personal devices level. The PDA takes the place of the computer and the other devices become things that connect via wireless to it.
A little thinking out loud...
HUDs are the way to go to cure the physical screen limitation. Bonus is you get a little more privacy.
Micro Optical Corporation has the right idea with their Clip-On. IBM could pull it off with their Wearable stuff.
For audio, look to the In-Ear monitors musicians use...
For the rest of it, I think Charmed Technology has the right idea. The ultimate form for our every-day tech is when it no longer looks like tech. It's the peripherals that count. A single screen that can pull the video from any device, clip-on headphones to listen to any audio, and cameras and microphones added as you see fit - the Blue Tooth promise.
To be honest, the barriers to physical size reduction are power-source and connectivity between chips. Watch the SOC developments (System-On-Chip) for significant shrinks from multi-chip to single-chip forms. At the rate feature size is shrinking on-chip, the limitation isn't how many transistors or gates you can squeeze on, it's how many bond-pads you need to I/O with the chip.
Aside: Bought myself a couple of E-holsters to take care of more immediate gadget-loading. Works well under a sweater or jacket.
--The more you know, the less you know.