The United States Losing "The Tech Edge?"

Ed Matthews writes " Yesterday's Wall Street Journal profiles the coolest gadgets that either aren't available in the USA or are slow to emerge. It questions whether the U.S.'s reliance on PCs is a ball and chain, and highlights the mistake made by the US in not adopting a single standard for wireless communication. It also refers to the cell-phone carriers as "slow-moving, bureaucratic," and "having a chokehold on innovation." The regular B section requires a paid login, but you can read Walter Mossberg's column for free." Having dealt with the US-cellular companies for the last two weeks, and been extraordinarily unhappy with one company that's sucked away fourteen off my life, I'm curious what everyone else thinks will be the emerging technology - and where it will be.

Comments

And where will US put 3G cell phones?

[flufffy]

This is appropriate timing, as the FCC has just postponed the auction of the frequencies for 3G cell phones (the streaming audio/video ones). The best frequencies for these phones -- UHF, around 700 MHZ -- the ones you can receive indoors -- are already taken up by tv. The tv interests are supposed to be kicked off these frequencies by 2006, when digital tv should be up and running, but there's no guarantee that they will leave by then, as the tv corporation lobbies in WashDC built various escape clauses into the regs. So while Japanese and European 3G frequencies are being auctioned off and the infrastructure/tech is being developed, US manufacturers have to wait five years just to see whether or not they will get the frequencies. There's a report on this on MSNBC. A different and very interesting perspective was in a business editorial in The Economist last week, but as the current issue has just appeared, and at the moment I can't get on to the site to see if the article was archived, no link.

fff

You're confusing the web with the Internet

[w00ly_mammoth]

It's a commonly made mistake. The Internet is an evolution of various standards/protocols.

The world wide web, OTOH, is a specific protocol specifically invented by one person.

Read this Time magazine article which describes this in greater detail, and explains why he made their top 20 inventors of the century list.

"Unlike so many of the inventions that have
moved the world, this one truly was the work
of one man. Thomas Edison got credit for the
light bulb, but he had dozens of people in his
lab working on it. William Shockley may have
fathered the transistor, but two of his
research scientists actually built it. And if
there ever was a thing that was made by
committee, the Internet--with its protocols
and packet switching--is it. But the World
Wide Web is Berners-Lee's alone. He
designed it. He loosed it on the world. And
he more than anyone else has fought to keep
it open, nonproprietary and free. "

Hold on a sec

[jabber]

I'm not getting into the political flame-war that is sure to erupt here, but...

there are still many places in USia that don't even have electricity yet!

Like where, the Ozarks and the Grand Canyon?? Las Vegas, fer crissakes, is in the middle of the freaking desert, and is the biggest single consumer of electric power in the world.

Ok, look here. It may not be worthwhile to pull electric cables to every nook and cranny of the US, but I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that there are many more residential areas in Europe than in the US that are still short on power, plumbing and pavement. But they do have Cellular coverage. Here's why.

The wired-telephone infrastructure is so pitifully BAD in many areas of Europe, that putting in a Cell tower is much more cost effective. In the US, the post-WWII boom in the economy enabled running phone-lines to everywhere; while in Europe, whatever money was available was spent on rebuilding HOUSES.

Hell, these same criteria are almost certain to result in the invention of the teleporter in either Asia or Africa; not because their scientists are more brilliant than the US or European ones, but simply because they do not have a good road system out that way, and so would get more bang for the buck out of the technology. Necessity is the mother of invention; not Socialism.

Re:Limitations of USian capitalist model

[Rupert]

This particular "best mind" flocked to the US because of the ridiculously high material standard of living available to computer programmers. No bureaucrat was telling what to do (apart from when I was on government projects - I have heard that isn't to different here).

<flamebait>
As much as I like it here, I often wonder about the overall sanity of a country where the shooter has a right to carry his gun, but the shootee does not have a right to hospital treatment.
</flamebait>

Only two years until I move back. I wonder what I'll miss most?

--

Not best tech, best marketers.

[Moderation abuser]

Common misconception.

It isn't the best technology that survives in the US. It's the best marketed technology which survives in the US.

That's why you have:

• phones that suck
• TVs that suck
• computer operating systems that suck
• computer architectures that suck
• video cameras/recorders that suck
• cars that suck
• motorcycles that suck

Hell, even your electricity sucks. :)

And that's just off the top of my head.

Limitations of USian capitalist model

[Dan Hayes]

This shows one of the main limitations of the laissez-faire capitalism that USia endorses over the more rational policies implemented in the rest of the world. When corporations are as unfettered as they are in USia, getting them to agree on things like standards is a herculean task - each corporation is assured that it has the One True path.

In Europe OTOH they're more used to being told what to do by more socialist governments, and the idea of a standard is more easily applicable to the way they work within regulations anyway.

Also, you have to remember that USia is such a huge place that establishing the kind of mobile phone networks that are seen in Europe is extremely difficult - after all, there are still many places in USia that don't even have electricity yet! I'd say that was a priority over the wireless revolution.

Re:Limitations of USian capitalist model

[w00ly_mammoth]

In Europe OTOH they're more used to being told what to do by more socialist governments

Govts. don't have a good reputation for knowing what they're talking about when they make decisions on technology. This pretty much explains why Europe lags behind the US in most technologies.

In almost every case, what you describe as a limitation (being unfettered by govt. regulation) is the key advantage that US business has over the rest of the world. This is indeed why the best minds flock to the US - so that they can do what they want in peace without some bureaucrat telling them what to do.

Of course, there are a few exceptions when the socialist model might seem to be advantageous, but not if you look at the big picture.

w/m

Maybe this is all a misinterpretation

[Jerf]

Maybe we don't need all of these fancy-schmancy gadgets because we've got an outstanding computer network and great computers that render those gadgets obsolete before they even get here.

Why would I want a web-browsing cell-phone? I have a web-browser at work, free local phone calls for my ISP at home, cheap good computers, and I actually have a cable modem at home. The amount of time I'd actually want to use a thing with an vanishingly tiny screen to browse the web or use e-mail is quite small.

Maybe we don't have them because neither need nor want them. Goodness knows there's nothing that special about the technology... they don't have some sooper-secret chip-making process that produces 100 GHz Pentium Pros... then I would be worried. The power of desktop computers lies with their generality.

The Future of Technology

[Alien54]

This really has to do, in part, with where you feel the future of technology is.

Let's face it, even though print media was invented over 500 years ago, there are still billions of people who read print media from time to time. The glib catch phrase that it is *so* 20th century (for example) when applied to print media makes it sound that there are maybe three people left on the planet would read print media. When in fact the people on the cutting edge are not the majority by any means.

Long ago, and far away, when I lived on another planet and worked in retail repair shop, I would often tell customers hungry for the latest gadget that "If you can buy it, it is already obsolete".

Point being that 1) you can get into an endless treadmill trying to keep uyp with the technology and every new toy; and 2) even tho plenty of new tech toys will being coming out, the vast majority of technologies will stay around in some form for a very long time to come. Alot of folks will not change out a working solution to a problem just because of razzle by a technology spin doctor. Yes, there are problems in waiting too long, but on the other hand there are still lots of businesses who are **still** running on a paper system, never mind something as archaic as a dos boook keeping system on a 286

So this worry about the technology edge has some truth, but it is not nearly as dire as panic would suggest.

Re:The fault is with the consumers...

[Hard_Code]

"Ideally, if consumers are abused, they will take it out on the company by complaining, or just moving to another product. Then the abusing company either rights their ways or dies."

And how exactly can a consumer complain or boycott companies which are virtual monopolies on necessities? You just can't. You have to eat, you have to have some sort of clothes, you pretty much need electricity and hot water. Also, voting with your wallet just means that the rich get a bigger vote. Boycott all you want, your vote doesn't count.

"I don't think it's the system that is broken so much as the consumer these days. This, I feel, is one of the biggest problems in America today. People don't accept their responsibility as consumers. I think that a lot of people are just too taken in by marketing to sit down and rationally consider their choices."

I think it's both. Corporations feed the consumers what they think they want to hear, and the consumers overloaded with pandering, just pick the ritziest presentation. Something is wrong when companies start spending considerable, if not more, money on advertisement and packaging, than actual product. If there were actually choice, then it would be the consumer's fault. But I think in many cases there is no choice, or the choices are just equally bad (so, how exactly are you going to *choose* the company with saner gasoline prices? you can't, they're all fixed the same).

Of course, the US has more land mass

[bee]

The advantage that Europe and Japan have over the US is that they have greater population density, making technologies that can take advantage of it, such as wireless and public rail transportation, much more cost-effective. It's a simple matter of geography, nothing more.

---

The fault is with the consumers...

[slothbait]

When corporations are as unfettered as they are in USia, getting them to agree on things like standards is a herculean task - each corporation is assured that it has the One True path.

I'd really like to believe that this isn't true. But with the likes of MS running around these days, I'd have a difficult time counter-arguing.

Ideally, if consumers are abused, they will take it out on the company by complaining, or just moving to another product. Then the abusing company either rights their ways or dies. This same reasoning can apply to standards acceptance and environmental issues. The consumers have the ultimate power (and, in fact, responsibility) in correcting corporate behavior. This is the system, and it all seems reasonable to me.

So why does it break down? I don't think it's the system that is broken so much as the consumer these days. This, I feel, is one of the biggest problems in America today. People don't accept their responsibility as consumers. I think that a lot of people are just too taken in by marketing to sit down and rationally consider their choices. In the case of MS, I think companies have been too short sighted to realize that they'd be better off telling Gates to take a hike. Maybe then MS would shape up. Instead, companies take the short-term easier route of sticking with Windows, and MS continues to get away with murder.

Also, you have to remember that USia is such a huge place that establishing the kind of mobile phone networks that are seen in Europe is extremely difficult...

A very good point -- and one that I think is often ignored. There are some real disadvantages to being big. American infrastructure simply can not adjust as quickly as that of smaller nations.

--Lenny

What 'Tech Edge' ?

[Moderation abuser]

Computer networks and cheap PCs. That's about it.

What happens is that innovative new technologies are invented in the UK, fail miserably because the financiers couldn't tell a good idea if it was rammed up their arse sideways.

The Japs grab the idea with both hands and run with it, make a fortune.

Progressive European countries import idea and technology from Japan to Europe.

The UK is dragged into the new technology kicking and screaming that the bloody Europeans are trying to take over the world.

The UK inventor dies unknown and penniless with enormous debts which cause his family to be cast into the streets and have his house reposessed.

Americans re-invent the technology but make it incompatible. Claim they invented it first.

Not behind where it counts

[Lechter]

I would tend to disagree with Walter Mossberg's column. There are certainly a lot of things available overseas that have yet to migrate to the US (I ocasionally have a friend of mine form Hong Kong bring me the latest things.) And granted that our cellular phone infrastructure is inferior and inefficient compared to Europe's. But I don't know that we are really all that far behind. To my mind, Mossberg failed to site any real examples of technologies where the US has been surpassed.

Regarding wireless interent access I would argue that Americans have the edge, with the Palm VII, and the OmniSky adaptation for the Palm V/Vx, and with the HandSpring (assuming they ever release any non-vapourware cards...). I don't know anyone who uses their Cellphone for wireless 'Net access, and quite frankly I would much rather check my e-mail on something with a screen large enough to display more than 3 or 4 lines of text, I would be uncomfortable with the notion of buying stocks on(wireless)line if I was unable to fit more than the ticker symbol on my screen. For me it seems that the ability to access the internet with something as small as a cell phone, will be little more than an gimick until they have a much better way to present data.

In term of 'Net appliances, we're way far behind in some irrelevant ways: I don't know if anybody remembers but I think that there was a service by which people in Japan could access news, purchace stocks (maybe), and do other simalar things using their Nintendo (remember that 8-bit thing, we had as kids?) And the French have had something similar to that for decades.

Nonetheless Mossberg seems to have forgotten that the idea of web appliaces has been tried here. It won't play cool games but we do have things like webTV, which would look just fine next to the Cable box on the TV in your kitchen.

The thing about PC's (why American's still love them and why I believe that they'll be around for many years to come) is their versility. People want something that they can surf the 'Net on, and keep track of their finances with, and write documents with, and play games on, and securely and privately store lots of information on (read mp3s these days). It is the great versility of the PC that makes it such a staple of technology. Compared to other web appliances it's a much more open option - we don't even think of putting a new hard-drive into a PC as "hacking" but doing that with a web appliance is a major achievement.

In today's world I don't think that there are many of us who are on the go so much that we need to access our e-mail from anywhere and everywhere all the time. Nor does there appear to be much demand for the limited (web surfing) capabilities of current info appliances. As for the future, we'll see but for right now I would argue that the US is not behind where it counts.