Thirty Years in Computing

Jacob writes "Jacob Nielsen, usability guru, writes about the last 30 years of computing and his predictions of the next 30 years of computing. An interesting read. quote: 'Computer games in 2034 are likely to offer simulated worlds and interactive storytelling that's more engaging than linear presentations such as those in most movies today.'"

Comments

You mean "if"...

[sean.peters]

Since it's by no means a sure thing that computers will EVER attain consciousness.

I also have heartburn with the term "singularity" as applied to the growth in computer capability. "Singularity" is a mathematical term with a precise definition: it's a point on the curve representing some function at which the slope of the curve is infinite - think of the limit of f(x)=1/(x-1) as x approaches 1. But "Moore's Law" is an exponential function - its slope is finite everywhere on the curve.

While I understand what people mean when they discuss a computer "singularity", it's really not a very accurate way to use the word.

Sean

Re:Think outside the box!

[Saeger]

Yes, Nielsen is guilty of the "intuitive linear" view of progress, when the reality is that progess is exponential in any evolutionary system.

Required reading for any so-called Futurist should be The Law of Accelerating Returns , which is more comprehensive than the more familiar Moore's "law".

An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense "intuitive linear" view. So we won't experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century -- it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today's rate). The "returns," such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There's even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. Within a few decades, machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, leading to The Singularity -- technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history. The implications include the merger of biological and nonbiological intelligence, immortal software-based humans, and ultra-high levels of intelligence that expand outward in the universe at the speed of light.

When confronted by this for the first time, a lot of people are understandablyshocked, and quick to dismiss it.

Pray for the Singularity

[fstat(pipe)]

The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era Vernor Vinge

Or not.

Re:we'll never recognize computers

[RogerWilco]

>MS Word already allows table and cell editing similar to Excel,
>graphics manipulation, and desktop publishing.

WP 5.1 did do a lot of that in the nineties already.
WP 6.0 did all of it in 1994.
In features WordPerfect was and is still way ahead of MS Word.

You could do calculations, references and use variables in WP5.1 tables.

WP was always a more serious DTP tool. WP 6.0 already supports folding signatures to do 2-up, 4-up, 16-up, booklet, separate font libraries, absolute page positioning styles, kerning, ligatures, a good equation editor, TextArt, fully WYSIWYG, etc.

And lo' and behold, it still uses the same file format for all versions since 6.0. I can make a file in WP 10+ for XP and my dad can use it on his 486 in WP 6.0 for DOS.

Where Word had the advantage is in usability and OS support (!)
It lost it in the win3 and win32 steps MS took, where playing catch-up - only having a version about 2 years after the OS arrived -
gave Word the opportunity to overtake WP.

I could go on, but I've found that this site is very complete
http://www.wpvsword.com might you be actually interested in the difference between WP and Word.