Most Anticipated Tech Products of 2011

adeelarshad82 writes "2011 is just around the corner, and with the new year comes expectations. Based on hype and recent announcements, PCMag put together a list of twelve most anticipated tech products of 2011. Some are new, like the technology to bridge Wi-Fi, PowerLine, and Ethernet or the 3D camcorders, which will let you create content for your 3D TV. Others will just carry over from what we anticipated in 2010 but never materialized like iPhone on the Verizon network or Phones with dual core processors."

Comments

No Nintendo 3DS?

[Daverd]

It promises 3D without glasses! That sounds way bigger to me than a slightly better smartphone.

Re:Tablets

[RapmasterT]

Yes. Otherwise the list of things to anticipate in 2011 would be much shorter.

Improved article technology

[swanzilla]

I hope 2011 will bring us the technology to load twelve items on a single page.

Re:Improved article technology

[JustinOpinion]

The "Products & Technologies" are:

1. Verizon iPhone
2. BlackBerry PlayBook
3. Honeycomb Tablets
4. Even More Tablets
5. Chrome OS Notebooks
6. Phones with Dual-Core Processors
7. Mac App Store
8. Google TV: Take 2
9. Hulu for Magazines
10. Intel's Sandy Bridge and AMD's Fusion Processors
11. Sony PlayStation Phone
12. Net Neutrality Rules in Practice

In terms of subject areas, this is:

1. Smartphone
2. Tablets
3. Tablets
4. Tablets
5. Netbooks
6. Smartphone
7. Content Access
8. Content Access
9. Content Access
10. Processors
11. Smartphone
12. Content Access

The base technology (processors, etc.) is under-represented compared to hot product categories (tablets and smartphones). Clearly they were more focused on "products" (and "business models") and not so focused on new "technologies".

Duke Nukem Forever

[verbatim]

Don't forget about DNF. It's supposed to come out in 2011. This year for sure!

Dual core cell phone ?

[DarkOx]

Really why would that be an anticipated product. To the end user it should mean nothing. The only time multiple cores is better is when the power use / price / performance ration of a single core system has reached a maximum for the current capabilities of a single core. In the case of phones usually you are optimizing for performance / power use. I think we can still get more umph out of building a better core than adding more cores at this stage. Unless you scheduling is teh 5ux0r its still just as good a user experience if apps are otherwise properly threaded as N cores for smallish values of N and if apps are not properly threaded its a better experience.

Re:Dual core cell phone ?

[mlts]

If the cores are different, it may be useful. Say a phone has two low power/low speed cores, one core dedicated to the radio, and two cores that have high speed/power. This would make the phone useful. When playing games, it could have one or both high speed cores running, but when just idle and sitting there, it could just be using one low-speed core for the OS and background apps.

The advantage about cores is that for devices which run a number of separate discrete tasks, it provides smoother performance. To boot, cores can be turned on and off for further power savings.

This isn't to say a fast, single core CPU is a bad thing, especially if it had the ability to power off or throttle back clock speed for battery savings. However, it might be easier for engineers to design a dual core system where one core is optimized solely for power savings and the other for performance as opposed to try to make one core do the whole show.

Extra features most anticipated in phones

[rossdee]

Hand warmer
lock deicer
car battery charger/jump starter
Hair drier
snow blower
fish finder
microwave oven
humidifier
coffee maker

and built in toilet

Re:Tablets

[bluefoxlucid]

The squawking I always hear from these developers is that you never know your target, because everyone implements Android on a different platform with different amounts of CPU and RAM and sometimes there's a different set of system services running on it (like Motoblur etc) and so on. And also that some of them run 1.5, 1.6, 2.0. 2.1, 2.2.

So they are complaining that some machines have different specs... like just about every freaking computer out there. They also complain that there's more than 3 versions of Android, I guess, since there's 3 of iOS and I always hear that iOS is better about this. They also complain that other software might be installed (Motoblur is a software package Motorola installs).

Welcome to the world of embedded developers. It's a very specialized place, and when they meet something not so specialized they go apeshit. The problem is cell phones are general purpose computers now, not embedded devices.

Think about PC developers complaining about how their stuff might crash with Crossfire but not with 4 nVidia cards, even though this is supposed to be transparent. Or maybe it'll blow out on a specific AMD CPU combined with a specific VIA north bridge. Or a particular sound card gives troubles. How ridiculous does that seem? Oh and on top of it all, you might be running XP or Vista or Windows 7 now. The market is so fragmented, it's impossible to write programs for!

Re:Tablets

[Altus]

I think a lot of the problem isn't that embeded developers are developing for phones, its that desktop application developers are developing for phones but they now have to make an application that, just like thier desktop apps, has to support a variety of machines and OS's and specifications but they have to sell that application for a fraction of what they might charge for a desktop application.

The challanges are similar to the desktop and its possible that there is even more money to be made, but its difficult to make the decision to support a bunch of devices when you are going to sell your application for just a couple of dollars.

Regarding OS fragmentation, you are right that iOS has several verison, but unike android you can install the latest version on the iPhone you bought last year so developers can insist on the latest OS and still support all but the very first iPhone (support 2 OS's and you can cover everything). Since many android phones are locked down or require a special version of Android from the Phone manufacturer you end up having to support more OS's just to make sure your app works on more phones. I know this isn't a technical failing of Android but it is a factor in developing for the platform.