Slashdot Mirror
Tech That Failed To Fail
itwbennett writes "There are tech fads that flare up quickly and then, pouf, they're gone (Tamagotchi, anyone?). And then there are technologies that industry bigwigs predict will follow that familiar pattern and instead end up withstanding the test of time. The Internet, for example, has famously failed to implode, despite dire predictions by Ethernet inventor Bob Metcalfe. And what about TV, the cornerstone of the American living room? Inventor Lee DeForest, known as one of the 'fathers of the electronic age,' declared TV a commercial and financial impossibility, a sentiment that was shared by 20th Century Fox exec Darryl Zanuck. And FCC engineer T.A.M. Craven was absolutely certain back in 1961 that there was 'no chance communications space satellites will be used to provide better telephone, telegraph, television, or radio service inside the United States.'"
I've pretty much always been in favor of ATMs, but that's because I'm relatively anti-social -- I certainly recall the hue and cry about how impersonal and awful it was when they first became common. (Yes, I'm old, get off my lawn, etc.)
I'm still cranky about ATM fees, though -- the other thing I recall from when they were introduced was how much money the banks would save by not having to hire as many tellers, and these savings would more than cover the cost of the machines, so of course there would never be fees, they said. Simple common sense.
2*3*3*3*3*11*251
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
They(OSX and Linux) have utterly failed to "destroy Windows on the desktop", and will continue to do so.
I don't think Windows has failed to fail. It fails pretty well.
Bank close at 3PM, because, in the pre-computer days, there was several hours worth of counting & bookkeeping that had to be done between kicking the last customer out & close for the night. Why they STILL close at 3PM, is... well... tradition, I guess.
Despite all the problems, using an ATM machine beats standing in that long ass line trying to cash a check.
Only if it's an automatic ATM machine. :-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
No, you're right. I don't go to the bank to have a lovely little conversation with the teller about the weather and the local sports team. I go to the bank to either 1.) Get Money, or 2.) Leave Money... These two jobs are perfectly suited to a machine, and in theory the machine should cost less to operate and thus lower banking costs... That's the theory anyway. The only problem I have with ATMs is that they seem to attract morons who can't operate them, and end up taking even longer than going to a human teller... Same thing with self-checkout at the supermarket. Outstanding idea -- I can get through those things in about 1/4 the time it would take even in the express lane. However, the problem arises that anybody over 40 can't seem to work them, and if you're behind someone over 60, well, just forget about it...
I prefer human checkout operators - they're faster than robo-checkouts. The majority of the time spent checking out is rotating the goods so the barcode is visible to the laser sensor and selecting the correct item for produce by weight - both of which are something that a human has to do, and which a checkout operator has much more skill at than myself. On top of that, a robo-checkout adds a mandatory pause after each item to check the bag scale to make sure the barcode matches the mass of the item you put in the bag, so even if you DO get as fast as a checkout operator at scanning, you won't be able to operate at full speed.
The only reason to use a robo-checkout I can think of is when you're in a hurry, you only have one item, the other checkouts are saturated, and the robo-checkout lane is empty because they are so crap. Even then, I prefer to use the human lane - a minimum wage checkout worker needs their job more than I need to buy stupid crap faster.
Unfortunately, it looks like many people are missing the humor in the redundancy and superfluously of your redundant comment. The thing that bugs me about automatic ATM machines is having to set and remember a personal PIN number.
The x86 CPU architecture would be a good candidate too.
From my reading of these. All the technology was fine the failure predictions were based on not understanding the socialogical impact of the technology.
Google -> search
Internet -> sharing and remote access
ipod -> really personal applications
TV -> advertising
The most important part of these technologies seem to be the humans in the loop and what the technology does for the humans. The predictions failures seem to be failures in understanding the sociology. The message seems to be understanding the sociological market for the technology.
The fashion was (and is). Really the tech for MP3 players has never been a big deal for most users. "Plays my music," is as far as they care about anything. Please remember that people were happy with discmans and walkmans and shit like that.
What the iPod did was make MP3 players cool, it made them a fashion accessory. The best way to notice that is the white earbuds, with cord hanging out front where it is visible. Their commercials show this and it is the style that sold. An iPod is fashionable and has thing like the white earbuds so that you can proclaim ownership and show off the fashion. Heck when the iPod came out all of a sudden high end earbud manufacturers suddenly had a demand for white earbuds. They'd always been a darker colour before since being understated was what people wanted. However white earbuds were a fashion statement. People wanted better sound, but only if they could still have the iPod fashion going.
That is why the iPod was so successful. Other MP3 players were just music players so people really didn't give a shit more than they had before. However the iPod was a fashion accessory that you had to have.
Then of course once it started to take off you got one of those nice positive feedback loops. People didn't know about MP3 players, they knew about iPods. If you wanted a music player you got an iPod simply because that was all you knew, even if there were no fashion concerns. An "Everyone uses it because everyone uses it," sort of situation.
Technology was never the big factor, and in consumer electronics that can sometimes be the case.
Brazil is changing it's ATMs to Linux. Presumably it's the year of Linux on the ATM.
Did Tamagotchi fail? Or did it just *ahem* evolve into Pokemon and Nintendogs?
And what kind of an example is Tamagotchi in the first place? Tamagotchi wasn't a tech, it was just a particular application of an existing tech that had been around a long time, in fact by that point it was practically retro. All it did was make the little hand-held LCD games that had gone out of vogue around the release of the GameBoy briefly popular again by coming up with a novel new style of game.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
Maybe I'm alone in this; but I always feel like I'm being *judged* by the human tellers.
They see my accounts, the balances, they look at me, can reasonably estimate my age and in a split second they decide if I'm a good customer or a bad customer (and by extension a good person or a bad one).
Maybe it's silly? I don't know...
I distinctly remember going into my bank and asking to sit down with an investment guy. I wanted to come up with a savings/investment/retirement solution that I would follow from now until forever. Eventually, this could be large sums of money. At the time, the teller asked for my debit card, to pull up my information. She took one look at the screen and my ~$300 (combined between my checking and savings account) and handed me a fold-out pamphlet on 'How to Save Money'.
I admit, I was fully extended on a house flip project I was doing. But I went to the bank because I was expecting a reasonably large sum of money to come my way in the next few weeks when the house sold.
A few weeks later, the house was sold and now I had a check for ~60k. This time, all I did was go up to the teller to make a deposit, I didn't even *ask*, but they 'invited me' to sit down with one of their personal financial advisors *right now*. Truthfully, I was surprised because I didn't really think 60k would be enough for them to bat an eye at. Anyway, I declined. Later I switched banks, but I have a feeling my experience would be similar at the new bank.
Tellers (or phone customer service reps) don't have to guess if you are a profitable customer; the computer tells them this outright. Many years ago, I was reading about a shift at a FirstUSA (now Chase) call center, and every rep had a "traffic light" appear when the customer's file came up. That light would tell them if it was a "good" customer (and therefore deserving of obsequious (and time consuming) service, fee waivers, etc.) or a "poor" customer (and deserving the bare minimum of efficient service, no waivers for anything, etc.)
Naturally, "good" was either high-volume pay-every-month (and therefore a source of fee income), or maxed out (and paying on time.) "Bad" was small-volume, paid every month (and therefore expensive due to account overhead) or an erratic payer (and therefore likely stuck no matter how ruthless the bank was with fees.)
I just go to stores where they call out extra check staff when there are more than two people in queue. Also, staff smile say hello and appreciate a "not to bad, how are you" with a smile in return. Life is about people, I switched insurance to a company that had local people answer the phone, I switched ISPs to a company that had local people answer the phone ie when I am paying for a service I will not deal with poorly automated answering or people with language difficulties. Not only does it make life feel a little better, a little more human, it also employs fellow citizens. Choose where you money goes, it makes a difference in everyone's life.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Article says the following products/concepts succeeded when they were predicted to fail.
1) iPod (Portable Digital Media Player)
2) Internet
3) Personal Computer
4) Television
5) Google (Minimalist Internet Interfacing, unobstructive advertising)
6) Android, iPhone (Smartphones)
Anyone who predicted the failure of the above was obviously WAY too far removed from the target audience to be worth his/her salt.
1) Portable Digital Media Player -- This was an obvious predictable survivor. The first realistic portable music device was the cassette player (Sony Walkman, notably). It was a hit and widely emulated. Then came the portable CD player (Sony Discman, notably). It was a hit and widely emulated. It was better than the cassette player because it offered higher-quality sound and greater convenience (if at the initial cost of "skipping" risk). Then came the MP3 player-- a device that stored CD-quality music on flash memory. It had no moving parts and great battery life. Apple then put forth the iPod (early iterations had moving parts) which was a fashion smash hit. Its staying power came from the need for the next step in portable music evolution and, surprisingly, because of its unforeseeable status as a fashion accessory.
2) The internet, even at its earliest incarnation, was a means of connecting people of similar minds and interests for communication. Advances in communication always survive and this advance combined the opportunity for well-thought letter-style communication at telephone speed. Furthermore, it became a marketplace for wares and a means of education. Yes, and adult entertainment. Its survival was a no-brainer.
3) Whoever said the PC wouldn't survive did not understand what a PC nor what digital computing was. It's the same as someone saying "books" would not survive because the person didn't understand that paper could transmit information beyond the death of a writer.
4) Television... jeez. People love entertainment. Jokes, stories, gossip, games, races, drama, fantasy -- all were hits on stage, in person, and in books. The person who said TV wouldn't last had no understanding of people.
5) Google survived initially because while everyone was annoying users with massive front-page bloat and forceful marketing/advertising, Google was simple. Google provided what the intelligent and focused internet user market wanted- a simple and efficient search engine. Word of their apparent search honest spread like wildfire and thus came the demise of the all-encompassing "web portal".
6) Smartphones survive for a few reasons: the popularity of social exhibitionism/voyeurism, new generation reliance on internet connectivity to provide solutions, and the wow-factor of touchscreens and pretty UIs. They will continue to survive so long as the touchscreen remains the best affordable visual interface... though I'd really prefer the return of buttons... they just work.
Philo Farnsworth invented Television.
...a year after John Logie Baird did.