Maybe longterm ... but, for the next 5 years or so, I don't see people wearing an Apple Watch instead of carrying an iPhone -- rather, wearing an Apple Watch in addition to carrying an iPhone.
There are just so many things an iPhone should be able to better than a watch -- even if it is less convenient ...
Taking pictures, entering text, panning zooming maps, web pages ...
I can't see a watch, no matter how advanced, ever replacing a smartphone without some major breakout technology, which we simply don't have now. If it's a major breakthrough, it's unpredictable, and until it happens, no one will expect it. What Apple is genius at doing is taking technologies that exist, and using them where other companies are afraid to. Or taking them and obsoleting what they currently use. Or taking them and combining them to do what no one else has thought to do. They even invent some of their own.
But if there's a breakout technology they, or others, are working on that will change everything, again, we don't know of it.
The problem is that breakthroughs aren't predictable. Usually, someone gets an idea, because they understand something that others don't, and are capable of making a leapfrogging thought. There are few of those people, and it doesn't happen in committee. It gets refined to usability in committee, but that's later. We can look to the invention of the transistor, it was invented twice at Bell Labs, by two different groups, of a couple, or three, in each group. One was slightly first, and worked better. The other, which worked very poorly, had much better possibilities for production, and so that was where it went. That was the group headed by Schokley. The other is lost to the popular histories, even though it was first, and performed better.
I imagine that in the future, we will interact differently than we do now, and so smartphones may no longer be needed, or wanted. Same thing for tablets, possibly, and desktops. It really depends on wireless, and, to (a term which I really dislike) the cloud. If that ever works the way we're being promised it will, with the wireless speeds we're being made to expect (eventually 1Gb/sec), and sufficent processing out "there", then devices with power, storage, and even possibly screens and keyboards, may become obsolete. But we'll need a new way to interface.
With the research going on that shows that we can accomplish tasks by just thinking about doing them, with the right interface, we might find, eventually, that that's the way we will interact with our stuff. Want to talk to someone! Just think "Hey, John, let's discuss ...", and it happens. Or, "How do I get to...", and you just..know. I can really see this happening at some point, but it might be ten, twenty years out.
Maybe longterm ... but, for the next 5 years or so, I don't see people wearing an Apple Watch instead of carrying an iPhone -- rather, wearing an Apple Watch in addition to carrying an iPhone.
There are just so many things an iPhone should be able to better than a watch -- even if it is less convenient ...
Taking pictures, entering text, panning zooming maps, web pages ...
I can't see a watch, no matter how advanced, ever replacing a smartphone without some major breakout technology, which we simply don't have now. If it's a major breakthrough, it's unpredictable, and until it happens, no one will expect it. What Apple is genius at doing is taking technologies that exist, and using them where other companies are afraid to. Or taking them and obsoleting what they currently use. Or taking them and combining them to do what no one else has thought to do. They even invent some of their own.
But if there's a breakout technology they, or others, are working on that will change everything, again, we don't know of it.
The problem is that breakthroughs aren't predictable. Usually, someone gets an idea, because they understand something that others don't, and are capable of making a leapfrogging thought. There are few of those people, and it doesn't happen in committee. It gets refined to usability in committee, but that's later. We can look to the invention of the transistor, it was invented twice at Bell Labs, by two different groups, of a couple, or three, in each group. One was slightly first, and worked better. The other, which worked very poorly, had much better possibilities for production, and so that was where it went. That was the group headed by Schokley. The other is lost to the popular histories, even though it was first, and performed better.
I imagine that in the future, we will interact differently than we do now, and so smartphones may no longer be needed, or wanted. Same thing for tablets, possibly, and desktops. It really depends on wireless, and, to (a term which I really dislike) the cloud. If that ever works the way we're being promised it will, with the wireless speeds we're being made to expect (eventually 1Gb/sec), and sufficent processing out "there", then devices with power, storage, and even possibly screens and keyboards, may become obsolete. But we'll need a new way to interface.
With the research going on that shows that we can accomplish tasks by just thinking about doing them, with the right interface, we might find, eventually, that that's the way we will interact with our stuff. Want to talk to someone! Just think "Hey, John, let's discuss ...", and it happens. Or, "How do I get to...", and you just..know. I can really see this happening at some point, but it might be ten, twenty years out.
I agree that the watch, as we know it, will not replace the smart phone, as we know it.
Your musings, however, struck several interesting chords ...
Breakthroughs: I've had the good fortune to participate in several breakthroughs in my life. As I think back about them, they have some similarities. It usually involved a few (3-5) like-minded individuals who shared common interests, but were frustrated by the status quo ...
At some impromptu gathering (lunch, a gathering in the hall at work), it would usually start as a bitch session ... But then, someone would say: "What we really ought to do is: ...
Bam! that lit the fuse and each participant would add his thoughts (about what we could/should do) to fuel the fire ... Maybe a 5 to 10-minute frenzy where each would build on top of the others' contributions ... At the end, sated (almost like sweet release) we looked around and the path ahead was just so obvious ...
Sometimes the path ahead just appeared. Working for IBM in Silicon Valley, in the 1973-1980 era I was exposed the new toy computers, micro computers ... Everything from PET, Altair, Smoke Signal Broadcasting, Ohio Scientific, Grid, Apple I, Trash-80, Northstar nee Kentucky Fried Computer, Cromemco ...
Then I saw an Apple ][ and had it demoed and 'splained to me by an expert (Woz's younger brother). This attractive, inexpensive little package shared similar compute specs and capabilities with the IBM/360 maimframes I taught/used at work. The I/O capabilities were inferior -- but the Computer specs were remarkably similar ... the path ahead was just so obvious ...
A Different way to Interface: Again, I've been fortunate in my business and personal life, to have been around people who were on the same wavelength, for lack of a better word. In 1958-1960 I worked as a punched card tab operator for a large company, Three of us worked the night shift (at $1.75 per hour + 10 cents night shift differential) -- Bob, Ray (Really, Bob and Ray) and myself. The amazing thing was that after working together for a week or so we began to think alike and could communicate in some mix of partial thoughts and spoken half-sentences ... An exchange might be:
Bob: "[Dick] have you sorted the ... "
Me: "Yea, I finished it earlier ..."
Ray: "... I'm merging that now with the ..."
Then, one or the other of us would pick up for the others' activities in the middle of a series of dependent, intricate processes (sorting, merging, calculating, tabulating, etc.) without any of us giving it a second thought. We were able to get tons of work done quickly, accurately and efficiently ... We usually finished our assigned work with hours left in the shift -- then we'd do some of the next day's work ...
It was an amazing experience -- we were communicating on the same wavelength!
The only similar wavelength experience I've had was with my wife of 35 1/2 years -- something like I'm watching TV, and Lucy's across the room reading or needlepointing. I turn my head to blow her a kiss -- at the very same moment that she raises her head and blows me a kiss ...
In the demo of the Apple Watch, what impressed me most was the new communication/interface methods: the pulse/heartbeat exchange, the taptic "ready for lunch" exchange, the ephemeral drawing exchanges and the "Here's my question, select an answer" dialog.
Not really. Apple's success as a chip manufacturer is zero by either metric. They're providing great chips to themselves, but they aren't making any money in the market on them. They're just an in-house manufacturer.
Now by quality standards, they may be a winner. By price/unit for themselves standards, they may be a winner. But it isn't like companies are comparing Intel v Apple and choosing Apple. Apple's not even a choice in the marketplace.
Apple's mobile chips are selling (iPod/iPad/iPhone/Apple TV)
Intel's mobile chips are not. Causing Intel to lose tons of money because of that.
Don't act like if Intel made Apple's mobile chips their profits would be the same.
It's not the word but the implication that Sony is somehow involved, yet there's nothing about Sony in the article .
Jeez, I really thought you were kidding about Sony. The last syllable is sony not Sony. A monopsonist practices monopsony. From mono- ‘one’ + Greek ops?nein ‘buy provisions’. Hence my obviously 'woosh overhead' joke about not learning Greek in school. 8-)
Jeez, I really thought you were kidding about Sony. The last syllable is sony not Sony. A monopsonist practices monopsony. From mono- ‘one’ + Greek ops?nein ‘buy provisions’. Hence my obviously 'woosh overhead' joke about not learning Greek in school. 8-)
I agree that the watch, as we know it, will not replace the smart phone, as we know it.
Your musings, however, struck several interesting chords ...
Breakthroughs: I've had the good fortune to participate in several breakthroughs in my life. As I think back about them, they have some similarities. It usually involved a few (3-5) like-minded individuals who shared common interests, but were frustrated by the status quo ...
At some impromptu gathering (lunch, a gathering in the hall at work), it would usually start as a bitch session ... But then, someone would say: "What we really ought to do is: ...
Bam! that lit the fuse and each participant would add his thoughts (about what we could/should do) to fuel the fire ... Maybe a 5 to 10-minute frenzy where each would build on top of the others' contributions ... At the end, sated (almost like sweet release) we looked around and the path ahead was just so obvious ...
Sometimes the path ahead just appeared. Working for IBM in Silicon Valley, in the 1973-1980 era I was exposed the new toy computers, micro computers ... Everything from PET, Altair, Smoke Signal Broadcasting, Ohio Scientific, Grid, Apple I, Trash-80, Northstar nee Kentucky Fried Computer, Cromemco ...
Then I saw an Apple ][ and had it demoed and 'splained to me by an expert (Woz's younger brother). This attractive, inexpensive little package shared similar compute specs and capabilities with the IBM/360 maimframes I taught/used at work. The I/O capabilities were inferior -- but the Computer specs were remarkably similar ... the path ahead was just so obvious ...
A Different way to Interface: Again, I've been fortunate in my business and personal life, to have been around people who were on the same wavelength, for lack of a better word. In 1958-1960 I worked as a punched card tab operator for a large company, Three of us worked the night shift (at $1.75 per hour + 10 cents night shift differential) -- Bob, Ray (Really, Bob and Ray) and myself. The amazing thing was that after working together for a week or so we began to think alike and could communicate in some mix of partial thoughts and spoken half-sentences ... An exchange might be:
Bob: "[Dick] have you sorted the ... "
Me: "Yea, I finished it earlier ..."
Ray: "... I'm merging that now with the ..."
Then, one or the other of us would pick up for the others' activities in the middle of a series of dependent, intricate processes (sorting, merging, calculating, tabulating, etc.) without any of us giving it a second thought. We were able to get tons of work done quickly, accurately and efficiently ... We usually finished our assigned work with hours left in the shift -- then we'd do some of the next day's work ...
It was an amazing experience -- we were communicating on the same wavelength!
The only similar wavelength experience I've had was with my wife of 35 1/2 years -- something like I'm watching TV, and Lucy's across the room reading or needlepointing. I turn my head to blow her a kiss -- at the very same moment that she raises her head and blows me a kiss ...
In the demo of the Apple Watch, what impressed me most was the new communication/interface methods: the pulse/heartbeat exchange, the taptic "ready for lunch" exchange, the ephemeral drawing exchanges and the "Here's my question, select an answer" dialog.
I think that they're on to something!
Very interesting. The only computer you mentioned that I haven't used, or even knew about was the Smoke Signal Broadcasting. I used to love the Northstar demos at the computer shows with the wireframe figures revolving about. My girlfriend at the time, since then, my wife, used to really like those.
I think we've taken the standard UIs about as far as they can go. There are continued refinements, but they're all just that, refinements. To make the next leap, we've got to go well beyond them. Voice is out. I never understood why it was thought that would work. I suppose when it was first brought forth, there were no mobile devices, and it was still thought that computers would be fixed things in the home, or at work.
We can't talk everywhere, but we can think everywhere. I'm convinced that that will be the breakthrough that is needed.
Did you not see the post we were referring to? The OP wrote 'monop-Sony'. He separated sony and capitalized the first letter to imply a name.
Then that post I didn't see was a joke of some sorts. What was funny I know not. As you say Sony was not mentioned nor should it have been. My guess ... the poster didn't know Greek..
Very interesting. The only computer you mentioned that I haven't used, or even knew about was the Smoke Signal Broadcasting. I used to love the Northstar demos at the computer shows with the wireframe figures revolving about. My girlfriend at the time, since then, my wife, used to really like those.
Here ya' go:
I think we've taken the standard UIs about as far as they can go. There are continued refinements, but they're all just that, refinements. To make the next leap, we've got to go well beyond them. Voice is out. I never understood why it was thought that would work. I suppose when it was first brought forth, there were no mobile devices, and it was still thought that computers would be fixed things in the home, or at work.
We can't talk everywhere, but we can think everywhere. I'm convinced that that will be the breakthrough that is needed.
I totally agree!
I think that the breakthrough will come in baby steps rather than giant steps.
It could start something like this:
A disciplined mind usually has some sort of plan for the day ahead -- a todo list, if only mentally ... the executives hot five list of things to get done
When planning for tomorrow, you could voice dictate into this into an Apple Watch or iPhone where it would be converted into text, merged with schedule and contacts ... (all doable with today's tech)
Then, as the day progresses, the Apple Watch could remind/alert you by tapping your wrist and displaying your next todo item
You respond * by selecting a response indicating 1) done, 2) in process, 3) reschedule, 4) Cancel ...
The watch iPhone takes the appropriate action and taps to let you know it's done
* the response could be verbal, tapping the watch or a simple hand or eye movement,
The astute individual will leave holes in his schedule for unanticipated occurrences.
So what? This what! With a little planning and some intelligent tech -- you can plan and attack the most important anticipated items of your day.
The tech can be savvy enough to include interfacing other individuals, anticipating their responses, and determine what your response might be if the other says: 1) OK, 2) I can't make it, 3) IDK, 4) Unreachable ...
Basically, what I am suggesting is that you can offload a lot of the chaos of life by allowing tech to help you pre-think your day ... one day at a time.
I suspect that after a few months, your motor skills would allow you to handle most daily events without re-thinking. -- maybe in the blink of an eye or just lifting a finger
Hopefully, we've uncluttered the playing field and gained enough knowledge to take the next baby step.
A mind interface would require a major breakthrough, but you could get pretty close just with highly sensitive external sensors. For example a neckband that can detect when you are subvocalizing, or a camera that can pick up the tiniest eye movements. So you can be sitting there hardly moving and yet in full control of a computer (yes, "hardly moving" is not the same as "only thinking" but it's pretty close). At All Things D Tim Cook was asked what the next big thing might be and he mentioned sensors.
Then that post I didn't see was a joke of some sorts. What was funny I know not. As you say Sony was not mentioned nor should it have been. My guess ... the poster didn't know Greek..
"That post that you didn't see" except that you certainly did see it, because you quoted my response to it, initially saying that I was the one who didn't understand the word.
Why would the OP make a monop-Sony joke if they didnt understand Greek (or hadn't taken a basic business economics course)? If that was the case then they surely wouldn't be aware of the word?
You talk about whooshing over someone's head but I think you've entirely missed the point of why I was questioning the initial post. It doesn't make sense to me, but not because I think the OP doesn't understand Greek (actually Ancient Greek), because Sony has no obvious relevance to the thread, and I'm not all that sure that any monopsony has any relevance either (though I'm happy to be wrong on either count, the whole point was asking for clarification).
I think that the breakthrough will come in baby steps rather than giant steps.
It could start something like this:
A disciplined mind usually has some sort of plan for the day ahead -- a todo list, if only mentally ... the executives hot five list of things to get done
When planning for tomorrow, you could voice dictate into this into an Apple Watch or iPhone where it would be converted into text, merged with schedule and contacts ... (all doable with today's tech)
Then, as the day progresses, the Apple Watch could remind/alert you by tapping your wrist and displaying your next todo item
You respond * by selecting a response indicating 1) done, 2) in process, 3) reschedule, 4) Cancel ...
The watch iPhone takes the appropriate action and taps to let you know it's done
* the response could be verbal, tapping the watch or a simple hand or eye movement,
The astute individual will leave holes in his schedule for unanticipated occurrences.
So what? This what! With a little planning and some intelligent tech -- you can plan and attack the most important anticipated items of your day.
The tech can be savvy enough to include interfacing other individuals, anticipating their responses, and determine what your response might be if the other says: 1) OK, 2) I can't make it, 3) IDK, 4) Unreachable ...
Basically, what I am suggesting is that you can offload a lot of the chaos of life by allowing tech to help you pre-think your day ... one day at a time.
I suspect that after a few months, your motor skills would allow you to handle most daily events without re-thinking. -- maybe in the blink of an eye or just lifting a finger
Hopefully, we've uncluttered the playing field and gained enough knowledge to take the next baby step.
Still don't remember that.
But I imagine your baby steps are the logical way to go in the beginning.
After all, typing is a learned motor skill that actually rewires your brain, just as learning a musical instrument, or sports does. That is, an actual physical rewiring, and nerve cell growth. It's why a lot of people, particularly the better typists, have problems adjusting to virtual keyboards. Their brain has, over time, wired itself for those particular motor skills. Then going to a virtual keyboard required somewhat different motor skills. So the brain needs to partly unwire itself, and form new connections. People forget that it took weeks to just become barely competent on a regular keyboard, and months to become good at it, then years to become expert. But they expect to do that in a day, or in a week, going from physical to virtual keyboards.
Ironically, people who are not good typists, move from one to the other more easily because they've never formed that complex rewiring in the first place.
I know that seems to be an odd aside, but it's important. It's difficult for many people to learn something new. The older we are, the more reinforced our skills become because of ever increasing wiring to do those very specific tasks. It also becomes more difficult as we get older to rewire what already formed. I do t want to get into the details for that.
But learning how to use this watch will come easy for some, and not for others. It will require different finger and hand movements, which means that wiring problem. Coordination will take some time. I still see some people who can't pinch or spread their fingers properly on a touchscreen. Interface work is hard!
However it's done, I hope Apple understands that on such small devices, people are going to have problems with landing sites. Right now, Touch works well because the software looks at the points touched and interpolates the supposed center point, and activates that. Usually it works really well, but not always. I'm amazed that I can hit a link in Safari that just 1/32" high by 1/8" wide, and get it most of the time. Thats really amazing! But I'm used to working with tiny object, others may not be as successful.
I imagine that Apple does understand this, but the software needs to be even more selective.
I'm not interested in buying the watch the first year, unless I was looking for a collectors item. But maybe next year.
A mind interface would require a major breakthrough, but you could get pretty close just with highly sensitive external sensors. For example a neckband that can detect when you are subvocalizing, or a camera that can pick up the tiniest eye movements. So you can be sitting there hardly moving and yet in full control of a computer (yes, "hardly moving" is not the same as "only thinking" but it's pretty close). At All Things D Tim Cook was asked what the next big thing might be and he mentioned sensors.
I've never understood this subvocalizing thing. Except for in the movies, and on Tv, I really don't see people doing that. I don't know if it's even a real thing. How does one do that? I've tried, and it never seems to work. I don't mean actually using it with something, I mean just trying to do it. Maybe for a few words meant to invoke something. But actual speech? I doubt it. We need our tongue and mouth for that. Then it's no longer subvocalizing, it's whispering.
Well, that sensor sounds like Glass. It would need to ve very sensitive to pick up tiny movements from two feet away, though I suppose, in good light, it's possible.
Im pretty sure that Cook meant sensors on the watch designed to be used for health monitoring.
As far as the mind thing goes, yes, as I said before, it's ten to twenty years away. But it's already being done. Monkeys have moved artificial arms that way. Injured veterans can get arms and basic hands that do simple things with thought. There are feedback devices you can buy that work from your concentration, etc. there have even been video games that could be played that way.
It's a bit far off, but progress is being made. My concept doesn't use the hands, or head, or eye movements at all.
A mind interface would require a major breakthrough, but you could get pretty close just with highly sensitive external sensors. For example a neckband that can detect when you are subvocalizing, or a camera that can pick up the tiniest eye movements. So you can be sitting there hardly moving and yet in full control of a computer (yes, "hardly moving" is not the same as "only thinking" but it's pretty close). At All Things D Tim Cook was asked what the next big thing might be and he mentioned sensors.
Hmm ...
Isn't it interesting that you and I, both, seemed to have roughly equated a thinking interface to a hardly-moving interface ... I don't know whether this is a step in the right direction or a distraction.
I (and I think you did too) used the Apple Watch (possibly, with some additional sensors *) as a manifestation of a hardly-moving interface.
Apple and others are looking to this very same Apple Watch (possibly, with some additional sensors *) to provide workout-class activity monitoring and healthcare/wellness monitoring ...
* assuming that these sensors need not be directly attached to the Apple Watch -- rather accessible via BLE or WiFi via the attendant, nearby iPhone
Doesn't it strike you as an odd juxtaposition of use cases?
I think that the breakthrough will come in baby steps rather than giant steps.
It could start something like this:
A disciplined mind usually has some sort of plan for the day ahead -- a todo list, if only mentally ... the executives hot five list of things to get done
When planning for tomorrow, you could voice dictate into this into an Apple Watch or iPhone where it would be converted into text, merged with schedule and contacts ... (all doable with today's tech)
Then, as the day progresses, the Apple Watch could remind/alert you by tapping your wrist and displaying your next todo item
You respond * by selecting a response indicating 1) done, 2) in process, 3) reschedule, 4) Cancel ...
The watch iPhone takes the appropriate action and taps to let you know it's done
* the response could be verbal, tapping the watch or a simple hand or eye movement,
The astute individual will leave holes in his schedule for unanticipated occurrences.
So what? This what! With a little planning and some intelligent tech -- you can plan and attack the most important anticipated items of your day.
The tech can be savvy enough to include interfacing other individuals, anticipating their responses, and determine what your response might be if the other says: 1) OK, 2) I can't make it, 3) IDK, 4) Unreachable ...
Basically, what I am suggesting is that you can offload a lot of the chaos of life by allowing tech to help you pre-think your day ... one day at a time.
I suspect that after a few months, your motor skills would allow you to handle most daily events without re-thinking. -- maybe in the blink of an eye or just lifting a finger
Hopefully, we've uncluttered the playing field and gained enough knowledge to take the next baby step.
Still don't remember that.
But I imagine your baby steps are the logical way to go in the beginning.
After all, typing is a learned motor skill that actually rewires your brain, just as learning a musical instrument, or sports does. That is, an actual physical rewiring, and nerve cell growth. It's why a lot of people, particularly the better typists, have problems adjusting to virtual keyboards. Their brain has, over time, wired itself for those particular motor skills. Then going to a virtual keyboard required somewhat different motor skills. So the brain needs to partly unwire itself, and form new connections. People forget that it took weeks to just become barely competent on a regular keyboard, and months to become good at it, then years to become expert. But they expect to do that in a day, or in a week, going from physical to virtual keyboards.
Ironically, people who are not good typists, move from one to the other more easily because they've never formed that complex rewiring in the first place.
I know that seems to be an odd aside, but it's important. It's difficult for many people to learn something new. The older we are, the more reinforced our skills become because of ever increasing wiring to do those very specific tasks. It also becomes more difficult as we get older to rewire what already formed. I do t want to get into the details for that.
Typing strikes a chord with me ... One summer, bored, I took a typing class -- no credit, just for something to do ... I was getting the basics down pretty good ... But, something better came along (I forget what), and I dropped the class. We had a typewriter at home, but I had no need to use one (all homework was handwritten). So, I never learned to type properly -- no motor skills to unlearn. The iPad kb is easy to use for me -- though these 75-year-old eyes need a larger screen.
But learning how to use this watch will come easy for some, and not for others. It will require different finger and hand movements, which means that wiring problem. Coordination will take some time. I still see some people who can't pinch or spread their fingers properly on a touchscreen. Interface work is hard!
However it's done, I hope Apple understands that on such small devices, people are going to have problems with landing sites. Right now, Touch works well because the software looks at the points touched and interpolates the supposed center point, and activates that. Usually it works really well, but not always. I'm amazed that I can hit a link in Safari that just 1/32" high by 1/8" wide, and get it most of the time. Thats really amazing! But I'm used to working with tiny object, others may not be as successful.
I imagine that Apple does understand this, but the software needs to be even more selective.
Yes!. You aren't going to be scrolling through long lists or doing complex drill-downs. The challenge is present you with a few options with an implied immediate context -- like in the Watch demo where they asked if he was going to the party and gave him 3-4 answers from which to choose.(tap select).
I posted earlier of being on the same wavelength and being able to to communicate with partial thoughts and half sentences ... the Apple Watch may [force] enable this form of succinct, focused interface ... Just like the good salesman: "Do you want the Red car or The Blue car?" "Do you want to finance for 2 years or 3 years?".
I'm not interested in buying the watch the first year, unless I was looking for a collectors item. But maybe next year.
I will buy the Apple watch to experiment as a developer ... I have a particular application in mind that I have already written -- but I just can't tell if it's practical on the simulator.
Also, for a while, I've maintained that done properly, a watch could perform the job of a phone. The fact that the Apple Watch requires an iPhone in your pocket (purse or pack) potentially makes that even more practical.
Consider:
a watch with a speaker and microphone
worn on the wrist of the hand with which you usually hold the phone for phone calls
the watch is on the inside of the wrist
To make or answer a phone call:
you simply raise your hand and cup it to your ear as if it were holding a phone -- but your hand is empty.
the sensors in the watch disable the screen and enable the microphone and speaker.
the watch is naturally positioned near to your mouth and ear to function as a phone
It might look a little weird but it would work. I remember earlier incarnations of telephones that looked a lot weirder ... Besides, I've paid my dues and don't care how I look
I've never understood this subvocalizing thing. Except for in the movies, and on Tv, I really don't see people doing that. I don't know if it's even a real thing. How does one do that? I've tried, and it never seems to work. I don't mean actually using it with something, I mean just trying to do it. Maybe for a few words meant to invoke something. But actual speech? I doubt it. We need our tongue and mouth for that. Then it's no longer subvocalizing, it's whispering.
Well, that sensor sounds like Glass. It would need to ve very sensitive to pick up tiny movements from two feet away, though I suppose, in good light, it's possible.
Im pretty sure that Cook meant sensors on the watch designed to be used for health monitoring.
As far as the mind thing goes, yes, as I said before, it's ten to twenty years away. But it's already being done. Monkeys have moved artificial arms that way. Injured veterans can get arms and basic hands that do simple things with thought. There are feedback devices you can buy that work from your concentration, etc. there have even been video games that could be played that way.
It's a bit far off, but progress is being made. My concept doesn't use the hands, or head, or eye movements at all.
Subvocalising is just the words you hear in your head when you read to yourself. The thing is, I believe your body involuntarily sends nerve signals to the muscles in your throat while you are doing this, so it's not something you have to learn.
I agree your concept is the ideal, I was just trying to think of a way we could get 99% of the way there with tech that is maybe 3-5 years away instead of 10-20. But as Dick Applebaum raised, I am also not sure if it's a distraction or not.
Isn't it interesting that you and I, both, seemed to have roughly equated a thinking interface to a hardly-moving interface ... I don't know whether this is a step in the right direction or a distraction.
I (and I think you did too) used the Apple Watch (possibly, with some additional sensors *) as a manifestation of a hardly-moving interface.
It certainly seems like the beginning of one. I think you would have to start by making a list of all the actions of the body that are under voluntary control (e.g. breathing). Pulse rate for example is not under voluntary control (not directly anyway). And then try and mash all these together in to a new kind of interface. Flick your eye for this, tighten your arm muscle for that...
People who complain about the small touch screen, or the crown interface, are not thinking about all the new ways you can interact with things that are very close to you.
A mind interface would require a major breakthrough, but you could get pretty close just with highly sensitive external sensors. For example a neckband that can detect when you are subvocalizing, or a camera that can pick up the tiniest eye movements. So you can be sitting there hardly moving and yet in full control of a computer (yes, "hardly moving" is not the same as "only thinking" but it's pretty close). At All Things D Tim Cook was asked what the next big thing might be and he mentioned sensors.
I've never understood this subvocalizing thing. Except for in the movies, and on Tv, I really don't see people doing that. I don't know if it's even a real thing. How does one do that? I've tried, and it never seems to work. I don't mean actually using it with something, I mean just trying to do it. Maybe for a few words meant to invoke something. But actual speech? I doubt it. We need our tongue and mouth for that. Then it's no longer subvocalizing, it's whispering.
Well, that sensor sounds like Glass. It would need to ve very sensitive to pick up tiny movements from two feet away, though I suppose, in good light, it's possible.
Im pretty sure that Cook meant sensors on the watch designed to be used for health monitoring.
As far as the mind thing goes, yes, as I said before, it's ten to twenty years away. But it's already being done. Monkeys have moved artificial arms that way. Injured veterans can get arms and basic hands that do simple things with thought. There are feedback devices you can buy that work from your concentration, etc. there have even been video games that could be played that way.
It's a bit far off, but progress is being made. My concept doesn't use the hands, or head, or eye movements at all.
IDK about sensors on the watch -- with BLE and WiFi it would be more practical to interface the sensors to the attendant iPhone.
The mind thing has real potential -- especially when combined with our other senses. I don't know how, but I understand that amputees can feel pain in missing limbs ... Sight/smell triggers appetite ... The sight/thought of a pretty woman ... Watching a football game on the tube, I find myself lurching with the running back as he goes through the line ... WiFiSlam can determine where you are by analyzing dissonant radio waves and recognizing fingerprints -- couldn't the meaning of your individual brainwaves be analyzed and recognized in a similar manner? And, it doesn't need to be 100% accurate -- it can present 3-4 best estimates and let you choose!
Ooops ... there's the bell. Gotta' go, it's feeding time
Typing strikes a chord with me ... One summer, bored, I took a typing class -- no credit, just for something to do ... I was getting the basics down pretty good ... But, something better came along (I forget what), and I dropped the class. We had a typewriter at home, but I had no need to use one (all homework was handwritten). So, I never learned to type properly -- no motor skills to unlearn. The iPad kb is easy to use for me -- though these 75-year-old eyes need a larger screen.
Yes!. You aren't going to be scrolling through long lists or doing complex drill-downs. The challenge is present you with a few options with an implied immediate context -- like in the Watch demo where they asked if he was going to the party and gave him 3-4 answers from which to choose.(tap select).
I posted earlier of being on the same wavelength and being able to to communicate with partial thoughts and half sentences ... the Apple Watch may [force] enable this form of succinct, focused interface ... Just like the good salesman: "Do you want the Red car or The Blue car?" "Do you want to finance for 2 years or 3 years?".
I will buy the Apple watch to experiment as a developer ... I have a particular application in mind that I have already written -- but I just can't tell if it's practical on the simulator.
Also, for a while, I've maintained that done properly, a watch could perform the job of a phone. The fact that the Apple Watch requires an iPhone in your pocket (purse or pack) potentially makes that even more practical.
Consider:
a watch with a speaker and microphone
worn on the wrist of the hand with which you usually hold the phone for phone calls
the watch is on the inside of the wrist
To make or answer a phone call:
you simply raise your hand and cup it to your ear as if it were holding a phone -- but your hand is empty.
the sensors in the watch disable the screen and enable the microphone and speaker.
the watch is naturally positioned near to your mouth and ear to function as a phone
It might look a little weird but it would work. I remember earlier incarnations of telephones that looked a lot weirder ... Besides, I've paid my dues and don't care how I look
As someone who has always built things, and who has woodworking, plastics, electronics and metal working and machine shops, I can say that having something on the bottom of the wrist is courting disaster. While it may work for some people, when you put your wrist down, which side ends up hitting the surface? If my watch was on the bottom, I would have destroyed it long ago. The bottom of my wrist is always banging up against something that's solid metal.
I get the ease you're speaking about. It's a natural position. But the practicality of it worries me. Put your wrist down on a table. How would it feel with a half inch bulge on the bottom that you also know must be handled carefully?
Maybe, somehow, the speaker and mic could be there, if they're thin.
IDK about sensors on the watch -- with BLE and WiFi it would be more practical to interface the sensors to the attendant iPhone.
The mind thing has real potential -- especially when combined with our other senses. I don't know how, but I understand that amputees can feel pain in missing limbs ... Sight/smell triggers appetite ... The sight/thought of a pretty woman ... Watching a football game on the tube, I find myself lurching with the running back as he goes through the line ... WiFiSlam can determine where you are by analyzing dissonant radio waves and recognizing fingerprints -- couldn't the meaning of your individual brainwaves be analyzed and recognized in a similar manner? And, it doesn't need to be 100% accurate -- it can present 3-4 best estimates and let you choose!
Ooops ... there's the bell. Gotta' go, it's feeding time
Feeding time? are you living in a zoo?
Ok, I've mentioned this once or twice over the years. Over twenty years ago I had a thought about this which I wrote about, and have discussed a bit over the intervening years.
Humans are very adaptable. We can take people out of the jungle, and mostly, they can adapt to modern life. That's one heck of a lurch. But sometimes we have philosophies, mostly theological in nature, that don't want new ideas as they see them as a threat, and that's usually right.
But even aside from that, people can have incorrect ideas about new things. For example, in the early 19th century, people were afraid of these new railroad things. They were convinced that traveling over 32 miles an hour would create a vacuum that would suffocate them. Seems irrational now, but there were some "scientific" reasons why they thought that.
Move forwards, and we see people with irrational ideas about vaccines, and other beneficial technologies. So now we see talk about cloning. There is a great fear among some parts of the populous about cloning, but even more about human cloning. Human cloning will be extremely hard, because cloning primates has been shown to be very difficult. It hasn't been done yet, because there are things about primates that make it almost impossible. But someday, it will happen.
Ok, I understand why it might frighten people, and get the theological battle lines drawn up. But if not done here, it will be done in the rest of the world with a different outlook.
So now I have my idea, which also frightens some people, particularly these days with the big brother thing going on. But I'm also beginning to read others writing about it, so maybe it might have a chance.
Sometime late this century, or early next century, assuming that global warming doesn't begin to destroy civilization, computer technology will have advanced to levels we can't really imagine. SiFi novels only touch upon this. There has been work on organic molecules for computing and memory going on for almost thirty years. Some breakthroughs have happened, but it's still a long way off.
So, back to my idea, which even a few scientists are now beginning to think is possible. I've been saying that at some point in the future, when an embryo becomes vital, an organic/electronic computer bud will be emplanted within that embryo. That bud will contain something akin to DNA, and will grow with the embryo, and in later stages, the fetus.
This computer will infiltrate every nerve, in fact, most every structure within our bodies, including parts of the brain. It will be so integrated, that it will seem like a natural part of us.
It will have numerous functions. It will keep track of our health, intervening when required to fix problems. It will be able to rally the immune system, recognize real viruses, and eliminate them. Keep our body toned. Essentially, it will do whatever it needs to to keep us healthy, and perhaps to extend our lives.
But in addition, we will have access to the computing power, which will be vast, by today's standards, and a vast memory. Just think of a math problem, and the solution will be there. Or anything, actually. It will have immediate access to all networks and information. We will even have what we could think of as telepathy. No reason why a low power radio couldn't be part of the package. Think of anyone fairly near you, and you could contact them. For longer range access, use the networks.
Yeah, I know this is far out, and some people will always find reasons why it couldn't, or shouldn't be so, but I'm pretty sure that at some point in time, it will happen. If there is one thing we know about humans, it's that if they can do something, they will do it.
Comments
I can't see a watch, no matter how advanced, ever replacing a smartphone without some major breakout technology, which we simply don't have now. If it's a major breakthrough, it's unpredictable, and until it happens, no one will expect it. What Apple is genius at doing is taking technologies that exist, and using them where other companies are afraid to. Or taking them and obsoleting what they currently use. Or taking them and combining them to do what no one else has thought to do. They even invent some of their own.
But if there's a breakout technology they, or others, are working on that will change everything, again, we don't know of it.
The problem is that breakthroughs aren't predictable. Usually, someone gets an idea, because they understand something that others don't, and are capable of making a leapfrogging thought. There are few of those people, and it doesn't happen in committee. It gets refined to usability in committee, but that's later. We can look to the invention of the transistor, it was invented twice at Bell Labs, by two different groups, of a couple, or three, in each group. One was slightly first, and worked better. The other, which worked very poorly, had much better possibilities for production, and so that was where it went. That was the group headed by Schokley. The other is lost to the popular histories, even though it was first, and performed better.
I imagine that in the future, we will interact differently than we do now, and so smartphones may no longer be needed, or wanted. Same thing for tablets, possibly, and desktops. It really depends on wireless, and, to (a term which I really dislike) the cloud. If that ever works the way we're being promised it will, with the wireless speeds we're being made to expect (eventually 1Gb/sec), and sufficent processing out "there", then devices with power, storage, and even possibly screens and keyboards, may become obsolete. But we'll need a new way to interface.
With the research going on that shows that we can accomplish tasks by just thinking about doing them, with the right interface, we might find, eventually, that that's the way we will interact with our stuff. Want to talk to someone! Just think "Hey, John, let's discuss ...", and it happens. Or, "How do I get to...", and you just..know. I can really see this happening at some point, but it might be ten, twenty years out.
I agree that the watch, as we know it, will not replace the smart phone, as we know it.
Your musings, however, struck several interesting chords ...
Breakthroughs: I've had the good fortune to participate in several breakthroughs in my life. As I think back about them, they have some similarities. It usually involved a few (3-5) like-minded individuals who shared common interests, but were frustrated by the status quo ...
At some impromptu gathering (lunch, a gathering in the hall at work), it would usually start as a bitch session ... But then, someone would say: "What we really ought to do is: ...
Bam! that lit the fuse and each participant would add his thoughts (about what we could/should do) to fuel the fire ... Maybe a 5 to 10-minute frenzy where each would build on top of the others' contributions ... At the end, sated (almost like sweet release) we looked around and the path ahead was just so obvious ...
Sometimes the path ahead just appeared. Working for IBM in Silicon Valley, in the 1973-1980 era I was exposed the new toy computers, micro computers ... Everything from PET, Altair, Smoke Signal Broadcasting, Ohio Scientific, Grid, Apple I, Trash-80, Northstar nee Kentucky Fried Computer, Cromemco ...
Then I saw an Apple ][ and had it demoed and 'splained to me by an expert (Woz's younger brother). This attractive, inexpensive little package shared similar compute specs and capabilities with the IBM/360 maimframes I taught/used at work. The I/O capabilities were inferior -- but the Computer specs were remarkably similar ... the path ahead was just so obvious ...
A Different way to Interface: Again, I've been fortunate in my business and personal life, to have been around people who were on the same wavelength, for lack of a better word. In 1958-1960 I worked as a punched card tab operator for a large company, Three of us worked the night shift (at $1.75 per hour + 10 cents night shift differential) -- Bob, Ray (Really, Bob and Ray) and myself. The amazing thing was that after working together for a week or so we began to think alike and could communicate in some mix of partial thoughts and spoken half-sentences ... An exchange might be:
Bob: "[Dick] have you sorted the ... "
Me: "Yea, I finished it earlier ..."
Ray: "... I'm merging that now with the ..."
Then, one or the other of us would pick up for the others' activities in the middle of a series of dependent, intricate processes (sorting, merging, calculating, tabulating, etc.) without any of us giving it a second thought. We were able to get tons of work done quickly, accurately and efficiently ... We usually finished our assigned work with hours left in the shift -- then we'd do some of the next day's work ...
It was an amazing experience -- we were communicating on the same wavelength!
The only similar wavelength experience I've had was with my wife of 35 1/2 years -- something like I'm watching TV, and Lucy's across the room reading or needlepointing. I turn my head to blow her a kiss -- at the very same moment that she raises her head and blows me a kiss ...
In the demo of the Apple Watch, what impressed me most was the new communication/interface methods: the pulse/heartbeat exchange, the taptic "ready for lunch" exchange, the ephemeral drawing exchanges and the "Here's my question, select an answer" dialog.
I think that they're on to something!
Apple's mobile chips are selling (iPod/iPad/iPhone/Apple TV)
Intel's mobile chips are not. Causing Intel to lose tons of money because of that.
Don't act like if Intel made Apple's mobile chips their profits would be the same.
Jeez, I really thought you were kidding about Sony. The last syllable is sony not Sony. A monopsonist practices monopsony. From mono- ‘one’ + Greek ops?nein ‘buy provisions’. Hence my obviously 'woosh overhead' joke about not learning Greek in school. 8-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony
Did you not see the post we were referring to? The OP wrote 'monop-Sony'. He separated sony and capitalized the first letter to imply a name.
Very interesting. The only computer you mentioned that I haven't used, or even knew about was the Smoke Signal Broadcasting. I used to love the Northstar demos at the computer shows with the wireframe figures revolving about. My girlfriend at the time, since then, my wife, used to really like those.
I think we've taken the standard UIs about as far as they can go. There are continued refinements, but they're all just that, refinements. To make the next leap, we've got to go well beyond them. Voice is out. I never understood why it was thought that would work. I suppose when it was first brought forth, there were no mobile devices, and it was still thought that computers would be fixed things in the home, or at work.
We can't talk everywhere, but we can think everywhere. I'm convinced that that will be the breakthrough that is needed.
Then that post I didn't see was a joke of some sorts. What was funny I know not. As you say Sony was not mentioned nor should it have been. My guess ... the poster didn't know Greek..
Here ya' go:
I totally agree!
I think that the breakthrough will come in baby steps rather than giant steps.
It could start something like this:
A disciplined mind usually has some sort of plan for the day ahead -- a todo list, if only mentally ... the executives hot five list of things to get done
* the response could be verbal, tapping the watch or a simple hand or eye movement,
The astute individual will leave holes in his schedule for unanticipated occurrences.
So what? This what! With a little planning and some intelligent tech -- you can plan and attack the most important anticipated items of your day.
The tech can be savvy enough to include interfacing other individuals, anticipating their responses, and determine what your response might be if the other says: 1) OK, 2) I can't make it, 3) IDK, 4) Unreachable ...
Basically, what I am suggesting is that you can offload a lot of the chaos of life by allowing tech to help you pre-think your day ... one day at a time.
I suspect that after a few months, your motor skills would allow you to handle most daily events without re-thinking. -- maybe in the blink of an eye or just lifting a finger
Hopefully, we've uncluttered the playing field and gained enough knowledge to take the next baby step.
A mind interface would require a major breakthrough, but you could get pretty close just with highly sensitive external sensors. For example a neckband that can detect when you are subvocalizing, or a camera that can pick up the tiniest eye movements. So you can be sitting there hardly moving and yet in full control of a computer (yes, "hardly moving" is not the same as "only thinking" but it's pretty close). At All Things D Tim Cook was asked what the next big thing might be and he mentioned sensors.
Why would the OP make a monop-Sony joke if they didnt understand Greek (or hadn't taken a basic business economics course)? If that was the case then they surely wouldn't be aware of the word?
You talk about whooshing over someone's head but I think you've entirely missed the point of why I was questioning the initial post. It doesn't make sense to me, but not because I think the OP doesn't understand Greek (actually Ancient Greek), because Sony has no obvious relevance to the thread, and I'm not all that sure that any monopsony has any relevance either (though I'm happy to be wrong on either count, the whole point was asking for clarification).
Cripes.
Still don't remember that.
But I imagine your baby steps are the logical way to go in the beginning.
After all, typing is a learned motor skill that actually rewires your brain, just as learning a musical instrument, or sports does. That is, an actual physical rewiring, and nerve cell growth. It's why a lot of people, particularly the better typists, have problems adjusting to virtual keyboards. Their brain has, over time, wired itself for those particular motor skills. Then going to a virtual keyboard required somewhat different motor skills. So the brain needs to partly unwire itself, and form new connections. People forget that it took weeks to just become barely competent on a regular keyboard, and months to become good at it, then years to become expert. But they expect to do that in a day, or in a week, going from physical to virtual keyboards.
Ironically, people who are not good typists, move from one to the other more easily because they've never formed that complex rewiring in the first place.
I know that seems to be an odd aside, but it's important. It's difficult for many people to learn something new. The older we are, the more reinforced our skills become because of ever increasing wiring to do those very specific tasks. It also becomes more difficult as we get older to rewire what already formed. I do t want to get into the details for that.
But learning how to use this watch will come easy for some, and not for others. It will require different finger and hand movements, which means that wiring problem. Coordination will take some time. I still see some people who can't pinch or spread their fingers properly on a touchscreen. Interface work is hard!
However it's done, I hope Apple understands that on such small devices, people are going to have problems with landing sites. Right now, Touch works well because the software looks at the points touched and interpolates the supposed center point, and activates that. Usually it works really well, but not always. I'm amazed that I can hit a link in Safari that just 1/32" high by 1/8" wide, and get it most of the time. Thats really amazing! But I'm used to working with tiny object, others may not be as successful.
I imagine that Apple does understand this, but the software needs to be even more selective.
I'm not interested in buying the watch the first year, unless I was looking for a collectors item. But maybe next year.
I've never understood this subvocalizing thing. Except for in the movies, and on Tv, I really don't see people doing that. I don't know if it's even a real thing. How does one do that? I've tried, and it never seems to work. I don't mean actually using it with something, I mean just trying to do it. Maybe for a few words meant to invoke something. But actual speech? I doubt it. We need our tongue and mouth for that. Then it's no longer subvocalizing, it's whispering.
Well, that sensor sounds like Glass. It would need to ve very sensitive to pick up tiny movements from two feet away, though I suppose, in good light, it's possible.
Im pretty sure that Cook meant sensors on the watch designed to be used for health monitoring.
As far as the mind thing goes, yes, as I said before, it's ten to twenty years away. But it's already being done. Monkeys have moved artificial arms that way. Injured veterans can get arms and basic hands that do simple things with thought. There are feedback devices you can buy that work from your concentration, etc. there have even been video games that could be played that way.
It's a bit far off, but progress is being made. My concept doesn't use the hands, or head, or eye movements at all.
Hmm ...
Isn't it interesting that you and I, both, seemed to have roughly equated a thinking interface to a hardly-moving interface ... I don't know whether this is a step in the right direction or a distraction.
I (and I think you did too) used the Apple Watch (possibly, with some additional sensors *) as a manifestation of a hardly-moving interface.
Apple and others are looking to this very same Apple Watch (possibly, with some additional sensors *) to provide workout-class activity monitoring and healthcare/wellness monitoring ...
* assuming that these sensors need not be directly attached to the Apple Watch -- rather accessible via BLE or WiFi via the attendant, nearby iPhone
Doesn't it strike you as an odd juxtaposition of use cases?
Running, sweating, breathing ... thinking ...
Pulse rate, breath rate, pulse rate ... brain wave activity ... thinking ,,,
Typing strikes a chord with me ... One summer, bored, I took a typing class -- no credit, just for something to do ... I was getting the basics down pretty good ... But, something better came along (I forget what), and I dropped the class. We had a typewriter at home, but I had no need to use one (all homework was handwritten). So, I never learned to type properly -- no motor skills to unlearn. The iPad kb is easy to use for me -- though these 75-year-old eyes need a larger screen.
Yes!. You aren't going to be scrolling through long lists or doing complex drill-downs. The challenge is present you with a few options with an implied immediate context -- like in the Watch demo where they asked if he was going to the party and gave him 3-4 answers from which to choose.(tap select).
I posted earlier of being on the same wavelength and being able to to communicate with partial thoughts and half sentences ... the Apple Watch may [force] enable this form of succinct, focused interface ... Just like the good salesman: "Do you want the Red car or The Blue car?" "Do you want to finance for 2 years or 3 years?".
I will buy the Apple watch to experiment as a developer ... I have a particular application in mind that I have already written -- but I just can't tell if it's practical on the simulator.
Also, for a while, I've maintained that done properly, a watch could perform the job of a phone. The fact that the Apple Watch requires an iPhone in your pocket (purse or pack) potentially makes that even more practical.
Consider:
To make or answer a phone call:
It might look a little weird but it would work. I remember earlier incarnations of telephones that looked a lot weirder ... Besides, I've paid my dues and don't care how I look
I've never understood this subvocalizing thing. Except for in the movies, and on Tv, I really don't see people doing that. I don't know if it's even a real thing. How does one do that? I've tried, and it never seems to work. I don't mean actually using it with something, I mean just trying to do it. Maybe for a few words meant to invoke something. But actual speech? I doubt it. We need our tongue and mouth for that. Then it's no longer subvocalizing, it's whispering.
Well, that sensor sounds like Glass. It would need to ve very sensitive to pick up tiny movements from two feet away, though I suppose, in good light, it's possible.
Im pretty sure that Cook meant sensors on the watch designed to be used for health monitoring.
As far as the mind thing goes, yes, as I said before, it's ten to twenty years away. But it's already being done. Monkeys have moved artificial arms that way. Injured veterans can get arms and basic hands that do simple things with thought. There are feedback devices you can buy that work from your concentration, etc. there have even been video games that could be played that way.
It's a bit far off, but progress is being made. My concept doesn't use the hands, or head, or eye movements at all.
Subvocalising is just the words you hear in your head when you read to yourself. The thing is, I believe your body involuntarily sends nerve signals to the muscles in your throat while you are doing this, so it's not something you have to learn.
I agree your concept is the ideal, I was just trying to think of a way we could get 99% of the way there with tech that is maybe 3-5 years away instead of 10-20. But as Dick Applebaum raised, I am also not sure if it's a distraction or not.
Hmm ...
Isn't it interesting that you and I, both, seemed to have roughly equated a thinking interface to a hardly-moving interface ... I don't know whether this is a step in the right direction or a distraction.
I (and I think you did too) used the Apple Watch (possibly, with some additional sensors *) as a manifestation of a hardly-moving interface.
It certainly seems like the beginning of one. I think you would have to start by making a list of all the actions of the body that are under voluntary control (e.g. breathing). Pulse rate for example is not under voluntary control (not directly anyway). And then try and mash all these together in to a new kind of interface. Flick your eye for this, tighten your arm muscle for that...
People who complain about the small touch screen, or the crown interface, are not thinking about all the new ways you can interact with things that are very close to you.
IDK about sensors on the watch -- with BLE and WiFi it would be more practical to interface the sensors to the attendant iPhone.
The mind thing has real potential -- especially when combined with our other senses. I don't know how, but I understand that amputees can feel pain in missing limbs ... Sight/smell triggers appetite ... The sight/thought of a pretty woman ... Watching a football game on the tube, I find myself lurching with the running back as he goes through the line ... WiFiSlam can determine where you are by analyzing dissonant radio waves and recognizing fingerprints -- couldn't the meaning of your individual brainwaves be analyzed and recognized in a similar manner? And, it doesn't need to be 100% accurate -- it can present 3-4 best estimates and let you choose!
Ooops ... there's the bell. Gotta' go, it's feeding time
As someone who has always built things, and who has woodworking, plastics, electronics and metal working and machine shops, I can say that having something on the bottom of the wrist is courting disaster. While it may work for some people, when you put your wrist down, which side ends up hitting the surface? If my watch was on the bottom, I would have destroyed it long ago. The bottom of my wrist is always banging up against something that's solid metal.
I get the ease you're speaking about. It's a natural position. But the practicality of it worries me. Put your wrist down on a table. How would it feel with a half inch bulge on the bottom that you also know must be handled carefully?
Maybe, somehow, the speaker and mic could be there, if they're thin.
Feeding time? are you living in a zoo?
Ok, I've mentioned this once or twice over the years. Over twenty years ago I had a thought about this which I wrote about, and have discussed a bit over the intervening years.
Humans are very adaptable. We can take people out of the jungle, and mostly, they can adapt to modern life. That's one heck of a lurch. But sometimes we have philosophies, mostly theological in nature, that don't want new ideas as they see them as a threat, and that's usually right.
But even aside from that, people can have incorrect ideas about new things. For example, in the early 19th century, people were afraid of these new railroad things. They were convinced that traveling over 32 miles an hour would create a vacuum that would suffocate them. Seems irrational now, but there were some "scientific" reasons why they thought that.
Move forwards, and we see people with irrational ideas about vaccines, and other beneficial technologies. So now we see talk about cloning. There is a great fear among some parts of the populous about cloning, but even more about human cloning. Human cloning will be extremely hard, because cloning primates has been shown to be very difficult. It hasn't been done yet, because there are things about primates that make it almost impossible. But someday, it will happen.
Ok, I understand why it might frighten people, and get the theological battle lines drawn up. But if not done here, it will be done in the rest of the world with a different outlook.
So now I have my idea, which also frightens some people, particularly these days with the big brother thing going on. But I'm also beginning to read others writing about it, so maybe it might have a chance.
Sometime late this century, or early next century, assuming that global warming doesn't begin to destroy civilization, computer technology will have advanced to levels we can't really imagine. SiFi novels only touch upon this. There has been work on organic molecules for computing and memory going on for almost thirty years. Some breakthroughs have happened, but it's still a long way off.
So, back to my idea, which even a few scientists are now beginning to think is possible. I've been saying that at some point in the future, when an embryo becomes vital, an organic/electronic computer bud will be emplanted within that embryo. That bud will contain something akin to DNA, and will grow with the embryo, and in later stages, the fetus.
This computer will infiltrate every nerve, in fact, most every structure within our bodies, including parts of the brain. It will be so integrated, that it will seem like a natural part of us.
It will have numerous functions. It will keep track of our health, intervening when required to fix problems. It will be able to rally the immune system, recognize real viruses, and eliminate them. Keep our body toned. Essentially, it will do whatever it needs to to keep us healthy, and perhaps to extend our lives.
But in addition, we will have access to the computing power, which will be vast, by today's standards, and a vast memory. Just think of a math problem, and the solution will be there. Or anything, actually. It will have immediate access to all networks and information. We will even have what we could think of as telepathy. No reason why a low power radio couldn't be part of the package. Think of anyone fairly near you, and you could contact them. For longer range access, use the networks.
Yeah, I know this is far out, and some people will always find reasons why it couldn't, or shouldn't be so, but I'm pretty sure that at some point in time, it will happen. If there is one thing we know about humans, it's that if they can do something, they will do it.