7 ms·

Mobile is Eating the World

311 points by tomazstolfa 12y ago

sstas 12y ago
Hmm, Good Information ...
jerf 12y ago
The western world right now is in a bit of a defeatist mood and pessimism reigns supreme. And while I can't deny that all things end and in some sense civilization is scheduled for some receding, I find myself wondering what impact this sort of technology will have on that process. Technology is speeding everything up so much and so fast... what if technology speeds up our next "dark age" from centuries to decades... or decade... or mere years? What if we're even already halfway through the decline? We know technology is a big game changer. Sometimes we overestimate that impact, but sometimes we underestimate it too. What will it do for everyone to have a smartphone? Heck if I know! But perhaps it's reason for at least a smidge of hope.
- sillysaurus3 12y ago
  Well, smartphones simply enable you to do things that you can't otherwise do. I don't think they'll have much of an effect on how long our next Dark Ages lasts. The dark ages were primarily due to culture, not ability. Smartphones enable culture to morph in interesting ways, but they don't override it. People will still be people.
  - diltonm 12y ago
    >> Well, smartphones simply enable you to do things that you can't otherwise do. No, that's not true at all. They are more compact and with the touch HID more frustrating but certainly far from better.
    - sillysaurus3 12y ago
      People take exponentially more photos and videos now that they have smartphones. That's the definition of "enable people to do something they can't otherwise do."
      - diltonm 12y ago
        The guy said, "smartphones simply enable you to do things that you can't otherwise do". People were taking pictures with their cameras long before smartphones and uploading them. I was using Microsoft StreetMaps (I think that was the name) and a $100 GPS serial device to map trips around the SFBA. People have used a compass to navigate for thousands of years. So yes, smartphones don't do things you can't do otherwise; they are just compact and more fun, if you can them in your pocket. If you can't then you might want to look at a small laptop or notebook, more bang for the buck.
        sillysaurus3 12y ago
        I don't know why this is controversial. You aren't going to carry a camera around with you everywhere you go, nor a GPS, nor a laptop. But you'll carry your smartphone. So you can do more things because you have your smartphone with you. Anyway, my main point was that culture was the reason for the dark ages, not ability to do things. And smartphones don't override culture.
        pixl97 12y ago
        >And smartphones don't override culture. What does override culture? Talking to the people around you? Newspapers? Books? Telephones? Peoples options? News? Culture: the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively. If you don't think that an instantaneous audio/graphical communications device cannot be used as a means to effect culture you are highly confused about what culture is.
        sillysaurus3 12y ago
        Another day, another snarky HN comment... As I said, smartphones morph culture in interesting ways. That's a direct product of having access to all of the things you mention. But people are still fundamentally people. If the world believes that war is necessary, smartphones aren't going to change that. And that belief was one of the main reasons for the dark ages.
  - KobaQ 12y ago
    But as people will still be people, ability to get what we want easily also drives culture. Deep inside we all are shockingly selfish and lazy little animals. We all take the easiest road, at least what for our selfish desires seems to be the easiest road. Sometimes, it's looks like a hard or unselfish road on the outside, but needed to fullfill our own selfish needs. Even buddisths are selfish, as they try to be free from selfish desires for the selfish reason of reduce pain in their live. There's always a melt down of higher cultures. People having all the tools to fullfill their basic needs loose the drive to achieve. That's why I generally see this "we make the world a better place with all our great services" direction quite sceptical. It was never easier to distract ourselves with mobile devices, but do we benefit? No, Apple, Google, FB, MS and Amazon do. BTW: One of my favorite movies is Idiocracy :-)
ddbb01 12y ago
Technology gets cheaper and easier to use - a consistent story over time. Interestin stats.
fidotron 12y ago
Is this actually true? My perception is that the smartphone bubble is bursting. Yes, there are lots more people to come online, but all they're going to do is use WhatsApp and Facebook. The big disappointment of mobile is that all this stuff doesn't seem to result in enabling people to do their jobs better or more easily. Web apps really exploded with things like Basecamp, but the most mobile has brought along for that seems to be mobile email. (Edit to add, the only exceptions I can think of to this are actually the SMS apps deployed in the places pegged to explode in smartphone usage). Having lots of people mindlessly addicted to notifications is not really that interesting.
- cageface 12y ago
  Completely agree with this. We've reached the same point we did with laptops a few years ago where making hardware more powerful doesn't improve the user experience much. Phones from different manufacturers are more or less interchangeable and there's not much incentive for an owner of last year's model to upgrade to this year's model. Both of the leading app stores are full of gimmicky junk and the leaderboards are increasingly stagnant. The prospect for indie mobile developers with new ideas is grim in 2014. Users are settling into patterns with a handful of established apps and it turns out there's just not that much you can do as a developer with nothing more than a 5" touch screen. So I'm a contrarian even though I've been building mobile apps for the last four years. The desktop seems like both a vastly more interesting but likely also more lucrative place to be for a developer.
- LA_Banker 12y ago
  > "all this stuff doesn't seem to result in enabling people to do their jobs better or more easily..." While I disagree with that notion, I also wonder why the focus on merely jobs. Smartphones and mobile devices have enabled people's lives to be much easier. Not more than 10 minutes ago I just determined the optimal route to a meeting, factoring in real-time traffic (measured by phones) and overlapping mass transit lines. If I'm late or my meeting partner isn't there ("there" being a location determined by ratings on Yelp's app, as the meeting was scheduled via my phone during another meeting), I have instant access to him and vice versa. Just the first example that comes to mind. There are, literally, dozens of expensive devices that have been replaced by free/inexpensive smartphone apps in the past few years, to say nothing of smartphones enabling us to do things we never even thought of a few years ago. In 2014, it is possible for the middle class to take timelapse aerial video from a drone and edit/upload/share it remotely via phone in a matter of minutes. I cannot imagine what will be possible in a mere two years, when apps have replaced even more expensive things and enabled us to do things heretofore unconsidered.
cageface 12y ago
There is no point in drawing a distinction between the future of technology and the future of mobile. I find Evans' analysis of mobile a bit hyperbolic. Yes the growth of mobile is explosive and, in some cases, it's displacing older technology. But for a lot of use cases small touch screen devices are simply inadequate. It's probably true that a lot of people that used to use desktop or laptop computers just to check email and Facebook have shifted that activity to their phones and tablets. But its equally true that these devices are still really only good for quick, informal communication and browsing. Despite the best efforts of Apple and Samsung to persuade us otherwise, tablets are lousy for getting real work done. So we find ourselves in the ironic situation of a domain that is experiencing almost unprecedented growth but in which almost nobody is making money except Facebook and the vendors of what are essentially gimmicky slot machine games. My take on this is that the market for richer desktop/laptop software isn't going anywhere soon. People that need to edit complex spreadsheets, compose scores for films, analyze genomes, and render 3d effects need real computers. As a developer this kind of customer is in many ways a better customer to serve than a teen snapping selfies on a phone.
- snogglethorpe 12y ago
  "A bit" ... >< Seriously, who is this guy?
- hayksaakian 12y ago
  > But for a lot of use cases small touch screen devices are simply inadequate. The number of use cases is less important. What are the most common use cases? You're conflating people that use computers as part of their job incidentally, with people that use a computer because their job inherently necessitates one. Refer to this article about the most common occupations in the US: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-10-most-common-and-10-least-common-jobs-in-america-today/274526/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-10-m... Managing emails, customer relationship software, and checking websites are often the extent of how a person uses a computer at their job. -- > So we find ourselves in the ironic situation of a domain that is experiencing almost unprecedented growth but in which almost nobody is making money except Facebook and the vendors of what are essentially gimmicky slot machine games. Business facing software never gets mainstream news whether it's mobile or not. It just so happens that most new and popular consumer focused technology is mobile / web. Making news =/= making money. Microsoft, Oracle, etc. make gobs of money selling to business and enterprise customers. You never hear about it because it's uninteresting. In the same vein, you don' hear about business software that runs on mobile. "Make my business software work on mobile" is a booming category of work in software development. -- > People that need to edit complex spreadsheets, compose scores for films, analyze genomes, and render 3d effects need real computers. In the cases you suggested you propose that it's different. However, they might need the physical interface of a real computer, or the technical power of a real computer, but they don't really need a "real computer" - traditional input devices (keyboards) are increasingly compatible with mobile hardware - tablets and cell phones are only getting MORE powerful, not less -- It's really just a matter of time before the line between mobile and desktop disappears. Part of what's keeping it there is simply the fact that desktop class hardware from the last 2004 is still good enough to do what most people need to do in 2014
marknutter 12y ago
Mobile is not the future. We're in that future right now, and it's largely stabilized. I fully believe VR is the future. Anyone who's tried the Oculus and who has even an ounce of entrepreneurial imagination would agree. Just like when the iPhone came out in '07, the right convergence of technology has made it possible for truly convincing VR to make it into the mainstream. It will revolutionize gaming, commerce, socialization, productivity, and more. Those who understand this are already skating towards that puck. Everyone else is fighting over the few remaining scraps that the mobile table has to offer.
- InclinedPlane 12y ago
  We haven't even hit the tip of the mobile iceberg. The evolution of mobile is like the evolution of the micro-computer. At first it was way behind the capabilities and sophistication of mini-computers. But it caught up, rapidly, and then passed by mini-computers, rapidly. The same thing is happening with mobile. The end-to-end user experience on mobile is generally superior to that of a PC, largely because mobile incorporates the lessons of decades of work in the PC/server space (one-click app installation/uninstallation, for example). Additionally, a big factor in the success of the micro-computer was cost and complexity of systems. Mini-computers took up racks of specialized equipment, micro-computers were based on a handful of mass produced components the most important of which was a CPU on a single chip. Mobile takes that even further, as such devices are generally just a screen, battery, and handful of chips on a single board, all mass produced. Eventually mobile devices will be inexpensive, and this will help usher in the next wave of mobile adoption. Mobile devices will start making inroads in the workplace as they start to replace laptops and desktops (docking stations and keyboard "laptop" adapters will become more widespread). Mobile OSes will see forks which cater to corporate IT needs, etc. More importantly, mobile will be how most of the developing world gets online. Battery powered, wireless self-contained computing devices are almost a perfect fit for places without developed world infrastructure. Smartphones and tablets don't require constant internet connections to be useful. Imagine how valuable a tablet that can help teach people to read, indeed to learn almost anything, help people stay in touch with others, and connect people to the 21st century global economy can be for anyone. Computers are going to have a profound impact on the development of the world in the 21st century and mobile is going to be a huge part of it.
lnanek2 12y ago
Did a double take at the "Glass is eating the world" slide before finally realizing they were talking about LCDs and not Google's failed wearable.
hownottowrite 12y ago
Actually, we are eating the world. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population%20of%20the%20earth http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population%20of%20the%2...
diltonm 12y ago
My smartphone has 2 Gigs of RAM and most of it is wasted. Games on phones aren't even interesting because my fingers slide right off the screen when the action gets fast. Give me a PC with 2 Gigs of RAM and I can do amazing things with it, a mouse and a keyboard. Every single phone app I use is an exercise in futility or it feels that way. Touch is a terrible HID. Smart phones are handy when you don't have anything else but man I really prefer anything else, I'm considering buying a Chrome laptop or Surface if I can wipe them and install Ubuntu on them and can plug in a SIM card; not a bigger phone, a real computer.
- CalRobert 12y ago
  Remember when phones had keyboards? Like, actual physical keyboards that slid out when you needed them and tucked away neatly when you didn't? I really miss them :-(
  - tacoman 12y ago
    Given how huge the mobile phone industry, it don't understand why some manufacturer* hasn't carved out a niche for keyboard phones. Since all the manufactures have arrived at the roughly the same form factor and spec, maybe we'll start to see one of them try something different again. * Other than Blackberry. Despite being a BB10 user, I can understand why the general population isn't attracted to it.
    - CalRobert 12y ago
      You know, maybe it's time to see about sourcing a small keyboard, 4.5" or so display, and trying to squeeze down an Odroid to make your own phone. Might even make sense to make it wifi only and rely on Voip for some use cases.
  - jff 12y ago
    I always found that they keyboards weren't much better than on-screen. I make about the same number of typos either way, and frankly my corporate Blackberry's keyboard is a travesty. Little tiny keys with shitty action, your fingers slipping from one to the other. The original Motorola Droid had a decent keyboard, which was sort of nice in the days of itty-bitty screens, but these days if you offered me a Nexus 5 with keyboard I'd say "No, thanks, I'm good."
ams6110 12y ago
From one of the slides: Email is for grandparents I think this varies. I'm not a grandparent, but am close to 50 years old and have been working in computer technology my entire adult life. I have an Android smartphone (got my first one this year) but have not installed any apps on it. Email, web browser, text messages, calendar, contacts, and maps are all there and I can't really think of anything else useful I'd want it to do. My mother-in-law on the other hand IS a grandmother and she's constantly using Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and half a dozen other things on her phone. I don't see the point in any of it and don't use any of those things. Not sure who is the outlier.
- jrkelly 12y ago
  Yeah, my email usage at age 12-15 was also almost nil and that was in the 90s. Doubt stats at 12-15 correlate well to whether those kids will use email when they hit college.
  - jff 12y ago
    Agreed, I didn't have much use for email at 15, because I interacted with all my classmates and teachers every day; coordinating things was simple, and all my schoolwork was submitted in person. I primarily used email for asking questions on Linux mailing lists, and even that pretty rarely--15 year old me would probably be pretty shocked at my current level of email traffic.
- ececconi 12y ago
  You know I used to keep in touch with people primarily through emails. I don't know when, but recently - most of my communication switched to messaging apps like messenger iMessage and whatsapp. I never thought it would happen. I tripped onto email. Now I realize it's pretty good. I still do pump out emails for more formal writing through and longer messaging, but truth of the matter is with messaging apps I'm in contact with more people with shorter more personalized bursts of information.
- kalleboo 12y ago
  When I saw that slide I said to myself "rather, email is for people who have a job". But who knows, maybe that generation will reject email and create some brilliant collaboration tools that are modeled more after the instant messaging model? Was Wave just ahead of it's time?
Ologn 12y ago
I mainly program Android apps, many for my side business. Some people here have said "mobile has peaked". I go around with my Android mobile phone, and I have trouble finding out what time stores close. I have trouble finding nearby supermarkets. I certainly can't find out if supermarkets have an item in stock, or if the item on sale. I can't find a nearby bathroom to use. We are nowhere near mobile peaking. Yes, there may be a little bubble now that fizzles out before it comes back again. Kind of like how there was a website bubble, which fizzled in 2000, and then four years later Facebook was started. The day I can punch into my phone asking where I can buy a chair, and get back most of the local stores, and what they have in stock, and for what price - that is when the "smartphone bubble" is soon to "burst".
- bbarn 12y ago
  And on that note, the more places mobile puts it's fingers, ultimately, the more places that someone needs to make sure the finger points to the right thing. Every google maps, yelp review, craigslist post, etc., needs someone ultimately to vet it's place in reality before said reality can be made useless by it. I think we're on the cusp of mobile overload, where we're going to see more and more specialized mobile services made useless because we simply don't have the manpower to wire them up well without taking that manpower from something else. So, while we may not be peaked in terms of what could be done, we're nearing the point where what WILL be done is starting to look more and more focused on the things that grab quick money. Oddly, I think the next big revolution will be the generation that's tired of being chained to their devices and subscriptions and services, and starts to devolve back to actual interpersonal relationships. I'm seeing it every day with those of us who grew up without it, had it, and realized that it's not quite the silver bullet for living it marketed itself as. Siri still sucks, Google maps still gets you lost, and visual studio still blows on a touchscreen laptop.
- leapius 12y ago
  These new functionalities you speak of in the future like finding what items are in stock nearby are all more of an information gathering exercise rather that technological. We could do all that you talk about now but it would require a massive unified collaboration with shop owners for example to adhere so a common data interchange standard. I think the challenges are of a more political nature than technological.
InclinedPlane 12y ago
The evolution of mobile technology has ironically been held back by its success. Today it's too easy to make money in mobile devices, just make things thinner, shinier, faster, and prettier and you're most of the way there. And then you can rake in massive profit margins in a market where people replace their devices on a timeframe measured in months. It's practically raining cash in the land of successful mobile manfuacturers. But once we get past this early stage of mobile success people will be looking to gain more productivity out of their devices. Today have the power and OS chops to handle beefy tasks, but for the most part the UX and peripheral experience isn't there. But that'll change. There will be more attachable keyboards, more desktop docking stations, etc. And then the use of tablets and smartphones in business will drive the manufacturers to service that market more and more to meet those needs. Meanwhile, the low end of mobile will get cheaper as the developing world starts to gain access to computing and folks find out how valuable that market is and figure out how to serve it. This is the 2nd wave of the personal computing revolution and it's only just barely started, what we'll see in the next 10 years will blow the doors off the last decade.
Cyther606 12y ago
By these figures, 80% of the world will be carrying a mobile spy tool by 2020. I refuse to do anything on a mobile phone that is conceivably worse than PG-13. Until mobile hardware is free and open, I only view the proliferation of mobile Internet as a tool for human enslavement.
- general_failure 12y ago
  Its not like PC hardware is open fully.
  - dublinben 12y ago
    It can be though, and generally is more open than any mobile hardware. https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/gluglug https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/gluglug
api 12y ago
Don't disagree with the market numbers, but there's a problem with mobile. It is best illustrated by the fact that I csnnot develop a mobile app on a mobile device. There won't be any "convergence" until mobile OSes are uncrippled. I personally see a three device ecosystem. Mobile will cut into PC on the low end, but it's really growing into a space not served by PC or server. Computing in general is expanding.
- Ologn 12y ago
  > I cannot develop a mobile app on a mobile device. You can develop an Android app on an Android device. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aide.ui https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aide.ui
  - jgalt212 12y ago
    It's probably better stated: cannot effectively develop a mobile app on a mobile device. Productivity largely correlates with screensize. https://www.google.com/#q=productivity+screen+size https://www.google.com/#q=productivity+screen+size
mark_l_watson 12y ago
I have been hoping for a world where developers and content creators produced reactive HTML 5 web apps that worked beautifully on all devices from phones to laptops to large screen desktops and TVs. An analogy: writing and production tools have been getting better with output to PDF, Kindle, iBook, and print books. The overhead for creativity decreases so more effort goes to producing great content. This is what I would like for interactive web applications. There is a lot of niche content and special interests and there will continue to be a wide range of devices. Lots very inexpensive phones in developing countries and a wide range of devices upscale. Content providers and application developers should have access to all users, world wide, with low development overhead.
- CmonDev 12y ago
  I am hoping for a world where developers have a choice of a technology, without being limited to legacy semi-modernized languages like HTML and JS.
  - mark_l_watson 12y ago
    True! Of course technology choices are good.
lazylizard 12y ago
but batteries?
sinofsky 12y ago
At every moment of disruption in technology people saying that the new technology doesn't replace the incumbent. By definition disruptive technologies are less functional and inadequate "replacements". First, folks tend to talk about all the things that the new technology can't do that the old one does do. In the Steve Jobs interview at All Things D referenced in the comments, he goes on to talk about how software needs to get written--"it is just software" he says. In the near term history we have seen this same dynamic in the advent of the GUI relative to CUI or in the way browser/HTML subsumed the GUI client-server apps. People are writing more code all the time that is "mobile only" even if some of it reinvents or reimagines the desktop/laptop world. I was struck by Adobe's recent developer conference where they showed many mobile apps. As an always aspiring photog we can see how the field is transitioning. Second, people tend to underestimate the way that new tools, as ineffective as they are, drive changes in the very definition of work. Said another way, people forget that tools can also define the work and jobs people have. It isn't like work was always "mail around a 10MB presentation before the meeting". In fact a long time ago meeting agendas were typed out in courier by a typist -- that job was defined by the Selectric. The tools that created presentations, attachments, and follow up email defined a style of working. While we're reading all this, the exponential rise of mobile is changing what it means to work--to go to a meeting, to collaborate, to decide, to create, etc. What is so fascinating about this transition is that we might be seeing a divide where creators of tools will use different tools, at least for some time, than the masses that use tools. Let's not project the needs of developers on to the whole space. We might reach a point where different tools are needed. Two years ago I might have said this applies to a lot of fields, but the rapid rise of mobile and tablet based software for many things is making that argument weak. Cash registers, MRI machines, video annotation, and more are all scenarios I have seen recently where one might have said "needs a real OS" or "this need sa full PC". As with the the idea of underestimating software, our own desire to find an anchor pushes us to view things through a lens where our own work doesn't change. All of this is happening. In parts of the world they are skipping over PCs (Africa and China). Everyone is seeing their time in front of a screen go up enormous amounts and most of that is additive, but for many there is a substitute effect. This doesn't happen overnight or for everyone. TO deny it though is to deny the very changes that led to supporting the idea that the mouse, overlapping windows, and color once displaced other technologies where people said those were not substitutes for the speed, efficiency, or capabilities of what was in use.
ThomPete 12y ago
This remind me of the race towards smaller phones we experienced in the pre-smartphone era I don't see Sonys ultra small mobiles being in vogue anymore. We seem to forget a simple fact. The smartphone was not a better phone but a smaller computer. The idea that mobile is somehow replacing most of the other platforms and their usage is simply misplaced. Mobile is part of a diverting technology trend not converging.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
LVB 12y ago
I don't get the "Tech Brands Are Huge" slide, specifically the comparison to the same companies in 2004. Wouldnt you compare to the top four tech companies at the time (MSFT, AOL, whatever) to demonstrate that the share of global brand value in tech is much higher now?
fanssex 12y ago
probably because PCs had already eaten the world
maxsavin 12y ago
I saw Eric Schmidt's quote "By the summer of 2012, the majority of the televisions you see in stores will have Google TV embedded" and stopped there.
- burkaman 12y ago
  I really hate comments like this. What is the point of leaving this "review"? Are you proud of not spending the 2 minutes to finish the slideshow? You mention a quote you didn't like, but then immediately invalidate the criticism by saying you didn't keep reading to see if there was anything further to back it up or refute it. I'm not disagreeing with your complaint, I just really hate the way you framed it.
  - maxsavin 12y ago
    It makes me question the entire context of the presentation.
socialcubix 12y ago
I think it's too early to conclude something strong.
ck2 12y ago
Mobile is how I know I am old. After 5 minutes on a iphone or android phone I am like f* this give me a damn desktop.
- mrweasel 12y ago
  I think my iPad ran out of battery three months ago, I haven't looked at it since. If you don't use it for entertainment, it's pretty much useless. Touchscreens and the fullscreen apps just doesn't work for me.
jacquesm 12y ago
Very hard to compare two worlds (mobile and 'immobile' computers) without taking into account that the one is brand new and people seem to want one (and there is a very large push to own the latest and greatest) and the other is simply mature technology that works until the hardware dies. It's obvious you're going to sell more of things that sit in peoples pockets that replaced their previous phone, something they were doing with some regularity before smartphones appeared. Smartphones and tablets are interesting, they may enable new applications, they take over some of the functionality of desktops and laptops but it's more of a continuum than a very strong difference, you go from small and on your person to phablets (what a word), tablets, laptops, touch screen all-in-one PCs, regular PCs all the way to servers. So mobile simply completed the spectrum and as long as there is a fashion element to it they'll be sold in very large numbers (the fact that the batteries die is another push to upgrade them, ditto laptops). In the longer term it will slow down a bit but mobile phones will always be sold in larger numbers than desktop computers because of these reasons. There is one way in which 'mobile is eating the world', which is in terms of resources consumption, and that is going to be a real problem without better and more structured ways of thinking about disposing phones during the design phase as well as some kind of rebate program.
forgotAgain 12y ago
Its worth it to keep in mind that A&H are in the business of selling investors on their investment ideas. This is a marketing piece not a technology piece.
wslh 12y ago
The problem is the definition of mobile. Mobile seems to be more like a form factor than an operating system. If at the end I can convert a tablet into a full featured PC (i.e Microsoft Surface running Visual Studio) or I can plug a future mobile phone to a keyboard and monitor and run Microsoft Office there then there is no division between mobile, desktop PC, and web.
chevas 12y ago
I doubt this presentation was created on a mobile device.
joshrael 12y ago
I'm not sure I understand the "three phases of technology deployment" slide. Specifically, I can't think of a good example of a company that writes a check to buy technology (or the analogy to a plant on the following slide). Are these three types of companies distinct?

311 points by tomazstolfa 12y ago

sstas 12y ago

Hmm, Good Information ...

jerf 12y ago

The western world right now is in a bit of a defeatist mood and pessimism reigns supreme. And while I can't deny that all things end and in some sense civilization is scheduled for some receding, I find myself wondering what impact this sort of technology will have on that process. Technology is speeding everything up so much and so fast... what if technology speeds up our next "dark age" from centuries to decades... or decade... or mere years? What if we're even already halfway through the decline? We know technology is a big game changer. Sometimes we overestimate that impact, but sometimes we underestimate it too. What will it do for everyone to have a smartphone? Heck if I know! But perhaps it's reason for at least a smidge of hope.

sillysaurus3 12y ago
Well, smartphones simply enable you to do things that you can't otherwise do. I don't think they'll have much of an effect on how long our next Dark Ages lasts. The dark ages were primarily due to culture, not ability. Smartphones enable culture to morph in interesting ways, but they don't override it. People will still be people.
- diltonm 12y ago
  >> Well, smartphones simply enable you to do things that you can't otherwise do. No, that's not true at all. They are more compact and with the touch HID more frustrating but certainly far from better.
  - sillysaurus3 12y ago
    People take exponentially more photos and videos now that they have smartphones. That's the definition of "enable people to do something they can't otherwise do."
    - diltonm 12y ago
      The guy said, "smartphones simply enable you to do things that you can't otherwise do". People were taking pictures with their cameras long before smartphones and uploading them. I was using Microsoft StreetMaps (I think that was the name) and a $100 GPS serial device to map trips around the SFBA. People have used a compass to navigate for thousands of years. So yes, smartphones don't do things you can't do otherwise; they are just compact and more fun, if you can them in your pocket. If you can't then you might want to look at a small laptop or notebook, more bang for the buck.
      - sillysaurus3 12y ago
        I don't know why this is controversial. You aren't going to carry a camera around with you everywhere you go, nor a GPS, nor a laptop. But you'll carry your smartphone. So you can do more things because you have your smartphone with you. Anyway, my main point was that culture was the reason for the dark ages, not ability to do things. And smartphones don't override culture.
        pixl97 12y ago
        >And smartphones don't override culture. What does override culture? Talking to the people around you? Newspapers? Books? Telephones? Peoples options? News? Culture: the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively. If you don't think that an instantaneous audio/graphical communications device cannot be used as a means to effect culture you are highly confused about what culture is.
        sillysaurus3 12y ago
        Another day, another snarky HN comment... As I said, smartphones morph culture in interesting ways. That's a direct product of having access to all of the things you mention. But people are still fundamentally people. If the world believes that war is necessary, smartphones aren't going to change that. And that belief was one of the main reasons for the dark ages.
- KobaQ 12y ago
  But as people will still be people, ability to get what we want easily also drives culture. Deep inside we all are shockingly selfish and lazy little animals. We all take the easiest road, at least what for our selfish desires seems to be the easiest road. Sometimes, it's looks like a hard or unselfish road on the outside, but needed to fullfill our own selfish needs. Even buddisths are selfish, as they try to be free from selfish desires for the selfish reason of reduce pain in their live. There's always a melt down of higher cultures. People having all the tools to fullfill their basic needs loose the drive to achieve. That's why I generally see this "we make the world a better place with all our great services" direction quite sceptical. It was never easier to distract ourselves with mobile devices, but do we benefit? No, Apple, Google, FB, MS and Amazon do. BTW: One of my favorite movies is Idiocracy :-)

ddbb01 12y ago

Technology gets cheaper and easier to use - a consistent story over time. Interestin stats.

fidotron 12y ago

Is this actually true? My perception is that the smartphone bubble is bursting. Yes, there are lots more people to come online, but all they're going to do is use WhatsApp and Facebook. The big disappointment of mobile is that all this stuff doesn't seem to result in enabling people to do their jobs better or more easily. Web apps really exploded with things like Basecamp, but the most mobile has brought along for that seems to be mobile email. (Edit to add, the only exceptions I can think of to this are actually the SMS apps deployed in the places pegged to explode in smartphone usage). Having lots of people mindlessly addicted to notifications is not really that interesting.

cageface 12y ago
Completely agree with this. We've reached the same point we did with laptops a few years ago where making hardware more powerful doesn't improve the user experience much. Phones from different manufacturers are more or less interchangeable and there's not much incentive for an owner of last year's model to upgrade to this year's model. Both of the leading app stores are full of gimmicky junk and the leaderboards are increasingly stagnant. The prospect for indie mobile developers with new ideas is grim in 2014. Users are settling into patterns with a handful of established apps and it turns out there's just not that much you can do as a developer with nothing more than a 5" touch screen. So I'm a contrarian even though I've been building mobile apps for the last four years. The desktop seems like both a vastly more interesting but likely also more lucrative place to be for a developer.
LA_Banker 12y ago
> "all this stuff doesn't seem to result in enabling people to do their jobs better or more easily..." While I disagree with that notion, I also wonder why the focus on merely jobs. Smartphones and mobile devices have enabled people's lives to be much easier. Not more than 10 minutes ago I just determined the optimal route to a meeting, factoring in real-time traffic (measured by phones) and overlapping mass transit lines. If I'm late or my meeting partner isn't there ("there" being a location determined by ratings on Yelp's app, as the meeting was scheduled via my phone during another meeting), I have instant access to him and vice versa. Just the first example that comes to mind. There are, literally, dozens of expensive devices that have been replaced by free/inexpensive smartphone apps in the past few years, to say nothing of smartphones enabling us to do things we never even thought of a few years ago. In 2014, it is possible for the middle class to take timelapse aerial video from a drone and edit/upload/share it remotely via phone in a matter of minutes. I cannot imagine what will be possible in a mere two years, when apps have replaced even more expensive things and enabled us to do things heretofore unconsidered.

cageface 12y ago

There is no point in drawing a distinction between the future of technology and the future of mobile. I find Evans' analysis of mobile a bit hyperbolic. Yes the growth of mobile is explosive and, in some cases, it's displacing older technology. But for a lot of use cases small touch screen devices are simply inadequate. It's probably true that a lot of people that used to use desktop or laptop computers just to check email and Facebook have shifted that activity to their phones and tablets. But its equally true that these devices are still really only good for quick, informal communication and browsing. Despite the best efforts of Apple and Samsung to persuade us otherwise, tablets are lousy for getting real work done. So we find ourselves in the ironic situation of a domain that is experiencing almost unprecedented growth but in which almost nobody is making money except Facebook and the vendors of what are essentially gimmicky slot machine games. My take on this is that the market for richer desktop/laptop software isn't going anywhere soon. People that need to edit complex spreadsheets, compose scores for films, analyze genomes, and render 3d effects need real computers. As a developer this kind of customer is in many ways a better customer to serve than a teen snapping selfies on a phone.

snogglethorpe 12y ago
"A bit" ... >< Seriously, who is this guy?
hayksaakian 12y ago
> But for a lot of use cases small touch screen devices are simply inadequate. The number of use cases is less important. What are the most common use cases? You're conflating people that use computers as part of their job incidentally, with people that use a computer because their job inherently necessitates one. Refer to this article about the most common occupations in the US: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-10-most-common-and-10-least-common-jobs-in-america-today/274526/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-10-m... Managing emails, customer relationship software, and checking websites are often the extent of how a person uses a computer at their job. -- > So we find ourselves in the ironic situation of a domain that is experiencing almost unprecedented growth but in which almost nobody is making money except Facebook and the vendors of what are essentially gimmicky slot machine games. Business facing software never gets mainstream news whether it's mobile or not. It just so happens that most new and popular consumer focused technology is mobile / web. Making news =/= making money. Microsoft, Oracle, etc. make gobs of money selling to business and enterprise customers. You never hear about it because it's uninteresting. In the same vein, you don' hear about business software that runs on mobile. "Make my business software work on mobile" is a booming category of work in software development. -- > People that need to edit complex spreadsheets, compose scores for films, analyze genomes, and render 3d effects need real computers. In the cases you suggested you propose that it's different. However, they might need the physical interface of a real computer, or the technical power of a real computer, but they don't really need a "real computer" - traditional input devices (keyboards) are increasingly compatible with mobile hardware - tablets and cell phones are only getting MORE powerful, not less -- It's really just a matter of time before the line between mobile and desktop disappears. Part of what's keeping it there is simply the fact that desktop class hardware from the last 2004 is still good enough to do what most people need to do in 2014

marknutter 12y ago

Mobile is not the future. We're in that future right now, and it's largely stabilized. I fully believe VR is the future. Anyone who's tried the Oculus and who has even an ounce of entrepreneurial imagination would agree. Just like when the iPhone came out in '07, the right convergence of technology has made it possible for truly convincing VR to make it into the mainstream. It will revolutionize gaming, commerce, socialization, productivity, and more. Those who understand this are already skating towards that puck. Everyone else is fighting over the few remaining scraps that the mobile table has to offer.

InclinedPlane 12y ago
We haven't even hit the tip of the mobile iceberg. The evolution of mobile is like the evolution of the micro-computer. At first it was way behind the capabilities and sophistication of mini-computers. But it caught up, rapidly, and then passed by mini-computers, rapidly. The same thing is happening with mobile. The end-to-end user experience on mobile is generally superior to that of a PC, largely because mobile incorporates the lessons of decades of work in the PC/server space (one-click app installation/uninstallation, for example). Additionally, a big factor in the success of the micro-computer was cost and complexity of systems. Mini-computers took up racks of specialized equipment, micro-computers were based on a handful of mass produced components the most important of which was a CPU on a single chip. Mobile takes that even further, as such devices are generally just a screen, battery, and handful of chips on a single board, all mass produced. Eventually mobile devices will be inexpensive, and this will help usher in the next wave of mobile adoption. Mobile devices will start making inroads in the workplace as they start to replace laptops and desktops (docking stations and keyboard "laptop" adapters will become more widespread). Mobile OSes will see forks which cater to corporate IT needs, etc. More importantly, mobile will be how most of the developing world gets online. Battery powered, wireless self-contained computing devices are almost a perfect fit for places without developed world infrastructure. Smartphones and tablets don't require constant internet connections to be useful. Imagine how valuable a tablet that can help teach people to read, indeed to learn almost anything, help people stay in touch with others, and connect people to the 21st century global economy can be for anyone. Computers are going to have a profound impact on the development of the world in the 21st century and mobile is going to be a huge part of it.

lnanek2 12y ago

Did a double take at the "Glass is eating the world" slide before finally realizing they were talking about LCDs and not Google's failed wearable.

hownottowrite 12y ago

Actually, we are eating the world. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population%20of%20the%20earth http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population%20of%20the%2...

diltonm 12y ago

My smartphone has 2 Gigs of RAM and most of it is wasted. Games on phones aren't even interesting because my fingers slide right off the screen when the action gets fast. Give me a PC with 2 Gigs of RAM and I can do amazing things with it, a mouse and a keyboard. Every single phone app I use is an exercise in futility or it feels that way. Touch is a terrible HID. Smart phones are handy when you don't have anything else but man I really prefer anything else, I'm considering buying a Chrome laptop or Surface if I can wipe them and install Ubuntu on them and can plug in a SIM card; not a bigger phone, a real computer.

CalRobert 12y ago
Remember when phones had keyboards? Like, actual physical keyboards that slid out when you needed them and tucked away neatly when you didn't? I really miss them :-(
- tacoman 12y ago
  Given how huge the mobile phone industry, it don't understand why some manufacturer* hasn't carved out a niche for keyboard phones. Since all the manufactures have arrived at the roughly the same form factor and spec, maybe we'll start to see one of them try something different again. * Other than Blackberry. Despite being a BB10 user, I can understand why the general population isn't attracted to it.
  - CalRobert 12y ago
    You know, maybe it's time to see about sourcing a small keyboard, 4.5" or so display, and trying to squeeze down an Odroid to make your own phone. Might even make sense to make it wifi only and rely on Voip for some use cases.
- jff 12y ago
  I always found that they keyboards weren't much better than on-screen. I make about the same number of typos either way, and frankly my corporate Blackberry's keyboard is a travesty. Little tiny keys with shitty action, your fingers slipping from one to the other. The original Motorola Droid had a decent keyboard, which was sort of nice in the days of itty-bitty screens, but these days if you offered me a Nexus 5 with keyboard I'd say "No, thanks, I'm good."

ams6110 12y ago

From one of the slides: Email is for grandparents I think this varies. I'm not a grandparent, but am close to 50 years old and have been working in computer technology my entire adult life. I have an Android smartphone (got my first one this year) but have not installed any apps on it. Email, web browser, text messages, calendar, contacts, and maps are all there and I can't really think of anything else useful I'd want it to do. My mother-in-law on the other hand IS a grandmother and she's constantly using Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and half a dozen other things on her phone. I don't see the point in any of it and don't use any of those things. Not sure who is the outlier.

jrkelly 12y ago
Yeah, my email usage at age 12-15 was also almost nil and that was in the 90s. Doubt stats at 12-15 correlate well to whether those kids will use email when they hit college.
- jff 12y ago
  Agreed, I didn't have much use for email at 15, because I interacted with all my classmates and teachers every day; coordinating things was simple, and all my schoolwork was submitted in person. I primarily used email for asking questions on Linux mailing lists, and even that pretty rarely--15 year old me would probably be pretty shocked at my current level of email traffic.
ececconi 12y ago
You know I used to keep in touch with people primarily through emails. I don't know when, but recently - most of my communication switched to messaging apps like messenger iMessage and whatsapp. I never thought it would happen. I tripped onto email. Now I realize it's pretty good. I still do pump out emails for more formal writing through and longer messaging, but truth of the matter is with messaging apps I'm in contact with more people with shorter more personalized bursts of information.
kalleboo 12y ago
When I saw that slide I said to myself "rather, email is for people who have a job". But who knows, maybe that generation will reject email and create some brilliant collaboration tools that are modeled more after the instant messaging model? Was Wave just ahead of it's time?

Ologn 12y ago

I mainly program Android apps, many for my side business. Some people here have said "mobile has peaked". I go around with my Android mobile phone, and I have trouble finding out what time stores close. I have trouble finding nearby supermarkets. I certainly can't find out if supermarkets have an item in stock, or if the item on sale. I can't find a nearby bathroom to use. We are nowhere near mobile peaking. Yes, there may be a little bubble now that fizzles out before it comes back again. Kind of like how there was a website bubble, which fizzled in 2000, and then four years later Facebook was started. The day I can punch into my phone asking where I can buy a chair, and get back most of the local stores, and what they have in stock, and for what price - that is when the "smartphone bubble" is soon to "burst".

bbarn 12y ago
And on that note, the more places mobile puts it's fingers, ultimately, the more places that someone needs to make sure the finger points to the right thing. Every google maps, yelp review, craigslist post, etc., needs someone ultimately to vet it's place in reality before said reality can be made useless by it. I think we're on the cusp of mobile overload, where we're going to see more and more specialized mobile services made useless because we simply don't have the manpower to wire them up well without taking that manpower from something else. So, while we may not be peaked in terms of what could be done, we're nearing the point where what WILL be done is starting to look more and more focused on the things that grab quick money. Oddly, I think the next big revolution will be the generation that's tired of being chained to their devices and subscriptions and services, and starts to devolve back to actual interpersonal relationships. I'm seeing it every day with those of us who grew up without it, had it, and realized that it's not quite the silver bullet for living it marketed itself as. Siri still sucks, Google maps still gets you lost, and visual studio still blows on a touchscreen laptop.
leapius 12y ago
These new functionalities you speak of in the future like finding what items are in stock nearby are all more of an information gathering exercise rather that technological. We could do all that you talk about now but it would require a massive unified collaboration with shop owners for example to adhere so a common data interchange standard. I think the challenges are of a more political nature than technological.

InclinedPlane 12y ago

The evolution of mobile technology has ironically been held back by its success. Today it's too easy to make money in mobile devices, just make things thinner, shinier, faster, and prettier and you're most of the way there. And then you can rake in massive profit margins in a market where people replace their devices on a timeframe measured in months. It's practically raining cash in the land of successful mobile manfuacturers. But once we get past this early stage of mobile success people will be looking to gain more productivity out of their devices. Today have the power and OS chops to handle beefy tasks, but for the most part the UX and peripheral experience isn't there. But that'll change. There will be more attachable keyboards, more desktop docking stations, etc. And then the use of tablets and smartphones in business will drive the manufacturers to service that market more and more to meet those needs. Meanwhile, the low end of mobile will get cheaper as the developing world starts to gain access to computing and folks find out how valuable that market is and figure out how to serve it. This is the 2nd wave of the personal computing revolution and it's only just barely started, what we'll see in the next 10 years will blow the doors off the last decade.

Cyther606 12y ago

By these figures, 80% of the world will be carrying a mobile spy tool by 2020. I refuse to do anything on a mobile phone that is conceivably worse than PG-13. Until mobile hardware is free and open, I only view the proliferation of mobile Internet as a tool for human enslavement.

general_failure 12y ago
Its not like PC hardware is open fully.
- dublinben 12y ago
  It can be though, and generally is more open than any mobile hardware. https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/gluglug https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/gluglug

api 12y ago

Don't disagree with the market numbers, but there's a problem with mobile. It is best illustrated by the fact that I csnnot develop a mobile app on a mobile device. There won't be any "convergence" until mobile OSes are uncrippled. I personally see a three device ecosystem. Mobile will cut into PC on the low end, but it's really growing into a space not served by PC or server. Computing in general is expanding.

Ologn 12y ago
> I cannot develop a mobile app on a mobile device. You can develop an Android app on an Android device. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aide.ui https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aide.ui
- jgalt212 12y ago
  It's probably better stated: cannot effectively develop a mobile app on a mobile device. Productivity largely correlates with screensize. https://www.google.com/#q=productivity+screen+size https://www.google.com/#q=productivity+screen+size

mark_l_watson 12y ago

I have been hoping for a world where developers and content creators produced reactive HTML 5 web apps that worked beautifully on all devices from phones to laptops to large screen desktops and TVs. An analogy: writing and production tools have been getting better with output to PDF, Kindle, iBook, and print books. The overhead for creativity decreases so more effort goes to producing great content. This is what I would like for interactive web applications. There is a lot of niche content and special interests and there will continue to be a wide range of devices. Lots very inexpensive phones in developing countries and a wide range of devices upscale. Content providers and application developers should have access to all users, world wide, with low development overhead.

CmonDev 12y ago
I am hoping for a world where developers have a choice of a technology, without being limited to legacy semi-modernized languages like HTML and JS.
- mark_l_watson 12y ago
  True! Of course technology choices are good.

lazylizard 12y ago

but batteries?

sinofsky 12y ago

At every moment of disruption in technology people saying that the new technology doesn't replace the incumbent. By definition disruptive technologies are less functional and inadequate "replacements". First, folks tend to talk about all the things that the new technology can't do that the old one does do. In the Steve Jobs interview at All Things D referenced in the comments, he goes on to talk about how software needs to get written--"it is just software" he says. In the near term history we have seen this same dynamic in the advent of the GUI relative to CUI or in the way browser/HTML subsumed the GUI client-server apps. People are writing more code all the time that is "mobile only" even if some of it reinvents or reimagines the desktop/laptop world. I was struck by Adobe's recent developer conference where they showed many mobile apps. As an always aspiring photog we can see how the field is transitioning. Second, people tend to underestimate the way that new tools, as ineffective as they are, drive changes in the very definition of work. Said another way, people forget that tools can also define the work and jobs people have. It isn't like work was always "mail around a 10MB presentation before the meeting". In fact a long time ago meeting agendas were typed out in courier by a typist -- that job was defined by the Selectric. The tools that created presentations, attachments, and follow up email defined a style of working. While we're reading all this, the exponential rise of mobile is changing what it means to work--to go to a meeting, to collaborate, to decide, to create, etc. What is so fascinating about this transition is that we might be seeing a divide where creators of tools will use different tools, at least for some time, than the masses that use tools. Let's not project the needs of developers on to the whole space. We might reach a point where different tools are needed. Two years ago I might have said this applies to a lot of fields, but the rapid rise of mobile and tablet based software for many things is making that argument weak. Cash registers, MRI machines, video annotation, and more are all scenarios I have seen recently where one might have said "needs a real OS" or "this need sa full PC". As with the the idea of underestimating software, our own desire to find an anchor pushes us to view things through a lens where our own work doesn't change. All of this is happening. In parts of the world they are skipping over PCs (Africa and China). Everyone is seeing their time in front of a screen go up enormous amounts and most of that is additive, but for many there is a substitute effect. This doesn't happen overnight or for everyone. TO deny it though is to deny the very changes that led to supporting the idea that the mouse, overlapping windows, and color once displaced other technologies where people said those were not substitutes for the speed, efficiency, or capabilities of what was in use.

ThomPete 12y ago

This remind me of the race towards smaller phones we experienced in the pre-smartphone era I don't see Sonys ultra small mobiles being in vogue anymore. We seem to forget a simple fact. The smartphone was not a better phone but a smaller computer. The idea that mobile is somehow replacing most of the other platforms and their usage is simply misplaced. Mobile is part of a diverting technology trend not converging.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

LVB 12y ago

I don't get the "Tech Brands Are Huge" slide, specifically the comparison to the same companies in 2004. Wouldnt you compare to the top four tech companies at the time (MSFT, AOL, whatever) to demonstrate that the share of global brand value in tech is much higher now?

fanssex 12y ago

probably because PCs had already eaten the world

maxsavin 12y ago

I saw Eric Schmidt's quote "By the summer of 2012, the majority of the televisions you see in stores will have Google TV embedded" and stopped there.

burkaman 12y ago
I really hate comments like this. What is the point of leaving this "review"? Are you proud of not spending the 2 minutes to finish the slideshow? You mention a quote you didn't like, but then immediately invalidate the criticism by saying you didn't keep reading to see if there was anything further to back it up or refute it. I'm not disagreeing with your complaint, I just really hate the way you framed it.
- maxsavin 12y ago
  It makes me question the entire context of the presentation.

socialcubix 12y ago

I think it's too early to conclude something strong.

ck2 12y ago

Mobile is how I know I am old. After 5 minutes on a iphone or android phone I am like f* this give me a damn desktop.

mrweasel 12y ago
I think my iPad ran out of battery three months ago, I haven't looked at it since. If you don't use it for entertainment, it's pretty much useless. Touchscreens and the fullscreen apps just doesn't work for me.

jacquesm 12y ago

Very hard to compare two worlds (mobile and 'immobile' computers) without taking into account that the one is brand new and people seem to want one (and there is a very large push to own the latest and greatest) and the other is simply mature technology that works until the hardware dies. It's obvious you're going to sell more of things that sit in peoples pockets that replaced their previous phone, something they were doing with some regularity before smartphones appeared. Smartphones and tablets are interesting, they may enable new applications, they take over some of the functionality of desktops and laptops but it's more of a continuum than a very strong difference, you go from small and on your person to phablets (what a word), tablets, laptops, touch screen all-in-one PCs, regular PCs all the way to servers. So mobile simply completed the spectrum and as long as there is a fashion element to it they'll be sold in very large numbers (the fact that the batteries die is another push to upgrade them, ditto laptops). In the longer term it will slow down a bit but mobile phones will always be sold in larger numbers than desktop computers because of these reasons. There is one way in which 'mobile is eating the world', which is in terms of resources consumption, and that is going to be a real problem without better and more structured ways of thinking about disposing phones during the design phase as well as some kind of rebate program.

forgotAgain 12y ago

Its worth it to keep in mind that A&H are in the business of selling investors on their investment ideas. This is a marketing piece not a technology piece.

wslh 12y ago

The problem is the definition of mobile. Mobile seems to be more like a form factor than an operating system. If at the end I can convert a tablet into a full featured PC (i.e Microsoft Surface running Visual Studio) or I can plug a future mobile phone to a keyboard and monitor and run Microsoft Office there then there is no division between mobile, desktop PC, and web.

chevas 12y ago

I doubt this presentation was created on a mobile device.

joshrael 12y ago

I'm not sure I understand the "three phases of technology deployment" slide. Specifically, I can't think of a good example of a company that writes a check to buy technology (or the analogy to a plant on the following slide). Are these three types of companies distinct?