Question
Booz's report on "The Rise of Generation C": how accurate are their timing projections?
Answer
My first reaction is that the center-piece of the prediction, a converged "PDD" (primary digital device) does not seem even remotely plausible, which makes the rest of the argument very suspect in my head (to the extent that it goes beyond banalities at all). Technology diverges, it does not converge except very rarely (an observation from Al Ries).
Examples of convergence are PDA+dumbphones=smartphones and clock+radio=clock radio.
Examples of divergence? What could be simpler than a knife? Yet foodies typically own a knife block with a half-dozen specialized knifes these days.
When you get multiple varying predictions of how something will turn out, chances are they ALL will, if they sound plausible.
For instance, an alternative prediction to a PDD is "persona in the cloud." You have NO devices, but every specialized device everywhere can scan your iris/fingerprint and instantly personalize/customize itself for you based on your stored online persona in the cloud (or why just one, it could be one of many).
Or there's the case for the gadget-phile, who builds out a tech room at home tricked out with wall-sized monitors, tons of specialized input/gaming devices etc., and never leaves home, choosing to live in his VR cave, like that guy in the last Die Hard movie.
Or the nomad who just has an iPhone V35 which he uses as a magic wand to control all other devices (you can already use it to replace your TV remotes).
Or the minimally-connected/unconnected subculture that uses digital technology but not hyper-connectivity because they want to remain private. A kind of digital Amish.
A lot of this will be driven by what is being called the "Internet of Things." When every object can be made intelligent, self-maintaining, self-aware, social and self-regulating by adding a chip, some sensors/actuators, a WiFi connection and some AI, you don't think of the world as "me+my computing devices+my physical stuff." It's all a computer. You are living embedded within a giant computer. Your fridge talks to your vacuum, and your iPhone relays your instructions to both. When you go golfing, you use your golf club. When you want to play a golfing video game at home in front of your wall-sized screen, the robotic intelligence in the SAME golf club makes it a Wiimote like input device for the game.
When you view technological evolution this way, as a diversifying force, your question about timing becomes moot. Instead you ask, "how diverse will the ecosystem get by what point in time?"
As a counterpoint to a single PDD, I recently talked to a researcher from CSC who believes in a "four device" near future (smartphone, tablet, netbook, laptop). That seems more plausible to me.
Examples of convergence are PDA+dumbphones=smartphones and clock+radio=clock radio.
Examples of divergence? What could be simpler than a knife? Yet foodies typically own a knife block with a half-dozen specialized knifes these days.
When you get multiple varying predictions of how something will turn out, chances are they ALL will, if they sound plausible.
For instance, an alternative prediction to a PDD is "persona in the cloud." You have NO devices, but every specialized device everywhere can scan your iris/fingerprint and instantly personalize/customize itself for you based on your stored online persona in the cloud (or why just one, it could be one of many).
Or there's the case for the gadget-phile, who builds out a tech room at home tricked out with wall-sized monitors, tons of specialized input/gaming devices etc., and never leaves home, choosing to live in his VR cave, like that guy in the last Die Hard movie.
Or the nomad who just has an iPhone V35 which he uses as a magic wand to control all other devices (you can already use it to replace your TV remotes).
Or the minimally-connected/unconnected subculture that uses digital technology but not hyper-connectivity because they want to remain private. A kind of digital Amish.
A lot of this will be driven by what is being called the "Internet of Things." When every object can be made intelligent, self-maintaining, self-aware, social and self-regulating by adding a chip, some sensors/actuators, a WiFi connection and some AI, you don't think of the world as "me+my computing devices+my physical stuff." It's all a computer. You are living embedded within a giant computer. Your fridge talks to your vacuum, and your iPhone relays your instructions to both. When you go golfing, you use your golf club. When you want to play a golfing video game at home in front of your wall-sized screen, the robotic intelligence in the SAME golf club makes it a Wiimote like input device for the game.
When you view technological evolution this way, as a diversifying force, your question about timing becomes moot. Instead you ask, "how diverse will the ecosystem get by what point in time?"
As a counterpoint to a single PDD, I recently talked to a researcher from CSC who believes in a "four device" near future (smartphone, tablet, netbook, laptop). That seems more plausible to me.