Tech That Failed To Fail 428
itwbennett writes "There are tech fads that flare up quickly and then, pouf, they're gone (Tamagotchi, anyone?). And then there are technologies that industry bigwigs predict will follow that familiar pattern and instead end up withstanding the test of time. The Internet, for example, has famously failed to implode, despite dire predictions by Ethernet inventor Bob Metcalfe. And what about TV, the cornerstone of the American living room? Inventor Lee DeForest, known as one of the 'fathers of the electronic age,' declared TV a commercial and financial impossibility, a sentiment that was shared by 20th Century Fox exec Darryl Zanuck. And FCC engineer T.A.M. Craven was absolutely certain back in 1961 that there was 'no chance communications space satellites will be used to provide better telephone, telegraph, television, or radio service inside the United States.'"
ATM machines (Score:3, Insightful)
Despite all the problems, using an ATM machine beats standing in that long ass line trying to cash a check.
Why are banks open only from 10-3, the sort of hours they know everyone is at work? And why is it that at least one bank teller is on break or on lunch?
iPod (Score:5, Insightful)
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
Re:ATM machines (Score:5, Insightful)
Probably not fair to all of the quote sources (Score:4, Insightful)
To be fair, a lot of the quote sources are businesspeople being dismissive of their competitors. That doesn't necessarily mean they believe what they're saying: of course Microsoft is going to say that Apple isn't a competitor. Doing anything other than that would give Apple an advantage in the marketplace.
x86 (Score:5, Insightful)
Misunderstanding the social impact (Score:5, Insightful)
From my reading of these. All the technology was fine the failure predictions were based on not understanding the socialogical impact of the technology.
Google -> search
Internet -> sharing and remote access
ipod -> really personal applications
TV -> advertising
The most important part of these technologies seem to be the humans in the loop and what the technology does for the humans. The predictions failures seem to be failures in understanding the sociology. The message seems to be understanding the sociological market for the technology.
The tech wasn't the issue though (Score:5, Insightful)
The fashion was (and is). Really the tech for MP3 players has never been a big deal for most users. "Plays my music," is as far as they care about anything. Please remember that people were happy with discmans and walkmans and shit like that.
What the iPod did was make MP3 players cool, it made them a fashion accessory. The best way to notice that is the white earbuds, with cord hanging out front where it is visible. Their commercials show this and it is the style that sold. An iPod is fashionable and has thing like the white earbuds so that you can proclaim ownership and show off the fashion. Heck when the iPod came out all of a sudden high end earbud manufacturers suddenly had a demand for white earbuds. They'd always been a darker colour before since being understated was what people wanted. However white earbuds were a fashion statement. People wanted better sound, but only if they could still have the iPod fashion going.
That is why the iPod was so successful. Other MP3 players were just music players so people really didn't give a shit more than they had before. However the iPod was a fashion accessory that you had to have.
Then of course once it started to take off you got one of those nice positive feedback loops. People didn't know about MP3 players, they knew about iPods. If you wanted a music player you got an iPod simply because that was all you knew, even if there were no fashion concerns. An "Everyone uses it because everyone uses it," sort of situation.
Technology was never the big factor, and in consumer electronics that can sometimes be the case.
Re:iPod (Score:5, Insightful)
In defense of CmdrTaco, the first generation iPod was a piece of crap. It was expensive, only had 5 GB of storage space, required a FireWire port, and only had software available for the Mac. It wasn't until the third generation iPod where they had those issues fixed, which is right around where they started flying off the shelves.
Tamagotchi (Score:5, Insightful)
And what kind of an example is Tamagotchi in the first place? Tamagotchi wasn't a tech, it was just a particular application of an existing tech that had been around a long time, in fact by that point it was practically retro. All it did was make the little hand-held LCD games that had gone out of vogue around the release of the GameBoy briefly popular again by coming up with a novel new style of game.
How quickly we forget (Score:2, Insightful)
What the iPod did was make MP3 players cool, it made them a fashion accessory.
No, it made them easy and practical for ordinary people.
Before the iPod, the only people who bothered with MP3 players were geeks who already had all their CDs ripped to MP3s (or had pirated them from Napster.) Ordinary people were perfectly happy with their existing portable CD players and CD collections, because pre-iPod MP3 players were a world of hurt.
Most MP3 players before the iPod had barely any more capacity than portable CD players. Those that did have large capacities had only USB 1.1 connectivity, so they were way too slow to load up. Those large capacity players were also too huge to fit in a normal jeans pocket. Most didn't have screens that could show song names or playlists (only six-segment numeric displays.) Most didn't have playlist capability at all. All of them had frustratingly slow controls with arrow-key navigation. All of them required clunky software to load up. (Yes, worse than iTunes. Much worse. You'd have one program to rip music, and a seperate program to load it onto the player. Neither was aware of the other.)
Apple succeeded because it got the MP3 player right. Large capacity in a small form factor with fast FireWire (later USB2) loading. Quick and easy navigation with a big screen and scroll wheel. Integrated ripping and loading software on the PC side.
This is the sort of thing geeks don't notice and don't remember. If it's not a numeric specification, they forget it exists.
The teller doesn't have to guess if you are good (Score:5, Insightful)
Tellers (or phone customer service reps) don't have to guess if you are a profitable customer; the computer tells them this outright. Many years ago, I was reading about a shift at a FirstUSA (now Chase) call center, and every rep had a "traffic light" appear when the customer's file came up. That light would tell them if it was a "good" customer (and therefore deserving of obsequious (and time consuming) service, fee waivers, etc.) or a "poor" customer (and deserving the bare minimum of efficient service, no waivers for anything, etc.)
Naturally, "good" was either high-volume pay-every-month (and therefore a source of fee income), or maxed out (and paying on time.) "Bad" was small-volume, paid every month (and therefore expensive due to account overhead) or an erratic payer (and therefore likely stuck no matter how ruthless the bank was with fees.)
Re:iPod (Score:5, Insightful)
Ignoring the price, those were only "issues" if you didn't own a Mac.
I still remember the howls of anguish from Windows users complaining that they couldn't use it with their operating system and the software developers who, sensing the opportunity, stepped in and offered products which allowed you to do just that.
Re:The tech wasn't the issue though (Score:4, Insightful)
>What the iPod did was make MP3 players cool, it made them a fashion accessory
I say this as both someone who borderline dislikes Apple and who owned several pre-iPod players: you are wrong and you're just playing to the crowd's biases and exceptions here.
In reality, the mp3 hardware scene was a mess of manufacturers whose interfaces and software were just terrible. Techies didn't mind, but Joe Average certainly did and didn't understand how to use this technology.
The ipod began to address all these issues. Joe Average got some hand-holding when he installed iTunes. His ipod sync'd up without him having to move or categorize or even find his own MP3s. iTunes would rip his music and also introduce him to an online store where here could buy music. And guess what? IT WAS EASY.
The other guys were releasing half-assed PDFs on how to use Windows Media Player or CDex to do burns. They would either put in some half assed sync software or another PDF on how to use windows explorer to copy MP3s. Joe Average doesnt even know what a file format is, let alone where his mp3s are (if he has any) let alone how to do a proper copy.
Guess which one the market chose? The other items like white earbuds are just marketing items that complement the hardware. It was a success without it. Again, interfaces and ease of use from out of the box matter. They matter quite a lot.
Article states bad predictions for easy win (Score:5, Insightful)
Article says the following products/concepts succeeded when they were predicted to fail.
1) iPod (Portable Digital Media Player)
2) Internet
3) Personal Computer
4) Television
5) Google (Minimalist Internet Interfacing, unobstructive advertising)
6) Android, iPhone (Smartphones)
Anyone who predicted the failure of the above was obviously WAY too far removed from the target audience to be worth his/her salt.
1) Portable Digital Media Player -- This was an obvious predictable survivor. The first realistic portable music device was the cassette player (Sony Walkman, notably). It was a hit and widely emulated. Then came the portable CD player (Sony Discman, notably). It was a hit and widely emulated. It was better than the cassette player because it offered higher-quality sound and greater convenience (if at the initial cost of "skipping" risk). Then came the MP3 player-- a device that stored CD-quality music on flash memory. It had no moving parts and great battery life. Apple then put forth the iPod (early iterations had moving parts) which was a fashion smash hit. Its staying power came from the need for the next step in portable music evolution and, surprisingly, because of its unforeseeable status as a fashion accessory.
2) The internet, even at its earliest incarnation, was a means of connecting people of similar minds and interests for communication. Advances in communication always survive and this advance combined the opportunity for well-thought letter-style communication at telephone speed. Furthermore, it became a marketplace for wares and a means of education. Yes, and adult entertainment. Its survival was a no-brainer.
3) Whoever said the PC wouldn't survive did not understand what a PC nor what digital computing was. It's the same as someone saying "books" would not survive because the person didn't understand that paper could transmit information beyond the death of a writer.
4) Television... jeez. People love entertainment. Jokes, stories, gossip, games, races, drama, fantasy -- all were hits on stage, in person, and in books. The person who said TV wouldn't last had no understanding of people.
5) Google survived initially because while everyone was annoying users with massive front-page bloat and forceful marketing/advertising, Google was simple. Google provided what the intelligent and focused internet user market wanted- a simple and efficient search engine. Word of their apparent search honest spread like wildfire and thus came the demise of the all-encompassing "web portal".
6) Smartphones survive for a few reasons: the popularity of social exhibitionism/voyeurism, new generation reliance on internet connectivity to provide solutions, and the wow-factor of touchscreens and pretty UIs. They will continue to survive so long as the touchscreen remains the best affordable visual interface... though I'd really prefer the return of buttons... they just work.