Thirty Years in Computing 316
Jacob writes "Jacob Nielsen, usability guru, writes about the last 30 years of computing and his predictions of the next 30 years of computing. An interesting read. quote: 'Computer games in 2034 are likely to offer simulated worlds and interactive storytelling that's more engaging than linear presentations such as those in most movies today.'"
we'll never recognize computers (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm still trying to figure out... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:5, Interesting)
What I think will be interesting to watch is how software also starts evolving from apps with a narrow focus (think along the lines of early 90's WordPerfect) to apps which try to do pretty much everything - perhaps a bad example, but MS Word already allows table and cell editing similar to Excel, graphics manipulation, and desktop publishing.
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:5, Funny)
One word: EMACS
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:3, Informative)
>graphics manipulation, and desktop publishing.
WP 5.1 did do a lot of that in the nineties already.
WP 6.0 did all of it in 1994.
In features WordPerfect was and is still way ahead of MS Word.
You could do calculations, references and use variables in WP5.1 tables.
WP was always a more serious DTP tool. WP 6.0 already supports folding signatures to do 2-up, 4-up, 16-up, booklet, separate font libraries, absolute page positioning styles, ke
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:4, Interesting)
I predict that in 30 years, what is and isn't a computer will be hard to distinguish.
Conversely, movies and other linear entertainment will be utterly recognizeable. There will always be a place for good stories, and it's very hard to 'write' a good story on the fly and interactively. It starts to look too much like the tangled yarn that is life.
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:5, Insightful)
The analogy here is pretty plain, I think. I'm not sure that the idea of "the computer" as a separate machine will ever entirely go away, but certainly the computing power in everyday appliances (TV's, radios, hell, even toasters and refrigerators) is growing all the time. The standalone computer may eventually go the way of the standalone power tool motor.
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:5, Interesting)
Tablet computers are an example of this. A small tablet, that is hooked wirelessly to your network can be used for e-mail, etc. Of course the tablet will get smaller and smaller, and soon not recognizable as a 'computer'. It will be similar to a piece of paper.
Now, most people connect their MP3 type player to their computer, and download the music. Eventually, your MP3 player will once again, connect wirelessly, and just download everything- because storage won't be an issue. Of course it will be smaller, and barely noticable. But once again, you won't need to go to your computer.
Currently you can buy things on-line on your computer. But wouldn't that be better from your TV? Just yesterday there was an article the next Xbox having more computer functionality. With HDTV quality screens, I would rather make my purchases from my couch, not sitting at my desk. Why go to the computer, when the rest of my house is more comfortable?
Sitting in my 'office' at home isn't fun- it's not where I want to spend my time. I'd rather be out with everyone else. We've been tied to the keyboard long enough, and I think we'll start moving away.
Yes- I really would like a web-enabled refrigerator...It would be nice to walk into the kitchen, and get my news/e-mail while standing there drinking out of the orange juice container.
When display devices get advanced enough that they can simply be 'printed' then we can have them everywhere. This will be the biggest step forward.
Your TV is actually a great display device- because it streams in a lot of different information. But it is too big, bulky, expensive and ugly to have everywhere. But when I can place a display in the wall of my bathroom, I can use it while I take a crap. It won't be the luxury device of a Texas oilman anymore- it will show up in everyday life.
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:5, Insightful)
For instance, those power tools in that old Sears catalog probably didn't cost more than modern power tools, possibly less since they were simpler and didn't each have their own motor and battery (even after adjusting for inflation). Laptops only cost about $1000 less than they did 15 years ago and have been pretty steady for the last 6 years or so.
I predict that many technologies will start off relatively expensive and then stabilize after 5-10 years, just as many technologies before them did (TVs, microwaves, etc.).
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:4, Funny)
nngh-hey!
fs
Re:we'll never recognize computers (Score:3, Insightful)
Computers will be the center of the house. The "Media Center" computers are in the infant stages, these are the early attempts to bring the computer to the part of your house that currently receives the most attention.
When this technology becomes seamless, television will become an interactive and more personalized experience.
Do you like the outfit that Jennifer Lopez is wearing? "Click here to buy". "MMM
Pray for the Singularity (Score:3, Informative)
Or not.
Think outside the box! (Score:5, Insightful)
He and other futurists might do better to look at what we use computers for now and what we don't, but could, use them for in the future. They could also think way outside the box and think about how computers will physically change (will it still be everything in one box or will the hardware be as distributed as software can be) or how computers will integrate into everyday life.
I guess I expected a bit more imagination. 30 years is an awfully long time in terms of technological development.
Keep smiling!
Erick
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:5, Interesting)
Note: Think away the energy manipulating poltergeist possession thing to get my point.
Human society divides along two lines, Adamists and Edenists. Adamists embrace nanotechnology and information technology. Edenists embrace biotechnology. While the division isn't that plausable, most of the tech described from the Adamist side of things is a real possibilty in the distant future. We're allready seeing the beginings of it.
My predictions:
1.) Augmented Reality will be the killer app that moves the personal computer from your desktop into the category of wallet, watch, and keys that you need to leave the house.
2.) Increases in display technology and plumeting memory and processor costs continue to push more embded devices into the marketplace.
3.) Computer interaction will edge out human interaction as the primary means of doing buisness. How this happens will depend on the particular industry. It has allready happened to the banking industry. Some of this will be online interaction, an appreciable portion of it will be based on biometrics and customer tracking. The privacy people will object to this, but will be overcome by the allmighty dollar.
4.) The computer applications we use will continue to become more abstract and seperated from the data they handle. The reason this occurs is the cycle that drives hardware also drives sofware. Hardware sells because people want to run the latest software. Software sells because people who have the latest hardware want things to run that pushes their system to the limit. Programers thus write applications that allows a more sophisticated rendition of the same dataset. Not to use Microsoft as an example, but compare Excel 95 to Excel XP. What's the difference?
5.) Longhorn will begin a trend in operating systems that SGI first demonstrated with the Onyx. The OS is the redheaded stepchild of the mainstream software market right now. It is untilitarian, focusing more on getting its job done and less on looking slick. Apple has tried to change this, SGI has tried to change this, Enlightenment has tried to change this. Microsoft will succeed.
Most of these predictions are more like 10 years down the road instead of 30. What's really interesting are the social change that this kind of technological integration will bring about. What will happen as the governments of the world lag further and further behind the corporations as providers of the day to day services that people depend on?
The next 30 years of computing promises more than just faster system and bigger drives, it promises radical changes in where computers are found, what computers do, and how human beings interact.
Thirty years is a long time, and while I wouldn't put a bet in for me being able to get an 802.11 jack for my head in that time frame, it's only because I don't think the FDA would allow it by then.
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:5, Interesting)
None of these predictions were wrong per say. Rather, the author failed to connect the dots and follow the the most likely path of games. Why have an arcade machine with 15 control sets when you can simply hook machines together over long distances? Why have a chess board with an antenna when you can play the same thing on your super-realistic, Hi-Res, 3D screen?
The future of computer technology has always been known. It's simply been a matter of developing the power to do it. The only failure of the visionaries was in their lack of understanding market conditions and forces. They thought of each technology in a vacuum and didn't put them together as actually happened.
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:3, Insightful)
In one century we've experienced multiple revolutions, industrial and technological. Considering we've been around over 10 times that long (civilised anyhow), i'd say it's amazing.
I just think tech advancement happens on a much shorter scale as you'd have to change the measurement yearly almost.
I
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:3, Insightful)
* Games could allow more than two players. Perhaps even enough to play a full game of soccer or football! (The picture showed a "dome" with controls in a ring around it.)
* Games will be able to be played over great distances! (The picture showed a chess board with a wireless antenna on it.)
* Games will
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:2, Interesting)
and where does bio-tech technology fall in all of this. Foret about only hardware driven machines. How will they interact with our bodies in 30 years. Just a thought. 30 years is a long time.
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:2)
Just assuming that there will be just one processor. Probably the number of processors will be measured in KP (kilo-processors).
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:3, Insightful)
I even doubt that he is right. The reason is because it will become impractical. Right now we have plenty of CPU power on the desktop. For example we can build cars (drag racers) with 2000HP, but is it practical for a mainstream car? Not with oil prices being what they are.
As you point out computers will integrate into mainstream and the features that we pre-occupy ourselves with (RAM, CPU Speed, etc) will become irrelevant.
Don't forget Legal advancements (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Think outside the box! (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I've heard "futurists" like him before. One goofball suggested that "in the future" we would store ALL our music on a dis
It won't really change... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:It won't really change... (Score:2, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Um... (Score:4, Interesting)
While I liked the game (and am currently playing the Bloodmoon expansion). Morrowind was about as interactive as a chose your own adventure book. Sure, you could do things that where outside of the script. But they had no effect.
You could rob all the great houses blind while the guards watched, you could kill entire towns, you could reach the rank of guild master in any of several guilds. But nothing changed. No one reacted diferently to you regardless of what you did (unless you where wanted for murder or something, then you had to pay a small fine. And keep in mind that you realy could kill entire towns without getting a price put on your head). One would hope that in the future there will be Morrowind like games with real interaction rather then scripted events.
PS: My favorite example of this problem in Morrowind is when I would walk into a house vault naked, turn invisible, unlock the vault doors, take anything not nailed down,stagger back out with more stuff then I'll ever be able to sell, and all the guards say is "we're watching you. Scum!". I bust out laughing every time that happens.
uh.... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Computer games in 2034 are likely to offer simulated worlds and interactive storytelling that's more engaging than linear presentations such as those in most movies today "
Even some of today's primitive games have most movies beat... (watching Hollywood eat it's young [imdb.com] at a prodigious [ign.com] rate, I sometimes think "Tetris" is more complex, multifaceted and emotional storytelling.)
Actually... (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree with this statement too, but for a different reason.
I wouldn't underestimate the engaging nature of the narrative. Storytelling is as old as mankind and it's not likely to disappear just because we can suddenly take control of the story. In fact I would argue that if you could control the story, what's the point of readin/watching/taking part in it? The point of storytelling is to engage the reader and make him feel
Computer games in 2034? (Score:5, Funny)
DNF due in March.
Re:Computer games in 2034? (Score:2)
Updated June 1st, 2004:
DNF to be released "when it's done"
Compu...what? (Score:4, Interesting)
It will prolly be like a PDA that has periphs you can plug in and just have everything virtual.
I mean, 30 YEARS! Considering the exponential advance in technology, all we'd have to do is find a new battery model (nanotech i'm sure) and voila.
I'm gonna be in my rocking chair playing final fantasy XX i'm sure.
Re:Compu...what? (Score:2, Interesting)
Today computers are in most cases big noisy grey boxes. People have to reinstall or maintain their OS, manually install security patches and every once in a while a nice internet worms does funny things with your machin
Re:Compu...what? (Score:2)
We can make molecular computers and quantum cryptography, etc.. but when it comes to using it, we run the same things we're used to.
We really need an increase in intelligence to advance and when we can teach our machines to think for us, then the bottleneck is gone and the exponentail becomes exponential only limited to resources... it's all very interesting.
Re:Compu...what? (Score:4, Insightful)
You can easily buy an SBC with an AMD Geode 1 GHz CPU and 128 megs of RAM, put your storage on CompactFlash with an IDE convertor, and have integrated Ethernet on it. With no fans needed and solid-state storage, it'd be quiet. With everything but the CF on one board, it'd be small. It would run most software people run on the stock desktops.
VMS indeed does do versioned filesystems. It's not too long, I'm sure, before there's a Linux filesystem that implements it at the FS level if there's not already. Until then, there are versioning systems at the application level.
There are all kinds of software we have now that we didn't 15-20 years ago. You're almost certainly reading
Sure, the uses of the individual applications may not have changed much -- reading text, editing text, listening to sounds, playing games, todo lists, calendars, address books, etc. Tewnty years ago, though, could you open your address book, drag a CD-quality sound clip into it, and type an annotaion before clicking a button to send it to someone on another continent?
Re:No, in a visor. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No, in a visor. (Score:2, Funny)
IN 30 years,,,, (Score:2, Interesting)
At least I hope there is a backlash. Too much, too invasive, too quick.
Re:IN 30 years,,,, (Score:2)
Kind of like the Butlerian Jihad [dunenovels.com]?
Re:IN 30 years,,,, (Score:2)
Isn't that the famous last words of the Dodo bird?
Re:IN 30 years,,,, (Score:4, Insightful)
Take Tivo for instance. A few years ago, if you wanted to record something, you had to set up your VCR, program it, make sure there was a blank tape, etc... Now you just punch into your Tivo that you like certain kinds of shows, and they are recorded for you. In the future, devices like Tivo probably won't even need you to tell it what to record, it will know what you want to record based on what you watch most.
Another example is cars. The new Mercedes recognize who is driving, and adjust the seats/mirrors/stereo to what that driver likes automatically. They also recognize if a seat is empty, and in an accident it won't deploy the airbags for empty seats. Some of the new cars don't even require a key to start any more. The owner carries a card with a RFID chip in their wallet that the car recognizes, and allows them to drive the car without having to use a key. Even 10 years ago, the things that are standard on a lot of new cars would have been unimaginable.
I think things will keep getting far more technologically advanced, but we will see it less and less.
Interactive storytelling? (Score:2)
Re:Interactive storytelling? (Score:2)
I doubt there will be immersive storylines (Score:5, Insightful)
A story is a meaning applied to events after they have occured. A game is a game, like sports or a board game. You can only make a story out of it after events have been completed. A story has a status quo, an event that disrupts that status quo, and a hero who overcomes a challenge to create a new status quo. You can only joing narrative events to actual events after they have all taken place. If you have a wandering storyline, what's to say that this particular event is the shift to the 2nd or 3rd act? It's only after you have everything that you can make a complete story. And that's not to say that there's only one story. Any event might serve as any of the narrative events, depending on the story you're telling.
Re:I doubt there will be immersive storylines (Score:2)
Then perhaps your definition (or the standard definition, whatever) is narrow, or perhaps they just misused the term, but I don't think that is the point.
I think the point the author of the article was trying to make was that instead of having a "story", or some linear sequence of events happen to the player (the character), you will have a completely interactive world where your actions can change the world, and that changed world affec
Re:I doubt there will be immersive storylines (Score:3, Insightful)
For good, unplanned stories to happen, I think that will only happen in MMORPGS with either great AI (unlikely), or a lot of freedom for avatars. And then, again, *a story will be a re-telling of events that have already happened* . Hey, did you see what happened in $_MMORPG yesterday? I finally got my castle fortifications set
Re:I doubt there will be immersive storylines (Score:2, Insightful)
I will never understand why this old chestnut appears every time there's a discussion of interactive storytelling.
By your definition, fiction is impossible. When the author sits down with a blank sheet of paper, he should be stuck, since there are no past events for him to relate.
But of course, we know this isn't the case. E
Re:I doubt there will be immersive storylines (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem is that storytelling is hard. It's easy to create a story. It's tough to create a compelling and interesting story. And it seems
Exactly! (Score:3, Insightful)
Shared game content (Score:3, Interesting)
Not really, but if that level was "Open Source" sort of speak, it would then be able to be modified, with modifications going back to the original, and used in the next game. With several improvments over time that section would eventually become a great peice of colabirated art.
Re:Shared game content (Score:2)
Re:Shared game content (Score:3, Funny)
Still designing levels in 2034? Can't the games make their own levels on the fly yet? Boy, NetHack still has 'em beat...
So.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Doesn't it already do this, its called history. I see that he is saying it will screen capture all of it, but why? This article doesn't really predict anything but just states the obvious. Yes, we will have faster processors and more hard drive space, bigger screens, higher resolutions, amazing predictions! But I want to know when my computer will talk to my car and refrigerator and let me know when I'm driving to the grocery store that my son (future son) just drank the last of the milk.
DUKE Nukem (Score:3, Funny)
So, I guess this will be when Duke Nukem Forever is completed then....
One prediction - fewer/more programmers (Score:2)
Consistent with this prediction - the only major piece
Re:One prediction - fewer/more programmers (Score:2)
Re:One prediction - fewer/more programmers (Score:3, Insightful)
The Unix Clock will Overflow (Score:5, Funny)
I'm just glad I live in a later timezone. Oh, wait....
Re:The Unix Clock will Overflow (Score:2, Funny)
Control versus centralization (Score:2, Interesting)
I started using computers about the same time Neilsen did (only 28 years ago for me :). One of the trends that keeps rearing its ugly head is the return to centralized computers. Nowadays they call them "Application Service Providers", or
Re:Control versus centralization (Score:5, Insightful)
With thin clients, I make the same change on the server and it's all done. It IS a return to the mainframe model, and it's one I'm extremely happy about because it will make my life so much simpler. Once I get these 150 done I'm going after 150 staff computers. Most people simply do not need real PCs, and half of them couldn't see a difference anyway. As long as they get a login screen and a desktop they couldn't care less if the files they create are stored on a server or locally, or whether they have a hard drive somewhere under their desks. Sure, there are a few folks who are going to need local storage for various reasons, so they can keep their PCs. But the vast majority simply don't need it. I'm also saving money. Even when you amortize the servers over the number of thin clients they can support, my capital cost is half what it would be for PCs.
I surely would not advocate that approach for any of us, perish the thought. But in the real world in a production environment, which slashdot certainly is not, it's a viable solution.
Really? (Score:2)
Entertainment in 20 years will be more entertaining than entertainment today? go figure, never saw that coming.
Erm... (Score:2)
Dick Cheney?
John Ashcroft?
Donald Rumsfeld?
The girl in "50 First Dates"?
This is basically a 'flying cars' article.
Computer will replace certain kinds of workers (Score:2)
I remember Arnold B Scrivener - the story of a scrivener (hand copier) left useless by the invention of the typewritter.
So robotics are edging out industrial line mechanics.
I suggest that good software will soon be edging out intellecual translators - the people who speak in professional languages because the "rest of us don't understand" like Lawyers for example.
even doctors - essentially translate a list of complaints into
Re:Computer will replace certain kinds of workers (Score:3, Insightful)
The Turing Point... (Score:4, Interesting)
At that point, they will be empowered to invent and innovate creatively without the biological encumbrances we have. Imagine a human-like mind that can, while thinking, remember every fact with equal clarity. And imagine the scope of that knowledge base to include all discovered facts. Every theoretical mathematical conjecture could be instantly evaluated and computed (no more tedious sessions working with Mathematica). Sci-fi writer Vernor Vinge has stated that this point in history will be so revolutionary that we are entirely incapable of seeing what lies after it -- a horizon "singularity".
You mean "if"... (Score:4, Informative)
I also have heartburn with the term "singularity" as applied to the growth in computer capability. "Singularity" is a mathematical term with a precise definition: it's a point on the curve representing some function at which the slope of the curve is infinite - think of the limit of f(x)=1/(x-1) as x approaches 1. But "Moore's Law" is an exponential function - its slope is finite everywhere on the curve.
While I understand what people mean when they discuss a computer "singularity", it's really not a very accurate way to use the word.
Sean
Circular Logic (Score:2, Interesting)
While I applaud anyone who is willing to attempt to predict "30 years in computing" and like everyone, can not say he or she is wrong (after all, it has not happened) I have to say that this is a useless article from Mr. Nielsen. In the same couple of paragraphs that he is talking about his dislike of the mainframe and his pleaant experience with the desktop
Re:Circular Logic (Score:2)
screens, screens, screens (Score:2)
Diamond Age (Score:3, Interesting)
Nielsen may be a fine usability expert but as a futurist and visionary he is lacking in the imagination department. I strongly recommend the Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson for an inspired read of what computing may be like many years from now.
Thirty years in Computing (Score:2)
Half an exabyte of hard disk equivalent storage (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Half an exabyte of hard disk equivalent storage (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Half an exabyte of hard disk equivalent storage (Score:3, Funny)
Thanks, I like my passives very much. (Score:5, Insightful)
Alternate endings to movies on DVD's and open-ended worlds in games like GTA are good examples of the kinds of things we'll be doing for a while. But a story told from a million angles? Forget it. Even with technology to create those worlds, you still need to think about, well, everything, and all the consequences of every action. It's not gonna happen.
What we like about linear stories is their flow from conflict to resolution. And we see movies because the people that make them are good at what they do. The original storytellers around a fire could have sat there waiting for their "users" to interact with them ("storyteller, put the mail on the duffel bag"
rouftop
Too far in the future... (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, if you'd asked me in 1974 what things would be like in 2004 I simply couldn't have guessed what we'd have now. Actually, I'd probably just have replied "Goo! Gah gah gah! Whaaaah!" but that's besides the point...
My prediction for future games... (Score:2)
Scott Adams figured this out a while ago (Score:5, Funny)
Woman (to Dogbert): Is Dilbert available?
Dogbert: He's been in the holodeck since March.
Does he get paid for this? (Score:2)
I could spew meaningless crap like that all day for a fiver.
Computing Power Prediction (Score:2)
My computing prediction. (Score:3, Insightful)
In the past, Internet Terminals were heralded as the wave of the future. This was because of their convenience, ease of use, etc. I see them now as the wave of the future because they don't store content. They are simply a gateway into someone else's content. Once the RIAA and MPAA have finished their buyout of the legislative and legal system, new regulations will require that computers not store any information. That way the big guys don't have to worry about the little guy sharing music or downloading the latest episode of Law & Order - Pothole Repair Crew for free. To listen to music, plug in your credit-card and connect to their services. Only $5.99 for an hour's worth of music. Want to play the latest game? Only $2.99 to plug into the Doom 5 server and play.
This can even extend to the workplace. Microsoft Office Services. For $15,000 per year, you can get a 10 connection license to allow your employees to work on presentations, software requirements, etc. Then for only $150,000 per year, two of your developers can connect to Microsoft Development Studio Services and work on that software you need written. Then for the low-low price of $200,000 per year, Microsoft will go ahead and host the software you wrote. Imagine, you don't have to worry about backups, and you'll never need to worry about the BSA pounding down your door.
All that needs to happen is widespread acceptance and availability of broadband. This is sure to have happened in 30 years.
Think this can't happen? I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Moore's law is misunderstood (Score:2)
What's the benefit? (Score:3, Insightful)
That amount of computer storage probably won't be enough to help men understand women. =)
I'm growing in favour of technology being just a little more clunky and difficult so that people will move their heads away from the monitor once in a while - and not just to make new PC mods.
In Thirty Years I predict.... (Score:5, Funny)
2. EUI. Emersive User Interface, perhaps something like Minority Report or The Matix. I mean manipulating virtual object in real space, not jacking in.
3. Cyrrano Virus proof of concept hits on your girlfriend (or mom, in the case of hopeless nerds)
4. Indian Tech Giant "Bollysoft" is investigated for anti-competative practices, cuts cost by farming out tech support to the up and coming Afganistan tech industry.
5. Computers finally translate dolphin speech. Turns out it's mostly fart jokes and machismo pick up lines. And, they are very interested in our culture's "beer" and "ESPN"
6. PentiumXI prosessor requires a 220 volt electric connection, liquid oxygen cooling. Intel investigates opening small wormholes between processors and surface of Jupiter moon Europa for joint processor cooling/planet heating terraforming project.
7. That's right, virtual 3D holographic blue screen of death.
You want really hightech computers... (Score:3, Insightful)
The next big thing will be the touch interface.
Futurama - All My Circuits The Movie (Score:2)
Ah....interactive movies.
The Star Trek Holodeck (Score:2, Insightful)
Sounds Like Holodecks (Score:2)
Got to admit, for many things it's hard to think of a more perfect interface than a holodeck simulation.
Whatever the power of those computers are, (Score:2)
Jakob's Clueless re:Pre-PC Centralized Computing (Score:5, Interesting)
Check out Plato [platopeople.com]. Pre-1975 bitmapped graphics, audio and photographic quality images, instant messaging, near zero latency multiplayer network gaming, distance learning, groupware, newsgroups, online newspapers, animated email, network delivery of music, client/server computing, touch screen interfaces, flat-panel displays, and multimedia that were delivered across a worldwide educational network with satellite and cable communications using CDC mainframes.
linear story telling (Score:3, Insightful)
Many games may well be "non-linear" (i.e., have many different paths), but that's not to make them more engaging, it's to make them more replayable. And there will also continue to be many highly linear games that present a single, well-designed storyline as part of the game, although hopefully authors will find ways of making the interaction with the storyline more natural than "you must find switch A and trigger it to continue".
My guess (Score:3, Insightful)
Imagine: a couple hundred corporations around the united states each have dedicated facilities to process and/or store information. Other companies network these commodities to cohere the aspects of computing. These companies could specialize in redundancy/dependability, power, or affordability. You subscribe to one of these companies' services, and they give you a username and password. Now, you can use any compatible I/O device, log in, and you're at your (virtual) computer.
These I/O devices could be anything from a current monitor/keyboard/mouse desk setup to a wireless touchscreen you carry around with you (assuming pervasive WiFi). Even if it's a palmtop, it'll have all the processing power and storage of your desktop setup. So a gameboy would be just as powerful as a desktop system, and a no-moving-parts $10 MP3 player could access your entire hard drive. The virtual computer recognizes which device you're using to access it, and adopts its interface accordingly.
But the I/O devices could start posing as appliances: your kitchen telephone AND your cell phone are just computer terminals. Your coffee maker takes commands from the virtual computer: once you've set your alarm clock (another computer I/O device), your coffee maker knows when to start preparing a morning pot of coffee.
I don't even care to speculate what this model would do to our legal battles over IP and DRM; I think 30 years is far enough in the future that the technology will remake the legality beyond recognition.
The barriers to this model of computing are bandwidth and (to a lesser extent) wireless permittivity. Many of the gains could be recognized even with only wired technology -- it's just that the alarm clock, coffee maker, and mp3 player would have to jack in to a wall port somewhere.
in 30 years... (Score:4, Insightful)
Nielssen seems to be saying that computers will be used largely the same way they are being used today, with some obvious tweaks. While computers have gotten faster, fundamentally, we have made little progress in how we interact with them over the last 30 years (Smalltalk and the Alto were being developed in the 1970s and contained most of the paradigms that the most advanced commercial desktops are using today), and Nielssen is basically saying that not much will change over the next 30 years either. That may excite him, since it allows him to continue to peddle his user interface incrementalism, but, frankly, I find it depressing.
One thing is certain: in 30 years, we will still have self-appointed "gurus" that make a name and a business for themselves by repeating populist techno-babble and buzzwords, but without having any real insight or vision. That has nothing to do with computers, it is just human nature, and that won't change.
Re:What? (Score:3, Funny)
No, they haven't perfected the technology yet to prevent the outside collapsing onto the hollow inside ;)
Re:What? (Score:2)
A two line quote straight from TFA is insightful? (Score:2)
Sean
Hickdot.org (Score:2)
"Billy Joe, did yall upgrade mah spacial auditory sub-processor like ah told yew too?"
"Not yet paw, Hickdot ran an thang on yer model, says here yew can git anuther ten percent performance outa it by applyin this here filter program."