The computer industry is boring these days. People are looking to cell phones and tablets to resume some of the excitement, but let me be honest: It’s all terribly boring.
History shows a computer industry that was traditionally exiting, leading edge. It was crazy! Nerds had ideas and made a ton of money.
There was the transition from text-based computing to graphics.
There was the transition from monochrome to color.
There was the Internet and networking everywhere.
Revolution after revolution, but for the past few years: Nada. Seriously, Windows 7 is really no different from Windows Vista, which is really no different from Windows 95. You could sit down at a computer with any of those operating systems and be in familiar territory.
In other words: Boring.
The problem with kicking up new dust in the computer industry isn’t lack of innovation. There’s plenty of that. It’s that people are now conditioned to accept and use boring.
Microsoft has become McDonalds. They deliver up the same, consistent, pitiful hamburger no matter where you go. People like good food, but they count on Mickey D’s because they know it will be the same, cheap, awful food every time. Can’t you just say the same about Microsoft Office?
There’s room for innovation, but no incentive for it. After all, you couldn’t compete with McDonalds unless you decided to become Burger King, and where is the innovation in that?
So that leaves me pondering how the computer industry can save itself from the stale, boring state it’s entered. Or can it?
An interesting analogy comparing Microsoft to McDonalds, Mcsoft? I think open source, is more exciting, as it is community based you can have your own input, like with the new Firefox. I suppose Windows 7 had the beta to download, but it wasn’t that much different to Vista apart from it worked! Things like Unbuntu are more interesting because it is quite a bit different to Windows, so maybe the excitement lies here, I can see more Netbooks being sold with a Linux OS on it because it works so well for little computers like that.
Comment by chiefnoobie — January 17, 2011 @ 3:22 am
I think it’s more than Microsoft, I think it’s the whole industry. Google is doing crazy things, but they’re still in the box. It would be interesting to see whether anything fun and cool is coming from the universities, which is probably where we’ll see the next big evolutionary leap.
Comment by admin — January 17, 2011 @ 8:41 am
I think the comparison to the automobile industry is more apt than that of the fast-food industry (or maybe I just read too much slashdot).
The problem is that most people don’t see the innovation that is happening. Apple makes transparent changes, like new electronics, based on existing technology. But the best research labs are like HP (memristors), IBM Watson, MS Research, and Intel that do real “under the hood”-innovation (as an academic, I recently looked into some work in the scheduling of multi-core processors and power mgmt in Data Centers, and I fell in love with the research. But most end-user never hears nor cares about this stuff).
It’s like the auto industry. After automatic transmission was invented, every car is similar to drive. A guy can get into a 1990 car or a 2010 car and still drive both easily. The real work is under the hood (hybrids, computerized engine control etc.) and there is still lot of work being done. But the end user is insulated from this (kind of like Windows 95 to 7).
And I believe that is how it should be. For most people the computer (car) is a tool to get a job done. And since it is so widespread, there is a lot of inertia even to UI changes (ribbon anyone?). Since a lot of under-the-hood work is supported by consumer who couldn’t-care-less about the internals, there is no fanfare about the real research being done.
Comment by sriksrid — January 17, 2011 @ 8:47 am
I like that car industry comparison. It’s very true. Then again, I saw a demo of a new electric car that didn’t have pedals. It used a special steering wheel or joystick to go. So there are ways to improve things.
My issue is more with software than hardware. I think the desktop/window/menu paradigm is stale. Where is the 3D interaction. Look at some of the interfaces available on computer games and you’ll see what a mean. Some of them are very clever and much easier to use than Windows or a Mac.
Comment by admin — January 17, 2011 @ 9:18 am
We may even see the use of the X box kinect to control your computer at some point. I think people have already hacked it so you can use it to scroll through photo’s with your hands, so it might be interesting, not much use if you are sat in an office though.
Comment by chiefnoobie — January 18, 2011 @ 12:53 pm
Chief: Aren’t you surprised that Microsoft came up with that, not Apple? 😉
Comment by admin — January 18, 2011 @ 2:17 pm
Actually, the guy who invented the technology, hardware, and software that powers Kinect went to Apple first. But they weren’t interested and turned him down. Then he went to Microsoft. Apple missed a HUGE investment opportunity.
Comment by gamerguy473 — January 18, 2011 @ 4:45 pm
Now you mention it I guess Apple have usually been quick off the mark, if you look at Microsoft trying desperately to get windows 7 to work on tablet devices, it just isn’t made for that type of device. I suppose Apple haven’t really had much to do with gaming hardware, since they did that console in the mid nineties that flopped. They have got the ipad now to bring a lot of titles to the portable gaming market which looks like it is going to be huge.
Comment by chiefnoobie — January 19, 2011 @ 2:56 am
With Steve Jobs campaigning for a buttonless/cordless computer experience, I thought Apple would have jumped all over the technology. Now that they see how powerful it is since its finished, they’re probably kicking themselves that we didn’t take it.
Comment by gamerguy473 — January 20, 2011 @ 4:22 pm
I think one reason that smartphones and tablets are so boring is that they have a touchscreen-only interface. The industry is just obsessed about copying the from factor of the iPhone and iPad.
Dan- you blogged a while back about the Plan 9 OS, have you checked out the Inferno OS? Its a follow-on to Plan 9 that offers a graphical interface and has a very light weight footprint. I think an OS like that could pick up where Android leaves off, Android is just not open enough to fulfill the mobile computing market IMO.
Comment by BradC — January 21, 2011 @ 10:56 am
I have not kept up on Plan 9. I’ll have to check out Inferno. Thanks for the tip!
Comment by admin — January 21, 2011 @ 11:22 am