|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
More lead than gold When Apple released the Macintosh 15(!) years ago, the way home users and businesses used their computers changed. And in the years since, Apple, Microsoft, IBM, and others have added considerably to the GUI concept. And with the work of other vendors, they have created an omnipresent multipurpose appliance for professionals and casual users alike. That such a machine could be created, much less catch on, is truly amazing. Twenty years ago, the idea that a computer like the Mac could do what it has done was preposterous and the fodder for amazing tales of science fiction. Ten years ago, the idea that a collection of fiber-optic cables and routers could change the way that people exchanged information was also preposterous. Five years ago, the idea of a sub-$1500, much less $800, computer was economically unfeasible - if you wanted a processor, memory or monitor, anyway. But these three events have made computers more user-friendly, intuitive, information-based, affordable and useful than they had ever been, or dreamt of being. They have changed the way that students learn, teachers teach, businesses do business, and home users relax and play. Computers are now a deeply rooted part of our society, and almost all for the best. But the one thing that separates these three amazing feats is that they are all related to proven human tendencies. The GUI and common-man approach to the Mac interface, and subsequent GUI's, are directed at making the experience easy-to-use yet powerful at the same time. Control panels allow the change of settings without having to use a command-line interface or understand the code at work. Buttons are much easier than command-line switches. But beyond any of these reasons, people want to have cool stuff for lower prices that work well and look nice. The idea that "Golden Convergence" is currently worth its weight in electrons does little to follow this model. I like the basic idea, but I hate the overall idea. No matter the proclamations from Oracle, Sun, Apple or anyone else, the idea that we will all soon have houses full of "information appliances" is just not tenable. The best "appliances" are the ones that require little or no mental interaction between object and user. Answering machines are data appliances that have become parts of our lives because all we have to do is push a button to hear sound. How easy is that? And leaving a message is as easy as talking. Televisions themselves are content appliances. All we have to do is hit a power button and find the right station. Users can effortlessly adjust sound and color settings. The only installation hassles are setting that pesky clock, and screwing a cord in the back of the unit. Appliance based items such as e-Rolodexes and e-recipe books would be amazing additions to the home environment. The ease and power would come from the painless sharing of information at multiple points in the house, neighborhood, or your friends in Okinawa. They would change the way we take notes when we're on the phone. The possibilities are almost endless. But if we look into our crystal ball, we have ponder why someone would give up their Power Macintosh G5/2000/512 MB RAM/100.2 GB Ultra SCSI-3 HD/20X Generation 4 DVD-RAM/AV/1000 Base-T/etc. minitower for an appliance which is singular in its usefulness? Especially when this low-end G5 costs $2000, and each e-mail appliance with an interface you can't adjust is priced at $200 a piece. The NC model is lacking because it assumes that all appliances will be a good idea. Some will, but most won't. I don't want to use (much less own) a computer that I don't have complete control over, but I would like to have a computer that I could set up for a novice to use. NCs would be useful as terminals, but not as home computers. A networked computer is a much better idea than a Network Computer. "Golden Convergence" seems to be a blurring of the line between the two ideas, and it has its pros and cons. The scheme's power would come from its potential utility - businessmen and children alike could use any computer from anywhere to access their personal data. Their computer(s) would all be synchronized and feature the same appearance. The usefulness of this is immeasurable. But let's not start talking about the next Apple-led revolution quite yet. It's intriguing to say the least, but it's not a proven standard. |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All content - ©1998-2010 - Mark J. Hershenson |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
The MacOS Xclave is hosted by green-ant.com.
