(That's not really my real name but does it really
matter? I mean, really?)
THERE'S A LOT OF TALK BY FUTUROLOGISTS
about how the computer of the future is going to become
more and more "invisible".
(It would be a bit like the "Computer" on
Star Trek. None of us have ever seen it, though we've all heard its
voice many times.)
The processing power and storage capacity, they say,
will disappear
into ordinary appliances like toaster ovens and vacuum
cleaners, all
of which will, as a result, become "smart".
Your home and office will be filled with these wise and
enlightened
gadgets and subsystems, including "smart" toilet
bowls which will flush
themselves (great for families with kids, especially my
kids!) and faucets
which will automatically regulate the temperature of the
water, and in
addition turn themselves off after you've finished brushing
your teeth.
All of which, hopefully, making your life a lot easier --
or at least more
interesting, especially when the software develops bugs.
Of course, all this really could be done with
a CPU and a hard disk
in every piece of furniture and every kitchen appliance. But
think of
the cost. And the unnecessary duplication of processing power.
To a large extent, though, this is achievable even today,
and that too without
the CPU in your coffee table, allowing you thereby to dispense
with the coffee
table book about coffee tables. (Eat your heart out, Kramer.)
The reason is, that in your Mac you already have one of the most powerful CPUs on the planet -- the PowerPC!
In fact, if you are the lucky owner of an iMac (or an even
more powerful G3
machine), you already own a chip to rival any single CPU in
a Cray. (A Cray
uses lots of them, that's the only difference!) And just wait
till the G4 comes
out: it will really s-s-sizzle --and that too, without
even working up a sweat.
So why aren't we using all this awesome processing power,
except
when we sit right in front of the computer monitor? Most of
us non-
nerds spend maybe four hours a day, tops, at the computer,
and
even less on weekends and holidays. That's way below 20
per cent of the time!
This is where Apple could really do something, since
it's in the unique position of being both a hardware AND a software company.
The fact is, there's no reason for a CPU to be anywhere near
its own
input and output devices. Many of us even today, in fact,
put our CPU
under the table. All we want to see and touch are the keyboard,
mouse
and screen. With infrared keyboards and mice, we can even
sit many
feet away from the CPU. And with flat screens finally becoming
the "in"
thing, the desk is once again getting a lot less cluttered
than it used to
be.
Indeed there's no reason the CPU couldn't disappear
completely, say into the basement, provided there was
a way to get the signal to and from it rapidly enough,
and without too much hassle.
Well, it just so happens that there are not merely one,
but two readily available ways to get the signal there and back.
The first is the ordinary wiring that already exists in any
modern
home: at the very least the nice fat power wiring, and also
the
somewhat thinner phone lines. Sure, the power wires carry
electricity,
humming away at a leisurely 60 Hertz (or 50 Hertz, depending
on
where on earth you live); but what's to prevent them from
also
carrying signals at 333 MegaHertz? The ones would hardly even
interfere with the others. Or if they did, the interference
could easily
be filtered out. Same goes for the phone lines: indeed that's
how
xDSL works.
And virtually all input and output devices need electricity, so more likely than not, they'd be plugged into a wall socket anyway. Transmit the in- and out- signals through the self-same wiring, and you've got it made!
That, in fact, is how some European countries are planning
to get their citizens on the Internet -- and that too,
at speeds
rivaling ADSL. They'll transmit the Internet signals over
the
regular power lines. We can't do that in North America
as yet,
because our voltages are lower, and thus we have more
transformers (which block the signals). But it just goes
to show
that this can be done.
And not to be outdone, even Radio Shack markets devices
which will plug into your wall socket and enable you to turn your oven
on and off right from your computer keyboard.
And the Mac has always supported multiple input and output devices. With USB technology, in fact, it could support up to 127 -- more than enough to satisfy any cyberhog.
So why limit yourself to just one keyboard, mouse and screen?
Have one in every room! One in the kitchen to call up all
those
delicious recipes, another built into the coffee table (we
discussed
that earlier), a third in the garage to refer to those cool
tips for
waxing your car, and yet another in the garden shed, to
find out
directly from Holland how deeply tulip bulbs should be planted.
Just plug the devices into the wall sockets, and carry
on working like nothing's changed.
(And if you feel you want privacy, keep the signals inside
your home by installing a little doodad at the point where the electricity enters
your home -- thus keeping the signals inside, inside, and those outside, outside.
The doodad, in fact, need be nothing more complicated than a simple transformer that
doesn't actually increase or decrease the voltage: it just blocks the signals.)
But you may once in a while want to carry a battery-powered
output screen around with you. Here comes the second
possiblity: wireless!
Using either infrared or radio-frequency signals, the kind
used in
TV remotes and cordless phones (not to mention the iMac's
irDA
port), the signal could be beamed directly to the output device.
Indeed when necessary, both methods could be used.
The power lines could
carry the signal to a little doohickey you'd plug into a socket
on the outer wall
of the house, and it would then beam the signal wireless to
you in the gazebo.
Hey: they've already developed wireless mice and keyboards,
right?
Maybe there'll be some bandwidth problem about developing
wireless
screens, but surely there's nothing that can't be solved
with a little
ingenuity. (Like, how about bouncing infrared signals off
a mirror on
the ceiling? After all, infrared light of 100 nanometre
wavelength would
generate 3 quadrillion waves in one second -- more
than enough to
surpass even Gigabit Ethernet in bandwidth, at least theoretically.)
And why limit yourself to traditional input and output
devices. Read and answer your e-mail in bed, using
nothing more than a low-cost flat screen and a magnetic
(or light-sensitive) pen. Browse the Web while sitting on
the can, holding nothing more than a lightweight tablet
like the Federation crew uses on Star Trek.
Take notes
or draw pictures while wandering around in the garden.
This is no mere Palm 3 or Newton, mind you -- let alone
a friggin'
laptop costing twice as much as your main Mac, yet possessing
only half as much computing oomph. All the records are stored
in one single central location, so they're all there,
ready to be retrieved
at your slightest whim. And the system can store gigabytes
of records;
in the future, maybe even terabytes. All searchable with a
single
Sherlock. With no need ever to "synchronise files".
(Puh-leeze! Who
needs thathassle.)
(A computer, after all, is an extension of your mind.
You have only one mind, so why would you want more than one computer?)
AND you can call up the entire processing power of
the most powerful machine
you possess from your garden, garage, kitchen or coffee table,
as the case may
be. The Internet, MS Office, Photoshop, ElectricImage,
Macromedia Director,
you name it. (Or better still, the Über-App! See my article
entitled Simplicity, at http://macreviewzone.com/futureofthemac/opendoc.html).
Everything you
want right at your fingertips, right where you happen to be
at any given time.
And when you upgrade, you only have to upgrade the Big Kahuna
in
the basement. The extra peripherals scattered around the house
can
stay the same!
The peripherals would also cost next to nothing, at least
compared to an
equal number of PowerBooks, or even an equal number of Palm
3s. (How
much do extra mice and keyboards cost anyway? And flat screens
are
coming down in price even as we speak.) If you are really
stingy, of
course, you could use second-hand CRT monitors in the garage
or garden
shed.
On the other hand, if you want to splurge, why limit yourself
to
input devices that work with human fingers only, and output
devices that merely display stuff visually? Go the whole
hog,
and buy yourself a few that generate input with changes
in
temperature, voice, light, or even smells; and output devices
that can control appliances and gadgets you already possess.
So drop one of those into your flush tank, and hey presto,
your self-flushing toilet bowl. Or hook one up to your sink,
and hey presto, your temperature-regulating faucet. Put
one in your fridge, and you'll know soon enough if some
of your cheese has gone off. Attach one to your oven,
and it'll let you know when the roast beef is done just right.
Install one in your coffee table (but we discussed that
already). Etc., etc., etc. Why not, eh?
Heck, why stop at that. Plug in microphones and loudspeakers
in every room, and
give your kids comm badges to wear on their shirts. Then,
when you want to know
where your kids are, just say "Computer, locate Counsellor
Troi" (that being the
code name for your seven-year-old daughter). You'd get a reply
saying "Counsellor
Troi is in the back yard." (Of course, if Counsellor
Troi has run off with her friends
to play in the park, the computer might say: "Counsellor
Troi is not on board the
Enterprise.") Twenty-fourth century technology, here
in 1999.
Apple could make a bundle developing such peripherals.
Not just the flat tablets, but all kinds of input and output devices that
work seamlessly with the InvisiMac located in the basement. Of course,
if Apple didn't do it, someone else would, because such devices would sell
like hot cakes. Provided, of course, they worked, and worked every time
without fail. Just like on the Enterprise.
After all, this would be the very ultimate in "plug-and-play", wouldn't it? Just plug your device into the wall, and start playing.
And wouldn't Apple, being both a hardware and a software
company, and
moreover having a well deserved reputation for real
plug and play, have
a much greater ability to make them work every time, than
would Radio Shack?
After all, the peripherals should be connected to Apple's
own machines running
Apple's own software, right? Whereas anyone else, if they
did it, would most
probably tailor their equipment to PCs, and we all know how
well PCs plug and
play.
At the very least, Apple should make this option a realistic
one in all its future hardware and software -- just as it has made
networking a true plug and play option available on all Macs since
Day One. After all, upstaging the Twenty-fourth century would be no
small achievement, especially if it were done while we're still in the
Twentieth. (Or are the
script writers on the Paramount staff so darned incompetent,
that they can't tell
the difference between next year's technology and the Twenty-fourth
century's?)
Anyway, Steve, here's our big chance. Don't blow it, now.
Copyright 1996-2007 by Cider Press Publishing LLC all rights reserved. MacReviewZone is not authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Apple Computer. Apple, the Apple logo, Macintosh, iPod, iBook, iMac, eMac, and PowerBook are registered trademarks of Apple Computer, Inc. Additional company and product names may be trademarks or registered trademarks and are hereby acknowledged.