Smartphones going the way of the dinosaur?

[Ozarker]

This from "The Telegraph".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/12039813/Smartphones-to-die-out-within-five-years-says-new-study.html

Maybe there's hope for DSLRs afterall?

 

[Hillsilly]

I can accept that a phone might not be the ideal device for watching football or cooking. But I have this app on my phone called "telephone" which allows me to speak with other people who have a similar app. It's pretty cool. In fact, I'd buy a phone just to use the telephone app. Most of my friends and relatives use this app a lot, too. So I can't see phones disappearing soon.

If I was a futurist, I'd be predicting the death of voicemail and email instead.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Somehow, looking at the general growth of Smart Phones and Apps, I doubt it. Smart phones will become smarter. That's where huge amounts of R&D dollars are already being spent on phones that will be used 5 years from now.

 

[expatinasia]

With poor quality articles like that, I think the Telegraph could well beat smartphones to extinction!

One thing I am seeing amongst friends, is that they are not upgrading as fast as they used to. The phone they currently have is fast and powerful enough for now.

Embedding chips within the body may well be happening now but it will take more than 5 years for that to become mainstream. The smart watches will become popular before that.

 

[Ozarker]

I can't see phones disappearing soon.

To be fair, the article nevers says phones will disappear. They will always exist is one form or another.

 

[Ozarker]

With poor quality articles like that, I think the Telegraph could well beat smartphones to extinction!

One thing I am seeing amongst friends, is that they are not upgrading as fast as they used to. The phone they currently have is fast and powerful enough for now.

Embedding chips within the body may well be happening now but it will take more than 5 years for that to become mainstream. The smart watches will become popular before that.

I think you are right.

 

[Ozarker]

Somehow, looking at the general growth of Smart Phones and Apps, I doubt it. Smart phones will become smarter. That's where huge amounts of R&D dollars are already being spent on phones that will be used 5 years from now.

Probably true, except that the phones will have to become smaller. Some of them now are almost as large as tablets. I can remember when the "in" thing was to buy the smallest possible cell phone. Then the internet and smartphone came into being.

I think this is more the immediate future:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J7GpVQCfms

Implanted chips are not far behind.

Imagine an app in an implanted chip that uses the human eye to take photos through the neuro pathways between brain and eye. Already there are artificial lenses implanted into the eyes of cataract patients. My grandmother of 92 years has 20/20 vision, no astigmatism and sees clearly through hers.

Now imagine a lens implant that can zoom and an app that allows one to change ISO and aperture as a function of the brain.

 

[Ozarker]

"A study published last month in Nature Medicine titled "Clinical translation of a high-performance neural prosthesis" sought to, essentially, let humans control computers with their thoughts.

The study followed two patients who were able to control a computer cursor by willing it to move with their brains — something much more precise than an early experiment that used a robotic arm to drink a beer. The recent tests involved moving the cursor over objects on a screen and typing, using thoughts alone, at a speed of six words per minute."

http://mic.com/articles/126430/the-phone-of-the-future-will-be-implanted-in-your-head#.E1VGCz8cp

 

[Hillsilly]

Except for medical purposes, I struggle to imagine implants ever becoming popular.

I wouldn't be surprised if people tended to go the other way with people more likely to spurn new devices and rehashed "new versions" of existing products.

 

[sanj]

I can accept that a phone might not be the ideal device for watching football or cooking. But I have this app on my phone called "telephone" which allows me to speak with other people who have a similar app. It's pretty cool. In fact, I'd buy a phone just to use the telephone app. Most of my friends and relatives use this app a lot, too. So I can't see phones disappearing soon.

If I was a futurist, I'd be predicting the death of voicemail and email instead.

 

[Sabaki]

So on the photo capabilities of smartphones. Yes, the images got very impressive in a reletively short space of time but as we all recognise, it is not DSLR quality.

Could there ever come a time when your smartphone matches a DSLR? I'm thinking the difference in size between the two devices will always mean that you could get mote technology and therefore more capability into a DSLR. And I doubt digital zoom could ever compare to a telephoto lens.

But who knows...perhaps with some alien tech landing at Canon's head quarters

 

[9VIII]

I actually think they're on the right track, but not necessarily going exactly where they think they will.

The "wearable" trend is finally introducing people to hands free telecommunications, but it won't immediately rid us of the cellphone.
Ironically we've already seen this trend come and go in science fiction.

In Star Trek (of course), at first they had belt holsters with handheld communicators, then in Star Trek: The Next Generation they use a communicator that just clings to your shirt. But they still had tricorders and tablets strewn about the Enterprise.
For now we're going to move into talking to our wrists just because that's the trend, but I actually think the cling on (pun not intended, but we may as well roll with it) style of communicator is going to take priority eventually. Eventually the screen will be the secondary device and the thing that sticks to your shirt is the part that you're going to care about. I still think the idea of a 4" web browsing device is downright silly, and that goes for 5" too. What is actually practical is having a large device for web browsing and media consumption, and a small, extremely simple device for communication.
Once voice commands become remotely reliable we'll be able to consider using a standalone communicator with no screen. We also need to invent the micro-grippy mechanism to make things cling to fabric at will, but it'll happen.

The main reason for using a clip on communicator v.s. a wrist worn communicator is all the watches I've destroyed.

 

[pwp]

I'm reminded of that well worn line:... " is that actually true, or did you read it in the Telegraph?"

As a photographer who spent a couple of decades of my life shooting daily news as a staff photographer before starting my own business back when editorial standards were high, circulation and budgets were strong , my affection for newspapers barely has a pulse any more. With a few superb exceptions, the front pages of just about any newspaper's homepage will be sensation, inflationary rubbish, soft porn and click bait.

I think I'll read a book.

-pw

 

[Ozarker]

I'm thinking the difference in size between the two devices will always mean that you could get mote technology and therefore more capability into a DSLR. And I doubt digital zoom could ever compare to a telephoto lens.

But who knows...perhaps with some alien tech landing at Canon's head quarters

The article isn't about DSLRs or digital zoom (It is about the demise of the smart phone, but okay... I'll bite (re: Alien Tech).

Here's the rub: In 1980 I was an IBM mainframe computer operator (For Computab) in Honolulu, Hawaii (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_System/360). The computer system and support staff took up several floors in a high rise building on Bishop St. There were 6 guys that did nothing but run back and forth between the tape library and a bank of at least a dozen gigantic tape drives. There were dozens of disk drives the size of washing machines. All programs and jobs were fed into the mainframe via punch cards. The mainframe itself was the size of a Volkswagen. All this simply to run payroll for various large companies around the island and on the mainland.

Today's smartphones are far more powerful than that old IBM mainframe and one doesn't need a whole company to operate it. They are given away free by cell service providers.

In 1981 I went to a computer show in Honolulu. The big deal were the word processor workstations put together to replace typewriters. They were the size of a loveseat. The price? A paltry $30,000.00 for a single basic word processor.

I'm 52 years old. The advancements in the last 35 years are unbelievable. We would have considered (Back in 1980 when I was listening to Blondie and DEVO) the tech we have today to be alien tech.

I bought my first PC in 1989 ($2K). It was many times more powerful than the millions upon millions of dollars worth of equipment I worked with just 8 years earlier. It all fit atop my desk. It had a huge hard drive (30 MB). It was a Packard Bell PC with an 8088 processor that had a blazing fast speed of 4.7 Mhz with an 8 bit data bus.

I also bought a Microsoft mouse. The mouse was nearly $200 and had only two buttons.

Windows wasn't affordable yet and I paid $400 or more for a word processing program called "Word Perfect".

I paid another $180 for a grammar checking program. The monitor was monochrome. I couldn't afford the more expensive 4 color VGA monitor and video card.

Since then, the technology has shrunk more and more each year. The 1 terabyte drives we can get today for $50 would have cost $2,000,000,000 and a city block of space 1980. That's two billion dollars in 1980! A single gigabyte of storage in 1980 cost about $2,000,000.

Alien tech is here. It is supernatural. We really cannot imagine what 5 or 10 years from now will offer up.

 

[tron]

I can accept that a phone might not be the ideal device for watching football or cooking. But I have this app on my phone called "telephone" which allows me to speak with other people who have a similar app. It's pretty cool. In fact, I'd buy a phone just to use the telephone app. Most of my friends and relatives use this app a lot, too. So I can't see phones disappearing soon.

If I was a futurist, I'd be predicting the death of voicemail and email instead.

;D ;D ;D

 

[AcutancePhotography]

"Therefore, one in two think that smartphones will belong to the past within five years."

Uh, everything today will belong to the past within five years. That's what "the past" means.

 

[TeT]

OMG: they asked 100000 consumers... May as well ask a box of rocks than joe average consumer.

Joe average consumer thought there would be flying cars by 2001...

 

[MrToes]

OMG: they asked 100000 consumers... May as well ask a box of rocks than joe average consumer.

Joe average consumer thought there would be flying cars by 2001...

I'm still waiting on my hoverboard!!!

 

[TeT]

OMG: they asked 100000 consumers... May as well ask a box of rocks than joe average consumer.

Joe average consumer thought there would be flying cars by 2001...

I'm still waiting on my hoverboard!!!

OT warning!

Those are cool looking... http://www.wired.com/2015/06/lexus-hoverboard-slide/

I would propose that the evolution of the hoverboard is not unlike the evolution of the Canon mirrorless camera; its getting there.

 

[scyrene]

Somehow, looking at the general growth of Smart Phones and Apps, I doubt it. Smart phones will become smarter. That's where huge amounts of R&D dollars are already being spent on phones that will be used 5 years from now.

Probably true, except that the phones will have to become smaller. Some of them now are almost as large as tablets. I can remember when the "in" thing was to buy the smallest possible cell phone. Then the internet and smartphone came into being.

I think this is more the immediate future:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J7GpVQCfms

Implanted chips are not far behind.

Imagine an app in an implanted chip that uses the human eye to take photos through the neuro pathways between brain and eye. Already there are artificial lenses implanted into the eyes of cataract patients. My grandmother of 92 years has 20/20 vision, no astigmatism and sees clearly through hers.

Now imagine a lens implant that can zoom and an app that allows one to change ISO and aperture as a function of the brain.

It's hard to argue against futurism, but it's worth remembering that an artificial lens is a damn sight easier to produce - quite feasible - than getting detailed readout from nerves, which is what you're talking about. Plus the lens is at the front of the eye, the retina and nerves at the back...

It makes great science fiction, but given where we are with artificial limbs that can sense, and direct brain-computer interfaces (both in their infancy), it'll be a long time before you can get readouts of the optic nerve and convert them into any kind of usable image - even assuming it was possible to insert a device to a healthy person without damage, affordable, and sanctioned by the medical authorities (not to mention the human eye works very differently to a digital sensor - unless you mean insert a CMOS, in which case why not just wear it, as we already can in smart glasses etc?)

Implanted chips (just under the skin?) that measure blood sugar etc are much more realistic and required, and I suspect will be coming soon.