"Technology"

[truste1]

I agree that a lot of technology is not productive or maybe a good use of our talents, but I still think there is a place for entertainment innovations. Having a cell application to change your DVR remotely is no different than calling home to have somebody push "record" on the VCR. DVR's are awesome...and I don't watch TV.

I don't think you get his point.  In buying an i-phone people aren't "foregoing" the cost of things like cameras.  They are paying for crappy versions of those things. What about those people who just want to buy a cell-phone and don't want to have to (implicitly) pay for all the other stuff?
[/quote]

They have phones without cameras, they are not as widespread but they are still manufactured. Most likely the demand is for camera phones, that is why retailers stock them in larger quantities and manufactures produce more models. But cameraless phones are available. A few years ago a 3mp camera was an OK camera to have, and now that's on the phone. It's a progressive process.

I agree with your overall point that there are lots of ways we "waste" technology, but I don't think multitasking devices are one of them. I also thing remote-updates are a great thing because bugs always get by, and that's even more possible now with the increase in streaming media. (I love streaming Netflix->Xbox 360...soon enough it will go straight to the TV).

[c0Ld]

I enjoy having an "all-in-one device" in my Blackberry. I usually leave my iPod at home these days and am considering selling it and just buying a bigger SD card for my phone instead. If I want to perform a quick google search, it's at my finger tips. With a 3.2 megapixel camera I don't feel like I have to buy a disposable whenever I go on a trip. I can check my email, chat on AIM, etc from any location. Sometimes having a more complex device is a good thing and can be incredibly handy.

How far do you have to take it? What if every cell phone was ONLY a cell phone, and didn't even have the basic feature of a clock? Suddenly everyone needs to buy a watch.

Where?  They're all damned computers now-a-days! I used to have an old Nokia that resembled a real phone, but they don't make it anymore.  It had the most useful non-phone feature though.  A flash light!  Can't say I have ever needed or used the camera on my new phone...  

Ever seen the flash on the Blackberry Storm's camera? Damn thing is more then a flashlight, it could light up a football stadium.  :P

Consider, for example, Google Chrome.  The interface shears off most functionality most people don't use.  It's simple and its (almost) perfect.  By contrast, I feel like other web browsers are cluttered with crap I don't use or need.

I remember seeing a firefox plugin once to control winamp ... what the hell? Is it so difficult to press alt+tab to do that? A browser is hardly a cell phone, though.

[rabbit]

Chrome also includes a TOS which gives them legal ownership of your soul, so there's that tradeoff.

[Warrior]

I think you've just become fatigued with technology, it's evolving pretty rapidly, and the aim of technology is to make lives easier.

I don't think anything you pointed out was necessarily bad, but rather an example of an ecosystem of connected devices starting to come to fruition. Short term it may look gimmicky and maybe even useless, but I'm sure the Internet of 1999 also looked gimmicky and useless by today's standards (Blinking text, geocities, etc..) but on the backs of those small annoyances, came the internet of today.

My point is, it's merely one of many evolutionary phases that technology will go through, and ultimately the goal is to enrich lives and ease burdens.

[Explicit]

Along with what Warrior said, we're just taking a minor detour in terms of technological development, but I can definitely agree with how it's deterring actual progress. The minds that are put to use developing these slight conveniences could be doing much, much greater things.

[nslay]

There's a difference between technology and gimmick.  You see gimmicks on TV commercials for only $19.95 (5 payments of course) complete with free $50 value bonus pack!  Those rarely make it on store shelves.  Real non-gimmicky technology, on the other hand, has a lasting impression on society.  Their benefit and use  is easily understood.  For example, I doubt anybody ever once thought GPS was gimmicky.  But a cell phone app that can remotely control your DVR?  Is that really useful?  Is it really that hard to set the DVR to record your shows when you're at home?  When it comes to GPS, sure anyone can read a map, but it makes a huge difference when someone/thing talks you through the drive.  It allows you to focus on driving instead of looking for road signs or addresses.  This is an obvious net improvement over reading a map.

[iago]

I'd have to agree, I think this is pretty silly. What exactly are they updating that justifies the (admittedly low) cost of the hardware to do this? Should I be concerned that someone is going to hack my TV so the screensaver is porn?

Concerned? I'm more concerned that they WON'T! ;)

[nslay]

...why do new TVs connect to the Internet to download updates...

I'd have to agree, I think this is pretty silly. What exactly are they updating that justifies the (admittedly low) cost of the hardware to do this? Should I be concerned that someone is going to hack my TV so the screensaver is porn?

Concerned? I asked "Why?"  Should a TV need to update itself?  What about my living room lamp?  I think it has a bug...developers messed up while developing the lamp's firmware :(
Does software really belong on a TV?  Does the TV really need Internet access?  I mean, the TV has a simple purpose...is that really needed?

...why do Blue Ray players boot an OS?

Your blue ray player needs an OS because it has hardware, and an OS is defined as the part of the software that communicates with the hardware.

As opposed to all the previous house-hold appliances that didn't/don't have an OS?  Are you kidding me?  Should I look forward to booting my toaster in the future? Anyways, Blue-Ray players have an OS because they need to run the JVM to play the Blue-Ray menus.  Java was originally developed for embedded devices...but it seems really silly to wait tens of seconds for my movie player to boot.

Why in God's earth do we need a cellphone app that can remotely control our DVR...

If they supported my phone, you could bet I'd have it installed.

How pathetic.  It's already very easy to set it to record things when you're at home.

[rabbit]

Most toasters and blenders and microwaves have been running basic MIPS based OSes for years.  Sheesh.

[dark_drake]

Most toasters and blenders and microwaves have been running basic MIPS based OSes for years.  Sheesh.

Yes, but I don't have to hook my toaster up to the internet to keep it from burning my toast.  :P

[MyndFyre]

What about my living room lamp?  I think it has a bug...developers messed up while developing the lamp's firmware :(

What about a lamp that automatically conserves energy by adjusting its output based on the ambient lighting of the room as well as whether there are people inside?  Would that lamp use software?  Using software would enable it to be able to vary its behavior more readily than a hardware-connected component.

Does software really belong on a TV?  Does the TV really need Internet access?  I mean, the TV has a simple purpose...is that really needed?

TVs aren't as simple anymore.  Consider that technologies like HDMI require all devices in the chain to be secure; consider also that the codecs used by TVs are far more sophisticated.  As we've switched to digital compression rather than analog, and as the standards of video have changed, TVs have to adapt.  It is expensive to manufacture, test, and change a hardware decompression module; it would be even worse if a critical problem was identified in the standard and hardware was responsible for all the work.

As opposed to all the previous house-hold appliances that didn't/don't have an OS?  Are you kidding me?  Should I look forward to booting my toaster in the future? Anyways, Blue-Ray players have an OS because they need to run the JVM to play the Blue-Ray menus.  Java was originally developed for embedded devices...but it seems really silly to wait tens of seconds for my movie player to boot.

Blu-ray is more than simply a movie transfer medium; it's an interactive medium.  The fact that they allow for the JVM to run menus and stuff should be a GREAT advantage and help diminish cost.  Long boot times, I would agree, are unacceptable; but that will undoubtedly improve as flash memory becomes cheaper.

How pathetic.  It's already very easy to set it to record things when you're at home.

It's sometimes equally easy to forget to record things.  Surprisingly, not everyone has your (apparent) attention to detail.  As a colleague noted to me yesterday, half of the world's population are below the mean intelligence.  (Yes I know that it's not exact).

[Sidoh]

As a colleague noted to me yesterday, half of the world's population are below the mean intelligence.  (Yes I know that it's not exact).

Haha.  Just say median and you'll be fully correct!

[dark_drake]

As a colleague noted to me yesterday, half of the world's population are below the mean intelligence.  (Yes I know that it's not exact).

Haha.  Just say median and you'll be fully correct!

Yes, but it just doesn't sound as malicious.