Five years ago analysts were predicting that cellphones and PDAs will eventually merge. Many laughed at these predictions (especially PalmOS users of that time) but today we know that the future of PDAs already lies with smartphones. "Convergence" seems to be the key element of all new cellphones, even the ones that are not in the "smartphone" category: they all playback mp3 for example. It's obvious that convergence will move even further: music & video players and recorders will eventually give in much of their marketshare in favor of a one-device-does-it-all type of informational, entertainment & communication product. And Apple is definitely aware of this trend.
Post a Comment
Member since:
---
Member since:2005-06-28
I suggest you read the whole of the article before posting. The kind of "convergance" you have today even with the best smartphone in the market, it's not as full as the one I describe on my article.
Today, we HAVE the technology to create the device with all the features I am describing there (especially the A/V recording stuff), but we CAN NOT make it thin enough for public consuption. YET.
Member since:
---
Unless there's a breakthru in battery technology, I don't want my PDA to be replaced by my mobile phone.
Imagine not being able to make a call because you waisted all your battery life by using the PDA or entertainment features.
No thanks.
I prefer to have my PDA utilize my mobile phone features using bluetooth or wifi if needed.
Member since:2005-06-28
Member since:
---
... is already implemented in most Japanese phones.
They...
- Play MP3 (since 2002 if I'm not mistaken)
- Have a hold button (for non-folding units)
- Have FM radio (recent)
- Have TV tuners (recent)
- Have swivel screens that when flipped and held in landscape operate identically to digital cameras.
- Can have the screen/lid stand stable at any viewing angle like a mini laptop.
- Have AV-OUT for playing J2ME games on the TV
- Have 2.7" QVGA screens
- They cost from 20,000 to 30,000 yen
My V902SH does most of the above except for the FM radio.
Member since:2005-06-28
Exactly. HALF of what I mentioned.
And other devices are doing the other half, but NOT ALL in ONE device. That's why I name the killer device being a child of "convergence".
Today, we don't have the technology to make a small device out of ALL of these features. But soon enough, we will. That's the point of my article. It's just a list of ALL these features to be found in ONE smartphone in the next 3 years.
Member since:
2005-07-20
"But Apple... Apple will have to follow the trends with a smartphone, sooner or later. The only question is: will they use FreeBSD as a base for their embedded OS, or Linux?..."
I am sure none, since Apple likes to do unpredictable. I feel a great possibility of them adopting QNX or somethingelse. Coz they hate common standarts and sharing with others.. Imagine a mp3 player device that you can't upload from other software, imagine mp3 player that disables the downloaded song to play on other mp3 software,imagine a OS that doesnt work anyother device other than their trademark.. imagine....
Member since:2005-06-28
Member since:---
QNX has no need to deal with phones themselves: that's merely an end-user (of QNX's) application. QNX is a hard real-time operating system with a microkernel, and is very well-suited to the purpose, being small, super modular, and makes it quite convenient with development tools, too.
There's absolutely nothing (in terms of practical technical reasons: perhaps the per unit licensing costs would be more than Apple would cough up willingly) that would stand in the way of Apple slapping their own GUI level on top of the OS, slapping something in that did the codec for any form of phone, etc. and all of that would be running in userspace without a problem, presuming they wrote it correctly. Heck, QNX is very POSIX compliant, too!
Member since:
2005-07-06
"But the point is, most young people take with them outdoors their mp3 player, their phone, their PDA, their laptop and sometimes their video player too."
No. No they don't. most young GEEKS lug that crap around around. Most young NORMAL PEOPLE have a phone and maybe an iPod Shuffle or some other similarly cheapo music player. No video player, no laptop and DEFINITELY no PDA. Young people tend to like tiny phones, even at the cost of functionality. I'm not a sure a big geek-o-phone will appeal.
Member since:2005-06-28
Adam, there was a time that people were asking the question of "why the heck do I need a computer for?". But as the times pass by and new blood fills this planet, such a device will be used a lot. People won't see it as a geeky gimmick, but a way to call, use it as a FULL computer, play games, check directions, information, entertainment etc etc.
In the beginning laptops were not popular because of their flimsy storage and price. But as these two points got fixed (around 1998), every young person now has a laptop.
This "geek" device as you call it, it will be the next step. It will be the next thing to have.
Don't see this device is as a phone with a lot of other crap in it. It is instead a device of its own right, that happens to also do voice!
Member since:
2005-07-06
Sorry, Eugenia, but your cosy vantage point is, oh, several years further ahead of the curve than you think it is. Step out of the bubble once in a while and see what the 'young people' you speak for actually _do_ with their lives and with technology...
(and no, they don't all have laptops. at least, not on this planet.)
a computer is different from this thing. You can buy a computer, stick it in the corner, and not use it for weeks at a time. (Which a lot of people who buy them do...ask your relatives sometime). You can't do that with your phone. It's a very personal possession.
Member since:
---
I read your article and really like what that have been described there. Although I think that PDA will end up as a digital swiss army knife... that is it will be able to do all the things ... but a dedicated device will do it better. a lot better. Inteface wise that is.
No one in is right mind would like to navigate while driving a car with its cellphone/pda while a dedicated device with 10" monitor could be used instead. Nintendo DS will be a better *gaming* device as those need to be broad (remeber the n-gage I say). and so on...
Yoni.
Member since:
---
I don't get it, a table stand to watch videos on a 4" screen? Gaming/functionality buttons?
I happen to agree with one of the other people who posted, most of it's available now, but most people just don't want it. I certainly wouldn't buy this 'device' and I know many other youths that wouldn't either...
Member since:
---
Divergence is the reality, be it in nature, or technology.
How did Linux come into being? Why doesn't everyone use a Media Centre (or Linux) powered PC for their home theatre? (In North America at least) Why can't Media Centre PCs manipulate HD video? Why would electronics companies all want to sell the same few widgets, with only appearance to distinguish them?
Member since:
---
One limiting thing about handhelds is the display. Until there are plug-in bigger screens, or rollable displays, or projectors or whatever, these things aren't really going to move beyond 640x480. Density for density-sake won't have any discernable improvement.
What a mass-market device needs is a clean, simple interface (Palm?). Colour and theming is good, as long as it is subtle.
So I am not convinced about the need for big graphics cards. What is needed is predominately 2D accel, if anything. That is the nature of the interface.
If you can play a movie over the network in 3 years time, why not play a game over the network? Remote rendering yah.
And that can be a consideration for storage too. Why have 40GB local when you can have much more remotely? (The remote server could easily ref-count data, as most people will have copies of the same content, typically songs and movie-clips.) Home-movies and recordings is all that would take space, and I rather suspect that those are the kind of thing that new users make one of, and promptly forget and don't use again..
Member since:2005-07-06
"If you can play a movie over the network in 3 years time, why not play a game over the network? Remote rendering yah."
Because the latency stinks.
"And that can be a consideration for storage too. Why have 40GB local when you can have much more remotely?"
What if you're in an area with no 3G coverage (and yes, there'll be lots of those, yes, even in three years...) and you want to watch a movie? Not going to happen over GPRS.
And also because most people won't have unlimited data plans. Where do you think cellphone companies expect to earn their money on 3G systems? Data transfer fees.
Member since:
---
Don't see them ever becoming mainstream(you need to hold the camera at armslenght to get a good picture but than the screen is way to small to see the other person). But a phone needs a camera so why not.
Harddisk need a lot of energy and are not as sturdy as flash so i see the phone of the near future as having 4GB of flash and wireless USB for if you want more (like 400GB of harddisk space)
Speech recognition isn't exactly new to phones and not a succes. Wonder how many of the Opera users use it. In short it is a tick mark on the data sheet and not much more
Member since:
2005-07-06
1. Fast IR with the ability to remote control devices. My current PPC phone has IR but I have to be less than 5 feet from the TV to control it - not good
2. Jog-wheel - like the SonyEricsson P-series phones - this is something I miss in PPC phones.
3. CDMA - I use GSM in my everyday life, but the world is a a dual standard world. CDMA + UMTS would be optimal
4. QUADBAND GSM +EDGE, please no more triband nastyness
5. Mobile TV/PVR - DBM, NTSC, PAL - it's all good 
Now one comment:
Why a 20GB HD and not 20GB flash memory a-la iPod Nano?
Member since:
2005-10-18
About 7 years ago, my dad predicted that smartphones would become really popular while he worked at Motorola. The company rejected his idea to start making them and laid him off like a year later (economic problems, they closed down the San Diego division). Back then, people couldn't conceive that it would work out, just lke some of you are saying of OUR future (from now's standpoint).
Trust me, smartphones will get better. The whole display thing? I beleive that some sort of Holographic display will take over within a couple years (like Star Wars holograms). Many people here are affraid of change. It WILL happen.
Battery technology might get better in the future? You can't really question if it will or won't. Power technology has been constantly improving since the beginings of computers. The early computers would take so much power (relative to their standards for a lot), and have very little functionality. Now look at today. My Fx57 Guzzles power with my 500W PSU, and yet PSUs have not changed in size, if fact they have gotten slightly smaller over the years, but more wattage. If you showed an Ipod nano to someone 5-10 years ago and tell them what it does, he'd look at you and laugh, or beleive it is some military gadget. Now it's being mass produced. Another 2-3 years, and apple will be able to make it smaller and more battery life (if they really wanted). Batteries WILL get better
(another example is hard drive capacity (from like 40 gig being a lot 10 years ago to having 1 terrabyte commercially available at a slightly expensive price today) and how the silicon process has gotten smaller and smaller. just 2-3 years ago 180nm was the norm, now 90nm is becoming the norm, and smaller than that possible)
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the Future Looks Good
--ZaNkY
Member since:
2005-10-21
Convergence is a pretty safe bet,Euginia. I'm almost certain that these things will come to pass. But as you know there will always be veriety. If I were to guess at the future of cell phones this would be my expectation:
Cheap, as in blister pack at the check-out line at Walmart. Calling card included. Small, light, and disposable. Takes AA or AAA batteries. The unit should be good enough for a one year manufacturer warranty. Sound quality better than two tin cans and a string
One can only dream.
Member since:
---
To me convergence is a red herring argument. We say we want it, but then when we get it we say we want this additional feature! And then we need to wait three more years!
Let me explain why convergence will not happen.
1) Try flying in a plane listening to your MP3's on your cellphone. Oh yeah, gonna happen REAL soon!
2) When I excercise I don't want everything. I want an MP3 player only and that can be strapped on my arm. I sweat and my device has to stand up to me sweating.
3) When I travel battery power is essential. If I know something is going to drain my cellphone, well I wont use it!
4) I am not a Borg! These days at conferences I see people wearing their bluetooth head pieces all the time, with their cellphone strapped to their side. Sorry, no Borg here! Small phones in my pocket!
5) Sure 1200 USD is quite a bit of money, but if my cheaper 600 USD piece breaks then I have no camera, no MP3 player, no GPS and no cellphone! The likelihood that all 1200 USD pieces will break at once is pretty darn remote.
6) With separate pieces I can buy what I want, and need and not a lowest common denominator device.
And finally people fail to grasp why Apple does so well. It is not about convergence, but sheer elegance!
RE: Silly, Silly, Silly and here's why!
Member since:
---
I don't think we'll move in the direction of the iPod and the LifeDrive. In the near future, solid state storage will increase capacity greatly. We're already starting to see 8GB chips in small devices. There was an article a few months back about the possibility of 100GB flash ram modules based on nanotech.
I don't need to tell anyone here that hard drives are prone to failure because of their moving nature. They also use much more battery.
The iPod nano got it right - huge amount of storage, no hard drive, very few worries about data loss and corruption.
Member since:
---
People spend entirely too much time talking on the goddamn phone as it is (especially while they're driving). Cell phones every you go now, going off in the middle of movies and other places, and now with some of the most annoying ring tones a human can conceive of. You want to theorize on some impressive technology? Come up with a cyber-phone implanted in a person's brain so they can do the electronic version of telepathy and not be bothering everyone around them, and arrange it so that it won't work on a plane or in a car.
Member since:
---
1440 mAH?
Are you serious? My camera has two 2100 mAH AA batteries in it. I think a monster device like this is going to require more juice than a camera.
I would also like to see someone run with a device like this.
Also remember that the more junk you put into a single device, the higher your probability of failure is.
I guess a device like this might be okay for a corporate drone type person that commutes to and from work and sleeps, but for real people like me who don't want to carry everything with them all the time, it doesn't make sense.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:---
I don't claim to be an electrical engineer, but I figured the two batteries are probably in series to provide 2.4 volts.
(I think NiMH batteries are 1.2V)
Are you saying that the 1440 mAH would supply more voltage or what?
I'm wondering where the power discrepancy is.
Member since:
---
I am sorry but this article is not meshing with reality. The majority of smartphone sales won't be PDA-like devices but phone-like devices. PDA-like devices are very specific devices and do not correspond well to the usage patterns of the average user. Communication and entertainment are the main two things here but it cannot trump the portability of the device. If it's to big people simply won't bring it with them, if they won't bring it with them all the time their need for a 'do-everything-device' is not as great.
Also it is clear that the author has no idea what goes into a modern smartphone operating system to begin with and the amount of work to actually move this into state of the art hardware, I am not talking about putting some shell on some Windows Mobile reference design here but actually delivering some leading edge device such as the Nokia 668x or the new DoCoMo FOMA phones.
The suggestion that Apple would take Linux or some BSD and port that over to an extremly tight embedded platform, add a full telephony stack, user interface and develop a new line of telephony hardware with no previous experience or knowledge in just a few years with easily breaking their entire R&D budget is not realistic. Apple has no such financial resource. A slick looking MP3 player is nothing like a smartphone. Nothing.
Of course even if they did manage to launch such a device they still have to compete with existing manufacturers like Nokia, Motorola and the rest. Release cycles are tight, the big players launch an insane amount of new phone models each year. Call me sceptic but this sounds like a 'I wish...' article and not any realistic analysis of the current state and the future of the market.
Member since:
---
624 Mhz to 1 GHz CPUs
... the new intel speeds are 600Mhz or faster and actually run SLOWER than the Xda 416mhz processor.. Why would u want to have a slower cpu with faster mhz? dont u actually mean u want a FASTER cpu.. clock speed is irrelevant being a mac affecionado surly youd understand this.
BTW the 416 Mhz cpu does 600 Mips something similar to a p 2 300.
* Bluetooth 2.0 Class 1
The lastest iMate and o2 XDA minis.. both have this. (i have a slightly older model wich has 1.2)
Basic speech recognition
Possible but it works so badly on desktops nobody really wants it on their pdas.. of course voice command and IBM dragon dictate are avalible for PDA anyway.
* WiFi and 3G/WCDMA/UMTS
The new version of the XDA has both
* SD or miniSD support
Of course my XDA has this... i can get a SD Wifi or adapter or GPS
* FM radio
I can buy a headphone that has a fm radio in it.. or get a different model that has it in it.. its a tiny given u can buy headphones with a fm radio inbuilt.
* GPS .... Its about 250$ for the sdio card for my phone.. fully supports navman etc etc
* Integrated keyboard
Lots of other versions of the XDA have keyboards.. they mini S or imate jasjar have it.
20 to 40 GB hard-disk/Flash
Soon .. or atm i can use my pocketpc to HOST usb and plug in a usb hard drive .. atm i can get up to 4 gig sdio cards... who needs more than 4 gig of mp3s or videos when its such a small screen?.. useful for taking warez to your friends.. not useful for buisness
* VGA front camera
XDA camera is XGA res 1.3 mp.. new cameras are allready over 2 mpixel.. the latest o2 xda can face the camera both ways
* TFT VGA touchscreen 4"
The Xdas screen is 2.8 inches.. if it was much bigger the size of the mini wouldnt be as small as an ipod.. i like its size.. that screen and device would be too bulky
* 4 MP camera with flashlight (on the back)
* 128 MB RAM
* 3D sound and stereo speakers
* microphone, headphone-out
The latest o2 device has 128 meg (64 is rom though which the os runs from .. still the os is always going to take up a fair bit)
My o2 has stereo sound.. and headphones.
I want to get a breakout cord for mic and headphone using a normal cable.. with this .. having extra ports on the phone would just be a waste of space.
ARg im tired of answering each of these items.. u get the drift.. the rest can be left for an excersize for the reader.. in GO AND LOOK IT UP FOR YOURSELF
90% of the things you mentioned are here now.. INCLUDING VIDEO OUT (check out te o2 xda range).
Member since:
---
My biggest beef with these convergence tools is that they're so awkward to carry. Yes, it's easier to carry than a separate cellphone, MP3 player, GPS unit, etc., but I don't want/need to carry them all at the same time. Also, I wish more gadgets were ruggedized or semi-ruggedized... If I spend more than $200 on a gadget, I get a little paranoid about carrying it around.
Member since:
---
Sorry for my arrogance before.. its just nobody actually bothers to look to see whats out there. This market is huge and has killed of Palm OS.. yet nobody including editors seems to have notice until apple comes along and sells overpriced limited functionality devices? .
Apple isnt ever going to win this market.. a convergence device requires a true OS .. not an ipod or early palmos.. apple dosent have such an OS.. Microsoft does and has thousands of compatible applications now.. and development kits.
MS has already won the convergence market game and half the ppl on the web think they still dont exist.
Member since:
2005-07-08
I have to admit that I was off on my original convergence position. When the original camera phones came out, I really thought it was a terrible idea. Suffice to say that it doesn't pay to be stubborn, and I've switched my viewpoint. When it comes to things that we carry around us, convergence is not just nice, it is necessary.
Battery - as is often the case, we cater our usage to battery limitations. People will learn to have a charger at home as well as at work and in the car. They may also learn to charge every night when the go to bed.
OS - it won't be QNX. They're too small, and that goes for the leverage. In good times, they have an enthusiastic team of developers to support them to port over new os software, but for the proprietary stuff and general usage - eg Flash, it's not happening. Apple also has an issue with ownership - it likes to own everything, if for no other reason - quality.
Member since:
---
Unless it's the size of a credit card, the screen rolls out to extend when watching movies and surfing the web, and it has a built in bottle opener. IF I have to sacrifice some functionality in order to achieve this then we can do without the voice recognition (it sucks anyway) and probably the GPS, Phone, PDA functionality, and movie playback. Actually just make it a small bottle opener and I'll be happy. Oh, but that would mean no convergence?
Jack of all trades......
And what have Apple got to do with any of this? They are at least 10 years behind already. They don't do convergence, well unless you count the iPod with Video.
Member since:
---