Whether you like Microsoft or not, the Redmond giant does have one thing going for it: the company's research division. Working together with several universities and other institutions, Microsoft Research works on the soft and hardware of the future, ranging from research operating systems to insanely cool things like what Microsoft's chief research and strategy officer Craig Mundie showed off during the Microsoft College Tour '09 (more videos).
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-02-06
I used to think the very same thing (and, to some extent, I still do). But these days I can at least think of a reasonable motive behind all that thing: I believe they aren't thinking about the usage of computers we have today: Not the personal computer where you sit (or lay down) and access things.
I think it's more like renewing the concept of a plugged house. One central computer with various kinds of interfaces around, mostly less powerful to the way we use them today, but possibly more expressive for small tasks and things you'd do in a "Surface" iface and this Minority Report-like thing.
Having a few of those things (in a not-so-near future) around in the house, and having access with simple gestures and touches to things like notes, videos, music, video-conference and stuff like that.
That's, obviously, just my view of the thing, but I could at least see it being somewhat useful to that experience.
Member since:2006-01-06
You're right. As Quato said (in Total Recall), "Free your mind, Quaid." If you're going to dream about the future, don't start with what you have today -- think about what you would like. Current interfaces (eg. the desktop) use physical/spacial metaphors to represent data. A friend of mine refers to the desktop as his "alternate junk drawer". But there's no reason you can't think in other terms -- temporal, for example ... using a timeline. While we have a tough time visualizing how useful that would be, it was completely useful in "Minority Report" because they were essentially sifting through temporal data. Yale computer scientist has been working on this concept for years. He calls it "Lifestreams". Check it out. Worth reading, if you're interested in this sort of thing...
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.02/fflifestreams_pr.html
Member since:2007-09-22
I don't feel like ranting about Microsoft, but I do think I know what you do make an interresting point. I always imagined people would have one device.
They would carry it around like a mobile/pda and when they are home, it would act like a remote for their TV and a control-system for their home automation-system and tv, etc. recording system (possible also from outside the house).
But maybe not, maybe it will be more like the lightswitch in each room. Which you flick on when you go in the room and flick off when you leave again. Obviously for other functions, sound/music, curtains, lighting.
Interface wise the movie and video both look terrible usability wise. I think it would only work for narrow applications. But maybe that's just me.
Member since:2005-09-13
Farenheit 451, anyone? Hide yer books ... it's coming ...
Member since:
2006-10-01
The Minority Report interface was pretty. However, it seems to be more of an audience interface, something to let the person watching the show know what the actor is doing on the computer. Unfortunately the video refuses to work for me so I can't comment on it specifically. However, I've never seen a use case for a wall display/figure gesture interface that wasn't horribly contrived and less useful then what is available now.