It's always been an evolution. What we're seeing now is a trend towards cellular everywhere, and device-agnostic services (same phone number on your Apple Watch as your iPhone). The next shift seems like it will be greater situational awareness in your devices -- your device can understand its surroundings (ARKit), and what you look like (Face ID).
So phones as a category may lose their uniqueness, in that other devices can fill the same roll, but I think we'll always see an evolution of a phone -- that is, a pocketable connected computing device.
I think the slides in the keynote were actually on-point for this, there've been multiple innovations (multi-touch, high-DPI screens, Touch ID, their shift to in-house processors, computational photography), and it's really the aggregate that's lead to a great device. But break it down and it is an iterative, evolutionary process. That's why so many people often seem disappointed after every keynote!
That said, maybe the original iPhone really was a bit special :-)
It's just that the iPhone appeared all at once, whereas you have 5 keynotes to go from 2012's iPhone (the iPhone 4S) to the iPhone 7.
Since then we've got: 4G (LTE), Touch ID, dual-LED flash, NFC and Apple Pay, motion co-processor, 802.11ac, Lightning, Bluetooth 5.0, phase detection autofocus, 4K video and slo-mo 1080p, 3D Touch, haptic feedback, water resistance, wide color gamut, brightness increases, and several times faster CPUs and GPUs (allowing for far more demanding apps).
"a dramatic and wide-reaching change in the way something works or is organized or in people's ideas about it."
First comment:
Do you think phones are a "done" thing? I mean what we are seeing these days is more of an evolution than revolution.
It's always been an evolution.
It wasn't always an evolution.
And for the first few years after that everything was changing so fast it was a revolution.
When it comes to AR, I am not interested in those "look at the pokemon on the street" kind of AR. I'd like projection on the street from the device. I want the Apple Watch to show me a hologram like in Star War. That's the kind of real AR I want to see. I will enjoy driving if map can be projected like hologram on the car windshield so I don't have to check the app on the side.
I think the next breakthrough is just happening now: all cashless transactions. This is already happening in China, India, and some country in Europe (I forgot which one, but over there even newspaper street vendors accept credit cards). US is way behind. Also, chip in human will eventually take off. So just wait for more human-wearable integrations (and this is depressing and dangerous, see my comment below). I bet in no more than 10 years.
We need Google Glass, Spectacles, or some equivalent AR device. All of that stuff you're talking about- projecting onto the street, onto the windshield, etc... that's setting the bar very low. We'll be able to do all of that on a per-user basis once we have AR glasses.
And those are hard problems to solve- projecting holograms into daylight without a surface? Good luck outshining the sun without overheating your tiny pocket projector. They all require unique solutions tailored to the problem and the environment they'll be used in. Why bother with that, when you can either work on AR glasses, or wait until AR glasses are readily available, which is pretty much an inevitability.
Otherwise, there is no way for AR to really take off as a general use. It would be nice to watch your baseball game from a AR+VR (watching from the "eyes" of the players) views.
But on the larger point, I'm not sure how it's depressing. We mostly all live in similar houses and buy similar consumer products, and we have interests, work, families and hobbies that look similar to other peoples.
Maybe along the same lines of how everyone just has their face buried in a phone these days? Disconnecting from "glasses" (or eventually smart contact lenses or brain-interface) will be much the same.
It's really a personal choice. I swear a lot, and I don't like glasses hanging on my nose. Also, I like to relax and practice mindfulness during my run so without glasses I am not distracted by the details of my surroundings (the same reason i think people like filming black/white monochrome). I do recommend without glasses if you can try.
I just feel we are slowly reaching to a point where we can't be free from "vendor lock-in" even in our lives. Perhaps one day there is no physical device you need to carry around except a pair of glasses or wearing a pair of contacts.
Of course these are just my wild speculations.
However after reading your comment and the one below which mentions quality AR glasses which can replace a monitor will be really revolutionary on how we approach computing.
Yes, cashless is something truly revolutionary. Being in India I am personally experiencing the change that it is brining in.
The average user could no doubt make due with a minimal multi-window iOS interface. I have no idea how people work with an iPad in any serious capacity when you are restricted to a full screen interface.
"From mobile... to desktop. Yes, it’s the full Ubuntu desktop OS used by millions on a daily basis -- and it runs directly from the phone, so you’ll be able to move seamlessly from one environment to the other with no file syncing or transfers required. The core OS and applications are fully integrated with their smartphone equivalents, so you can even make and receive calls from the desktop while you work."
The more interesting thing is how tightly connected the macOS VM could be with the iOS VM (I use the term VM here loosly, they could easily be containers living side-by-side and not within a literal hypervisor).
For example, are there two processes running 'Mail' and two copies of every message so that iOS and macOS Mail apps are both working? Do I have to configure them both separately to connect to my accounts? That would be quite silly.
If you can get the two OSs sharing resources but still effectively providing desktop sized vs phone sized user interfaces that could be something quite powerful.
This already sort of happens with some web apps.
Unless someone invents a phone screen that can roll up like a piece of paper, I think phones are going to look the same for a long time.
Face ID has been done, no home button has been done, big screen to the edges has been done. That notch thing is new, but ... doesn't seem interesting (it just obscures part of the screen).
> I sense something. A presence I've not felt since...
We are getting all this new tech in the phone space, faster processors, more ram, etc. But prices keep going up for "premium" experiences. Seems backwards to me
That's why many feels Apple is going backwards
And that's why many like me are not buying their new products
They're simply not a good value for money anymore
My next laptop is a Dell XPS
My phone's are Xiaomis as well as all my "smart home" gadgets
At least if they break I have better guarantees from a company that's not trying to sell me support as a religion that you have to go to the temple and/or they are much cheaper
Faceid is not worth a thousand dollars
It's a joke for rich spoiled people
I think prices have stayed pretty much the same or become lower over the years. You can get a 64GB iPhone 8 this year for $699, vs $749 for the iPhone 6 in 2014. I think the iPhone 8 is still a pretty "premium" experience, even if Apple now has a more fancy and more expensive model.
The SE uses Apple A9 CPU from the 6S.
I'm still using a 6 year old iPhone on the current OS without problems. And battery is working fine too.
You might be stretching it a bit there, but otherwise this point stands.
Admittedly, I'm upgrading this cycle, but I'm super impressed by how long this phone has lasted. I bought a Nexus 4 (9 months older phone), and it's been complete shit for the past 1.5 years.
Only real problem is the glass A 5 dollar protection fixed the problem
fixed typo: 120 dollars was really 200.
Apple ecosystem has no escape routes, either you take it all or you don't.
Anyway when the iPhone 5s came out it costed 800 euros in Europe and still costs around 250 euros on Amazon.
The iPhone's price makes no f*ing sense
I can understand rich people wanting it, I don't get why regular folks spend so much money for so little real value.
I first started creating custom roms for the Sprint HTC Hero when it came out in 2009. It was my first Android phone and I was in love with everything about it. I was obsessed with getting the next new phone with new features every time a new one came out. I made pretty good money and saved most of it; buying new phones was the one thing I would splurge on.
Now it's 2017 and I have had the same phone for just under 2 years. Previously I wouldn't go 6 months without buying a new phone, so having the same one for 2 years seems like a lifetime. But I just don't feel like I have a reason to get a new one.
It feels like the same thing over and over again.
Worse, I get worried about some newer devices which may make me less free - the Pixel has a very locked down boot process and the Magisk developer has been struggling to support it. I currently use Android Pay on my rooted device and I'm definitely not willing to pay to lose that freedom.
I completely agree with you on newer devices being worse in some aspects, especially when it comes to rooting.
The basic pattern of mobile phone design was more or less settled in the 80's with the DynaTac, and the phones leading up to (but not including) the original iPhone were all refinements of that same original pattern. The same thing happened with smart phones: the original iPhone set the pattern and then there've been a number of refinements ever since.
I'm not saying the refinements aren't huge improvements (particularly when viewed collectively over a period of 10 years), but just that the basic pattern is relatively fixed most of the time.
> All these features are cool and somewhat exciting but nothing groundbreaking that will change computing/communications forever.
Personally, I'm not that excited about a world where there are are continual 'groundbreaking changes that will change computing/communications forever'. There's a lot to be said for consolidating the gains made in these periodic steps up in functionality, and taking the time to understand the new capabilities offered by each.
The Star Trek communicator nailed the flip-phone design in 1966. The StarTac in 1996 was able to realize this: a quite different design from the DynaTac brick and its candy bar descendents.
Having used both, the StarTac was pretty clearly an evolution of the DynaTac, in particular as far as the functionality goes. (But I tend to discount the significance of the flip phone physical design as any kind of major step forward. Which is borne out by the fact that it's so uncommon these days.)
Smartphones were just a niche before 2007 made them mainstream. The iPhone did to smartphones what the iPod did to digital music players, turning niche into norm.
You sure about that? I don't really have fond memories of WAP...
It was a revolution because it actually sold and was relevant to more than just a handful of high-end users. (I had phones with e-mail, web, and app capabilities prior to an iPhone, but those features were all just sideshows until the iPhone made them useful. The only use I can remember having for J2ME apps was to play Yahtzee on a Sanyo 4900.)
I doubt there will be another big revolution in personal computing until you have direct brain communication (implants or sensors/transmitters that look unobtrusive).
A cell phone iWatch could change its usecase quite substantially, but whether it'll find new uses remains to be seen.
Pocket computers are pretty handy though. Maybe it will evolve into wrist computers or necklaces or something. The smart watches are coming along, but they all have the problem of screen real estate.
To be fair, phones have it too, but with the various zoom features and "readability" modes, they work around it.
I think we'll have something akin to the smartphones (whether or not they include a phone feature) until we have portable, practical, hands-free displays.
It will probably be a fashion accessory that rasters directly on the retina.
It's awesome that now we have a supercomputer in our pocket that is stuffed with sensors, needs no cables and is always connected to the internet. But looking at it is still cumbersome.
I say that because I consider them completely different from late 90s cellphones. Design, interaction etc.
See for example this foldable paper computer concept: https://youtu.be/F3i7KBPAx4A?t=66
A solid, feature-less block of aluminum.
http://pretotyping.blogspot.com/2010/08/one-of-my-favorite-p...
Evolution is how we got from primitive sea creatures to man.
>What do you think will bring the next revolution in personal computing and communications?
I think that there have not been many revolutions in personal computing and communications. It's all incremental evolution. The only actual big revolution was the invention of the digital computer and of networking.
Beyond that, well:
There were computers at homes before everybody got one.
There were mobile phones, even touch phones, before the iPhone and mp3 players before the iPod.
There were tablets before the iPad.
There was "internet" and "www" (ARPAnet, minitel etc) before the internet and the world wide web.
There were social networks before Facebook.
Heck, there were actually newspaper columns chronicling a person's opinions and everyday life before blogs.
All these features are cool and somewhat exciting but nothing groundbreaking that will change computing/communications forever.
VR was supposed to be the game changer but it appears that it will also take around 4-5 years at least to be mainstream.
What do you think will bring the next revolution in personal computing and communications?