Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

What the iPhone of 2045 will look like ?


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#21
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,107 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

I agree with this. And lets not forget what happened with "Google Glass" (2012) our culture was not ready to embrace that. 26 years gives some leeway for cultural shift but not as much as we may assume. In western countries many people will still value privacy in 2045.

Google [Gl]Ass failed for more reasons than just privacy issues. 2011-2012 was absolutely too soon for it to be embraced, but culture wasn't the reason why people rejected it anywhere near as much as it was basic technological limitations, the same limitations that still prevent smartglasses from becoming a mainstream product.
 
I use smartwatches as an example to explain why smartglasses like Google [Gl]Ass as well as the likes of MetaPro, Atheer, and even the HoloLens had no chance. People used to claim that smartwatches were the new wave of the future and that the Apple Watch was going to eventually outsell the iPhone. One day we'd be watching movies, streaming music, and maybe even playing games on our watches. When the Apple Watch didn't outsell anything other than Microsoft's MP3 players, the media ran with the story that smartwatches were a dead fad and would fade into oblivion. Neither came true. Smartwatches are still around and are mainstream to the point you can buy one at a dollar store alongside drones and VR headsets, but they were prevented from reaching the level of smartphones because of something that's utterly fundamental to them: their design. With smartphones, you have two articulating limbs to use, typically focusing on your thumbs and index fingers— but that still gives you a load of manipulation possibilities on a screen.
Smartwatches, by their very nature, reduce that to one articulating limb unless you're trying to crab-type on one with the other (which is absurd). This doesn't reduce your freedom by half, but something more like 10x over. It's not good to use, and the screen size is too small for many other features to be useful as well. You sacrifice too much. You can stream some playlists, but besides that, smartwatches couldn't come close to the versatility of smartphones. HOWEVER, it turned out that they still had some actually very practical uses that even smartphones didn't have, most notably through health monitoring. Hence why so many smartwatches followed in the footsteps of the Fitbit. Their utility wasn't immediately known because people expected something completely different from them, but they did find a utility.
 
 
Smartglasses have another problem. You have both hands back, but there's no physical feedback and the headset has to try to compute your gestures in 3D space— and artificial intelligence still had plenty of issues figuring out 3D space in 2012. Just think of motion-control consoles of the time. The PlayStation Move was the best one and even it was buggy and missed many basic motions. Now shrink that and try to make it understand subtle finger motions. This forced your body to become a controller, and this eventually included your voice. It's simpler to just use voice control for AR headsets. 
But just like how smartglasses reduce the perception of privacy for others, gesture and voice controls reduce your own privacy. So now it goes both ways with a gadget that's already unwieldy and not very useful: the [Gl]Ass had an atrocious FoV and was much too expensive for what it was. 
 
While its privacy eviscerating nature undoubtedly didn't help it, I'd hesitate before saying that was a primary cause for its failure. If it were more useful and cheaper, more people would've bought one and we'd begrudgingly swallow our paranoia. Just wait until AR headsets become much more capable, utilize BCIs, and can go for under $500, and you'll see exactly what I mean.


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#22
funkervogt

funkervogt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,015 posts

Excellent post, Yuli Ban. I agree with everything emphatically except what you said at the very end about BCIs. Having to wear a skullcap or even just a headband will be very unappealing to a critical mass of people, and I'm not convinced that the devices will be able to gather enough brain activity data to allow the users to control their devices with acceptable levels of precision. 

 

I think it's far more likely that AR glasses will come back and go mainstream thanks to the other trends you described, and that they won't replace smartphones but instead will supplement them in niche applications. Watching videos and playing games are probably examples of such applications where you'd be better off having the content delivered by glasses instead of looking at a small screen in the palm of your hand. 



#23
starspawn0

starspawn0

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,961 posts
Apple Reportedly Replacing iPhones With Smart Glasses "In Roughly a Decade"

https://hypebeast.co...e-iphone-report

And they really do mean "completely".

#24
funkervogt

funkervogt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,015 posts

Apple Reportedly Replacing iPhones With Smart Glasses "In Roughly a Decade"

https://hypebeast.co...e-iphone-report

And they really do mean "completely".

Has any of that been verified? It sounds like a rumor circulated by an anonymous person who allegedly works at Apple. 



#25
Sephiroth6633

Sephiroth6633

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • LocationUK

Apple Reportedly Replacing iPhones With Smart Glasses "In Roughly a Decade"

https://hypebeast.co...e-iphone-report

And they really do mean "completely".

One way to find out is waiting for their announcement in 2022. Or someone leaks information lol



#26
starspawn0

starspawn0

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,961 posts

Has any of that been verified? It sounds like a rumor circulated by an anonymous person who allegedly works at Apple.


The original report was published in The Information, one of the most reputable sources in tech journalism. They are better than Wired, up there with The Verge, in terms of credibility. If they say that the leakers had direct knowledge, you can take it to the bank. That doesn't mean, though, that errors weren't made along the way -- e.g. the sources might have slightly misunderstood or exaggerated. Or, they could be lying.

One does hear things in the press by "anonymous sources", though, that sometimes turn out not to be true.

As far as I know, Apple hasn't denied the report, and The Information hasn't retracted it. It was published about a week ago.

#27
starspawn0

starspawn0

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,961 posts
https://www.theverge...ed-release-date

On Monday afternoon, Bloomberg offered further corroboration of The Information’s report, noting that Apple “recently” decided to delay the release of its initial headset product from 2020 to the later launch timeframe. The combined AR/VR headset will “focus on gaming, watching video and virtual meetings,” according to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman.

Both devices will make use of a “new 3D sensor system” which is a more advanced version of the Face ID camera found in iPhones and the iPad Pro today. This 3D time-of-flight sensor will reportedly debut in a new iPad Pro due early next year, a prediction that has also been backed by Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, before making its way to the 2020 iPhones.



#28
Kynareth

Kynareth

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 189 posts

The iPhone was released in 2007 and twelve years later we still buy smartphones. In 2022 AR glasses will be the newest thing but smartphones won't disappear immediately. 15 years between finger-operated smartphone and gesture and voice operated smartglasses. So we can expect something newer (the next big thing) in 2037. By 2045 that thing is going to be about as popular as smartphones in 2015 or AR glasses in 2030. I hope for BCIs, preferably implants.



#29
starspawn0

starspawn0

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,961 posts

I really have no idea how fast smartphones will be obsoletized.  It could happen very quickly, though.  There are historical precedents of tech getting displaced, with user base dropping by a factor of 10 in a small number of years.  

 

I think invasive BCIs are going to be further in the future than people think, due to safety and security concerns.  Kernel realized this, which is partly why they pivoted to non-invasive.  I actually wrote a piece on my forum recently about some interesting things I discovered about Kernel's work, after checking the Wayback Machine, and contextualizing their patent filings:

 

https://www.reddit.c...resting_change/

 

(I only post a tiny fraction of the things on Futuretimeline that I post elsewhere.  For example, a few days ago I posted a comment about how some neuroscientists had discovered Gwern's posting about my "unexpected path to strong AI" posting, on using BCIs to improve AI; too bad he didn't list more recent papers in his posting.  It seems this approach is gaining momentum, which is just what I predicted.)



#30
tomasth

tomasth

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 294 posts

The only invasive BCI I can see are some versions of ingestible neural interface like those
(https://www.frontier...2019.00112/full) nanobots.

 

No holes making like neuralink for healthy people (unless tissue regeneration medicine is so easy and mundane , that people won't mind making and fixing holes).
 



#31
quantumdoc

quantumdoc

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 37 posts
  • LocationUnited States

 

Apple Reportedly Replacing iPhones With Smart Glasses "In Roughly a Decade"

https://hypebeast.co...e-iphone-report

And they really do mean "completely".

One way to find out is waiting for their announcement in 2022. Or someone leaks information lol

 

 

 

this article looks on target and accurate. i do know that AR and VR is the next wave, it is just a question of how they implement it, via glasses, headwear, contacts, implants. 

 

the reason i know its the next wave is that every aspect of our living is heading in AR, for example self driving cars will have AR highways, and if you believe flying personal vehicles will be a thing, they will need AR highways in the sky for navigation. additonally, people will eventually stop wanting to hold their phone and once a really cool AR headset becomes promoted by celebrities and on TV, effortlessly interacting with life as well as the AR world and its ease of use is demonstrated, people will jump on board. Google Glass failed because its tech wasnt there yet and there wasnt many real world AR applications to use if for yet. There will be.

 

ONE FEATURE I PREDICT WILL BE THE DEVICE WILL BE ABLE TO LOOK AT ANY INDIVIDUAL AND BE ABLE TO (THROUGH AR), GIVE THE USER INFORMATION ABOUT THE PERSON IN FRONT OF THEM. OF COURSE PRIVACY CONCERNS WILL BE DISPUTED, BUT IT WILL BE ABLE TO ANALYZE HEART RATE, BREATHING PATTERNS, AI WILL BE ABLE TO PREDICT MOOD AND EMOTION OF THE PERSON IT IS SCANNING,AND VIA FACIAL RECOGNITION ETC, IT WILL BE ABLE TO CROSS REFERENCE ALL SOCIAL MEDIA INPUT AND TELL THE USER A BRIEF SUMMARY ON ANY PERSON IT SEES. ********ONCE THIS TECH IS ADVERTISED, THERE WILL BE NOONE THAT WOULDN'T WANT THAT ADVANTAGE IN LIFE****** THIS IS WHAT APPLE AND GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK IS DEVELOPING AR FOR*****


"what we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning" WH





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users