Bob:
To extend your "toaster" analogy, how many times were the toast-loving public duped into purchasing a new toaster just because it had an little light to let you know that it was on?
I understand that incremental change is the nature of gadget evolution. However, unlike a toaster than can be rebuilt or turned into scrap or will simply rust away when left in the rain (albeit after a very long time), iPods & Razr's & MP3 players cannot easily be recycled, their batteries cannot be reclaimed without making a big mess, and crummy devices use up other seemingly finite resources.
Every time some goof dismisses the SONY Reader for only doing one thing, I want to ask if they own an iPod, and then beat them with it if they respond in the affirmative.
Personally, I cannot see why anyone would ever want to own a phone that was not a Motorola Q, Blackberry, or Palm Treo.
My ultimate point is that the ADD kids reporting for and posting on tech sites seem to incite the proliferation not just of meaningless news, but also of useless gadgets.
Unless consumers hold the gadget producers to task vis-a-vis making quality devices that truly are an improvement to the old and an enhancement of our lives, the vicious cycle of the "bleeding edge" will continue.
Back to the argument of the thread, I seem to remember as a young man hearing the phrase "paperless" office/society. I think that we have yet to see that, and indeed thanks to people like my parents who use five sheets of paper to print out something off AOL, we are far from there. Technology magazines will be around until their online counterparts have something substantial to say.
|