We do it ourselves too, of course, even while we know that
future generations will look back and laugh at the innovations and technologies
that we all think are gee-whiz today.
With the increasing slope of innovation, however, technology
marvels soar high and then fall just as quickly into obsolescence, and this is
now well within the easy memory of us all. We remember the convenience of three
and a half inch floppies, bulky cell phones, our first luggable laptops and
much else. We know that all of the things that are insanely great today will soon
be displaced by the insanely greater.
Many of the most useful technology tools start out lame and
get better rapidly; almost nothing is great in its first iteration. That’s why
we in technology hate to buy version 1.0 of anything.
Early versions are apt to be clunky, hard to use, of
questionable value, and sometimes laughably lame. Remember handwriting
recognition? GPSs, PDAs? Speaking computers that sounded more like a drunken
Swede than the computer on board the Enterprise? Remember voice recognition
that you had to teach to understand you, laboriously repeating a vocabulary of
words in the hope that it would recognize your voice? Now Siri (just one
example) understands everyone right out of the iPhone box, and she talks back
to you (and sounds so much better than that drunken Swedish guy).
This leads me to what I have called “Sundwall’s Law”. It
goes like this: in order to have a great version of anything, you almost always
have to go through a bad version. Want a great cell phone? Put up with a bad
cell phone. Want the iPad? Suffer through the Newton and the Palm Pilot. There
are thousands of examples.
I was thinking of Sundwall’s Law last month when I saw a report about Carla, the airport virtual assistant now working 24x7 at Logan
International Airport in Boston. She’ll greet you with a smile, give you
directions, and help you through security. She speaks two languages and she’s
not bad looking either. She’s there for you. So what if she’s a hologram?
Well, ‘video projection’ actually, but who cares? Other
versions of Carla are now on duty at Dulles, New York’s three airports and in
Europe too. You’ll be talking to one soon.
(All these assistants are attractive young females, BTW, but
that’s a subject for a different blog.)
You may laugh, or find it all a bit creepy, but I predict
the acceptance rate will be rapid and total. The applications in so many other
customer service environments guarantee that these virtual assistants will go
through rapid research, development and deployment. Carla doesn’t exactly
interact with you now, but Sundwall’s Law predicts that soon she will. Would
you bet against it?
Speaking of betting, I was talking with my friend Nick Donato
from IBM earlier this year and we got on the subject of driverless cars. We both knew
that the technology is still in its infancy, and naturally it makes us all a
bit nervous. Nick was skeptical about how fast this one would go mainstream,
but I thought it was inevitable. There are many worrisome flaws with the current version of this technology (as I pointed out in a previous post). But before you have a great version, you have to have a bad version.
So I made Nick a $100 bet that driverless cars would be commercially viable sooner than either of us could imagine; the proof would be that within ten years, one of us would ride in one in a completely normal fashion on the streets of Chester County.
So I made Nick a $100 bet that driverless cars would be commercially viable sooner than either of us could imagine; the proof would be that within ten years, one of us would ride in one in a completely normal fashion on the streets of Chester County.
We’re not even one year into this bet and driverless cars have already been made legal (in test mode) on the streets of Nevada. I’m predicting they’ll be coming
soon to your neighborhood. And who knows, maybe Carla will be at the wheel.
3 comments:
Wasn't too long ago that I had one of those chunky cell phones with a ridiculous antenna. Now I have Siri writing this response to your blog. Now if I could only get her to put in the correct punctuation!!
Although I believe your "Law" is spot on, I have to say that I also think this is a bet you are going to lose. You won't lose because the technology isn't there yet. You'll lose because the demand won't be there. From a pure technological POV your time frame of 10 years is too long. It'll be faster that that. But you've missed the psychological aspect. People love their cars. People love to drive their cars. We love the sense of control driving gives us. If none of this were true mass transit would be much bigger than it is and cars would be rare and all look alike (kind of like busses). So great column but I'm afraid your bet is in serious jeopardy.
Enjoy the blog but believe that “Sundwall’s Law” should focus as much on the non-tech as tech issues. As I am here looking at version 1 of next year's ITAG budget I am certain that version 6 will be much better. Can only hope that will be true of the company outreach plan as well. Jim jlauckner@msn.com
Post a Comment