-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Will you be subscribing to the new Disney+ R49 streaming package?
No stopping the cellphone juggernaut
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
supersunbird
Honorary Master
Aint that the truth...
We hardly want to use our phones for sms's or calls these days due to expense and they charge even more for these new fangled things...
EDIT: Me notices bwana upgraded again...
Atleast in SA vodacom has video calls for same price(i think), but another reason is the expensiveness of the handset some of which is large and ofcause the market keeps getting these tiny 2.5G phones brought in by the operators themselves.. do they want us to move to 3G+? Seeing that alot of tech out there cut their profits.
I was about to do so, but I couldn't find a cellphone with a 14" 1400x1050 screen, 80Gb hard drive, DVD writer and full keyboard. Strangely the cellphones with 6MP sensors, 4x optical zoom and quality flash also seemed to be out of stock. I figured there'd definitely be one that could play Ogg, FLAC etc. but apparently they're on backorder.
And I really struggled to find pants with a pocket big enough to hold this monster new cellphone.
In Africa tyrants are smart enough to shut the network down during elections.
More of a sideline. They could have been successful too, if not for a critical mistake in the gas they used and an unfortunate accident.
Cellphones can be convenient by allowing you to carry one device that isn't as good as any individual device, but will possibly always suffer from the fact that they have to be fairly small and portable. Even a PDA-size phone can become a burden when you want something you can stuff in your pocket.
PDAs themselves are limited to a certain screen size, and therefore maximum resolution.
I think the tech used for cellular phones simply cannot afford so many users so cheaply. The tech isn't the answer we were looking for when it comes to mass communication IMO. The way it is served up and the way it is sold simply leaves a huge gap for something new and better to come along... I don't think cellular phones are going to survive the next onslaught in comms tech... I give it 10 years max. It was nice while it lasted though... but the new services don't suit the technology. Screens are too small (for the sake of portability), keys are too small for the same reason. Interfacing tech needs to catch up, but with that I think there will be new transport methods that are way cheaper and easier to share amongst a large population.
Last edited:
LifelongGamer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2005
- Messages
- 455
- Reaction score
- 0
Vision of the future ...
Articles like these paint a picture of current trends and projecting that into possible future scenarios.
In order to evaluate these claims, one has to view the big picture. Starting with Costs, current level of technology, new tech currently in development and then add in user trends / wants / needs.
It stands to reason that the high costs of computers (due in part to import costs / duties / etc. from foreign manufacturers AND in part to short-term revenue return policies by local distributors / suppliers) has created a gap in which the majority of the population is not prepared to buy a computer as it's out of their budget. The fact that cellphones have overtaken landline connections is proof that consumers will rather opt for cheap handsets and make shorter calls on pay-per-second billing because it's more affordable than paying the monthly rental for a landline + higher telecoms tariffs compared to the rest of the developed world and some developing nations.
In order for cellphones to replace the pc as hinted in the article would require that:
1) costs of feature-rich cellphones drop drastically and preferably be manufactured locally to offset a large margin of the expense (but then the same can be said for computer components)
2) telecoms costs need to be reduced, while coverage and quality of wireless broadband be increased
3) the limitations of portable devices like cellphones be overcome. For example, microscopic image projection has been proven as a viable technology and prototypes have been made into pen-like devices. Using tech like this would allow a cellphone to project a larger image (monitor size) against a desk partition / bookshelf, desk surface and thereby cater for true portable computing with full resolution / detail and avoid squinting on a 240x320 LCD screen. Full voice-recognition built into the devices will overcome the tedious input methods currently required for cellphones / PDA's. Faster processing, graphics processing rivally desktop systems, etc. will give the same user-experience that pc's offer, but would also require better power consumption or else the device would need constant recharging.
There are some hurdles, but like all technology, it can happen if the manufacturers stop trying to profit in the short-term and look to the future. Smaller profits, but accumulated over a much larger client base based on reliable, affordable technology is what will make the next-generation MS.
Failure to understand these basic principals will result in expensive developments to bring about technology very few will use due to high costs.
Just because our mobile base is higher than landline doesn't mean it's a much better service - only that it's easier to obtain and managed correctly, more affordable.
Articles like these paint a picture of current trends and projecting that into possible future scenarios.
In order to evaluate these claims, one has to view the big picture. Starting with Costs, current level of technology, new tech currently in development and then add in user trends / wants / needs.
It stands to reason that the high costs of computers (due in part to import costs / duties / etc. from foreign manufacturers AND in part to short-term revenue return policies by local distributors / suppliers) has created a gap in which the majority of the population is not prepared to buy a computer as it's out of their budget. The fact that cellphones have overtaken landline connections is proof that consumers will rather opt for cheap handsets and make shorter calls on pay-per-second billing because it's more affordable than paying the monthly rental for a landline + higher telecoms tariffs compared to the rest of the developed world and some developing nations.
In order for cellphones to replace the pc as hinted in the article would require that:
1) costs of feature-rich cellphones drop drastically and preferably be manufactured locally to offset a large margin of the expense (but then the same can be said for computer components)
2) telecoms costs need to be reduced, while coverage and quality of wireless broadband be increased
3) the limitations of portable devices like cellphones be overcome. For example, microscopic image projection has been proven as a viable technology and prototypes have been made into pen-like devices. Using tech like this would allow a cellphone to project a larger image (monitor size) against a desk partition / bookshelf, desk surface and thereby cater for true portable computing with full resolution / detail and avoid squinting on a 240x320 LCD screen. Full voice-recognition built into the devices will overcome the tedious input methods currently required for cellphones / PDA's. Faster processing, graphics processing rivally desktop systems, etc. will give the same user-experience that pc's offer, but would also require better power consumption or else the device would need constant recharging.
There are some hurdles, but like all technology, it can happen if the manufacturers stop trying to profit in the short-term and look to the future. Smaller profits, but accumulated over a much larger client base based on reliable, affordable technology is what will make the next-generation MS.
Failure to understand these basic principals will result in expensive developments to bring about technology very few will use due to high costs.
Just because our mobile base is higher than landline doesn't mean it's a much better service - only that it's easier to obtain and managed correctly, more affordable.
These kinds of thing were said since WAP first came on the scene.
I only have one thing to say: Show me the money.
Cellphone networks, cellphones etc. all rely on proprietary technology and they are all geared towards massive customer lock in.
PCs and the internet are open! Just because you allow users on the cellphone network to access the internet does not change the fact that cellphone networks are essentially closed systems.
VANS and Cellphone Networks have huge incentives to make statements like these - it does not make it the truth however.
I only have one thing to say: Show me the money.
Cellphone networks, cellphones etc. all rely on proprietary technology and they are all geared towards massive customer lock in.
PCs and the internet are open! Just because you allow users on the cellphone network to access the internet does not change the fact that cellphone networks are essentially closed systems.
VANS and Cellphone Networks have huge incentives to make statements like these - it does not make it the truth however.