- #1
Dr Wu
- 174
- 39
Having read a fair bit of SF down the years, and now pondering the likely future direction(s) of the smartphone, I do wonder about the practicalities of the oft-cited videophone. Yes, the advantages are clear in domestic settings; that's to say using fixed screens on to which relay video images, as with Zoom, for example. Outside in Bricks and Mortar Land, however, I have my doubts.
Take a futuristic example. Picture a world where hand-held phones have given way to something that recalls Google glasses. Two wearers of such glasses could in theory be able to observe each other's visages during a video call (VC?) via miniature onboard cams and viewing screens. Some issues spring to mind, however. Any screen would necessarily need to be placed close to the eye, and that surely poses focusing problems. Meanwhile, as well as having focusing issues of its own, any onboard camera as a result of its location would also have a severely oblique view of its wearer's face, with all the resulting presentational problems. Full implants would be just as bad, if not worse.
A partial solution would entail going fully remote - i.e. using tiny drones. That's fine for the camera, and perhaps okay too for the audio mike. Not so when it comes to the viewing screen, though it's not necessarily a complete no-no. Such a setup might work in certain circumstances - holiday video calls, for instance. The emergency services already use such technology, of course. But reverting to a normal public setting, it would be highly impracticable during a crowded commute, say (all those swarming drones).
A better alternative, it seems, would be to use a videophone that straps to the wrist - in other words a glorified wrist-watch with an expandable screen etc. At least it's possible to keep one hand free while not having to hold something in the other. Did Star Trek have such a form of communication?
Other than a custom video-watch, which is a distinct possibility, within the realms of known science at least it appears that the plain old audio-only phone (in whatever guise) is going to be around a lot longer than many people suspect. . . unless someone knows better?
To sum up: the human voice as a sole conveyor of information will be plenty good enough for the most part, even if our future selves were to have FTL technology complete with wraparound gravity control, right?
Just giving my ten cents' worth.
Take a futuristic example. Picture a world where hand-held phones have given way to something that recalls Google glasses. Two wearers of such glasses could in theory be able to observe each other's visages during a video call (VC?) via miniature onboard cams and viewing screens. Some issues spring to mind, however. Any screen would necessarily need to be placed close to the eye, and that surely poses focusing problems. Meanwhile, as well as having focusing issues of its own, any onboard camera as a result of its location would also have a severely oblique view of its wearer's face, with all the resulting presentational problems. Full implants would be just as bad, if not worse.
A partial solution would entail going fully remote - i.e. using tiny drones. That's fine for the camera, and perhaps okay too for the audio mike. Not so when it comes to the viewing screen, though it's not necessarily a complete no-no. Such a setup might work in certain circumstances - holiday video calls, for instance. The emergency services already use such technology, of course. But reverting to a normal public setting, it would be highly impracticable during a crowded commute, say (all those swarming drones).
A better alternative, it seems, would be to use a videophone that straps to the wrist - in other words a glorified wrist-watch with an expandable screen etc. At least it's possible to keep one hand free while not having to hold something in the other. Did Star Trek have such a form of communication?
Other than a custom video-watch, which is a distinct possibility, within the realms of known science at least it appears that the plain old audio-only phone (in whatever guise) is going to be around a lot longer than many people suspect. . . unless someone knows better?
To sum up: the human voice as a sole conveyor of information will be plenty good enough for the most part, even if our future selves were to have FTL technology complete with wraparound gravity control, right?
Just giving my ten cents' worth.
Last edited:
