On Thursday, July 25, 2002, at 10:27 , Ken Chang wrote:
> ps. Benjamin, not everything has to be in the same way,
> wired/or wireless ... wireless Georgia home boy?
So why have remote controls units for TV, VCR, air conditioner at all ?
Why have a cordless phone ? why have a mobile phone ? why have a
wireless LAN ? You *could* do without those.
It may not seem to make sense to you to have a universal wireless
interface to household appliances for remote control, but it makes just
as much or as little sense as mobile phones with antennae flashing in
different colours, displays on the back of the handset, a bazillion
different ring tones and other features that you may consider so utterly
must have technological breakthroughs.
For example, I find it rather silly to put a camera into a phone. To me
a camera is a camera and a phone is a phone. Many people on this list
will disagree with that, and if only because they make a living of
developing such gimmicks. Fair enough.
What is not fair enough, however, is when the very same people who are
convinced that a phone and a camera should be combined into one then
turn around and tell people like me that having a whole bunch of remote
controls (I have at least seven of those at my house) is absolutely in
order and those devices need not be combined into one; that such a
combined remote control function wouldn't make sense to be put into a
mobile phone; that it wouldn't make sense to use a wireless interface
instead of IR and thereby let household appliances become peripherals;
that the job creation and new business opportunities argument doesn't
apply to wireless applications of the "smart house" variety.
I call that hypocrisy.
regards
benjamin
Received on Fri Jul 26 04:24:35 2002