The Web Device of Choice at Home
February 7, 2001
This is not exactly a new topic -- discussion of it began even before the
Internet of researchers and students became the Web. Personal computers,
with their protean capabilities, were used as tools to connect to sources
of information, entertainment, and transactions. They were also important
to building bulletin-board systems, BBS, and, now Web servers. As with any
tool, though, the PC's general-purpose nature exacts penalties in cost,
complexity, and reliability. This led to debate over generality vs. fitting
a particular purpose.
In a way, the discussion of non-PC devices, started with Dr. Nicholas
Negroponte's idea of digital convergence. That is, with a modicum of
oversimplification, a) everything will be digital and, b) everything will
converge in the TV set. "Everything digital" means information and
entertainment will be digitized, packetized, and compressed; therefore, it
will be storable and transportable. The TV set of the future was seen as
sporting oodles of processing power and storage. Ergo, all forms of
knowledge, art, commerce, and mud wrestling must converge towards the TV
set in the family room.
We know what happened to that idea. Parts of it were and still are
profoundly true. We haven't found a way to digitize wisdom, yet, but we
see how "everything" has gone digital and how "everything" is on the Web.
If not literally true, the previous statements make practical sense, they
sound right, and they have practical consequences of a large magnitude.
As for the TV set, that part hasn't fared too well. Yes, we have
interactive TV, WebTV, and set-top boxes. But none of that resonates in
the way the first part, the "everything digital and on the Web" part does.
The TV screen wasn't meant for things other than TV content, and we haven't
found ways to make either one fit the other, because that's hard to do when
Web content and the VGA screen, dimensions, resolution, and phosphors have
such an intimate relationship. There's also the psychology of the TV set
experience, what some call the lean-back vs. lean-forward state of mind.
Others ask whether e-mail is meant to be read in the privacy of your family
room.
More recently, the game console has been seen as the best candidate for
on-line access in the home. I disagree -- for some of the same reasons that
apply to the TV tube and Web content. But other technical factors are
involved as well. Web content is a little too easy a phrase. The
"everything digital" notion tempts one to think that everything can be
easily translated back into a form humans can understand or experience.
This is an easy thought, but a complicated reality. In fact, Web content
takes many bizarre shapes and formats, and each requires a decoding
engine -- Real, Flash, PDF, QuickTime, Windows Media, to name but very
few. These exist for the most part in the x86 realm and would have to be
rewritten and painfully optimized again for other processors in order to
provide meaningful rendition of Web content. Come to think of it, this
might be the reason why Microsoft chose an x86 processor for its very own
"Pay Station," -- sorry, xBox. Even with their resources, rewriting or
coercing others into rewriting these decoders for another processor wasn't
an option.
That's why, for the time being, for our Home Audio Reference Platform, for
wireless Web tablets, for the eVilla and similar devices, for a genuine Web
experience on something nimbler and friendlier than a PC, we like the x86
architecture and the PC clone organ bank, software organs included.