It seems like every consumer electronics company wishes that they had the success of Apple's iPod. The reasons for its success? The factors that are generally accepted are the iPod's sleek design, an impressive marketing campaign, and the low bandwidth (without a sacrifice in high fidelity) consumed by digital audio files. Oh yes, and we can't forget consumers' pent up desire for legal music downloads ... I know that I personally was happy to buy music without having to go over to the Dark side.
I can hardly think that a lucite-sheet-meets-shiny-sardine-can approach makes a terribly impressive design statement. And as for the marketing campaign, when I see the iPod posters I think of doctors wearing white stethoscopes going wild. No, I think that the iPod represents the tip of the iceberg. The iPod heralds the emergence of a new 21st century industry that I will call, for lack of a better set of words, consumer infotronics. The reason why we need a new term to describe this industry (versus calling it a new category) is that it is about going beyond what the consumer electronics industry currently represents.
The idea of consumer electronics is the realization of a physical gadget, composed of technology, for the consumer to enjoy some life-enhancing experience. The gadget is a physical object—something that can be held, inventoried, pointed at, dropped, head-banged, swallowed, and is thus a full-fledged citizen of our generally fragile world. Systems of factories, managers, and finances all supported this concept of consuming plastic, paper, metal, and other "mystery" materials to realize a steady flow of clumps of utility in our world. In the past, these clumps didn't have a lot of smarts inside. They didn't need to because they were meant to be consumed, and then disposed. You'd then have to go buy a new one ... making us full-fledged consumers.
Then came smarts. That was the problem. The new line of gadgets were not only smart, but you could make them even smarter by upgrading them. I recall that when MP3 players were first emerging, there was this new marketing point that you could easily "update the ROM for any future upgraded functionality." This was the beginning of the end for the consumer electronics industry. Not only did upgradable firmware make it possible to keep a gadget further along the obscolescence curve, but also it meant that gadgets could be shipped broken or with untested firmware—the unsuspecting consumer could "upgrade" (read "fix") their device at their own leisure.
As gadgets became smarter inside, the outsides of the gadget (i.e. the computer they were often hooked to) got even smarter. These smarts we are talking about of course had nothing to do with plastic, paper, metal, or the other conventional ingredients for good and wholesome consumer electronics. We're talking software here. The invisible stuff. The stuff that doesn't get put on a factory line nor is easily understood in the conventional language of business and production.
The problem? Consumer electronics company don't know how to deal with the invisible capital of software. The software division is often the lowest division in the food chain of a consumer electronics company. Why would anyone want to produce an invisible soup of bits when they can produce a hard, heavy, graspably palpable hunk of plastic and metal? Because without the bits, all you've got is a hunk of mass. You're better off just manufacturing hammers as they are inevitably more useful.
Apple's a software company. They had the lucky accident of a consumer electronics device that glommed into the rich and luscious matrix of Apple's clever backend computing infrastructure. Apple people love good software. Sony and other companies in the consumer electronics category have yet to feel the love for software. They are all stuck in the age of consumer electronics, and haven't made it to the new era of consumer infotronics. Whence simplicity? When there are sufficient smarts on the outside for a device to seamlessly rely upon, what happens is that the actual device can get by with less yet still be more.
For that reason, at the SIMPLICITY program we are developing a set of technology layers that will support a better symbiosis between simple hardware devices and powerful backend computing systems. In essence we are doing the basic research and development to support the future consumer infotronics industry. So look out, iPod!
Tomorrow we will discuss the issue of form as I promised. I think today I veered a bit off of the simpler stuff. Oh well.
Posted by maeda at March 22, 2005 06:27 AM