[tt] NS 2852: Tech before its time (six articles)

Frank Forman <checker at panix.com> on Mon Feb 20 02:54:49 CET 2012

NS 2852: Tech before its time (six articles)
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328521.700-tech-before-its-time-right-track-but-no-ipod.html 
et seq.

1. Right track, but no iPod

Imagine a portable music player that holds just a single hour of
content, interrupts your listening with 30-second advertisements,
and whose store offers none of your favourite songs. And all this
could be yours for the bargain price of $299.

If this doesn't sound like much of a deal, keep in mind that back in
1996, pairing an MP3 player with a dedicated music store was a
radical idea. Before the Listen Up player and Audiowiz store were
introduced by Audio Highway - a start-up in Cupertino, California -
downloading music was possible. But if you wanted to listen to that
music on the go, your best option was to burn the songs onto a CD.
The seamless coordination of today's iTunes store, which lets you
browse, buy and download your music to your iPod in under a minute,
was unimaginable.

The inspiration for this new model, says Audio Highway's then-chief
executive Nathan Schulhof, came from the try-before-you-buy
shareware often used to sell software at the time. "I thought you
should be able to do the same thing with music," he says.

The press swooned. Among other awards, Schulhof's invention grabbed
top honours at the 1997 Consumer Electronics Show, the Oscars of
gadgetry. It seemed to be on the road to global domination. And then
- nothing. The Listen Up player vanished, to be reinvented four
years later when Apple's iPod became the definitive king of MP3
players.

What happened? Simply put, Schulhof's technology was a few steps too
far ahead of its time. In 1996, less than 1 per cent of the world
was online and most computers did not have USB ports. That meant
Listen Up users had to connect it to their computer by way of a
parallel port, and then link the computer to the internet by way of
a modem that could only digest 28.8 kilobits per second. Downloading
1 hour of content this way would have taken about 2½ hours. The
Listen Up could hold at most 32 megabytes - the equivalent of about
20 songs.

You're not listening

By the time the iPod arrived in 2001, technology had caught up with
content: though it was about the same size and cost as the Listen
Up, the iPod could hold 5 gigabytes. Even if it could have held 1000
songs, however, there was a much more fundamental problem with Audio
Highway's player and store. "At that time you couldn't get the
mainstream music," Schulhof says. His firm just didn't have the
resources to enter into the kinds of deals that would have let it
sell popular music to customers. Most of the content on AudioWiz was
news and audiobooks - not enough to entice most people to shell out
$299, especially when even that meagre content featured advertising
slots.

It took a heavy hitter like Apple to wrangle the tunes people
wanted. When Apple's iTunes Store launched in 2003, Steve Jobs had
already negotiated the rights to sell music. "They were the first to
do it right," Schulhof concedes. "They just had better content."

Schulhof's device may have slipped into the mists of history, but at
least he got a slice of the Apple pie. Exactly how much is sealed in
various court documents, but Schulhof's name appears on a number of
patents related to iPod and iTunes-like functions, though Apple
never officially licensed his patents. An agreement with the company
prevents him from discussing the matter.

But there can be no doubt about his bragging rights. "I'm a
visionary, and sometimes visionaries have things ready before the
public is ready to make a change," he says. According to his
website, he is the "Father of the MP3 industry" - an industry now
worth billions.
---
2. Xerox's shooting Star computer
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328521.800-tech-before-its-time-xeroxs-shooting-star-computer.html
* 15 February 2012 by Jamie Condliffe

Imagine trying to print a document in 1977. Are you at home? If so,
forget it - your only hope of finding a printer is at work, where
there might be a single dot-matrix device shared by the whole
building. Sitting in front of your terminal, you will have to
painstakingly key in complex lines of code to initiate printing and
get the formatting you want. Don't even think about generating
pictures or different colours. Now you're in for a long wait - with
an output of less than 200 characters per second, the printer would
have taken more than half a second just to print this sentence.

The company that released us from this torture was Xerox PARC, the
Silicon Valley research incubator. Run by the company that pioneered
photocopying, it also gave the world Ethernet networking and laser
printers.

In 1977, drawing on its unofficial maxim "the best way to predict
the future is to invent it", Xerox PARC assembled the brightest
graduates in the US to produce the Xerox 8010 Information System.
Also dubbed the Xerox Star, it was like nothing anyone had ever
seen. A 17-inch bitmapped display provided a window-based graphical
user interface, pioneering the desktop metaphor we now take for
granted. Alongside a keyboard, users could manipulate objects on the
screen with something called a mouse. Ethernet connectivity brought
with it file servers, networked printers and email, precisely the
tools you needed to retrieve files and be freed of keying text into
a command line. For printing, the system was a game-changer. This
was the first high-powered desktop computer.

Apple's delight

After more than four painstaking years of perfecting these features,
the Xerox Star was launched in April 1981. "It was completely
different and so much better than what had been before," says Terry
Roberts, one of the system's user-interface designers. "We believed
we were changing the world."

That was when Apple got interested. "They were just gobsmacked,"
recalls Dave Curbow, then a software engineer at Xerox PARC. Steve
Jobs turned "gobsmacked" into a profit, selling computers with
software inspired by the Xerox Star for $2,500.

But despite the Star's head start - it was two years ahead of the
Apple Lisa, three before the first Macintosh, and four before
Windows - it failed. The Xerox Star's innovations had made it
prohibitively expensive: a single workstation cost at least $16,500,
while a fully networked installation could set you back $75,000. "We
couldn't offer something both good and affordable," Roberts says.
"Xerox chose to offer something high-quality. Apple decided to go
for the low end."

Apple's machines only had a third of the memory, their screens were
half the size and they did not have hard drives at first, while the
basic Xerox Star came with a luxurious 10 megabytes of disc space.

Unfortunately for Xerox, the company's attorneys had been too busy
during the development of the Star to patent any of the hardware,
and in the early 1980s software patents were such a nascent field
that nobody thought to protect the operating system, either. With
the Star's technology laid open for all to share, Apple eventually
took the best parts and won out.

Without the Star, there would have been no convenient way to print
from your desktop. Xerox cleared the path to the home office. Steve
Jobs knew everyone would want their own Star, and thanks to Xerox,
he had no difficulty in delivering their wish.
---
3.  Friends before Facebook
* 15 February 2012 by Cassandra Willyard

Type friendster.com into your browser today, and you'll be taken to
a social networking site for gamers. Should you by any chance have
forgotten who won the social networking battle, the blue button in
the top right corner of Friendster's home page reminds you by
inviting visitors to log in with Facebook.

Friendster wasn't the first social network - that honour goes to Six
Degrees and a few niche communities built, for example, to track
down your classmates - but it was the first attempt to rule the
world. It came close. Just four months after its public launch in
May 2003, the site boasted a few million members, and by 2005, it
had roughly 17 million. But Friendster spent much of its eight-year
existence limping down the mountain it had climbed so quickly. By
2006, The New York Times had already deemed it a failure. Friendster
in its original guise finally admitted defeat last year when it
relaunched as a gaming site.

What went wrong? Ironically, Friendster's problem was its
popularity. One of the site's key features was showing users how
they were connected to strangers via mutual friends, but calculating
those connections took considerable processing power. The more
people joined, the more the site strained under the computational
load of their visits. By late 2003, it was not uncommon for your
Friendster page to take more than half a minute to load.

Even as Friendster's engineers struggled to keep the site running
smoothly, its founder, Jonathan Abrams, was preoccupied with a
different problem - fake profiles. Early versions of Friendster
allowed only individual profiles. If you wanted to form a community,
to connect with other students in your dormitory or people with an
undying devotion to U2, you were out of luck, says Alice Marwick, a
social media researcher at Microsoft Research New England in
Cambridge, Massachusetts. As early adopters will, users took matters
into their own hands, creating personas known as "fakesters"
representing buildings, groups or other entities. By friending
"Perkins Hall" or "U2", you could connect with other people who
linked to these profiles. Before long, Friendster profiles included
God, Drunk Squirrel, Giant Squid and Homer Simpson.

Instead of seeing the need and trying to satisfy it, Abrams tried to
quash the problem. He found the fakester phenomenon "infuriating",
Marwick says. Friendster hunted down and deleted fakester profiles
without notifying their creators - a campaign that was dubbed
"fakester genocide" and prompted an angry backlash. In so doing, it
committed the cardinal sin of alienating its core users, says Danah
Boyd, also at Microsoft Research New England. Once the exodus began,
it was hard to stem the tide. "If all your friends are jumping to
MySpace, you're probably going to follow them even if you personally
haven't had a problem with Friendster," Marwick says.

Social faux pas

These kinds of lessons proved crucial for the next generation of
social networking sites. For example, MySpace welcomed the creation
of group pages - whether these promoted dogs or musicians - a
category Facebook later refined as fan pages. Mark Zuckerberg also
famously restrained Facebook's early growth to avoid the problem of
overload.

The rest is history. First MySpace conquered Friendster. Then
Facebook, with more than 800 million users today, climbed to the top
of the food chain. Facebook may eventually fail too, Boyd says, but
not for the reasons Friendster did. And the site won't be so easy to
topple. "Facebook is no longer simply a social network," Boyd says.
"It has become baked into the very essence of everyday life."

In October 2003, Abrams declined a $30 million buyout offer from
Google. Talk about a social blunder.
---
4.  The missing hyperlink
* 15 February 2012 by Helen Knight

No one knew what to do with HyperCard. As best as anyone could
figure, the software, created in 1985 by Apple engineer Bill
Atkinson, was a kind of virtual Rolodex. You could jump between one
virtual "card" and another by pointing a cursor at, and clicking on,
underlined text on the first card. It was a neat trick, but Apple
had no clear plan for how to use the software. In 1987, the company
bundled it with all new Macintosh computers and let users figure it
out for themselves.

Meanwhile, near Geneva in Switzerland, a young CERN physicist called
Tim Berners-Lee was labouring to design a system that could share
information with the world. How could he link together the discrete
information on the internet's computers?

Back in California, Apple was still struggling to capitalise on
Atkinson's idea. HyperCard was proving extremely popular; the simple
programming language allowed people to build their own custom
applications. But Apple couldn't find any obvious uses for it,
Atkinson says. "I remember one of the marketing slogans was
'HyperCard - but what is it?'" Berners-Lee and fellow CERN
researcher Robert Cailliau answered the question soon enough.
Inspired by Atkinson's software, Cailliau developed the hypertext
transfer protocol that links the World Wide Web. Six years later
came Mosaic, the world's first widely used web browser, and it had a
lot in common with HyperCard.

Atkinson had always insisted that his software be freely accessible
to everyone. That, he says, is precisely what allowed HyperCard to
become an open exchange format for ideas. But what if Atkinson
hadn't been so open-minded? Had he patented the hyperlink that drove
his HyperCard software, you might now be reading this on Apple's
i-Internet.
---
5.  Apple's 1992 iPad
* 15 February 2012 by Justin Mullins

If you own an iPad, you might have trouble remembering just how
terrible tablets were a few years ago.

The first one was released to great fanfare. In 1992, Apple's chief
executive, John Sculley, told a crowded room in Las Vegas that a new
generation of portable handheld devices was about to change the
world of personal computing. Their advanced handwriting recognition
capabilities, he proclaimed, would make keyboards obsolete.

The following year, Apple released the first such device. Called the
Messagepad, it ran an operating system called Newton, and the
brilliant new input device that would replace the keyboard was a
pen.

But the hotly anticipated device proved anything but revolutionary.
Among myriad problems, it had terrible battery life and the basic
model couldn't connect to a desktop computer. These failings paled
next to the shortcomings of its handwriting recognition software -
the Messagepad's unique selling point - whose deficiencies were
immortalised in an episode of The Simpsons.

Despite repeated improvements to both the pen and the handwriting
software, Apple just couldn't crack the code. Smelling blood in the
water, the company's chief competitor, Microsoft, took its own shot
at tablet computing with a pen-based version of Windows in 2001. Its
device failed just as grandly.

Arguably, what really opened the way for the tablet juggernaut was
jettisoning that troublesome pen. When Steve Jobs returned to Apple
in 1997, one of the first things he did was cancel the Newton
project and start again from scratch. His quest to find something
more intuitive culminated in 2007 with the launch of the iPhone and
then in 2010 the iPad - both slate-like computers controlled by
touch alone. The devices have become two of the best-selling
consumer electronics products in history and they have helped turn
Apple into one of the most successful companies on the planet.
---
6. Florida's 1980s internet
* 15 February 2012 by Joseph Calamia

The message on your screen says: "Can you come over and babysit?"
You type in your response, then check your bank account and the
weather before leaving the house to return the blender you purchased
online.

It might surprise you to learn that residents of Coral Gables,
Florida, were engaging in this behaviour in 1980, a full decade
before Tim Berners-Lee put the first web links on the internet. And
they weren't using personal computers - all of this was happening on
their television screens.

The system was called the Viewtron, and it was the brainchild of
Norman Morrison, vice-president of technology at US publisher
Knight-Ridder. He saw it mainly as a way for newspaper subscribers
to get an early peek at the next day's headlines. But the Viewtron
also featured other aspects of today's addictive internet: you could
use your television to play games, shop online and even communicate
with other users by way of a proto-email system.

The technology should have been a runaway hit. But in 1985, after
the Viewtron had attracted 5000 subscribers, Knight-Ridder and its
partner, telephone company AT&T, pulled the plug.

Its downfall, simply put, was networking. Despite its apparent
similarities with the internet, the Viewtron system was not a linked
web of computers. Instead, everything Knight-Ridder sent to its
users' TV sets was stored on a single mainframe computer in Miami
Beach. "The eight disc drives were monsters," Morrison says. "Each
one looked like a washing machine." For all their size, though,
those drives stored only a few megabytes apiece and the system
processed information at a rate equivalent to about 100 megahertz -
today, even a simple desktop computer is capable of far more. As a
result, even the Viewtron's poor-quality graphics took an age to
load, making screen navigation a chore.

No one was surprised by the Viewtron's demise: Morrison's group had
begun to smell trouble when subscribers became more elusive, which
coincided with the introduction of the personal computer.

"We kept thinking of the Viewtron as an analogue for a traditional
newspaper," says Phil Meyer, who conducted the initial 50-family
trial in Coral Gables. Own the pricey technology, Knight-Ridder
thought, and it could control the market in computerised news
delivery.

The PC changed all that. It simply offered more for less money,
especially when, in 1983, internet provider CompuServe broke
Viewtron's monopoly on electronic messaging with its introduction of
email. "People had to spend $500 just to tie in to Viewtron and get
nothing else," Morrison says. His team tried other pricing schemes,
including monthly rental or per-hour rates, but nothing seemed to
attract new customers. As PCs got cheaper, faster and more
connected, the Viewtron just kept treading water.

Perhaps it all worked out for the best. Using the TV to pay your
bills, after all, would be the worst kind of reality television.

More information about the tt mailing list