When Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were subtly arguing on Apple and Microsoft complementing each other’s businesses, they had put forth for further studies the ‘The Bejamin Button’ case, in a rather unconvincingly jeopardized fashion. They themselves couldn’t have agreed much on the debate of Benjamin’s race for youth versus natural, yet coherent ‘rest of the world moved on with time as time passed by’. Well, that was the truth Bejamin had to live with as time doesn’t compromise and always move forward.
A clear-case scenario with technology was argued upon by the two software giants - Steve and Bill.
When the former was talking about possible convergence of technologies into an Apple ipod or iphone, latter was reluctant to quit his side for big and better xbox advent. But there is an anomaly, notably supported by Heisenberg in his uncertainty principle. The momentum and the position of an electron can’t be defined precisely with all available resources and that’s so true. To define the position, we must view the electron and the packets of light (photons) which strike with the electron make its position uncertain by transferring quanta of light energy to it.
Analogous to this, when Steve is trying to transform to miniature devices, Apple ought to collaterally contemplate on the human satisfaction. We as humans don’t want a video file streaming on a miniature screen with miniature buttons and with so called miniature technology. Neither do we want to use the touch screen to view corners of a webpage, nor are we satisfied with polyphonic but feeble music tracks. They must provide end to end solutions keeping the taste palettes in utmost priority. Imagine a plate of delicious cuisines but each one of them in small quantity. I don’t want that. Rather, I would choose one in proper quantity. Isn’t it? Same holds absolutely true with entertainment devices/options. Things have become so prolific that we are placed with a lot of choices, despite the fact that we all need a close to satisfactory one out of hundreds. I’m content with an apple pie but not with Apple ipod. The capital ‘A’ makes no difference to my needs.
Bill, on the other hand, was trying to campaign for xbox as the next generation multimedia plus entertainment techno craft. He too failed to bargain with the sense of inhibited human satire. On one hand, he talked about internet connectivity and infrastructure required to take xbox to the next level and on the other, he was a disclaimer to bring xbox to a portable size which can be carried around and still be felt by us as the most enticing of all entertainment packages available. He too was afraid of holding up the right to justify and strike a perfect balance between what kind of dishes we want on our plates and in what quantities/sizes. Nevertheless, his act of justifying the software and drivers that they are marketing to other companies was commendable.
Now is the time when Steve and Bill should think about working on close contours to put this into effect. May be they can think about just developing hardware and software for each other’s devices later. Of course, they can still be competitors in real terms but the need to portray an exact combination of hardware size and software sophistication is knocking at their doors for sure.
We haven’t seen the edge because we can’t. We are moving on a spherical surface and the trail of technology can take infinite directions. But the requirement to justify current trends in demand and supply must be met either through collaborations or by a new AppleSoft.
Saroj.Joras@gmail.com
Visit www.pupilgarage.com to learn a new divergence into knowledge. Feedbacks awaited.
A clear-case scenario with technology was argued upon by the two software giants - Steve and Bill.
When the former was talking about possible convergence of technologies into an Apple ipod or iphone, latter was reluctant to quit his side for big and better xbox advent. But there is an anomaly, notably supported by Heisenberg in his uncertainty principle. The momentum and the position of an electron can’t be defined precisely with all available resources and that’s so true. To define the position, we must view the electron and the packets of light (photons) which strike with the electron make its position uncertain by transferring quanta of light energy to it.
Analogous to this, when Steve is trying to transform to miniature devices, Apple ought to collaterally contemplate on the human satisfaction. We as humans don’t want a video file streaming on a miniature screen with miniature buttons and with so called miniature technology. Neither do we want to use the touch screen to view corners of a webpage, nor are we satisfied with polyphonic but feeble music tracks. They must provide end to end solutions keeping the taste palettes in utmost priority. Imagine a plate of delicious cuisines but each one of them in small quantity. I don’t want that. Rather, I would choose one in proper quantity. Isn’t it? Same holds absolutely true with entertainment devices/options. Things have become so prolific that we are placed with a lot of choices, despite the fact that we all need a close to satisfactory one out of hundreds. I’m content with an apple pie but not with Apple ipod. The capital ‘A’ makes no difference to my needs.
Bill, on the other hand, was trying to campaign for xbox as the next generation multimedia plus entertainment techno craft. He too failed to bargain with the sense of inhibited human satire. On one hand, he talked about internet connectivity and infrastructure required to take xbox to the next level and on the other, he was a disclaimer to bring xbox to a portable size which can be carried around and still be felt by us as the most enticing of all entertainment packages available. He too was afraid of holding up the right to justify and strike a perfect balance between what kind of dishes we want on our plates and in what quantities/sizes. Nevertheless, his act of justifying the software and drivers that they are marketing to other companies was commendable.
Now is the time when Steve and Bill should think about working on close contours to put this into effect. May be they can think about just developing hardware and software for each other’s devices later. Of course, they can still be competitors in real terms but the need to portray an exact combination of hardware size and software sophistication is knocking at their doors for sure.
We haven’t seen the edge because we can’t. We are moving on a spherical surface and the trail of technology can take infinite directions. But the requirement to justify current trends in demand and supply must be met either through collaborations or by a new AppleSoft.
Saroj.Joras@gmail.com
Visit www.pupilgarage.com to learn a new divergence into knowledge. Feedbacks awaited.
No comments:
Post a Comment