Unless Robertson is not including the iPod Touch, then he has his assessment quite backwards. iPods are actually the iPhone killer. Everything from television to the landline network is gradually being sucked into TCP/IP. I don’t think anyone would be surprised by that statement. Data is data and data only needs one network, and that one’s already up and running on wifi and soon, wimax.

As someone who owns an iPod Touch with a microphone and that lives amongst (a University Campus and my house) ubiquitous wi-fi networks, I didn’t even see the point of getting a cell phone attached to my iPod. There’s nothing special about all the cellular networks with the exception of the fact that they are not as open as the Internet.

What other technological channel has managed to attach itself to the Internet without being entirely absorbed by it? Cellular networks and cable TV are being assimilated. Cell phones aren’t Internet devices–the iPod is. In fact, that’s got me wondering about Jobs’ inspiration for naming the iPod versus the iPhone. Did he realize the iPhone was just a hybrid while understanding that the iPod (a much more generic and flexible idea) was still the end-all-be-all?

Seriously though, is the Reality Distortion Field^TM hitting me this far out from California? There is only one well-known device on the market that is prepared for the transition from cellular network to wifi transmitted IP. The cost of maintaining cellular towers that can utilize 3G seems much higher than wimax. I really think the iPhone is a transition device, a hybrid. Still though, Apple has its bets covered on this one.

Digital paper is nothing short of amazing. E Ink explains some of specs as follows:

“Less than 300 microns thick, the paper-white display is as thin and flexible as construction paper. With a 10.1″ diagonal, the prototype achieves SVGA (600×800) resolution at 100 pixels per inch and has a 10:1 contrast ratio with 4 levels of grayscale.”

Also of note is the fact that digital paper displays use 100 times less energy than even an LCD. What this means is that digital paper opens the door to the ubiquitous display of real-time information. While ubiquitous computing is already mostly a reality (RFID tags and chips in everything) the next logical step is to provide a ubiquitous display. Digital paper doesn’t just mean cheap displays for cell phones. It means real-time displays for advertising, billboards, wall paper, magazines and much more.

Some folks question the economics of this but I think they haven’t done the math. Zymurgyboy over at slashdot summed the point up well:

… It could turn out to be less expensive [than paper] in the end. Paper is only cheap up front. Storing paper is what makes it expensive (my emphasis added). The cost of disk space is plummeting, while the cost of real estate is rising. Not to mention, the paper making process creates some of the most toxic chemicals known to man.

I’d think of the TCO (Total Cost of Operation) for this the same way I do with shoes. Don’t be afraid to spend the money on better quality. They’ll last longer, you’ll comsume less, and you won’t have to replace them, nearly as frequently. A few pairs of carefully chosen, high quality shoes will save you more money than a closet full of cheap ones in the long run without sacrificing too much flexibility.

The economic advantage couldn’t be put better. Above all else, digital paper is the ultimate in recyclable paper and its advent will have an effect parallel to that of the general acceptance of the laser printer. The big todo about the computer was the possibility of the paperless office, but what really happened was an explosion of printing. While the internet was creating the instantaneous transmission of documents, displays simply hadn’t caught up with the usability of paper, hence everyone printing out their emails. The proliferation of jokes and retro PDA articles say a lot about the usability of current displays and digital paper answers several of those challenges by working in bright and regular light, creating energy savings and even retaining a static image when the power is off.

Full color isn’t there yet and I don’t believe the refresh rate of these screens (read: animation capability) is very high but these are just engineering problems that will no doubt be solved in a few years. But make no mistake, digital paper is a major shift toward ridding ourselves of the computing paradigm that is the box in the office.

Technorati tags: digital paper, ubiquitous computing, media, E-ink

I just think MIT has its form-factor wrong. The PSP is a great example of a computer that is lightweight, portable, rechargeable, rugged and maybe most importantly of all: engaging. It’s not just a video game machine either. With wifi and a web connection, virtually anyone, anywhere can engage. In fact, I think the PSP has another going for it besides having a better form-factor and being a serious computing platform: you don’t have to know how to read to use it. I’ve played more than my share of games in Japanese though I don’t read a word of it. You can still figure it out. Video games, for all their entertainment value, are still at the height of the usability curve.

It doesn’t take much imagination to imagine the kinds of educational video games that are possible for such a device. There aren’t a lot for the PSP just yet and frankly I think we’ve only begun to take the idea of the educational game to the level it could be taken.

Oh yeah. The PSP is $250. Sell them in bulk units of 1 million (as MIT plans to do with their laptop) with pre-loaded educational tools to governments and educational organizations and you could easily reach the $100 mark. I say give the kids what they want. Give them portable game machines!

P.S. If your only protest is “There’s no keyboard!” then I should like to point out that teenage girls in Europe are quite capable of typing on their cell phones. Kids learn quick.