Strings And Beads:
January 12, 2001 1:04 PM Subscribe
Strings And Beads: Why worry about which device has the power to perform which function? Why not tie all your processing power together and use it to drive the functions you want where you want it? Full-motion video on your handheld? Sure!
I like the thought of a protocol, or API or some other interface to remove product-specific restrictions, it's a pretty nifty thought, and fits in nicely with my Science Fiction based view of the Sparkly Future.
I don't like the fact that this is proprietary, and like Holloway I have misgivings about the effectiveness of a proprietary technology to do those things.
I immediately thought of BeOS, too. I wonder if "Be" is going to become the new "e" or "My" and if that's the case will Be become more or less popular as a result? :-) (Hopefully more, it's a nifty OS, I keep meaning to dedicate a box to it, but never seem to have all the components necessary, like a video card, at one time. :-)
The problem with being in "stealth-mode development for over 4 years" is that you run the very serious risk of missing the boat. It sounds like they're trying to make a platform-independant widget, when the browser's become the defacto platform-independant standard.
And, oh how I wish that was actually true. :-)
I fear they've missed the boat. The technology's limited to devices they've managed to convince people to write "Beads" for, which seems to me to be an expensive process.
The FAQ is nice and elaborate though, and truth-be-told I'm only halfway through so far. It reads a little bit like a long press release, but it does delve slightly into the concepts behind the technology.
posted by cCranium at 4:49 PM on January 12, 2001
I don't like the fact that this is proprietary, and like Holloway I have misgivings about the effectiveness of a proprietary technology to do those things.
I immediately thought of BeOS, too. I wonder if "Be" is going to become the new "e" or "My" and if that's the case will Be become more or less popular as a result? :-) (Hopefully more, it's a nifty OS, I keep meaning to dedicate a box to it, but never seem to have all the components necessary, like a video card, at one time. :-)
The problem with being in "stealth-mode development for over 4 years" is that you run the very serious risk of missing the boat. It sounds like they're trying to make a platform-independant widget, when the browser's become the defacto platform-independant standard.
And, oh how I wish that was actually true. :-)
I fear they've missed the boat. The technology's limited to devices they've managed to convince people to write "Beads" for, which seems to me to be an expensive process.
The FAQ is nice and elaborate though, and truth-be-told I'm only halfway through so far. It reads a little bit like a long press release, but it does delve slightly into the concepts behind the technology.
posted by cCranium at 4:49 PM on January 12, 2001
I think it's rather obvious that home device protocols will be TCP/IP with a mini webserver (serving configuration pages and status and whatever) when the promises of IPv6 (enough addresses for everyones' dog and their fleas) come through.
mental note: don't use brackets so much
If that sounds rather heavyweight, consider the cellphones with TCP/IP and WAP. Or that web server on a C-64 (and there's one on an old Spectrum). It's not too difficult, it's well tested with immediate use through any browser. The nonproprietry-ness is whats important for consumer pickup.
I'll be cringing at the old joke when the media takes the WaCkY iNvEnTiOns angle: "someone could burn your toast through the internet"... though.
posted by holloway at 6:36 PM on January 12, 2001
mental note: don't use brackets so much
If that sounds rather heavyweight, consider the cellphones with TCP/IP and WAP. Or that web server on a C-64 (and there's one on an old Spectrum). It's not too difficult, it's well tested with immediate use through any browser. The nonproprietry-ness is whats important for consumer pickup.
I'll be cringing at the old joke when the media takes the WaCkY iNvEnTiOns angle: "someone could burn your toast through the internet"... though.
posted by holloway at 6:36 PM on January 12, 2001
"Damn neighbor kids! Always hacking into my fridge, making my ice cream go all melty...."
posted by youhas at 3:20 AM on January 13, 2001
posted by youhas at 3:20 AM on January 13, 2001
Couple, driving away for a holiday...
"Honey, I left the oven on. The house might burn down."
"That's OK dear, I'll turn on the shower."
posted by holloway at 3:28 AM on January 13, 2001
"Honey, I left the oven on. The house might burn down."
"That's OK dear, I'll turn on the shower."
posted by holloway at 3:28 AM on January 13, 2001
« Older where did word go? | SELECT 'name' FROM 'slave owners' BY 'gender'. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
2. About five years ago Sun's Java's JINI (or a chaty article) did the "imagine your JINI enabled toaster talking to your JINI enabled fridge" bit. It fell on it's face as there's no upgrade path for consumers - you need to have all JINI devices to get any benefits. I think this is the same. It doesn't seem to offer a way of using the devices already populating people's homes.
3. I want Lance Arthur's baby.
posted by holloway at 4:10 PM on January 12, 2001