- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 37,648
- Reaction score
- 2,362
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
To not further derail another thread:
Why don't you live in a cave? It also worked before. That kind of argumentation is, as you can see here, not really logical. Technology advances for a reason and that reason is usually utility. Hypes come and go, but lasting progress is made when a technology is useful.
A smartphone is for me an useful unification of many specialist tools into one very tiny package. Of course there had been such tools before. But never in a way that you can hold them in your hand comfortably. And that also much cheaper than the sum of all specialist tools.
A collective feeling of must-have? Sure. But not because the other collective people are stupid - they simply all can see the obvious advantages.
And even just cell phone part: It is just a phone that you can carry with you. Nobody forces you to phone with somebody, when you don't want to and you can be called in the middle of the night even with a normal old telephone.
Same with the car: You can live without one. But having one has advantages. Even you might need to know somebody who has a car. You can live without owning one yourself and be dependent on others in the rare situations that you might face. But still, it is only a question of technological advantages for you. As long as not owning one is less bad than paying for owning one, it is a good choice.
And if you are Superman, you will also never have the need for an aircraft. But for others, it can be a good concept.
But then, there is also one aspect that you ignore in your egocentric position: Without many people using smartphones, we wouldn't have them in their current form. The whole infrastructure around them would be unaffordable and make no sense at all. Why should many antenna masts exists all over Germany for a single phone to use them eventually? It only makes sense if many people use the infrastructure and drive innovation. And innovation is for example the higher density of masts that permits the current data rates for many users. Or public WiFi hotspots.
Some people are surprised that I can exist without a car and without a cell phone (while they are even more surprised of not having a cell phone rather than a car). But I'm surprised that they are surprised. Because it works. And why shouldn't it? It also worked before. It's not a real must- have. It's a collective feeling of must-have. A feeling which I never got. A phone which one can carry wireless and use everywhere? :hmm:
Why don't you live in a cave? It also worked before. That kind of argumentation is, as you can see here, not really logical. Technology advances for a reason and that reason is usually utility. Hypes come and go, but lasting progress is made when a technology is useful.
A smartphone is for me an useful unification of many specialist tools into one very tiny package. Of course there had been such tools before. But never in a way that you can hold them in your hand comfortably. And that also much cheaper than the sum of all specialist tools.
A collective feeling of must-have? Sure. But not because the other collective people are stupid - they simply all can see the obvious advantages.
And even just cell phone part: It is just a phone that you can carry with you. Nobody forces you to phone with somebody, when you don't want to and you can be called in the middle of the night even with a normal old telephone.
Same with the car: You can live without one. But having one has advantages. Even you might need to know somebody who has a car. You can live without owning one yourself and be dependent on others in the rare situations that you might face. But still, it is only a question of technological advantages for you. As long as not owning one is less bad than paying for owning one, it is a good choice.
And if you are Superman, you will also never have the need for an aircraft. But for others, it can be a good concept.
But then, there is also one aspect that you ignore in your egocentric position: Without many people using smartphones, we wouldn't have them in their current form. The whole infrastructure around them would be unaffordable and make no sense at all. Why should many antenna masts exists all over Germany for a single phone to use them eventually? It only makes sense if many people use the infrastructure and drive innovation. And innovation is for example the higher density of masts that permits the current data rates for many users. Or public WiFi hotspots.
Last edited: