That old clunky system -- the smart phone

Mainframes probably have first claim on the title of "that old large hard-to-use system".

Minicomputers were smaller, easier to use, less expensive, and less fussy. Instead of an entire room, they could fit in the corner of an office. Instead of special power lines, they could use standard AC power.

Of course, it was the minicomputer users who thought that mainframes were old, big, and clunky. Why would anyone want that old, large, clunky thing when they could have a new, small, cool minicomputer?

We saw the same effect with microcomputers. PCs were smaller, easier to use, less expensive, and less fussy than minicomputers.

And of course, it was the PC users who thought that minicomputers (and mainframes) were old, big, and clunky. Why would anyone want that old, large, clunky thing when they could have a new, small, cool PC?

Here's the pattern: A technology gets established and adopted by a large number of people. The people who run the hardware devote time and energy to learning how to operate it. They read the manuals (or web pages), they try things, they talk with other administrators. They become experts, or at least comfortable with it.

The second phase of the pattern is this: A new technology comes along, one that does similar (although often not identical) work as the previous technology. Many times, the new technology does a few old things and lots of new things. Minicomputers could handle data-oriented applications like accounting, but were better at data input and reporting. PCs could handle input and reporting, but were really good at word processing and spreadsheets.

The people who adopt the later technology look back, often in disdain, at the older technology that doesn't do all of the cool new things. (And too often, the new-tech folks look down on the old-tech folks.)

Let's move forward in time. From mainframes to minicomputers, from minicomputers to desktop PCs, from desktop PCs to laptop PCs, from classic laptop PCs to MacBook Air-like laptops. Each transition has the opportunity to look back and ask "why would anyone want that?", with "that" being the previous cool new thing.

Of course, such effects are not limited to computers. There were similar feelings with the automobile, typewriters (and then electric typewriters), slide rules and pocket calculators, and lots more.

We can imagine that one day our current tech will be considered "that old thing". Not just ultralight laptops, but smartphones and tablets too. But what will the cool new thing be?

I'm not sure.

I suspect that it won't be a watch. We've had smartwatches for a while now, and they remain a novelty.

Ditto for smart glasses and virtual reality displays.

Augmented reality displays such as Microsoft's Halo, show promise, but also remain a diversion.

What the next big thing needs is a killer app. For desktop PCs, the killer app was the spreadsheet. For smartphones, the killer app was GPS and maps (and possibly Facebook and games). It wasn't the PC or the phone that people wanted, it was the spreadsheet and the ability to drive without a paper map.

Maybe we've been going about this search for the next big thing in the wrong way. Instead of searching for the device, we should search for the killer app. Find the popular use first, and then you will find the device.