Microsoft Has An Interesting Vision : Where the software works flawlessly and the Displays are Cheap and In Everything

Productivity Future Vision

The main aspects of this vision are superior computer displays like OLED and improved LED.
* Displays are in every glass or flat surface. This would require displays to become 10 to 1000 times or more cheaper than they are now and to use 10 to 1000 times less power
* The interactive displays all have touch control like the Apple iPhone does now.
* The mouse has become a reconfigurable touch control, which can change into different kinds of dials.
* There is also voice interaction and real time translation
* There are no delays in software interaction
* It appears devices are also always or on instantly turned on as needed
* Devices are aware of other devices and you can drag and drop from one screen to the next.

Some of this vision could be realized with more expensive displays with projectors in cellphones and/or goggles that overlay or project a computer display over reality. Then the interface would still be visible but each person would carry their own displays and displays would not have to built into and onto everything. The computers would need to sense and react to gestures.

MIT and others have already created prototype “sixth sense” projectors of computer information onto real world objects.

The cost and power efficiency of the displays seems to be the biggest hurdle to the Microsoft vision. Also, getting no software interface delays given Microsoft’s recent trend of more software delays using Microsoft Vista.

About The Author

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.


by Newest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

$20,000 Triac electric vehicle available today. eligible for $4000 tax credit.

. Green Vehicles, manufacturer of the 3-wheeled TRIAC EV, calls it a “modern freeway commuter,” because the zero-emissions vehicle can reach 80 mph and will get you into the carpool lane with a single driver. Safety-wise, it has a structural steel cage the company says is the “same metal skeleton used in race cars” and a low center of gravity to maintain balance (but surprisingly has no airbags).


Tata's Girish Wagh revealed that the second-generation Nano will be developed in four years from now and designed for an assault on the European market.

In order to market in Europe, the next Nano will need to comply with the stringent Euro 5 emissions and safety standards, and Tata will target three liters per 100km, [about 80mpg] down from the current Nano's already tiny-sipping 5L/km.

3" REL="nofollow">The Tata nano has no airbags and was not developed to specifically meet America's stringent crash-test standards.

However, this doesn't imply that the Nano is a rolling death-trap, or subject to any half-baked engineering. During the launch of the Nano earlier this year at New Delhi Auto Expo, Ratan Tata, chairman of the Tata Group and Tata Motors, explained that the Nano has passed Indian full-frontal crash tests and has been designed to meet international offset and side-impact crash tests. So the potential to meet U.S. safety standards is there (at least in theory). The same is true of the car's engine. The Nano's rear-mounted, 34-horsepower, 623cc aluminum twin-cylinder gasoline engine is capable of more than 50-mpg and meets Euro III emissions standards.

So the Tata Nano is about on par in safety with a ten year old used car.

If the electric versions of such cars only go to India, China and then to Europe they would be able to offset a lot fuel usage.

There were also rumors during this year's Geneva auto show that the Nano could come to the States powered by an electric motor. Replacing the Nano's gas-powered engine with an electric one could qualify it as a low-speed vehicle (LSV) in the States (or what is sometimes referred to as the "quadricycle" class of city-car in Europe). These city-cars have limited power, top-speeds of only 25 to 30 mph, and can't be driven on highways. These vehicles are also exempt from having to meet stricter safety standards that apply to normal road cars.


All we have to do is ignore safety regulations and these crush=o=matic cars are long as government puts his heavy hand down.

Congratulations, Brian, you've moved from interesting blog to fascist enabler. Well done, sir!

5" REL="nofollow">The energy plan that site recommends is to build more nuclear power and more renewables to displace coal and to add more electrical power for electrifying transportation.

MIT/Westinghouse power uprates would increase nuclear power from 20 to 30% even without reactor build

6" REL="nofollow">big energy picture stats

Electricity generation in the USA.
50% from coal
20% nuclear
20% natural gas
7% hydro
1% wind
2% biomass and oil

it would save oil to go electric, plus lighter cars would be more efficient


John McCain (the more fiscally conservative of the two Presidential candidates) is proposing $5000 government subsidies for each electric car. There have already been hybrid car subsidies of about $3000 for several years.

The only difference in this proposal is that by keeping the entire cost of the car to less than those amounts then the government support would cover the cost of the car.

Covering only 80% of the cost of a lower priced car would be fine.

When a better plan is discussed the comparison is to bad or inferior plans. A better plan gets more electric cars deployed for the same level or less government support.

Spend $5 billion of government support and instead of 1 million cars get 10 million.

Subsidization has happened and continues to happen. There should be support for a plan that can actually solve the target problem.

In this plan people can keep their SUVs and pay high prices to use them. But they will have a cheap option for getting around that does not use oil.

Safety is better than electric scooters and should meet basic collision standards.

Cities like San Francisco, Berkeley and Washington DC have rules that restrict certain car usage. Odd/even license plate or banning cars from parts of the city. The expectation would be that if cheap electric cars were widely available that those kinds of cities would only allow those cars to be used within most of city limits.

hmmm would Berkeley pass such invasive laws ?


How are you going to recharge an electric car? Isn't it all that energy going to mostly be generated by gasoline anyway? Or is it mostly coal?

How much would it actually reduce gas usage?


I hope these things pan out, but I'm not holding my breath. Americans have a good reason for wanting SUVs and Minivans. I hope you'll cover the safety concerns with these tiny cars.

What bothers me about your report is the reference to planning, which usually means central planning, which usually works against free markets. We should have learned by now that this kind of stuff mandated by governments and NGOs like the U.N. does return optimum results. Central planning substitutes bureaucrats, often activists and enthusiasts, for the collective decisions made by markets.

If these wonder cars are feasible, bring them on by all means, but don't make them part of a government plan or subsidize them.


An electric car is one that uses electrical power as the primary source of power for propulsion for the vehicle. Compressed air counts in the case where air compression is performed with electric power.

There needs to not be a gasoline engine. A gas engine with electrical power is a hybrid car.

The XP vehicles inflatable car is supposed to be as safe as current cars. You are riding around in air bag material.

If we are addressing big time critical problems like peak oil and possible climate change, then we may not have the luxury of waiting for faster and safer. We may have to settle for fast enough (60-70mph), and safe enough (meet minimum collision standards). The examples that I gave were definitely less expensive to buy and operate and cleaner and quieter.


What is an electric car? If you use wires, computers, sensors, and servo-motors to replace the transmission, brakes, and suspension, but leave the gasoline engine in to turn the generator, is that an electric car? If you replace the gasoline engine with an electric motor and a battery, but leave in the mechanical transmission, brakes, and suspension, is that an electric car? If you take out all the safety features to make the car light enough to drive all the way to work on one battery charge, is that dangerous new car an electric car? Yes, I want an electric car - but for me that means it is faster, safer, quieter, cleaner, and less expensive.