Talk:Hardware requirements: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:00, 10 March 2004

Proposal: let's improve terminal device to NOT assume any friendly retail and NOT say anything about video ad production and focus mostly on audio options and headset presentation, treating display as a "nice to have", and friendly retail as a "nice to have", and anything beyond barcodes as a "maybe later". Then when we're done with that actual list of simple capabilities, we can redirect hardware requirements over there, and rename Hardware Requirements "Nokia proposal". Fair?

Maybe. I'm not commenting on this since I do not think that audio access which you've been toting as a must-have as feasible means of delievering the consumerium buying signal and besides thinking that Consumerium will increase e-waste is a stupid viewpoint. The emergence of the whole Consumerium:Itself was sparked by information on Bluetooth, which has not been adapted as quickly as I have hoped. This is propably due to the problems in 1.0 devices that have been overcome mostly in 1.1.

The whole concept of Consumerium would not be possible without powerful information processing and accessing machines or infrastructural capital. You can't take the concept of Consumerium and throw it back in time say to 1917. Consumerium would just not be feasible with pens and papers and telegraph --Juxo 14:00, 10 Mar 2004 (EET)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Proposal:  let's improve [[terminal device]] to NOT assume any [[friendly retail]] and NOT say anything about video ad production and focus mostly on audio options and [[headset]] presentation, treating display as a "nice to have", and [[friendly retail]] as a "nice to have", and anything beyond [[barcode]]s as a "maybe later".  Then when we're done with that actual list of simple capabilities, we can redirect [[hardware requirements]] over there, and rename [[Hardware Requirements]] "[[Nokia]] proposal".  Fair?
-Maybe. I'm not commenting on this since I do not think that audio access which you've been toting as a '''must-have''' as feasible means of delievering the [[consumerium buying signal]] and besides thinking that [[Consumerium]] will increase [[e-waste]] is a stupid viewpoint. The emergence of the whole [[Consumerium:Itself]] was sparked by information on [[Bluetooth]], which has not been adapted as quickly as I have hoped. This is propably due to the problems in 1.0 devices that have been overcome mostly in 1.1.
+:Maybe. I'm not commenting on this since I do not think that audio access which you've been toting as a '''must-have''' as feasible means of delievering the [[consumerium buying signal]] and besides thinking that [[Consumerium]] will increase [[e-waste]] is a stupid viewpoint. The emergence of the whole [[Consumerium:Itself]] was sparked by information on [[Bluetooth]], which has not been adapted as quickly as I have hoped. This is propably due to the problems in 1.0 devices that have been overcome mostly in 1.1.
-The whole concept of [[Consumerium]] would not be possible without powerful information processing and accessing machines or [[infrastructural capital]]. You can't take the concept of Consumerium and throw it back in time say to 1917. [[Consumerium]] would just not be feasible with [[pens and papers and telegraph]]
+:The whole concept of [[Consumerium]] would not be possible without powerful information processing and accessing machines or [[infrastructural capital]]. You can't take the concept of Consumerium and throw it back in time say to 1917. [[Consumerium]] would just not be feasible with [[pens and papers and telegraph]] --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 14:00, 10 Mar 2004 (EET)