Convergence vs. Proliferation

The seed behind the line of thought running through this article is the recent demise of the iPod, which had lost its preeminent status in Apple’s portfolio a long time back. An interesting start would be this article from a CNET editor back in 2007, in which she muses about the future of music players with the launch of the iPhone:
Steve Jobs launched the iPhone in 2007 with a set of statements that initially indicated that Apple was launching three separate products — “We are launching three revolutionary products of this class”
- The first one: A widescreen iPod with touch controls
- The second one: Is a revolutionary mobile phone
- And the third is a breakthrough internet communications device
He had opened up the possibilities of convergence and Apple’s ambition in that area through the launch speech. A quick read of this article from The Telegraph highlights, how over the years, Apple is stuck to its convergence strategy in its iPhone launches and the feature enhancements — camera, the revolutionary app store that opened up the software side of the converged world, continuous enhancement of the visual and audio capabilities, enhancement of the touch interface, integration of Siri and the launch of Apple Pay.
The convergence movement that the iPhone started is beautifully captured in this image from WIRED magazine in 2013:

Convergence is not a phenomenon restricted to the iPhone (or even the smartphone). Although a concept that needs to define itself clearly, the principle thinking behind the Internet of Things (IoT) is nothing but fusing protocols to enable more physical devices to get connected with each other. Consider the following examples of convergence at play:
- Sony PSP — Sony’s ambition was similar to that of Apple, which was bringing together its legacy expertise on multiple technology platforms into a single device (aka Walkman and Playstation). PSP was one of Sony’s best selling products with global sales in the range of 80 million plus
- Sony Playstation — An even bigger convergence play from Sony was to make its Playstation game console range a complete home entertainment device. Again, the strategy was to play to its strengths on technological innovation — gaming console, DVD/CD technology and home entertainment
- Television — This is not about a brand but a category. The impact of convergence on the ‘black box’ is currently limited to content creators / providers (Amazon, Hulu, Netflix), modes of viewing (live, delayed live, catchup, on-demand) and modes of connectivity (HDMI, Apple TV etc.). The future of convergence for the television is about projection modes (3D, VR and AR). The next biggest convergence wave would be the ability to experience Occulus Rift even when you don’t have the device (but can connect your TV remotely to it)
- Car electronics and entertainment — Again this is not about one brand driving it, but a whole industry coming to grips with convergence and identifying opportunities for growth (let’s keep the endeavours of Apple and Google to create driverless cars out of this). The convergence trend may start with adopting alternative business models (e.g. GM’s investment in Lyft) but it has a much wider set of routes at its disposal. This piece in The Raconteur sums up the biggest connected car trends very well:
- Refrigerators — The standard argument on this could be it is part of the wider IoT connectivity platform, but my intention is to assess each device in isolation (in terms of its functionality 10 years ago vs. what it is now). In CES 2017, LG announced that it will integrate webOS and Amazon Alexa into a new line of refrigerators, enabling them control their own power settings, order groceries, look up recipes, play music and do other cool things. The video below showcases Samsung’s ambition with its smart refrigerator technology (branded the Family Hub):
Although convergence as a cultural, social, or industrial force may have gathered momentum in the last few years, but the underlying catalyst remains rooted in deep human behavioural changes. In this insightful Techcrunch article, the impact of convergence on mobile devices is reflected through the increase in time spent on mobile devices:
Key facts from the research conducted, which is in line with Apple’s game-changing strategy of launching the Apps Store, which added fuel to the convergence movement:
- 158 minutes spent on mobile devices in Q1 2013 to 300 minutes spent in Q4 2016
- Mobile browsing has declined and time spent on apps has significantly increased
- Apps taking over traditional phone functions like making a call or texting (think of WhatsApp one day obliterating all messaging plans of mobile service operators)
- Apps being used for multiple activities (read convergence) which range from watching content, reading news, organising our lives (or pretending to), managing our finances (or again trying to) etc.
The proverbial point around this phenomenon would be the classic ‘chicken and egg’ story. Did Steve Jobs and his contemporaries take a huge bet on convergence or did they have hard evidence from research on human behaviour that we would always prefer to use “lesser number of things” to “do and achieve more” (the definition of achieve lies hanging in balance)?
This is the fundamental definition of ‘proliferation’, which was the other dimension I wanted to explore. Before the convergence of devices gained momentum, was humankind a unhappier species compared to now when we can connect almost anything to anything? Professor Jean M. Twenge, who is a Professor of Psychology at San Diego State University just published this thoroughly researched piece in The Atlantic (a weekend read), which definitely seems to indicate that teenagers are.
When Dr. Martin Cooper and his design team at Motorola invented the first cellular phone, they were spurred on by the rapid advances that technology was making in the domains of communications. Another trigger was to make a more human-centric version of the network that supported the car phone industry at that time (the only type of phone that was functional in a mobile sense). Today, the ambition to launch the next version of the iPhone or the Galaxy is to feed our insatiable appetite of ‘needing more’ and ‘doing more’. Majority of the smartphone launches in recent years have not taken technology innovation to the next level (unless we want to call the increase in the size of the screen or pixels on the camera has monumental leaps in technological advancement). Storage as a differentiator had long become a commodity and so is sound quality.
Don’t get me wrong. In no way am I saying that smartphones have made our lives worse than how it was before. Some smartphone led advancements have the true potential to significantly alter the quality of human life. In this Financial Times article, the author describes the experience of receiving medical advice from an AI-driven app called Babylon:
Medical advice and almost medical hospitals running on smartphones are not only saving but improving the quality of life of millions in Africa.
The biggest challenge with proliferation is its uncontrolled nature. Whether it is about buying things or even about displaying a set of emotions, proliferation becomes uncontrolled very quickly. We are now doing a lot of things on one device, which previously we would have needed 3–4 devices to do. A quick scan of the number of Apps that I have downloaded on my iPhone reveals that I have expressed an active interest to conduct the following activities on my smartphone:
- Grouping all my social media apps together
- Having more than 10 different entertainment apps
- Manage my loyalty cards
- Manage my travel demands
- Access to my 6 different email accounts
- Manage my finances
- Being selective and choosy about the different sources of news
- Downloading apps and completely ignoring them
- Making shopping lists using Notes (and not writing them down)
- Managing my home’s energy consumption and bills
Precisely 6 years ago I didn’t have a smartphone and was not doing any of the above on a phone. Am I happier now compared to 6 years ago? I doubt it. Happiness is a relative state of mind and it doesn’t need to be continuous and neither does it need to grow exponentially every year (but we do need to watch out if it is declining exponentially every year, which is what seems to be happening with Generation Z — another moniker tabled by those who believe use of technology differentiates us as human beings). But was I less busy 6 years ago then I am now? Definitely yes, and I do wonder how much of my ‘busy-ness’ is due to convergence and how much is really because I am doing more productive things.
