Skip to main content

FMPD - a screen without a screen

In my last post about future mobile phone design concepts, I talked about the thin film contact lens as screen. This time I'll talk briefly about a more radical possibility - using neurological techniques to place images directly into the brain without light shining on the eye.

Before considering this concept, please take a look at this link, to a technology called Brainport. In brief, Brainport uses electrodes mounted on tongue to transmit images from a head-mounted camera to the brain, in effect enabling the blind to see. This is a laudable objective and a very clever product, for the device appears to work rather well, however this type of technology offers a tantalising possibility for the communication device designer of the future.

Just like the contact lens screen overlays images onto the line of sight, a neural feed like that suggested by Brainport could overlay images without any device in the visual field. In effect, the user would be surrounded by a sphere of virtual screen, but without being encumbered by a device attached to the head.

As ever, there are hurdles to get over before such a technology is ready for commercial exploitation. First of all, its unlikely that the tongue is a practical means of linking such a device to the nervous system - it's quite useful or other things, like eating and speaking, so we need to find another tap into the brain or reduce the size and intrusiveness of the tongue-mounted electrodes. This is a significant challenge as any invasive procedure will make a consumer device impractical for the mass market - perhaps there is some way of externally controlling neurons using e-m radiation? I'll do some research - if any one has any thoughts on this subject please yell!

Next time I'll post about controlling the phone of the future, moving away from the keyboard using non contact or mental control of devices.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Impacts of a handset leasing model on mobile telcos

Following yesterday's post, here's some related thinking on the impacts on operators of handset leasing. Handset sales represent around 25% of operator revenues in a typical European market, but generate only around 5% of margin. It may therefore be the case that the scenario described would lead operators to a more profitable structural model than exists today. Oil companies are consistently and acceptably profitable, despite being (literally in some cases) the ‘dumb pipe’ that operators are so desperate to avoid becoming. One of the reasons for the oil majors sustained profitability is clear focus on their role in the value chain – to supply the fuel that enables transportation, relying primarily on location, then brand and finally product innovation to compete. BP or Shell do not need to subsidise the purchase of a car in order to drive consumption of fuel because consumers are ‘hooked’ on it (it gets them from place to place) and there are many credible car manufacturers an...

Differences between Industrial and Digital businesses

Since I'm stuck on a Eurostar crawling through western France I thought I'd use the downtime to share this table I've made on the differences between Industrial and Digital companies across the main business functions. A strange insight into how my mind works... but hopeful a useful summary!

Value drivers for telecoms retail

I've been doing a really large number of driver trees recently - we've taken to using them on every project to get really into the guts of value creation for businesses and thus decide where to focus initiative development (How To Win, if you're keeping score). Anyhow, I had to pause for thought recently to work out how to represent the subscription aspect of telecoms retail for a client. Since it took me a minute, I thought I'd share... its lack of elegance suggests that its not quite right, although it was enough to demonstrate that there was a certain lack of coverage in the initiatives that my client was pursuing and thus spark a debate. Enjoy.