3D and OLED Displays
Major changes are afoot in the world of TVs and computer displays and we are likely to see big developments next year. First off will be the introduction of Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED) devices. These displays have been used in smaller devices such as digital cameras for a while now, but manufacturers have recently started demonstrating OLED-based computer monitors and TVs. Samsung, for example, recently announced it will ship a laptop with an OLED screen by the end of next year. And Sony and LG already have OLED TV products, albeit at a high price.
OLED screens can be manufactured to be very thin (as little as 1mm deep) and their proponents claim greater brightness and superior picture qualities. But perhaps their most important contribution concerns energy use. As JISC TechWatch will be detailing in our forthcoming report on Low Carbon ICT, OLEDs are potentially more energy efficient than conventional LCD-based displays as they do not require a form of back-lighting (recent article claimed they were 30% more efficient).
3D TV is the other big development coming next year. Back in August 2005 JISC Techwatch published a report on advanced displays and this included some discussion of the emerging field of 3D display technologies. Although the report outlined the work that was taking place on prototypes and a number of specialised, high-end visualisation products there were few or no computer monitor or TV products. Back then, various manufacturers and analysts told us that 3D was definitely on its way and indeed, one of them argued that it would be normal within ten years. It seems he wasn’t too far off, as 2010 is gearing up to be the year in which 3D enters the mainstream.
There has been a lot of press coverage of 3D film recently, with the launch of James Cameron’s Avatar, but markedly less so about the forthcoming launch of 3D domestic TV. However, the big manufacturers are lining up products for launch next year. Sony’s CEO told the IFA conference last month that “the 3D train is on the track” and the New York Times reported that the company intends to produce TVs and a 3D Vaio laptop next year. Panasonic are also in the running, showing off a prototype 50-inch Viera plasma 3D set at a trade show a couple of weeks ago. Samsung are also reported to have a prototype system.
So far there’s a big catch (apart from the likely, top-of-the-range price tag), all these devices require the user to wear special glasses which synchronise the view each eye receives in order to create the 3-D effect. In fact, the killer tech for 3D – lenticular 3D, a system in which thousands of tiny lenses built into the screen direct the pictures to the eyes without the need for glasses – is still a way off. We saw a working demonstration of this kind of kit at CeBit back in 2006 and it was pretty impressive.
So, it seems that just as we complete the switch over from CRT to LCD a whole slew of new display technologies will be upon us, with more set to come. Institutions thinking about their refresh cycle for display technologies need to take a long-term perspective or risk being caught out by the speed with which this technology is set to change.
Services
There is a great deal of interest in the idea of software as a service at the moment. JISC has been leading the way in the education sector with its e-Framework and Enterprise Architecture work, some of which has been published through TechWatch, and for a general introduction, see UKOLN’s materials prepared for the CETIS 2008 conference, available at the session’s webpage.
More recently comes an announcement from the EU Commission about its S-Cube Network of Excellence. S-Cube aims to create a vibrant, pan-European research community to establish links with industry and act as an incubator for the next wave of service technologies. The network is currently recruiting for members and links to further details are on the S-Cube website. There is a closing date for applications of 25th September.
Semantic Web
Four years ago TechWatch published a report on Semantic Web technologies written by Brian Matthews, from the UK office of the W3C. He argued that semantic technologies have great potential in education, and new work published by JISC fleshes out some of the bones of this earlier report.
Semantic Technologies for Teaching and Learning is essentially a ’state of play’ report that looks at semantic technologies and tools and outlines how they could be of use to education. It also includes a very useful survey of different tools and details 36 of relevance to HE.
The report argues that activities to encourage exposure of data by HE/FE in semantic formats, such as RDF, will pave the way for new applications that will help with teaching and learning. Finally, it outlines a roadmap for adopting semantic technologies, involving a transition from what it terms ’soft’ to ‘hard’ semantics and envisages pedagogically aware applications within four to five years. Readers interested in further discussion of semantics in education might also be interested in The Semantic Web in Education, an article recently published in the EduCause Quarterly.
RFID and the Right to Silence
The European Commission has issued an action plan concerning the use, and possible abuse, of RFID, smart chips and other aspects of what is becoming known as the Internet of Things.
The report, “Internet of Things – an action plan for Europe”, proposes 14 action points, including work on the policy governance of RFID, continuous monitoring of the privacy and data security issues arising, action over the recycling of the potentially vast number of smart chips and cards, and pan-European standards work.
Most interestingly, the EU will launch a debate over what it terms the ‘Right to Silence of the Chips’ – empowering individuals to be able to disconnected from the emerging networked infrastructure at any time.
Although this may seem of tangential interest to higher education, university libraries are among the early adopters of this new technology. There is also likely to be considerable uptake of smart card-related technologies for the identification of staff and students and for building security.
Indeed, JISC TechWatch published a report on RFID in May 2006 which discussed these emerging developments and put them into an education context. The TechWatch report discussed privacy concerns in depth, pointing out that as individuals move around in a society of widespread tagging the products they buy, wear and consume, as well as the places they visit, will be capable of being identified and recorded by a widespread network of readers. Such information could provide a great deal of intelligence on a person, their habits, likes and dislikes and movements.
TechWatch concluded that the benefits of these technologies would only be properly realised if they can be trusted. The EU report backs this view and argues for a widespread debate over the issues and for the ultimate development of an Internet of Things for people rather than for technology’s own sake.
Open office document formats
In August 2007, TechWatch published a report on XML-based office document standards and there are a couple of reasons why this has come to the fore this last week.
First of all, at JISC’s strategy meeting this week there was much talk of the need to support institutions dealing with antiquated administration systems that are unable to provide, for example, the kind of business intelligence that managers need. One of the things the TechWatch report did was to acknowledge that institutions were going to need to update their systems. It also provided a way for thinking about the issues that put procurement questions into a bigger picture of soon-to-be mandatory policy requirements around the need to provide information without creating vendor lock-in.
Secondly, the IEEE Internet Computing magazine has recently published an article on ODF (OpenDocument Format: The standard for Office Documents) which looks at some of the new work being undertaken by the OASIS ODF Technical Committee. To understand why this is important you really need to have read the TechWatch report first, but we think what’s interesting is the ODF Futures section. This talks about: improved support for the use of mathematical and scientific formulas in applications that make use of ODF; facilities to help applications make use of collaborative editing and semantic tagging; enhancements for accessibility. The move towards Semantic Web-type applications is particularly interesting. Rob Weir, the article’s author, argues that such tools will “let authors capture… more of what they’re thinking”.
TechTracking: Location-based Experiences
Yesterday’s Guardian featured 100 top sites for the year ahead, and it was interesting to note how many of these were connected to location-based services. For those in HE who are interested in the educational issues surrounding these technologies, you might be interested in the TechWatch report on Future Location-based Experiences, published in January 2005.
The report was written by Steve Benford, currently Professor of Collaborative Computing at the University of Nottingham. Steve is one of the early pioneers of location-based media and is a recipient of the 2003 Prix Ars Electronic Golden Nica for Interactive Art. He was also nominated for a BAFTA in Interactive Arts and Technical and Social Innovation (2005) in conjunction with Blast Theory, a London-based group of interactive media artists.
As well as the location-based experiences report, TechWatch is currently commissioning a report provisionally titled Data mash-ups and the future of mapping (see previous blog item for more information). This will take some of the issues (raised in the 2007 report on Web 2.0) related to the use of geospatial data within the Web 2.0 context and explore them in more detail.
ICT 2008: Panel debate
At the end of day one there was a panel debate on the successes and failures of EU-funded research. It was generally agreed that the EU research environment is fragmented – there is no equivalent of MIT, no EU-wide centres of excellence. Along with that came the statement, from Martin Sadler of Hewlett Packard, that “we should recognise talent, we let down our young researchers. MIT, for example, has regular competitions for young scientists and technologists – it really puts them on pedestal”.
Sadler also noted that whilst Europe produces top quality graduates, these graduates have poor business acumen compared to their American counterparts. He also noted the lack of women choosing technology-related careers, something that was backed up by Wendy Hall from Southampton University.
One of the initiatives aimed at trying to combat some of these concerns is the European ‘blue card’ for talented foreign students. This would make it easy for them to study and take up research-related jobs within the EU.
ICT 2008: plenary report
The opening plenary debate of the ICT 2008 conference focused on trends and directions for the ICT agenda over the next ten years. It was chaired by Viviane Redding, the EU commissioner responsible for ICT and involved a panel including Ben Verwaayen, CEO of Alcatel-Lucent; Harold Goddijn, the founder of Tom Tom and Esko Aho, the ex-Prime Minister of Finland. The panel agreed that there are three major societal challenges for European ICT research and development:
- the green agenda and tackling climate change
- raising productivity and improving skills
- building the knowledge society
Despite the economic downtown it was agreed it was important that Europe should continue to support work that helped with these challenges and not be diverted from the existing roadmap.
Ben Verwaayen argued that the Web and its evolution into a tool for “massive” collaboration and creativity would be profoundly important for these three areas. He predicted: “a whole new era of collaboration with a new eco-system developing”.
There are potential downsides. One is that the economic downturn will turn people against the idea of investing in research and blue skies thinking. The second is that unless we are careful we will not create ICT systems that are robust, secure and accessible anywhere and by anyone. An important part of this is trust. The financial collapse over the summer has shown the vulnerability of complex systems that are not well understood. The panel were in agreement that the complex systems that are being developed in advanced Web and software systems must not be allowed to fail in a similar way. How this would be brought about was a key part of the discussions.
In particular, the consensus was that Governments will not be building the next generation Internet and ICT systems themselves by a top-down process of ‘grand visions’. Instead, technology will evolve organically and be built by independent researchers, large companies and SMEs. What this means is that the EU and other Governments and agencies need to do is to give “content” or concrete form to the understanding and meaning of trust. Ben Verwaayen said that there will need to be some element of control and regulation. Aho agreed that we need trust in our ICT systems and agreed that there can’t be grand designs, but argued strongly for systematic approaches and the importance of architecture. There is a huge amount of digitization taking place in many areas of life but, he argued, we need some kind of overarching architecture process to make it all fit seamlessly. This fits strategically with JISC’s work on architecture at the enterprise and inter-institutional level and could be seen as EU level confirmation of its efforts.
Content Management Systems: why we’re not updating the TechWatch report
Back in September 2001 TechWatch published a report on Content Management Systems, written by Paul Browning and Mike Lowndes. At the time it very quickly became one of the most popular TechWatch reports ever published, and is still a steady favourite, even today.
I can’t take any of the credit for the report as it was published before I took over TechWatch, but one of the first things people asked me for, back in 2004/2005, was an update to the CMS report; particularly the CMS product list. I did think about this, and even went as far as approaching the original authors to see if they were interested in a reunion. However, as I started to think about what the report would cover I had a crisis of remit.
The most important factor for me was what this was no longer a ‘future’ issue. As well as being a very practical report, exploring the nitty gritty of procuring a CMS, Paul and Mike’s report was also conceptual, outlining the bigger issues such as: “In reality a CMS is a concept rather than a product. It is a concept that embraces a set of processes”, and “… the boundaries of the CMS space are blurred. Substantial overlaps exist with document management systems, knowledge management systems, enterprise application integration systems, e-learning systems and portals”. In 2005 these concepts just hadn’t moved on far enough to warrant a new ‘future-facing’ report.
In addition, although there was a lot of demand for an update to the CMS product list, this isn’t within our remit. The purpose of the TechWatch reports is to start the ball rolling and hopefully stimulate interest/uptake elsewhere – we just don’t have the resources for ‘maintenance’.
However, this decision keeps coming back to haunt me, and when I was in Keele for the JISC Innovation Forum 2008 meeting last month, someone, once again, asked why there hadn’t been an update to the TechWatch CMS report. In fact, what this person was really saying was: “I want to procure a CMS but your report’s out of date”, and that’s really quite a different matter.
This got me thinking and revisiting the notes I made in 2005. My conclusion is that the answer is: “things have moved on a lot since then and perhaps you shouldn’t be buying a CMS”. I will elaborate on this in future blog items, but for now, suffice it to say that there is a paradigm shift brewing in institutional ICT provision, of which the institutional CMS is only one part. The future of the CMS is actually caught up in technological reinterpretations of the big concepts that Paul and Mike identified in 2001: processes rather than products, and blurring the boundaries between systems.
Semantic Web Technologies – has their time come in education?
In 2005, TechWatch published a report on Semantic Web Technologies written by Brian Matthews who, at that time, was deputy manager of W3C’s UK office. As JISC has recently announced an open call of funding for a study on Semantic Web technologies in teaching and learning we thought we’d use this opportunity to provide a bit of an update on Semantic Web developments.
The JISC call seeks to fund a study which looks at pragmatic aspects of the actual use of semantic applications in real world scenarios. The successful applicant will review a number of case studies of real-world teaching and learning scenarios and look at the potential for use of semantic technologies. The key question they are asking is: “Can you convince us that semantic technologies offer one potential solution to some real problems?”
This is an interesting development. In 2005, the Semantic Web was still seen by many people as very much a computer science ‘Grand’ research project which would take years to reach fruition. Despite some very well worked out visions as to what it would deliver – a more automated Web in which some sense of ‘meaning’ or semantics had been imbued into data held within pages and their links – there were still plenty of practical doubts. Even in 2006, when Tim Berners-Lee and other researchers at Southampton provided an update (The Semantic Web Revisited) they admitted that: “this simple idea, however, remains largely unrealized” (page 96). However, they were optimistic, arguing that the key development was for standards that express meaning to become well established and they reported that this was “progressing steadily”.
Despite this there are still concerns expressed, particularly by the business community, as to the practical reality of doing semantic web. Recent conferences such as Semantic Technologies have highlighted the question again: where are the practical examples? The Tallis Semantic Web Gang have produced a useful podcast of a round-up discussion which reviews their attendance at these conferences in which they debate some of these issues. As they make clear one of the key things to come out of these conferences is that venture capitalists and business development people are starting to ask quizzical questions about what exactly semantic web is, what does it actually do for real users and what is the ‘killer app’?
This reflects the original TechWatch report, which commented that: “people are still asking how they can be used in practical situations to solve real problems” (page 2). However, the report also concluded that higher education was likely to be at the forefront in the use of these technologies. Given that, the JISC open call seems particularly timely. There is an opportunity here for higher education to lead the way in making use of semantics with real users and I think it will be interesting to see the outcomes.