If you're visiting the Google I/O developers conference this week, you're a tiny part of a giant Google experiment to sniff out everything from your body heat to your breath. Google is even listening to your footfalls as part of its Data Sensing Lab I/O 2013.

Think that's a scary, Big-Brother invasion of privacy? The conference attendees I talked to didn't seem to mind. In fact, one wanted Google to collect even more data.

Google planted 525 powered sensors around the halls of San Francisco's Moscone Convention Center, and began collecting data from them on Wednesday, according to Michael Manoochehri, a developer programs engineer at Google. The company began measuring temperature, humidity, light, pressure (including nearby footfalls), motion, air quality and both RF and ambient noise. All of the data is sent back at intervals of 20 seconds or so, collected by Google's App Engine, with analysis performed by its BigQuery Big Data analysis tool. You can see the results at the Lab's dedicated Web site. 

Among other things, Google's I/O developer conference has focused this year on improving developer tools and better integrating the services that it already owns via a more intelligent cloud. The unnamed sensor project, part of Google's Data Sensing Lab, encompasses a bit of all of that. By itself, knowing that the air quality diminished at 4a.m. might be intriguing, but not all that significant. But by correlating that information with a peak in another data stream - ambient noise, say - it becomes possible to guess what's going oin; in this case, perhaps, the arrival of the cleaning crew.

Manoochehri said that Google could build in queries against the sensor network into its Google I/O app, to identify the quietest spots on the floor for a phone call or a brief nap.

Crossing The Creepy Line?

Eric Schmidt, then the chief executive of Google, famously described Google's policy as "to get right up to the creepy line, but not cross it." When Google unified its privacy policy in March 2012, the company suggested that its unified services could anticipate an afternoon meeting and direct you to leave at a certain time. A year ago, that notion prompted righteous outrage from members of Congress, users and privacy advocates. A year later, that feature (now called Google Now) has been lauded as the herald of anticipatory search. (Six privacy advocates from the EU are still threatening action.)

Source: Google

It's probably fair to say that attendees of Google I/O give Google a bit more leeway than the general public. That certainly proved to be the case for those sitting near the sensors. Alan Holzman, a retired venture capitalist who last worked for Intel Capital, shrugged it off. "My life is tied to Google in much more significant ways," he noted.

Ditto for Sam Napolitano, who was covering Google I/O for the Huffington Post. Napolitano said he believed that the sensors were probably picking up on the NFC tag embedded within his name tag - something that Google employees said wasn't true. In any event, Napolitano said, he didn't care, as he had no expectations of privacy in a public space. "As long as it's not under my toilet seat, I don't care," Napolitano said of the sensors.

And "Rachid," an employee of Motorola Mobility who declined to give his last name, said he wanted to Google sample more data. More data and more correlation often derives more interesting results, he said, such as the various causes of depression. 

The Internet Of Things

Collecting data from sensors is increasingly seen as part of the rise of the so-called Internet of Things, and Google clearly wants to be a leader in this growing domain. Google already collects some location data via Android phones to better improve its knowledge of traffic, and provide better solutions via Google Maps. 

(See also How The Internet Of Things Will Revolutionize Search.)

We know that Google is very good at parsing user data - pulling keywords from emails, for example, and selling ads against them. (Selling ads against search terms is child's play.) Likewise, it can make recommendations for where to eat, where to go, the route to take and when to leave - building more comprehensive, personalized and valuable profiles along the way.

But the I/O conference project suggests that Google is prepared to take the same value proposition - collect data, analyze it, and provide and sell services against it - far beyond today's core businesses. Imagine sensors placed on Google Street View cars, and selling a comprehensive snapshot of air quality to the communities it maps. Or mounting similar sensors on the light poles from which it strings  it Google Fiber broadband connections.

It will be interesting to see how far Google takes this. Remember this is the company that attempted to track the spread of influenza via search terms. Google said that it wants attendees and other users to be able to interact with its new sensor data via the project's website. How soon will it be when we'll be able to do the same for, say, San Francisco?

The Internet of Things isn't really an Internet of anything, at least not yet. Sure, devices are connected to the Internet, but they don't communicate with other devices — just with their own home servers. But that may be about to change.

A new common cloud platform dubbed Xively Cloud Services aims to provide a common ground through which any device connected to the Internet could actually communicate with any other device. Xively is an old fixture within the Internet of Things ecosystem, as it's actually a new commercial version of the older non-commercial Cosm platform, which in turn used to be known as Pachube until Xively's current owner LogMeIn purchased Pachube in 2011.

Like Cosm before it, Xively will offer a way for disparate devices to connect with each other, though now with commercial terms of service for commercial users and freely available services for projects in development. Whatever you call it, the availability of a platform like Xively is a key component in building a true Internet of Things instead of what we actually have now.

The Intranets of Things

To understand the difference, think back a decade or so to when the term "intranets" was all the rage. While the Internet was the grand, connected network of networks, intranets were the smaller, private networks used by corporations who were on the cutting edge of cool in the early days of the 21st century.

Today, the concept is still the same, even if the mystique of the term has worn off somewhat. Devices that are connected to the Internet at large behave in much the same way as servers on an intranet: they communicate only with their corporate systems, reporting data only to the commercial manufacturer.

Instead of the Internet of Things, then, what we have now is a whole bunch of intranets of things.

This may work for individual products, such as the car sensors that report back to the factory with critical maintenance data that, ideally, leads to faster diagnosis and repair of problems. But it doesn't leave much room for connecting devices and objects that really were never designed to communicate with each other.

What The Internet Of Things Might Look Like

Imagine, says Xively VP Chad Jones, a collection of tiny accelerometers and heat sensors woven into the fabric of an infant's onesie, designed to communicate with monitoring software in the cloud with the intent to watch the baby's breathing and body heat for the onset of sudden infant death syndrome or any other form of respiratory distress. The special clothing probably has its own alarm, but what if parents wanted the option to set off every fire alarm in the house?

(Hey, when it's your kid, you might want it to call the fire department and the National Guard, too.)

Right now, both the clothing and the alarms might be connected to the Internet, but not to each other. To make such an option work in our current circumstances, the manufacturers of the devices would have to meet, figure out common signal specifications and work out a commercial agreement. And that's for every fire alarm manufacturer.

Xively enables device makers to set the privacy settings for device data in the Xively network to share all, share some or share none, Jones explained. If device makers were on the Xively platform, they would have a common ground to connect and effectively communicate, using data sharing combined with directory services that provide the ability to selectively share device data and control.

Connecting the medical onesie and the alarms in this scenario would be a far easier and more frictionless experience.

This sort of common platform is exactly what the Internet of Things really needs. Xively and similar platforms like Open.Sen.se will make it much easier and faster for unrelated devices to connect with each other and start delivering on the promise of smart homes, intelligent devices services and similar long-promised notions.

Besides ushering in a boon of new connected devices, common cloud platforms for devices will ultimately help the consumer by ushering in competition and more choices. Right now, to build a smart or connected home requires you to choose from a relatively small array of compatible devices — which, unsurprisingly, aren't cheap.

Introduce more compatible devices through a common network, then suddenly the market will naturally drive prices down. More device vendors should jump into the game, too, knowing they will have a fair shot in this new market.

Image courtesy of Xively

A new survey of IT decision makers by SAP and Harris Interactive reithat the rise of machine to machine (M2M) communications - more commonly referred to as the "Internet of Things" - is on the cusp of transforming our homes, our cities and how business is conducted.

How, you ask?

• By leveraging Big Data and real-time analytics to improve parking and traffic flow, which could reduce pollution and traffic accidents as well.
• By managing all the gadgets in our homes, from lights, computers and smartphones down to our coffeemaker and garage door. Wake up, the coffee is brewing, the house is heated, the car already knows the best route to work and the news we need is showing on the screen of our choice - prioritized, obviously.
• Connected cars, roads and smartphones will guide us to the nearest open parking spot - and bill us automatically.

This Internet of Things will also let businesses increase "efficiency, productivity and collaboration," as it delivers real-time data and insight when and where it's most needed, including to a widely dispersed, highly mobile workforce.

Buried within the survey results are such nuggets as:

• Mobile devices will outnumber humans this year. 
• 90% of consumer-connected devices will have access to some personal cloud in 2013.
• 24 billion devices will be connected to the Internet by 2020.
• 66% of IT professionals surveyed believe business and consumer technology will converge within 3-5 years - great news for consumer tech leaders like Apple, Samsung and Google.
• At least 4 billion terabytes of data will be generated this year alone.
• The trend toward BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) has clear and present business repercussions: 75% of the surveyed IT professionals believe that employees' personal use of mobile devices impacts how the business itself uses the cloud. 
• 65% think the Internet of Things' biggest challent in managing and analyzing the resulting real-time data.

(Note: SAP and Harris have also prepared an infographic of the survey results, visible here.)

Global Phenomenon

The business-funded survey of 751 IT "decision makers" was generally upbeat about the Internet of Things. A statement released with the survey suggested connecting data from CRM systems, social media and billions of devices, all in real time, will result in "the ultimate social media collaboration of man and machine." 

That said, it is somewhat surprising that IT decision makers in developing countries - China, India and Brazil - appear more eager eager for the M2M revolution. Consider the response percentages to specific statements regarding the Internet of Things:

• Gives companies greater insight into their business: China (96%), India (88%), Brazil (86%), Germany (79%), U.S. (74%) and UK (61%)
• Enables businesses to respond to real world events: China (92%), India (86%), Brazil (82 %), Germany (82%), U.S. (78%) and UK (73%)
• Increases business efficiency:  Brazil (54%), UK (53%) and U..S (49%)
• Increases productivity for employees:  China (69 percent) - significantly higher than any other countries surveyed

Nearly all decision makers (89%) across all surveyed countries agreed, however, that widespread availability of LTE/4G infrastructure was vital for the success of the Internet of Things. This will likely not come cheap, however. A recent statement by Cambridge Wireless noted that today's mobile networks are "lacking ubiquitous coverage" and suggested that "service tariffs are too high to support" the full potential of the Internet of Things.

(See also Futurist's Cheat Sheet: Internet of Things)

The hope of the Internet of Things is that greater connectivity, vastly more data, improved data analysis - and response - will make our lives better in ways we can scarcely predict, at home, on the road, at work; everywhere.

Note: Per SAP, "the survey was conducted online by Harris Interactive on behalf of SAP among 751 IT decision makers in Brazil (n=126), China (n=125), Germany (n=125), India (n=125), the United Kingdom (n=125) and the United States (n=125) between January 15 and February 1, 2013."

As mobile devices dictate the terms of search and how results are being conveyed to end users, there's another phenomenon that will greatly influence the future of search - very soon, we're going to be swimming in more data than we will know what to do with.

The rise of the Internet of Things means billions of physical objects will soon generate massive amounts of data 24 hours a day. Not only will this make traditional search methods nearly impossible to use, it will also create an environment where instead of looking for things in the world, those things will be seeking us out to give us all sorts of information that will help us fix, use or buy them.

(See also Forget Searching For Content - Content Is About To Start Searching For You.)

Search Collides With Internet Of Things

When talking about the Internet of Things, it is important to get past the hype and explain exactly what it is: vast numbers of automated physical devices and objects connected to the Internet. These devices are usually routers, switches, phones… but increasingly devices like security cameras and remote climate sensors are being added - and over time we can expect everything from cars to refrigerators to join the party.

(See also Futurist's Cheat Sheet: Internet Of Things.)

At this moment in history, the relationship between search and devices on the Internet resembles the model of searching for Web content: you search for data from devices, and you get it.

The Shodan search engine follows this model very well. Using Shodan is pretty much like using Google or any other search engine: enter your search string and up pops quite a few results matching devices that Shodan has found on the Web. Routers, cameras, municipal control systems… they're all there to see.

CNN, true to its alarmist nature, recently described Shodan as the "The scariest search engine on the Internet" - and indeed, there are some disturbing aspects to using Shodan. Entering the search term "cisco-ios last-modified" - a term suggested by Shodan itself as popular - reveals a number of Cisco-based devices on the Internet that had not been updated in a very long time. Such devices could be very vulnerable to attack through well-known exploits.

Shodan exposes what security experts have known for a long time: a lot of devices connected to the Internet have been largely forgotten even as they continue chugging along performing tasks that range from mundane to mission-critical.

But Shodan, while interesting, will probably not represent the future of searching Internet of Things. Instead, as the world around us "wakes up" and becomes increasingly connected to the Internet, the world will talk to us without our having to look for it.

When The World Touches You

Here is one vision of how this potential future might work:

Imagine, says  J Schwan, CEO of Solstice Mobile, walking into an office building in which you are a maintenance technician about to start your day. Over the course of the previous day and evening, various tickets were filed by the building's tenants (or maybe even by the devices themselves): a squeaky door here, a hiccuping elevator there. An app on your phone lists the problems to be fixed - ordered by priority and optimized for maximum efficiency. This is a system that Solstice is working on now for clients.

Other examples abound. A department store could be populated with products connected to the Internet via RFID tags. Customers could walk in, request a certain item, and see a map to that item's exact location displayed on their phones. Or even see it as an augmented-reality display on their Google Glass or other wearable computer.

The same store's managers could use augmented-reality displays to view sales figures of the items the see on the shelves, perhaps in the form of a heat map that instantly indicates which items sell better in what position in the store. Just by speaking a couple words, they can have the stock room shift the position, or even update electronic price tags on the shelves to attract more buyers. Those price updates, by the way, then show up as alerts on shoppers' devices.

Not Far Away

This world is not far off. Smartphones and other mobile devices can already tap into public search engines to discover more about the world around them. You can use augmented reality to see results displayed graphically on device screens.

As more and more objects join the Internet, they'll create information that will be added to the potential data you can receive, raising the level of information available by orders of magnitude. This will be both a boon (more data to help make decisions) and a curse (so much data you could drown).

Searches, as active tasks, will become less needed - and less practical - as not just the Web, but the whole world around us will automatically send us information based on our preferences. And the questions we will have to ask will be far simpler and less arduous to construct.

Instead of entering "2013 best televisions" in your browser to get back lots of data in the form of articles and content, you'll be able to stand in the store and ask "which one of these TVs is the best for me for me right now?" and see the answers (based on your budget, space and other preferences) right in front of you.

Knowing the tenacity of advertisers, you probably won't even have to ask.

Image courtesy of Shutterstock.

The world of search is about to be flipped completely on its head. As part of that sea change, today's reactive Web-based searches are about to give way to proactive, geo-fenced answers that will pop up before you even frame the question.

In many cases, you won't be searching for content - content will be searching for you.

Putting The New Search In Context

Search, to date, has mostly worked something like this: You type a word or phrase into a search bar in a browser or mobile app and a search engine with a funny name returns a list of Web pages it deems related to your query.

In recent years, search has gotten a lot better in a number of ways. One key improvement takes location into account. If I type "Notre Dame" while I'm in my hometown, then it's very likely I will get results about the University. If I were located near Cleveland, though, I might get results about Notre Dame College. And if I were in France, surely my results would focus on this beautiful edifice. 

Location is part of what experts call "contextual search," which becomes even more important with the rise of mobile computing. Where we are and who we are makes a big difference in the search results we want, and contextually aware search engines are working to use that information to decide what results to return to us.

According to J Schwan, CEO of Solstice Mobile, there are four aspects of contextual searching that all have to work together:

• Where
• Relevance
• Push
• Security and privacy

First, there's the where - what Schwan refers to as geo-fencing. Where you are, as noted above, makes a difference in what search results are most appropriate.

Then there's relevance, which dictates results through explicit preferences that you have set, the results delivered to other users in a similar context and what is going on around you at that particular time (traffic, weather, business hours, etc.).

The third aspect Schwan highlighted is relatively new, but fast-becoming more important to contextual search: push. Rather than waiting for users to search and then reacting to that query, data providers and search engines are working on how to push data to users based on their context. Google Now does this now on Android and its Chrome browser extension: cards based on your search results, location and even email messages will appear that give you the traffic report to get home or inform you of the latest sports score.

The final aspect is the wrapper of security and privacy that has to work with all of this to ensure a user's data doesn't go where it's not supposed to.

Squinting For SEO

Contextual searching is perfect for mobile, because, well, mobile users are by definition moving around. But the mobile form factor also makes contextual search more important.

Many people may have honking big 27-inch monitors on their home PCs, but relatively tiny smartphone screens inherently limit the amount of information we can access. In that context, it's even more important for mobile users to get the right results near the top of the results screen.

This is even more true when adding natural interfaces to search, such as voice-activated searching using systems like Apple's Siri. Forget search strings, Siri has to process natural-language queries and either speak or display usable results on a small screen. 

For search-engine optimization (SEO), this is a huge challenge: With contextual search, it's no longer enough to get your business or product listed on the first Web page of results. On a mobile device, as well as in push situations, SEO is really effective only if you can push your results into the top position, or at least into the first few lines.

Wearable devices like Google Glass and the rumored iWatch could put even more pressure on search results. We don't yet know what their interfaces will look like, but it seems safe to assume that there may be even less real estate available to display search results. 

This is one reason why the search engines are working so hard to deliver knowledge rather than just Web page links in their results. Google and Bing both now feature "knowledge boxes" that try to encapsulate the pertinent information about a topic in one glance. This "knowledgization" of search results is conducive to mobile search because it parses data into easily displayed and digestible chunks - essential for the smaller screen.

We may already be seeing the early effects of this trend. Last Fall, Google reported its first-ever drop in search volume. Some of this decline is no doubt attributable to competition - such as Bing, Yahoo or even local searches through services like Yelp. But how much of it is due to pushed content and knowledge replacing what might have otherwise been searched for? If the information being received is of better quality, then perhaps we won't have to search as much in the future.

By incorporating context and working towards knowledge - useful information instead of just plain data - the next evolution of search will take advantage of new opportunities and cope with new demands and challenges.

Will that help us make better decisions? We can hope.

Lead image and Notre Dame images courtesy of Shutterstock.

Connected cars are hotter than turbo-charged V6 running at 8,000 RPM. The hype about how they're going to change the driving and passenger experience is accelerating faster than Danica Patrick coming out of a turn at a NASCAR race.

But most of the promises I've heard so far center around relatively prosaic things like better entertainment systems and integrated navigation. I like a great car stereo as much as anyone, but that just doesn't seem particularly revolutionary to me.

(See also Cars & The Internet Get Together At SXSW)

So I was looking forward to the connected car presentation at the Cisco Editors Conference in San Jose, Calif., on Wednesday. Much of it turned out to be pretty technical, all about how Cisco plans to support the back end of the process. That's important, but I was more interested in the some of the passing comments on the actual benefits connected cars are likely to deliver.

Why Driving Stinks

Maciej Kranz, VP and GM of Cisco's Connected Industries Group, laid out some of the grim statistics plaguing the world yet-to-be-connected cars:

Between 11% and 13% of commuting time is wasted in urban traffic congestion, for a total of 90 billion hours. (It just seems like of half of that is on the 101 Freeway between San Francisco and San Jose.) Some 7% to 12% of urban congestion is caused by people looking for parking. (It just seems like all of that comes in San Francisco's North Beach neighborhood.) Between 10% and 17% of of urban fuel is wasted at stoplights when there is no crosstraffic. Eighty percent of accidents (6.3 million) are caused by driver distraction.

"The good news," Kranz said, "is that we can actually lower all of these numbers quite dramatically."

How Connected Cars Make Driving Better

For congestion, that means traffic management and optimization of road networks. For parking issues, connected cars can link apps identifying the closest, most affordable available parking spaces to the vehicle's navigation. And the vehicles can intelligently adjust driving speeds to boost fuel efficiency.

Intelligent stoplights, for example, would know if there were 10 cars waiting in one direction but only 1 in the other, and adjust light timing to keep traffic moving. Along straight routes, Kranz said, they can build "green waves" of traffic signals to keep lanes flowing efficiently.

There's also the idea that if one car knows what other vehicles. traffic lights and other road infrastructure are doing, they can all adjust more efficiently. For examply, if your car knows that the car in front is about to make a turn or start braking, it can begin reacting even before it actually senses the action.

Cisco estimates this could lead to 7.5% less time wasted in traffic congestion and 4% lower costs for vehicle fuel, repairs and insurance. The benefits are particularly obvious in fleet settings, Kranz said. For example, a company with 10,000 delivery trucks would find it very valuable to be able to use connected technology to schedule preventive maintenance.

As for preventing accidents, vehicle-to-vehicle communications could enable a connected car to alert you if you get too close to the vehicle in front of you. If you don't respond, Kranz said, "at some point the car will make a decision to hit the brakes and avoid the accident."

Cisco estimatd 8% fewer accidents, 10% lower road costs and a 3% drop in carbon dioxide emissions.

Not Just Connecting The Car, But Also All Its Parts

The key to making all this happen, Kranz said, is not just connecting the car to the Internet, but also connecting together all of the various siloed subsystems in the car. When you connect a car to the Net, he said, "good things happen. More good things happen when you connect all of the systems," including telematics, diagnostics and driver assistance systems. Looked at this way, a self-driving car is just an advanced application of a connected car, taking over a higher-than usual proportion of the required tasks.

Cisco is pushing DSRC (Dedicated Short-Range Communications) technology to tie together the vehicle's various systems with the wider Internet.

Heck, if you ask me, though, even if connected cars just help me find a parking space on a Saturday night, all the development effort is totally worth it.

Lead image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Cisco is one of those companies people have a hard time figuring out. Despite the confusion, though,he company has posted a 44% increase in income from last year in its fiscal second quarter earnings released on Wednesday. And its long-term future looks even better.

Clearly, some people have gotten Cisco figured out, because they're doing business with the networking giant. The question is, what kind of business?

Retreat Or Strategic Withdrawl?

Look at the history of Cisco, and you see a company very much in retreat from the consumer market it had briefly coveted. Instead of routers for consumers and Flip video cameras, now its business is done back in the server rooms and network cabinets, as it once again targets the IT infrastructure of enterprises and governments around the world.

The drive to be the big-kid networking company on the proverbial block is more than just about selling equipment by the ton. It's also about developing a platform on these devices upon which applications can be run. Along with apps on the clients and the servers, Cisco is envisioning applications that will also run on the routers and switches. The end result, Cisco believes, will be a network that instantly responds to the needs of the data flowing within it, without the need to consume resources at either end of the data transmission.

Software-defined networks are but one outcome of this type of network-app paradigm. All-in-one networking appliances built to handle very specific tasks are another.

This is not, by any means, a sudden pivot by Cisco. As far back as 2009, the company was holding developer contests and hackfests to kickstart this type of app development (Disclosure: in 2009, I was an honorary judge for one such contest, while working with the Linux Foundation.) This is a vision that it has seen for a long time.

Doctor, Doctor, Give Me The News

Ironically, even as Cisco seems to retreat into the server rooms and network centers, the impact of the company may be felt by more consumers than ever were touched by its actual consumer product lines.

Cisco execs have made no secret that the future of their business lies in the Internet of Things, the hardware-oriented network of communication that will let your car tell your mechanic a fan belt is 1,000 miles away from epic fail even as the car is toodling down the Interstate. Or the micro-sensors in your heart that will tell your doctor basically the same thing, if the futurists' visions are on the ball.

As cool as that kind of information transfer will be, somebody's got to build the network to handle all that data - and all the other big data that will be generated through the "regular" Internet of ecommerce and entertainment systems.

(See also Peta, Exa, Yotta And Beyond: Big Data Reaches Cosmic Proportions [Infographic])

This is the job Cisco envisions for itself, and even though this current repositioning may be painful, the end result may put the company in the best place to take on this massive undertaking.

Which would be a bright future, indeed.

Image courtesy of Adriano Castelli/Shutterstock.

Every time the Apple iWatch rumor comes around, I can't help but get excited. It's not just the Dick Tracy childhood nostalgia that so many of us seem to share, although that's certainly part of it. I hope Apple is really building an iOS-integrated smart watch not just because it's futuristic, but because I want to tinker with my phone less. And I hope the iWatch is just the beginning helping me do that. 

Apple's rumored foray into wearable computing fits nicely into the popular narrative suggesting that's where the future lies. We appear poised to start moving beyond gadgets and toward a world in which operating systems and voice-controlled artificial intelligence are woven into our homes, cars and lives. 

Why A Smartwatch Makes Sense

Wearable, connected devices are a natural next-step in that evolution. As Nick Bilton points out, a smart watch will be a much easier sell for everyday consumers than the cyborg-esque augmented reality glasses Google will soon be hawking. Apple has patents and plans for head-mounted displays too, but a watch is a much more natural place to start with wearables targeted to a mass market. 

With our smart watches, we'll be able to get important notifications, send and receive messages and return basic information from search engines without pulling a small electronic brick from our pockets and hiding our faces behind them. It's why early reviews of the Pebble smartwatch say it "changes the entire dynamic of being connected." 

The Pebble is a good start, but its interface is grayscale and low-res and its iOS integration remains very limited. I'm counting on Apple to produce a far more polished, better-integrated wristwatch, complete with curved glass and its usual atttention to visual detail. 

Smart, Connected Objects Galore

While they're at it, I hope the Apple iWatch team is looking into how to bake iOS into any number of other non-smartphone, non-tablet devices. They're already working with car manufacturers to tighten dashboard and steering wheel integrations. That's wise considering that soon every new car will be Internet-connected.  And of course there's the longstanding speculation about a voice-controlled smart HDTV. Apple should push forward with cars and TVs, but it should take iOS much further than that. 

For example, I'd love an inexpensive, lower-power tablet - perhaps with one of those flexible displays everyone's so excited about - that  I can hang on my kitchen wall to conveniently display my calendar, a Photo Stream, to-do items from Reminders and a simple notepad. All of it should be synced online with my other, more multi-functional devices. Perhaps it will one day talk to my connected, grocery-aware refrigerator. 

In other rooms, we could have interfaces geared toward context-relevant tasks. Again, all of it will be synced via iCloud with a version of Siri that has evolved into something like Nuance's cross-device voice-control project called Wintermute (but even better). Sure, we'll likely still have one or two central, more powerful computers, but they will be supplemented by various gadgets, appliances and connected surfaces throughout the home, office and wherever.  

Of course, when I say Apple, I really mean Apple, Google, Microsoft and whoever else wants to push these things along. Apple seems best positioned to polish futuristic concepts with a shine that will entice even techno-phobes, whereas Google could push the envelope with some truly geeky, innovative concoctions. 

Beyond The Smartphone

Tablets and (especially) smartphones have begun to change so much about our day-to-day lives, but their form factors often make for a somewhat awkward integration into our worlds. At home, we carry a tablet from room to room, its purpose changing each time we cross a new doorway. Everywhere else, we have to kepp pulling the tiny computers out of our pockets to complete all kinds of tasks. Quite often, we're just checking for the notifications our brains have been conditioned to expect, tuning out our physically present friends and family in the process.

A lot of us are looking forward to connected this future that relies less on the kinds of gadgets we lust after today, but is nonetheless more connected than ever - the network is just woven into our lives more seamlessly. Projects like Google Glass and iWatch promised to be some of the first and most important steps toward that. Hopefully we won't look too goofy in our cyborg goggles or talking to our wrists. 

Wearable devices like the Nike+ FuelBand, Jawbone UP, larklife, and future products like the Misfit Shine and Google Glass have been the subject of much discussion, for good reason: They give us access to information about our physical bodies and the physical environment we inhabit, a phenomenon we call Smart Body, Smart World. (Self-proclaimed quantified self-ers have been early adopters of tracking sensors, but they're new to most consumers.)

Though at Forrester we think the market for fitness wearables is relatively small, the broader potential for wearables is huge. Body-generated data could be applied to any domain, such as relationships, productivity, gaming, shopping, personal safety and identity validation, just to name a few possibilities.

I recently participated in a panel in San Francisco hosted by service design agency Fjord, along with Adam Gazzaley, Director of the Neuroscience Imaging Center at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF); Bill Geiser, CEO of MetaWatch; Sonny Vu, CEO of Misfit Wearables; and Olof Schybergson, CEO of Fjord. With perspectives from science, research, product and design all represented, we had diverse points of view but all saw the same challenges ahead for wearables: designing for the human brain.

No, I'm not talking about sensors implanted in your brain (although that's certainly possible, and already happening in research and medical settings). I'm talking about designing for the nuanced way our brains process the experience of wearing a device.

In particular, we all saw a need for wearables that:

Support rather than distract from goal-oriented behavior. Dr. Gazzaley’s research at UCSF explicitly focuses on this topic: how goal-oriented behavior is affected by distraction. On the panel, he joked, “I’m the guy reporters call when they want someone to say distraction is bad.”

But it’s not that simple: Dr. Gazzaley noted that if devices are designed with the brain’s limitations in mind, they could be used to support rather than distract from goal-oriented behavior. For example, he said, we know that humans are not very good at staying alert while driving. If a wearable could be designed to detect when we’re falling asleep at the wheel and alert us before we do, that could literally save lives.

Increase self-awareness, but not to the point of self-consciousness. As I’ve tested various wearable devices, I’ve found that wearing an activity tracker like the UP does have a positive effect on my activity during the day - I’m more aware of my sedentary behavior and more likely to walk when I can, like pacing the platform while waiting for the train instead of standing still.

But I’ve found that wearing a tracker to sleep introduces an unwelcome element of self-consciousness into my bedroom: I’m paying attention (and not in a good way) to how long it takes me to fall asleep.

And what about sex? Should some elements of our lives remain untracked? (I argue yes; others may disagree.)

Fjord CEO Olof Schybergson predicted that we’ll need new rules of engagement when wearables like Google Glass allow us to record our surroundings invisibly. In business meetings or on dates, for example, self-consciousness could detract from trust in our relationships.

Give feedback, but avoid “chart fatigue.” All the panelists agreed that feedback is an important element of why wearables work: That’s why the Misfit Shine has LEDs that light up to show your progress toward your daily activity goal. In Dr. Gazzaley’s lab experiments, he often uses gamification strategies precisely for this reason - achievements, progression, and competition are powerful and addictive incentives to keep doing something.

But Schybergson noted that the novelty of data quickly wears off and erodes into “chart fatigue.” For wearables to keep our attention over the long term, they need to be “living services,” evolving as we evolve.

Lead image by Dane Frederiksen, picturing Bill Geiser, Sonny Vu and Olof Schybergson (left to right).

Nest is doing very well. The company that makes the eponymous smart thermostat just closed on an $80 million round of funding, according to GigaOm. It's now shipping 40,000 to 50,000 thermostats every month, which is apparently enough to win the confidence of Google Ventures and Venrock. 

Call it the iPod of smart home technology. And not just because the Nest was literally conceived by the man who led the iPod team at Apple for several years. Like the iPod, the Nest thermostat is a disruptive technology planting itself into the lives of everyday, non-techie consumers, where it will slowly sprout into something much bigger. With the iPod, Apple popularized the digital music players among the masses and paved the way for a series of other, even more important devices. The Nest is about to do the same thing. 

For those who aren't familiar with it, the Nest is an Internet-connected thermostat that purports to learn its owners habits and configure the house's cooling and heating patterns more intelligently. The result is a more energy efficient home and, as the company proudly proclaims, lower utility bills. It's not the first smart energy management product to hit the market, but it is among the sleekiest and easiest for everyday consumers to understand and use. Sound familiar? 

Home automation. Wi-Fi-connected appliances. The Internet of things. These tech industry buzz concepts can get the crowd going at conferences like Le Web and the Consumer Electronics Show (CES), but ask your mother or a random colleague what they think about them. Normal people don't even know what this stuff is. But soon they will. 

Plenty of startups, cable companies and telcos are gearing up for the smart home revolution, prepping their own remote lighting control, video security and energy automation features. Communications companies from Comcast to Verizon have begun offering these services as an add-on to customers' existing cable and phone bills. 

As cool as smart thermostats, security cams and remote controlled door locks are, they're only the beginning. The list of Wi-Fi connected household appliances keeps growing. An Internet-capable toaster or washing machine might seem silly, but the super-connected homes of the future will be much more energy efficient, easier to manage and secure. Soon we'll move onto automated cat feeders and plant watering systems - and from there we'll graduate to Jetsons-style domestic robots.

If any one product is poised to popularize smart home tech, it's the Nest. Its clean design, easy installation and availability from big retailers give it a prime position from which to plant a ticking, hyper-futuristic time bomb.

Guest author Sarah Rotman Epps is a Senior Analyst at Forrester Research.

Computing is permeating domains that were previously not connected. That theme was readily observable at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas last week, where sensor-powered devices for your plants, pets, posture and dining utensils were all on display, not to mention the numerous devices for tracking your sleep and exercise.

Enhance? Or Replace?

These devices are undoubtedly useful, but do we really need devices to replace our basic powers of observation?

For example, the Flower Power plant sensor by Parrot tells you when your plant needs more or less sunshine, water or fertilizer. Now, I am the first to admit failure in gardening - usually, my plants get eaten by critters before they can die of over- or under-watering - and if Flower Power brings success to more would-be gardeners, fine.

However, it’s worth considering what we might be missing by outsourcing our powers of observation to a sensor and a smartphone.

Will these tools, over time, enhance our powers of observation (i.e., would we eventually recognize the signs of a light-starved plant with our own eyes, and decrease our dependence on the device)? Or would looking at plants and understanding what they’re telling us become a skill we replace with another skill? (We don’t need to remember phone numbers anymore, for example, but we do need to discern spam emails from real ones. Evolution never ceases!)

We should push sensor-laden devices - and our use of them - to enhance, not outsource, our cognitive experience.

Spidey-Sense Superpowers!

An example (also from CES) of a product that does this is the Lapka: an elegantly designed “personal environment monitor” that senses humidity, pesticides (via a small block you "plug in" to a fruit or vegetable via a headphone jack), electromagnetic fields and radiation, through a tactile interface of wooden and plastic blocks that tether to your smartphone for data display. I like this product because it makes accessible data about our physical environment that we previously could not get to unaided. That data lets us make better-informed decisions.

Basically, I want superpowers: I want devices and applications to help us achieve more as humans than we could without them.

Sometimes this might be about automating tasks, like the app EasilyDo does, that don’t add value to our lives, such as merging duplicate contacts in our address book.

Other times it might be about giving us access to information about our circadian rhythm, like the larklife does, so we can optimize our energy for the things we care about most, like being creative at work or being with our families.

As computing permeates more domains of our existence, we have the opportunity to demand more of our devices, and our use of them. As we plug in our plants and our forks, let’s just stop for a moment to evaluate the capabilities these new tools give us... and what jobs our old tools (and often our own senses) do just fine.

In the not-so-distant future, everything in our lives is going to be connected to the Internet of Things. Fire hydrants, medical equipment, toasters. Really, everything. Yesterday a “smart” fork was introduced to bring “metrics to your mouthfuls.” If you can slap a sensor to a device and add wireless connectivity, eventually it will be connected to the Internet.

Qualcomm and AT&T want to make the process of creating Internet of Things devices and applications easier. Today the companies announced a joint project called the Internet of Everything development platform. Based on Qualcomm’s QSC6270-Turbo chipset and Gobi modem for 3G connections, the Internet of Everything platform aims to decrease time to market for IoT projects. The development platform will use AT&T’s cellular data bandwidth to connect things to the Web. The chipset supports Oracle’s Java ME Embedded 3.2 to write the programs necessary to create IoT devices and applications. The Internet of Everything platform should be available to developers in the second quarter of 2013. 

The Real Benefit

The idea is to lower the barrier to entry for connecting devices to the Internet. As such, it is a good sign that two of the leading American technology companies are starting to take IoT seriously. When we wrote our Futurist Cheat Sheet on the Internet of Things, we noted that much of the technology to create a robust Internet of Things possible is already in place - it just needed more infrastructure refinement to speed adoption. 

"This IoE development platform with Java support is a tool to extend the power of our integrated chipsets to application developers,” said Kanwalinder Singh, /SVP of business development at Qualcomm Technologies in a press release. “We are excited that AT&T shares our vision of a cellular-connected IoE, and by the opportunities that will be created by the AT&T developer community."

Qualcomm and AT&T join a growing community of machine-to-machine (M2M) companies working to make the Internet of Things possible. The leaders in M2M development over the last several years have been companies like Cosm, Numerex and KORETelematics, while other consumer- or enterprise-focused companies like Google (with Android) and Research In Motion (with its QNX-based BlackBerry 10 system) also have software platforms that could provide the capability to integrate items like home utilities and aspects of automobiles on the Web. Apple has not specifically built any products for the Internet of Things, but its iOS mobile operating system could easily be outfitted to run a variety of items beyond the iPhones and iPads that currently run iOS. 

Unlike other aspiring technology sets (Near Field Communications, for instance), IoT development lends itself to a variety of business applications. Name an industry, and entrepreneurs and innovators will be able to find a way to connect it to the Internet. Qualcomm and AT&T specifically mention healthcare, energy and automotive as sectors that will be able to use the Internet of Things to provide tracking, remote control and analytics.The Internet Of Things will give businesspeople capabilities that they could previously only track through inference, not directly.

Image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Everyone knows the smartphone is killing the point-and-shoot digital camera. Who wants to carry a digital camera as a separate device when your smartphone already takes good-enough pictures and makes them easy to share with your friends? 

Sure, a good point-and-shoot takes better pictures than a smartphone does. On the other hand, digital cameras can't use mobile apps, a cellular connection or a smart operating system. Until now.

Samsung Galaxy Camera

The Samsung Galaxy Camera is an Android-based digital point-and-shoot that will be available from AT&T on Nov. 16 for $499. The Galaxy Camera has a 16 megapixel backside illuminated CMOS sensor screen, a 21x optical zoom lens (note, optical zoom, not digital) and a 4.8-inch touchscreen panel. It runs on Android 4.1 Jelly Bean with a quad-core processor. Its cellular connection will run over AT&T’s HSPA+ network and can be added to a shared data plan or use a separate individual data plan from the carrier. The device will be Wi-Fi equipped as well.

Is there a place in the consumer market for such a device? I do not know about its widespread appeal, but I want one. I have always wanted a digital camera that can take better pictures than my smartphone and automatically upload all those high-quality photos to Flickr, Picasa (Google+) or other social networks without a USB cable and intimate knowledge of iPhoto or Photoshop. And I'd be willing pay good money and carry a separate device to do that.

Nokia 808 PureView Samsung is not the only company to attach a mobile operating system to a high-quality camera. Nokia released the 808 PureView earlier this year, a smartphone with a 41-megapixel camera with the vaunted Carl Zeiss optics. The difference is that the 808 PureView remains, at its most fundamental level, a smartphone. The Galaxy Camera is essentially a Samsung Galaxy S III smartphone with the phone stripped away and a quality digital camera bolted to the front. 

A Mainstream Step Into The Internet Of Things

The Galaxy Camera is a camera first, cell phone… never. This is an intriguing poduct, and not just because it is a camera that can use social apps like Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and others from wherever you are. 

When we think of mobile operating systems like Android or iOS, the first thing that pops into our minds are smartphones and tablets. That makes sense, considering that 99% of devices built on these operating systems are one or the other. But think about what these devices actually are. We call them smartphones, but they are really small, powerful digital computers that happen to be able to make phone calls. The mobile operating systems evolved into phone-centric devices because that is what the consumer market wanted. Yet to think that iOS, Android, Windows Phone or BlackBerry are limited to smartphones and tablets gives them short shrift. They clearly have the potential to run myriad other devices.

For instance, Android was built in such a way that it could be deployed everywhere. Want an Android-powered thermostat? Somebody can build that. A toaster? A car? Research In Motion wants to put BlackBerry into everything, including automobiles and infrastructure.

What we are talking about here is the Internet Of Things, where all kinds of machines and devices can connect to the Internet and can be interfaced through mobile systems. The backbone of the infrastructure of the Internet Of Things will be mobile operating systems such as Android, and the Galaxy Camera is one of the first mainstream devices to show its possibilities. 

In January, The New York Times wondered aloud why Apple did not make the iPhone in America. The story heaped a torrent of commentary and scrutiny on Silicon Valley’s most valuable company. Whether you think manufacturing in the U.S. is right or not for Apple, Cadillac is proving that American-made technology can compete with the best.

The new Cadillac ATS was designed to be a luxury car world-beater - a tall order that required catching up to the likes of BMW’s 3-series and Mercedes’ C-class. But the folks at General Motors took a unique approach to the job and the ATS definitely arrives at the head of its class.

What Cadillac did is often overlooked in Silicon Valley. To help design the Cadillac User Experience (CUE), the company assembled a team of designers, engineers and software developers to shadow drivers while observing them in their natural habitat.

This “contextual design” technique required team members to accompany actual consumers, an eye-opening experience. The shadow team was able to identify several different driving styles, which were categorized under a pseudonym. One type of driver, dubbed “Spencer,” always needed to check text messages immediately, while ‘‘Emily” liked listening to music, whether on her phone, iPod or flash drive.

Cadillac spokesperson David Caldwell tells me, “We took a hard look at what carmakers call 'infotainment.' Everyone’s doing that, that’s sort of par for the course. We took a bit of a riskier approach: Is there something we can do that says ‘hey these guys are doing something different?’”

Enter A New GUI

What became clear quickly is that most drivers are distracted by a myriad of bells, beeps and whistles emitted by our digital lifestyle tools. So Cadillac engineers set out to develop a less invasive type of user interface, one that communicates via seat vibrations.

You might call it “BUI,” but GM prefers the less colloquial Cadillac Safety Alert Seat. The Alert Seat is able to tell a driver whether an object is nearby on the left by triggering a pulse on the left side of the seat.

Cadillac also joins another innovative force in technology: the open source movement. The CUE system runs on a triple-core ARM 11 processor and uses a Linux platform so developers can help keep the architecture fresh with new extensions.

CUE powers both an 8-inch capacitive touch screen, reportedly the first non-resistive display in an automobile, and a second, 12.3-inch fully configurable instrument cluster mounted behind the steering wheel.

Another automotive engineering feat was the addition of haptic feedback. There’s a proximity sensor, which brightens the display when a driver’s hand approaches the system’s user interface and a touch screen that provides both pulse feedback and the ability to swipe and pinch.

Living In America

That producing a product as complex as a car with its myriad of alloys and steel and hundreds of technology features is not a trivial procedure is underscored by this Esquire article, How to Build an American Car, which breathtakingly describes the production process.

So would Apple benefit from building the iPhone in America? There are two trends to consider here. First, it’s increasingly likely that volatility in the oil business will cause fuel prices to double in the not-too-distant future. That will make shipping even a high-value iPhone from China via FedEx a less attractive proposition.

Another is that increasingly the added value in any consumer product is software. And in this area, America still out-shines the rest of the world although domestic educational obstacles and the ascent of India may diminish that advantage.

Still though, I’m happy to see that once-considered-dead General Motors can not only match global competitors in engineering but also reinvent an area where automobiles will increasingly have to shine - the human-machine interface. Don’t believe me? I have just one word to say, iDrive.

Happy motoring America, and please contribute software innovations for the automobile and computer revolution to our Spigit innovation crowdsourcing engine.

To the list of objects that might occupy the coming Internet of Things, add the internal injury you suffered learning to kickbox.

A government-funded research project has come up with dissolvable electronics capable of such tasks as monitoring a bruised kidney, sharing information and fending off infection.

Researchers at Tufts University and the University of Illinois said they have made small, complete computing devices – including energy sources – that melt at prescribed rates in water. They look and bend a little like novelty transparent business cards with the familiar right-angle circuit etchings of semiconductors.

It’s called transient electronics, and potential uses go beyond medicine to include environmental protection and national defense. In fact, the project was funded in part by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the U.S. Air Force, as well as by the National Science Foundation.

The clear material is specially prepared silk and the circuits, which are only tens of nanometers thick, are made of silicon and magnesium.

The silk gives the circuits a foundation, but also delays dissolution, depending on how thick the material is. (The thicker the clear silk layer, the longer it takes to dissolve.) The circuits themselves dissolve as well, leaving nothing behind once the process is finished, according to Fiorenzo Omenetto, professor of biomedical engineering at Tufts School of Engineering and a senior and corresponding author of the team’s paper.

The devices can be crafted to last up to years. Downstream applications might include compostable consumer electronics and geophysical monitors.

Photo courtesy of the Beckman Institute, University of Illinois and Tufts University

The vision of an Internet-connected car is already a reality in many ways. With a smartphone or tablet as your traveling companion, there is not much you cannot do from within a vehicle. But truly networked personal transportation is still a few years off. It is not as simple as embedding a tablet in the dashboard. It requires a revamped infrastructure. 

A connected car has been making the rounds of technology conferences and exhibitions this year. The 4G Chevy Volt is a hybrid sedan created in partnership with General Motors, OnStar and Verizon. ReadWriteWeb's Richard MacManus reviewed it earlier this year after getting a glimpse at Austin's SXSW confab in March. 

While Richard focused on the infotainment aspect of the Volt (two tablets in the back seat can be controlled from the dashboard), the car has other network connections. The OnStar system can control many of the car's functions, and it can send and receive messages and connect to almost any app in Android’s Google Play store. To make all this work, though, you need constant cellular connectivity. 

OnStar spokesperson Jeff Wandell said that the Volt, while interesting, is still in its research and development phase. We are not likely to see a real, working model available for sale for several years, probably by 2015. OnStar could choose a different operating system (such as Windows or iOS) instead of Android and improve the connection between the car and the home, among other possible innovations. The proposed features of the 4G Volt are not the story though. Really, the crux lies with Verizon and every other mobile data provider in the United States. 

4G LTE is still in its infancy in the U.S. Carriers like Verizon and AT&T are still building out basic capabilities to regions around the country and optimizing cell towers to handle the traffic. In terms of breadth of coverage, Verizon is well ahead of both AT&T and Sprint, but the fact of the matter is that LTE is still not ready to support a fleet of connected cars roaming across the country, constantly looking for a signal. For an automobile whose basic functions depend on being LTE-connected, that is a bit of a problem.  

The problem of connecting the Volt, an object, to the Internet with a persistent connection is not a problem just for the automobile industry. The “Internet of Things” (connecting objects to the Internet, like a heart sensor or a thermostat) will rely on cellular connectivity. As we noted in a past installment of The Futurist’s Cheat Sheet series, the Internet of Things (including connected cars) is already a reality. Yet the Internet of Things' growth is hindered not by the capabilities of the objects, but by the infrastructure that will connect them. 

Connected cars like the Chevy Volt are a harbinger of the next evolution of infrastructure in the U.S. Just as the Interstate Highway System revolutionized the country in the 1950s, LTE connectivity will bring about a new transformation. But, like the highway system, it will take time to build. After the passage of the Federal Highway Act in 1956, the original plan was not completed until 1992. Likewise, companies have been building cellular capabilities in the U.S. since the 1970s and each successive iteration (2G to 3G to 4G and so on) takes time and billions of dollars to accomplish on a meaningful scale. 

The building of a 4G infrastructure is a complicated matter. Radio spectrum, which carries data over the air, is a finite commodity. Carriers are acquiring and consolidating spectrum for LTE networks, and it is a tricky landscape to navigate between the federal government's spectrum auctions and competitors like cable networks or spectrum-hungry companies like Google. Unlike the Interstate Highway System, cellular infrastructure is being built by private companies, not the government. Each has its own motivations (such as quarterly profits) and is subject to federal scrutiny.

Despite the barriers, companies like Verizon are building the next generation of American infrastructure more efficiently than the federal government could. That is why the 4G Chevy Volt (and cars like it) are likely to be forming a new kind of transportation network within three or four years, not 10.  

None of this is surprising until you reflect that Giuli and Evans are not toiling on the next great social media site - but the next iteration of products made of glass and steel by an old-school manufacturing company founded 110 years ago.

Giuli, research lab leader at Ford’s Silicon Valley Lab, wants Ford cars to become open-source crowd-enabled modular products. “We don’t judge our success on the ideas we come up with,” said Giuli. “But the ideas from people outside of Ford. If somebody comes up with an idea I never would have thought of, then it’s a success.”

In fact, the core mission of Ford’s Palo Alto research lab is to enable innovators - even those with limited resources and technical chops - to see the automobile as a platform for creativity. Giuli points to a disembodied car dashboard and steering wheel, out of place in this office setting.

“Let’s say you don’t like these steering wheel buttons. Maybe you could slap in a capacitive touch controller,” he said. “Using this platform, people would, by themselves, be able to design things.” The lab also maintains two vehicles in its parking lot for testing.

In the next few months, Ford expects to release the beta version of its car app developer kit. There are already more than 1,000 developers waiting to be notified when it’s ready. At that point, this lab’s work will shift to supporting and growing a community of car hackers. “We’re interested in spurring the creation of an ecosystem,” Giuli said.

Trading Grease For Code

Ford’s OpenXC API runs on a combination of Arduino and Android platforms - technology chosen to make modding your car as easy as programming a smartphone. The system can potentially access the 1,000 or more data points, generated by sensors on Ford vehicles and served up via the 16-pin onboard diagnostics port (a standard feature of all cars since 1996). The Ford toolkit encourages development of software as well as add-on hardware.

Evans, a mechanical engineer with expertise in rapid prototyping and digital manufacturing technology, comes naturally to the automotive industry. His father is Andy Evans, a profession race car driver, who drove for Ferrari in the 1990s in the World Sports Car series. “I have cars in my blood,” said Evans.

“When you think back to the days of the 1960s Mustangs, you’d pop open the hood. If you knew what you’re doing, you could change all kinds of mechanical things,” said Evans. “But now, if you open up the hood of your car, what do you see? Plastic. It’s intimidating.” The answer: Ford wants to transform 20th century grease monkeys into 21st century DIY car geeks.

Ford first announced its OpenXC platform a year ago at the TechCrunch Disrupt 2011 Hackathon. Since then, the Ford Silicon Valley Lab has vetted its process, sometimes working with partners, by evaluating a number of hacks:

• Using the rate and duration of windshield wiper activity, cars become roaming weather stations capable of reporting rain and other conditions on a microclimate level.
• Got an overbearing mother who insists on knowing when you arrive at a destination? With a hack, the car texts, “Oy vay, I’m here already.”
• Looking at steering wheel angle, accelerator pedal position, speeds, RPM, and GPS location, an app determines that you just completed a fun drive on a twisty road. It does a GPS trace and tweets the deets, including a link to a Google map.
• An obvious application is traffic detection, which is not such a big deal in U.S. where traffic reports are everyday radio fare, but could be huge in the developing world. If multiple drivers repeatedly slam their brakes on the same stretch of road, traffic planners could learn there’s a safety problem in the road design.

From there, who knows what innovation could emerge from an online community of car hackers? Ford’s lab is not currently constrained by a need to commercialize any of the ideas but sees its work instead as research regarding the feasibility of a car-based open source strategy. Giuli will grow the lab’s staff from three employees currently, to about 10 to 15 people in the next three years.

Ford might seem forward thinking in establishing such a lab, but Giuli doesn’t see it that way. He believes it’s more a matter of keeping up with where innovative geeks are already going. “Tons of people are already making car apps that work with OBD2 readers, or replacing the center stack with their own car computer.

That’s happening today, and there’s nothing that anybody can do to stop it,” he said. “So, it’s a good idea for OEMs like Ford to make this really easy. Hopefully, we can benefit customers with a lot of awesome new features.”

Plenty of devices can claim to have an Intel microprocessor inside. But, seriously, a Coke machine? This one does, and it can take your picture, too.

At the Intel Developer Forum on Tuesday, Intel showed off an interactive Coke machine manufactured by SIA Interactive, a South American technology and design firm. The machine towered over Dadi Perlmutter, the head of Intel's chip group.

Who Needs A Core i7 For A Soda?

Inside the Coke machine is a Core i7, the most powerful of Intel's desktop microprocessors. Normally, the chip would be found within a server or high-end PC. It's telling that Intel is positioning its chips as drivers of what are normally called "embedded" devices, where the microprocessor is placed in a variety of housings, typically for a mobile device. That role, more and more, is being played by rival ARM, a chip designer that licenses its chips to a number of chip manufacturers, including Samsung and even Apple, and is often found in smartphones and other mobile devices.

Oddly enough, the SIA Coke machine isn't really the most interesting Coke dispenser out there; that would probably be the Coke Freestyle, which uses an external design by Italian designer Pininfarina and specialized microdosing technology that can mix up "custom" Coke drinks.

Star In Your Very Own Coke Ad?

But the Intel-powered Coke machine does have one advantage: social networking. If you'd like to show off to the world what you're drinking, the machine includes a Webcam that can take your picture and then email it to whoever you'd like.

If you're already worried about the privacy implications, you're not alone. Even Perlmutter himself noted that the "camera could give a lot of information to the supplier, including gender, and the age group," so many users may want to guard their privacy. Whether that means they would have to wear a mask while buying a refreshing beverage wasn't made clear.

What also wasn't made clear was why the Coke machine actually needs a chip as powerful as a Core i7. Perlmutter made light of the issue, noting that an animated LCD display performed admirably: "The Coke is going very fast," he joked.

Unfortunately, the SIA Coke machine isn't available - yet - within North America. So far, it's found primarily in Latin America - including Argentina and Mexico. A representative for SIA said that the machine is available in a total of eight countries.

All images by Mark Hachman.

Tech entrepreneur Jim Disanto sees the automobile as the next great platform for connectivity. “There are a more than a billion cars in the world,” he said. “Every automotive OEM and Tier 1 supplier will tell you that within three years, every car will need connected systems, or you’re not going to be able to sell it.” That, Disanto believes, will spawn a new generation of app developers offering Internet-enabled enhancements to the driving experience.

However, as large as that opportunity is, the obstacles facing entrepreneurs wanting to develop apps for cars are bigger still.

It’s the chasm between the opportunity and its realization that led Disanto to start what he believes is the first Silicon Valley incubator to specifically focus on connected car technology. Disanto first caught a glimpse of the opportunity for web-enabled cars soon after selling a previous company, KonaWare to a China’s Yamei Electronics in 2008. KonaWare provided remote logistics to transportation companies, but the wave of smart phone applications had not yet reached critical mass.

Four years later, everybody and their mother have a smart phone. We all step into our cars, and wonder why we can’t bring those apps along for the ride. “A new generation of car buyers aren’t interested in the mechanics of the car. They are much more interested in the electronic stuff onboard,” Disanto said. “Before, the car was a transportation system. Now, it’s an extension of your digital life.”

Disanto’s incubator, Transportation Technology Ventures, consists of two partners, six advisors, and an office in Palo Alto. The group, which serves as an angel investor fund, is now “circling up entrepreneurs in the space,” said Disanto.

But those fledgling entrepreneurs face the following serious obstacles.

Nobody Knows Which Apps Make The Most Sense

Sure, you want dashboard navigation integrated with things like Yelp or Open Table. Or you want to listen to Internet radio, like Pandora and Spotify. But beyond that, it’s a mystery as to which apps will become popular, and what will even make sense while driving.

The grand vision is to eventually have hundreds or even thousands of downloadable car-related apps. But at this stage, the only ones out there are carried over from the mobile phone, rather than specifically created for an automotive environment.

No Centralized App Store

There are about 20 major automotive companies selling vehicles in the United States, and around 70 around the world, according to Disanto. Because each car company has to worry about potential lawsuits from a rogue app, or one that distracts too much. So each OEM will want to test and bless every app, and control its own app store where drivers will download right to the car.

Apple or Google app stores probably don’t make sense, unless you can easily elevate the car-related apps above the clutter. Expect confusion when there are as many app stores as there are models on the road.

Lack Of Standards And Qualified Developers

The automotive industry has not yet established app standards for hardware, software, interfaces, and communications protocols. Who wants to spend countless hours and dollars developing a car-based app, when you don’t know if it will meet a standard that hasn’t been finalized yet—or even discussed?

The Department of Transportation will throw out its own roadblocks. A game app for a smart phone is child’s play, compared to developing functionality that has to interact with a car’s computer network, widely divergent dashboard configurations, touch screen interaction, steering wheel controls, and potential voice recognition and heads-up displays projected on to the windshield.

And we’re not even talking about vehicle-to-vehicle or vehicle-to-road communications that’s right around the corner. These technologies are not taught in most computer science classes.

All of these complications add up to time, money, and headaches. And it creates a scenario where innovation is stifled because the best ideas never get off the ground. But this won’t stop enterprising tech innovators from coming up with ideas, and seeking money and logistics to support them.

“There’s a massive gap between the seed stage of a new company focusing on transportation, and the institutional financing route,” said Disanto. “A lot of things need to get done in the gap.” Disanto intends to fill that gap.

Buried in the details of last week’s update to Facebook’s now-native iOS app was a small bit of technology that could have potentially big impact on the future of the Internet of Things.

The technology is called Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT), an IBM-developed protocol for real-time messaging over networks with low power and bandwidth. MQTT is now under the hood within Facebook’s iOS app’s messaging features, part of Facebook’s efforts to pull in the features from its native Messenger app.

“We use MQTT to update notifications, messages, and bookmarks. At application startup, we walk the dependency graph and ensure that our MQTT service has started before we start listening for new notifications. Even as we add new features, our modular system ensures that our application setup happens in the right place, at the right time,” wrote Facebook engineer Jonathan Dann on the company’s engineering blog last week.

Short- And Long-Term Effects

For Facebook app end-users, the immediate effect of using the push-driven protocol for the updated app won’t immediately be apparent, but it portends some potentially big features down the line.

In the short-term, however, MMQT is going to get a big boost in adoption cred from Facebook’s use. Messaging in the Internet of Things sector is still gelling around one standard implementation, as device manufacturers figure out how to get sensors and other micro-devices to best communicate with the Internet and from there the rest of the world. MQTT is one such protocol and tent.io is another.

Both MQTT and tent.io have very strong social media components, which may at first seem incongruous with the Internet of Things. But the messaging protocol that can handle social media messaging (as MQTT will do on the new version of Facebook’s iOS app) and messaging from hardware will be seen as a much more universal protocol. And in the world of standardization, that perception may be enough to win the gold.

MQTT vs. tent.io

Redmonk analyst James Governor sees Facebook’s commitment as a big win for MQTT.

“IBM has been seeking pervasive status for its message queue technology since I joined the industry in 1995. It looks like it just finally got there. I don’t want to confuse a protocol with an implementation but in a week when Dave Winer questioned the status of tent.io and app.net began its play for real time stream utility status I can’t help noting that IBM and MQTT.org are in the game,” Governor blogged.

Governor’s reference to Winer’s thoughts on the tent.io protocol is significant, since Winer is the inventor of the RSS newsfeed protocol.

“RSS won not because of its great design, but because there was a significant amount of valuable content flowing through it. Formats and protocols by themselves are meaningless. That’s what I say about specs. Show me content I can get at through the protocol, and I’ll say something,” Winer said on his own blog.

Now Endorsed by Facebook

For Governor, Facebook’s investment in MMQT sets the content bar very high.

“Whether or not you like Facebook, there is now going to be a metric crapload of content flowing across MQTT. It just got anointed by Facebook,” Governor said.

MMQT’s anointment won’t mean much to average users - yet. But if the Internet of Things and social media development communities can rally around one protocol, it will be one big step towards the goal of getting people and objects communicating with each other more efficiently 

All thanks to Facebook.