硬件升级频率向软件看齐

    现在的硬件已经今非昔比。

    最近，产品检测与认证公司Underwriters Laboratories公布的一份研究表明，48%的消费者认为，技术企业推出新产品的速度超过他们的需求，最终结果是造成 “全球性产品更新疲劳”。一方面，消费者无法跟上创新的速度；另一方面，制造商过于频繁地发布产品更新，却未能推出足够多的新功能能，产品升级名不符实。

    对于以上两个观点，笔者深表赞同。笔者是一个小型设备迷和早期使用者，过去对小型设备的追逐曾经令人兴奋不已。人们很容易就能找到购买新笔记本电脑的原因。因为新老产品的差距可谓巨大，用户可以清楚地指出其中的差异所在。例如，如果确信产品更新换代能提高工作效率，人们就会不由自主的对产品进行更新换代。

    但是，硬件的发展已经跨越了一个门槛：为了获得优良的性能，人们不一定需要最新的产品。如果是一台在二十世纪九十年代购买的配备了120MHz处理器的佰德电脑（Packard Bell），几年后就可以淘汰了。而在我们所生活的当代，许多计算机设备的性能“足够优良”。（科技博客TechCrunch前任专栏作家MG•西格勒最近很好地指出了这个问题。）

    可能你会说你喜欢一款产品的外观。但是，即使只花550美元从百思买公司（Best Buy）购买的东芝（Toshiba）笔记本，也应该能够运行99%的常见软件，保存高图形负荷的游戏或视频编辑应用程序。如果销量真的能说明问题，那么价值499美元的平板电脑同样可以满足许多人基本的计算机需求，比如苹果公司（Apple）的iPad。

    我们看到，这一观点正在对一些高端设备产生影响，如最新的MacBook Airs和PC ultrabooks。这些设备融合了“绝佳”性能、设计和便携性。除包装上的介绍外，“体验”是更重要的特质。运行速度是否够快？是否便于使用？是否可靠？如果一台计算机或智能手机满足上述标准，大多数人可以惬意地使用多年，而无需对其进行升级。

    但是，我们仍然看到，更新版设备上市的速度快得令人匪夷所思，甚至有时候，新版和老版的差别微乎其微。总体而言，硬件变得如此反复，以至于硬件不断向软件看齐——特别是基于网络的软件——非常频繁地进行小幅更新，人们几乎无法辨别新版与老版之间的差异。

    以谷歌公司（Google）的安卓（Android）系统为例。该操作系统本身非常稳定、功能多样而且用途广泛。但是我认为安卓系统上市的速度过快。仅在过去的两年中，我们多次看到这样的评论：“市面上最棒的安卓手机”或“史上最棒的安卓手机”。最佳手机每个月都在变来变去，难怪消费者会出现“更新疲劳”。如果手机运行速度够快、便于使用、搭载通用和可升级的操作系统，提供健康的生态系统应用程序——更不用说电池寿命长——谁还需要购买宏达电（HTC）Edge系列四核机等类似产品呢？

    硬件之所以失去了几年前的魅力，另一个原因是数据的集中。越来越多的数据被存储在云中。消费者越来越依靠网络视频流媒体公司Netflix和流媒体音乐网站Sportify等服务供应商远程提供的内容。另外，更重要的是，我们的很多内容可以在大量不同的设备上存取。例如，购买Kindle电子书后，既可以在专门的Kindle电子阅读器上阅读，又可以在智能手机、平板电脑或任何可以使用亚马逊公司（Amazon）阅读应用程序的电脑上阅读。网路随身碟（Dropbox）、Box.net网站和全能便签 （Evernote）储存的数据也是一样。

    笔者担心的是，对制造商而言，不断把重复的产品销售给日益“审美疲劳”、对所谓的“产品更新”逐渐失去耐心的消费者，最终将作茧自缚。如果硬件设备沦为简单的接口，而不是具有内在价值的实用物品，其重要性将被进一步弱化。

    译者：乔树静/汪皓

    Hardware just isn't what it used to be.

    Recently, Underwriters Laboratories, a product testing and certification company, issued a study that found that 48% of consumers think tech manufacturers are shipping new products faster than they need them, the end result being a sort of "global gadget fatigue." Either consumers in general just can't keep up with the rate of innovation, or manufacturers are releasing upgrades too frequently with not enough new features to justify the change.

    I think it's both. Being a gadget hound and early adopter, the chase used to be thrilling. Finding cause to buy a new laptop was easy. You could point out the differences because the gap between one product generation and the next were huge. You could easily hang your jones to upgrade, for example, on the increased productivity you were sure to see.

    But hardware has since crossed a threshold where you don't need the newest thing to have good performance. Owning a Packard Bell computer in the 1990s with a 120 MHz processor guaranteed it a trip to the junk bin a few years after purchase. Now, we live in an age where many computing devices are "good enough." (Ex-TechCrunch columnist MG Siegler recently pointed this out nicely.)

    Say what you like about its looks, but even that $550 Toshiba (TOSBF) laptop from Best Buy (BBY) should have enough muscle to run 99% of everyday software, save graphics-heavy games or video editing apps. And if sales are any indication, a $499 tablet like the Apple (AAPL) iPad also fills many people's basic computing needs too.

    On the higher end, we're seeing this attitude permeate some devices like the newest MacBook Airs and PC ultrabooks, which marry "good enough" performance, design, and portability. Instead of what the side of the box reads, it's more about the "experience." Does it feel fast? Is it easy to use? Is it reliable? If a computer or smartphone meets that criteria, most of us may comfortably amble about for years without wanting to upgrade.

    And yet, we're still seeing updated devices hit shelves at a ridiculous rate, sometimes with imperceptible differences. Hardware has generally gotten so iterative that it approaches software -- especially web-based software -- that updates in small increments so frequently, you can barely tell the difference from one update to the next.

    Take Google (GOOG) Android devices. The operating system itself is solid, versatile and widely available. But I'd argue the rate of Android devices hitting the market is just too frequent. Over the last two years alone, how many reviews have we seen end with decrees like, "It's the best Android phone you can buy" or "the best Android phone ever made." Hearing that one Android phone is "the best" one month and that another's "the best" the next, it's no wonder if consumers have gadget fatigue. Because at this point, if it's fast enough, easy enough to use, runs a ubiquitous, upgradable operating system with a healthy ecosystem of apps -- not to mention carries a decent battery charge -- who needs something like the quad-core HTC Edge?

    Another reason hardware may not have quite the same luster it has in years past is the convergence of data. More and more of it is being stored in the cloud. And consumers are becoming more reliant on content streamed remotely from services like Netflix (NFLX) and Spotify. On the one hand, what's really great about that is that much of our content is accessible across a slew of devices. Buy an Kindle e-book, for instance, and you can read it on your dedicated Kindle e-reader, smartphone, tablet or any computer you can access Amazon's (AMZN) reading app. That also applies to data stored via Dropbox, Box.net and Evernote.

    My fear is that could eventually spell bad news for manufacturers who keep foisting iterative products upon an increasingly "fatigued," less receptive audience. If our devices merely become portals, rather than objects with intrinsic value, their importance could be further diluted.