Bill Gates: TV As We Know it, Obsolete in 10 years


Recommended Posts

Riyadh, Nov. 10: Television as we know it today will become obsolete in the next 10 years, said Microsoft founder Bill Gates. He was speaking at the First Global Competitiveness Forum in Riyadh during his first visit to Saudi Arabia on Wednesday. ?I had my children with me recently and while we were walking in a shopping area, there was this record store and my son asked me: ?What is a record?? Well, he has never seen a record. If I take him to a museum, he will see one. Yes, he knows what a TV is, but 10 years from now even TV will be something people will look back on and say: ?Well, how inconvenient that was. You couldn?t carry it with you wherever you wanted to, and you couldn?t organise it the way you would?ve liked to,? Mr Gates said during his keynote address.

He was referring to a sea-change in both the way we watch TV, as well the TV sets themselves. Books will become obsolete too, Mr Gates said. ?For interaction today, we primarily use the keyboard. In the future we will be using all sorts of means for interacting with the computer. We are talking about eliminating textbooks or books altogether because we will have a very light thin screen, a tablet-like computer connected to the Internet that you will carry with you at all times.? An interesting revolution is underway, he said. ?Ten years ago, when we thought about photographs, we thought about taking a camera, developing a film. And when we thought about organising and sharing our photo collection, it required working on paper. That was not very efficient. Well, today, if you take a photo you can put it on the Internet and have it published in a very rich, automatic way, and yes, in seconds. You can review your catalogue in a very rich way. Amazing, isn?t it??

Mr Gates gave full support to Saudi Arabia?s economic development plans and announced the signing of a record 14 agreements with Saudi public and private organisations. ?The reason your plan is actually realistic is that you have the resources to make that kind of investment,? he told the top Saudi business, government and IT leaders at the forum. He said Saudi Arabia should draw lessons from the huge successes of both the US and India in the world of information technology. ?The US has been the strongest in terms of research on IT and that?s where investments in universities are going to help you,? he said. ?India has been the strongest in terms of the number of (IT) engineers it has employed in a wide variety of things. There again it was the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) that helped it do that,? he said, heaping fulsome praise on the Indians.

source.pngBink

some how i doubt this. Television will be here forever. Anyway if we do replace television lets give all of our old TVs to countries with violence problems. People will be too stuck to the tube to do anything violent then.

I doubt that they will be here for ever. Highly Doubt it, Wonder if we will ever become a world like Star Trek where the GUI is replaced by a button interface and TV is replaced by HoloDecks and money is no longer needed.

I can fore see a future where home user personal computers are replaced with internet-boxes and other appliances. Everyone will have online storage and subscribe to web apps. Partly due to DRM/Security issues and partly due to the fact that the majority of people use computers for internet and email. Broadband, voice recognition and gesture input will change how we interact with these appliances. Linux will rule the business world. IMO the only reason WEBTV didn't take off was because you couldn't share music with it, edit photos, etc...

Read half of the above.

Anyway I tend to agree with what he's saying. TV "as we know it" will go away I'm sure. The future at present I think will be telivision delivered online. Now will that happen in 10 years? I dont think so. Some regions this may happen but theres many parts of the world without the money, connections ect to make it happen too soon. In what form it will take I cant say but the immediate push seems to be media pc's although their uptake seems to be fairly slow. I think the online services and streaming in general will need to improve until computers can generally really take over and I doubt many people are in a situation where they can readily stream HI-Def tv and do so reliably. I mean you have to bare in mind that most of the world are still on standard tv sets and adoption of HD equipment in almost all places has been alot slower than say the US. Price is an issue in alot of places too.

Infact almost any medium will take a while to be adopted. DVD's took quite some time before they became the norm and MP3 players were around for quite some time before the iPod became the status symbol that it is today (even they took 2 or 3 generations and a windows version to really catch on).

As for the tv not being portable. I dont know what he has in mind their. Projectors? The current push with home cinema is larger and crisper displays...something that doesnt exactly promote portability. Even projectors need some screen or something to look any good on so I think replacing the actual tvset is a bit further down the track.

i can agree with the tv thing. TVs and computers are beginning to move closer and closer to each other. I mean, we already have WebTV... we have websites with television. there are big screen 42 inch flatscreen televisions that can be used interchangably as computer monitors. its only a matter of time.

but the books being extinct thing? i dont think so... never.

Edited by Cyranthus

i would miss the feeling of taking a good book from my bookshelf and feeling the weight in my hand, turning the papers, smelling it. It would take away the fun of reading

i do however agree with the television thing, i havn't had a television for a few years now, i use webtv and windows media center (i agree it's basicly still the same thing)

Well Analog TV is already if not soon to be obsolete. When was the deadline for tvs to switch to all digital?

According to USA Today it could be Feb. 17, 2009.

According to USA Today it could be Feb. 17, 2009.

intreasting... HD is the way to go now a days. I wonder if there will be a cheeper altertive for those who can't afford a $500-$700 TV. Perhaps offer them "todays" digital at a low price?

Cakey: Microsoft as we know it, obsolete in 5 years.

That would make me happy :whistle:

You both are fools if you actually think that. The same damn thing has been said EVERY year. It hasn't happened and it won't.

Then why are more people and buisnesses using Linux for desktops and servers? :shiftyninja:

I personally feel books will disappear. They just aren't convenient and are extremely fragile as a form of information. Now I don't think it will necessarily happen in our lifetime but mark my word it will happen.

I mean whats the sense in having a book when you can have a paper thin screen with 2 buttons, one to scroll to tne next page and one to go back. Considering that could store 100's of books it makes pure sense. It would also be cheaper for publishers since books wouldnt be manufactured as much as they are provided electronically.

Really I see no advantage to having a book when the right medium arrives for reading electonic documenets. ATM no such device exists that can be used say in bed but it'll happen. The only thing that would keep them going is people latching onto them because they arent ready to let go but im sure many people said records would never be replaced and look what happened.

Hell it may not be a sign but how often does software come with electronic documents now days as opposed to the few hundred page books wed get in the past. ALso digital books can be searched, bookmarked, blogged ect ect far easier.

But yeah, theyd need a hand held device to cater for their reading and no such device exists yet.

I personally feel books will disappear. They just aren't convenient and are extremely fragile as a form of information. Now I don't think it will necessarily happen in our lifetime but mark my word it will happen.

I mean whats the sense in having a book when you can have a paper thin screen with 2 buttons, one to scroll to tne next page and one to go back. Considering that could store 100's of books it makes pure sense. It would also be cheaper for publishers since books wouldnt be manufactured as much as they are provided electronically.

Really I see no advantage to having a book when the right medium arrives for reading electonic documenets. ATM no such device exists that can be used say in bed but it'll happen. The only thing that would keep them going is people latching onto them because they arent ready to let go but im sure many people said records would never be replaced and look what happened.

Hell it may not be a sign but how often does software come with electronic documents now days as opposed to the few hundred page books wed get in the past. ALso digital books can be searched, bookmarked, blogged ect ect far easier.

But yeah, theyd need a hand held device to cater for their reading and no such device exists yet.

Books will never go, especially since everyone nowadays thinks they're a writer.

I'd hate to see books be put to a digital medium. For one, I can't STAND reading eBooks or any of the sort online. The only thing I read online are short articles and forums. There's way too much stress for the eyes to be staring at lit-up screen all day. Not to mention that you can't lay down/relax with it (unless you've got a laptop but still). Now, if there was a handheld device, it'd still be the same with a screen. Hell, I get tired of looking at my cell phone menus. :\

Besides, it wouldn't be the same with a regular book. Books don't need batteries. I'd HATE to have to charge my reading device. Books are meant for the rainy days, relax time, or whatever. Hell, they're my only escape from politics and the digital world.

Besides, it wouldn't be the same with a regular book. Books don't need batteries. I'd HATE to have to charge my reading device. Books are meant for the rainy days, relax time, or whatever.

Exactly. When there is a power cut what do I do? Read a book. If books were electronic, there would be literally nothing to do other than sit staring at the walls. The other factor to consider is that books offer a certain "comfort appeal". Paper offers that. Plastic doesn't.

Regards TV, I think we will still have TVs, but they will receive the signal via the internet, opposed to an antenna/satellite dish. I think in the future, all digital entertainment (TV, movies, music) will be delivered via the net, especially with the possibility of 50Gb/s+ broadband speeds.

Mr. Gates is out of touch with the rest of society if he thinks that. I'm not even sure what he means by obsolete. Does he mean, the TV will be obsolete because there will be a successor to the TV (while this may be true it does not render the TV obsolete. It just gives us another option of how we want to obtain our information). Or does he mean the TV will be obsolete because nobody will be using it? The reason I am confused derives from his analogy with records. Records are still the preferred medium for DJ's; they're definitely not obsolete. But I don't think Bill has gone to a club in about 25 years so he wouldn't know about that or turntablism.

Either that or he needs to rethink his usage of the word obsolete. Then again, this is coming from the same people who said we wouldn't be using paper anymore over a decade ago. Pipe dreams motivated by the ambition to have a little Microsoft O/S in every gadget known to mankind.

Then why are more people and buisnesses using Linux for desktops and servers? :shiftyninja:

Prove it. From what I have read, sales of Windows servers are growing much faster than Linux servers.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!