Reports coming back from D11 indicate that most companies are focusing on (according to a report attributed to Mary Meeker) "Wearables, Drivables, Flyables, Scannables".
Simply put, I tend to disagree still.
While all these brilliant minds are gathering, I think the feedback leaking out feels as out of touch as the iPhone... I'm not sure it even sounds different anymore.
With respect to wearables, I believe the pre-backlash against Google Glass is telling, and has more to do with the fact that people are very comfortable with their smartphones... and not so comfortable with the Borg-like assimilation of them.
I think Apple will run into the same sorts of issues with the iWatch. I'd rather put an iPhone on an arm- or wrist- band than have both an iPhone and an iWatch... that makes two devices to manage the care & feeding of... this goes directly against the premise of the SmartPhone... the idea that *one* device is your buddy and your complete "away-mission" kit.
The idea of drivables is similar. Computers in cars is one thing. I don't want to have another computer interface in my car.
Blame it on R2-D2 and the Borg.
No one wants to be assimilated.
Further, why carry an X-Wing (or Y-Wing or B-Wing) fighter around when you can have your astromech (smartphone) follow you from fighter to fighter?
While I fully agree... any company worth their salt should be looking at making everything have a well connected computer in it, they should not, necessarily, be looking at having a human interface on those devices. These should be control & reporting processors built into devices, not redundant smartphones built into devices.
Let the interface be our beloved astromech... I mean smartphone.
I love where some auto manufacturers are going with things like Ford SYNC.
The ten year cycle on the smartphone is only just beginning, and wearables, drivables, flyables and scannables probably won't work as stand-alone products, but as extensions of the smartphone era.