IdeaJones

I saw a recent cartoon where the character was searching all over, lamenting the fact that it now took three different remote controls to be able to watch TV, when in the “good old days,” it took only one.

Yep. Been there, although I can sometimes get by with just one remote if I turn on the TV locally. (Little-known fact: most TVs have  an on/off button or switch on the set itself.)

Most of technology seems to be going the other way, with one device being used for multiple functions. Your phone is now also a camera, a map, a video game – oh, and can also be used as a remote control for your TV (also your home alarm system, lights and coffee-maker.)

In the “good old days,” if one device failed, you still had some capabilities with your other devices. Now, when the battery fails on the MP3 player, it often takes the camera and phone with it. (I’ve been eyeing those little outboard battery packs that provide emergency power to the phone, but what if the problem is more serious than just a dead battery?)

Multi-tasking is a myth, although some people are better than others at being able to switch rapidly between tasks without losing their place(s). Not me. Once distracted, I may not get back to the other task until much later. I am good at prioritizing, so it’s still safe to drive with me. Just don’t try to negotiate a deal while I’m negotiating a turn.

Machines are great at “multi-tasking.” Computers actually only do one thing at a time, but they do it so quickly, to our slow human senses, it seems that everything’s happening at once.

I’m still not sure if it’s better to have one multi-device, or multiple separate devices. I am sure of one thing. It’s always best to have devices that can make use of common-sized batteries. The ones you can find at any grocery or convenience store. Until there are significant advances in mobile solar or wind power, a spare set of AAs is your best safety net in keeping all your devices under control.