Dive computers of the future?

[tridacna]

"I doubt there will be any new findings in the science of scuba diving."

Really?

 

[dmaziuk]

I suppose they might figure out a way to elicit informed consent from goats...

 

[stgcph]

Beside the question how far technological development can take us in the future I also think about how desirable that would be.

In the future, I imagine some implanted gadget that will continually monitor every physiological and environmental factor and emit a super-light speed signal if anything is out of the normal. Instantaneously, some search vessel will hover anti-gravity-like over you and beam you to the surface and directly into a recompression chamber, where androids with the most contemporary knowledge of hyperbaric medicine will attend to you. The prospects are endless and reality sometimes supersedes imagination.

I have no doubt that something like that will happen; it’s a question of time (if we, as a species, survive that long). Maybe I am oldschool, but what saddens me a little is, that along that route we may lose some of those qualities that make diving (and other challenging activities) attractive.

I was “brought up” with high altitude skydiving, I am not sure how many I did, I stopped logging when I passed a thousand, I have been paragliding through the European Alps and now, in my senior years I am diving. I never stopped to philosophize much about the reasons that I wanted to do this, but I guess it has to do with wanting to experience something a little out of the ordinary, seeing things, that people do not normally see and last, but not least, to get out of the everyday comfort zone and into a reality, where my own knowledge, reactions and decisions make a difference.

So I don’t want a dive computer or whatever gadget it may be, that can monitor everything, tell my mood, inform me if my daughter is pregnant and wipe my ass.

 

[tridacna]

This is why I hate science fiction. Never looks anything close to whatever eventually transpires. But people pretend to hate their version of "the way things will be" anyway...

This is why cellphones are so unpopular and why "self-driving" cars will never work.

 

[drrich2]

In the future, dive computers will suffer the same fate as every other gadget: being eaten by my phone. My current model already has a barometer and is (sort of) water resistant. They will only get better. Why have a special computer for this one infrequent task?

The phone 'ate' the PDA (e.g.: Palm Pilot), becoming the smart phone, which then 'ate' the pocket-size compact camera market and has been eating away at some of the desktop computer market (e.g.: serving as a platform for Facebook, e-mail & texting, forum viewing, etc...). Efforts to turn smart phones into dive computers have probably not taken off because the target audience is too tiny to justify building it into the phone as a default. You could have a scuba specialty business make a dive computer/smart phone, not unlike some cameras (e.g.: SeaLife brand), but I doubt many people would 'settle' for that for their usual day-to-day phone.

Let's consider that train of thought in another context; what can the dive computer 'eat' as it grows? It's already eating some of the compass market via the digital compass feature. Shearwater has a DC that can attach to some rebreather, doesn't it? If rebreathers progressively 'dumb down' to meet the mainstream rec. diving market, will they need computers to operate? If the rebreather comes with its own, that may be the 'killer feature' that sells some. If it can be driven by 3rd party products like a Shearwater DC, that's a nice new feature.

Wonder if a console DC with 'GoPro' functionality built-in would appeal to many people? This would feed images in so the DC might could I.D. the target animal for you, as someone suggested earlier.

I'd like a DC to wirelessly sync with a digital camera so when the camera takes a photo, the EXIF data includes depth and maybe even water temp. Interesting for data nerds, or science-minded folks who'd like to know the depth they say an animal, and might depth be useful for white balance correction?

Since the dive computer is 'in the water' could the DC continuously read white balance and relay that info. to the camera, leading to auto-white balancing?

Perhaps some high-end DC's could 'eat' the Nautilus Lifeline market? It would be a nice selling point if your DC could call for help & relay your location in the event of a lost at sea situation.

What about those divers who disappear and are never recovered? Any way a DC continuously submerged for a set # of hours could automatically broadcast some kind of signal to aid in body recovery? Wonder how effect that would be at depth. An ultrasonic pulse once per half hour?

Richard.

 

[KeithG]

This thread has had some very interesting thoughts and when I get too excited I step back and think of "function vs feature". Then my excitement quickly disappears.

I can not think of any new "functions" that have been added to our world since about 1995.

Lots of new marketing "features" have been added, but our current crop of dive computers really do not do any thing new. They do the old stuff in a slightly different manner (and burn way more batteries doing it).

We have simply changed existing functions by substituting new technology to provide an equivalent function.

I can download my dive profiles from my uwatec aladin. Substituting a blue tooth connection for a wired connection has not added a new function, it just changed the way I would do something. I am not doing something new. I am still downloading my dive profiles. An electronic compass is similar. Instead of looking at a mechanical compass, you can look at an electronic one. New feature, not a new function.

I am interested in new functions. Some recent new functions that are interesting:
- inertial navigation stuff (i am highly skeptical it can be made to work in real world conditions)
- buddy locator stuff (but not really useful since I can see her right there)

So please stop celebrating new features and start to demand new functions.

 

[KeithG]

... why "self-driving" cars will never work.

Self driving cars will never work. There are too many edge conditions.

We will see self driving planes first - actually we have had all of the required technology for that for many years now...

 

[Steve_C]

I can not think of any new "functions" that have been added to our world since about 1995.

When did digital cameras take over. They may do an old function but they create many new capabilities.

 

[Steve_C]

.
We will see self driving planes first - actually we have had all of the required technology for that for many years now...

Planes are largely self driving now. Many are self landing. On the stealth fighter there is a button. If the pilot is confused and out of it, they push the button. Plane figures our what configuration they are in and steer the plane into linear motion with a slight climb. If a plane is damaged the controls can even figure out what is left and if possible alter the controls to get it home.

 

[stuartv]

Lots of new marketing "features" have been added, but our current crop of dive computers really do not do any thing new. They do the old stuff in a slightly different manner (and burn way more batteries doing it).

Ratio computers have a built-in magnetometer. They have a built-in GPS, too, I think.

Having a compass built in is new to computers, even though compasses themselves are not new.

Some computers that at least have been on the market have/had a buddy/boat locator feature.