> Smartphones were sort of obvious. We didn’t predict we’d all be using phones as primary devices per se, but it was obviously going to be some portable screen computer device.
It was a wide prediction, for a long time, sure.
> We’ve all heard about wearable computers, VR/AR. Well the technologies here and nothing seems revolutionary.
We had “portable screen computer devices” a long time before smartphones clicked, too. Handheld devices with full programmability, and the ability to load software, existed a long time before even the first pre-iPhone smartphones, and even pre-iPhone smartphones and PDAs weren’t convincing as the broad “portable screen computer device” that everyone expected, but no one had seen the right implementation of.
So the predictions of wearables (maybe integrated in a personal-area-network) being the next thing may be spot on – we may just be for wearables where “portable screen computing” was in the days of the Apple Newton.
> People love to fantasize about wearable devices tracking bio information, doing away with checkups. We all know how the Theranos story went, you just can’t do it.
Wearable monitors for various bioinformation exist, and did so before Theranos was dreamt of. Theranos was a fraud, but that doesn't negate wearable biomonitor devices, which continue to advance.
> VR is impractical, having to use parts of your body for what used to be at your finger tips is a step backwards.
Fingertips are part of your body, so, no, its not a step backward to use a part of your body for something that used to use a part of your body.
> The amount of obscure gestures one would need to know, they might as well learn command line.
Is this an argument for why smartphones won’t be replaced by VR, or for why smartphones won’t replace keyboards? Because you seem to be presenting it as the first, but it seems to make as much or more sense for the second. Turns out, people actually are fine learning “obscure gestures”.