"What were they (the editors of Popular Mechanics) thinking? Was it a lack of imagination or a lack of vision? Or did they just not have enough “critical mass” in High Tech to be able to envision the future as we are now experiencing it." They weren't lacking anything. You immediately applied their comment to an infinite horizon. They were correct...for 5-6 years in the future. The article doesn’t say by when that shrinking of computers will happen...nor does it say that’s as small as they’ll ever become. They failed to see the invention of the transistor. By definition, you can’t predict timing of paradigm shifts. You can say that they’ll happen...but you can’t say when, or to what magnitude. The invention of transistors changed the entire future of integrated circuits. What are WE missing? The ability to quickly adopt those shifts in our industry, and revise our vision based on them. How long has it taken us to truly absorb one-to-one marketing, even though the technology has been available for a dozen years? Have we even been able to truly understand what it is we’re trying to do in that space? Have we succeeded anywhere along that front? Or have we merely moved the needle closer to the vision? We’re often so stuck in our own paradigms (“Isn’t Wunderman the direct mail company?”) that we fail to seize upon the new...or trying to apply our old ways of thinking to new technologies and capabilities.

Even people who are forward thinkers get caught up in the status quo. " I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas watson, CEO, IBM, 1943 We all need to think beyond the present horizon.

My point -- so how do we anticipate transistors in a world where we cannot even fathom their creation? Look at Jules Verne; Asimov; vs real scientists -- seems to me that often the creators are more limited -- despite their brilliance -- than the sheer creative types who relish teh ideas but are not limited by their own technolgy