Five Predictions About Technology That Were Totally off the Mark

Updated on March 14, 2019
JillianK profile image

Jillian has been interested in computer science since her second year of high school. She tries to keep abreast with current trends in tech.

Even the smartest of us aren’t immune to making poor calls every once in a while. In the field of tech, particularly, experts have put forward a number of claims that, while feasible in the moment, would later prove spectacularly wrong.

Here are five of the worst predictions people throughout history have made about technology.

#1 - Computers Will Never be Lightweight

Back in 1949, Popular Mechanics, a magazine devoted to exploring interesting developments in technology, published the following statement: “Where a calculator like ENIAC today is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh only 1½ tons."

The prediction seems absurd in today’s world—indeed, I’m writing this article on a phone that weighs a good sight less than 1½ tons—but in 1949, it wasn’t entirely unreasonable. As the writer notes, the lightest-weight “calculators” of the time, like ENIAC, weighed up to 30 tons and came eqiupped with a mind-boggling plethora of vacuum tubes. Compared to those, a 1½ ton computer would seem futuristic—if not downright impossible to produce, hence the writer’s liberal use of words like “maybe” and “perhaps”.

Although the prediction turned out to be wrong—hilariously so nowadays—it might be wise to cut Popular Mechanics a bit of slack. They were trying their best to piece together a picture of the future using information available at the time, a daunting task in any era.

Psst, kid... wanna buy some vacuum tubes?

#2 - The Internet Is a Fad and Will Die Out

In a now infamous piece of editorial fire published in February 1995’s issue of Newsweek, Clifford Stoll tried to call baloney on the idea of a society built around the Internet. “The truth,” Stoll wrote, is that “no online database will replace your daily newspaper, no CD-ROM can take the place of a competent teacher and no computer network will change the way government works.”

While Stoll’s prognosis seems extreme for those of us reading in the modern day, some of his arguments would have held water in 1995. In protesting the rise of electronic reading devices, for instance, Stoll claims that “the myopic glow of a clunky computer” can never adequately replace “the friendly pages of a book.” Considering a device you might use to read books with in 1995 was larger, heavier, and filled with 100% more wires than an actual copy of the book, he’s entirely right. Nowadays, though, e-readers offer just as “friendly” an experience as ink-and-paper books.

Stoll’s predictions, however off-target, have been memorialized for enternity on Newsweek’s mobile site—the only place you’ll be able to find them now that the newspaper chain has shifted to a wholly online presence. I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether that’s ironic or not.

The only thing harder to predict than the future of the Internet? What Clifford Stoll’s hair will look like in the morning.

#4 - The iPhone Will Be an Economic Flop

Today, it’s difficult to imagine how the world would look without iPhones. More than 90 million people use them on a daily basis to connect with friends, play games, and conduct business, contributing to a globally interconnected marketplace of ideas.

We might take the iPhone’s success for granted now that it’s secured such a massive role in the marketplace, but back in 2007, some reserved their doubts about the device’s future.

One skeptic, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, made the following remark when asked about the iPhone, which at the time was making its grand debut in Apple stores across America: “There's no chance,” he said, “that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance.”

As unfortunate a prediction as it turned out to be—216 million iPhones were sold in 2018 alone—Ballmer wasn’t shooting entirely in the dark with his projections. As he explains in an interview almost ten years after his initial remarks, he thought the iPhone would flop because, at $600, its price ”was too high” for most consumers to pay. But because Apple came up with a “business model innovation ... to get [that cost] essentially built into the monthly cell phone bill,” the iPhone took off in a way Ballmer couldn’t have predicted.

I like to imagine Mr. Ballmer wipes away the tears articles like this bring to his eyes with crisp Benjamins.

#5 - Television Is Too Boring to Have a Future

Think back to the last great television show you watched. Odds are, it had you glued to your seat, eyes fixed on the screen as you anticipated what might happen next. Perhaps it was the finale of a season you‘d spent the whole day binging, an increasingly popular pastime in the age of streating services like Netflix and Hulu.

In 1946, however, leading figures in the movie industry had their doubts about the prospect of an in-house theater. Darryl Zanuck, a prodigious screenwriter and founder of Twentieth Century Fox, had this to say about TV:

Television won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night.

What he didn’t fathom was that the ”plywood box” would go on to become one of America’s most profitable systems of entertainment, selling 12.2 million units in 1970 and laying the foundations for an industry that thrives to this day.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment
    • JillianK profile imageAUTHOR

      Jillian Cameron 

      15 months ago from CA

      Yeah, exactly. I’d figure the writers would have at least one (if not more) connections with researchers in the fields they were writing about in order to ensure they were getting, and publishing, the most accurate information they could. It would only be expected, as you say, of such a popular magazine to stay on top of innovations like the transistor.

    • RonElFran profile image

      Ronald E Franklin 

      15 months ago from Mechanicsburg, PA

      I'm not sure how widespread knowledge of transistors was by 1949. I do recall that it was the mid-50s before transistor radios hit the market. So, it's not surprising that the PM editors hadn't realized the significance of this new technology in 1949. On the other hand, keeping on top of current tech research so their readers would know what was on the horizon is something you'd expect a magazine like that to be doing.

    • JillianK profile imageAUTHOR

      Jillian Cameron 

      15 months ago from CA

      Oh wow, I didn’t know that! Ironic, indeed.

      Do you think the writers at Popular Mechanics simply weren’t aware of how the transistor would change the way we approach hardware development? Or were they already being used by 1949 to replace vacuum tubes?

    • RonElFran profile image

      Ronald E Franklin 

      15 months ago from Mechanicsburg, PA

      The irony of Popular Mechanics' computer size prediction is that the invention that would change everything was already on the scene. Bell Labs invented the transistor in 1947, making the concept of "1000 vacuum tubes" in a computer already outdated when the PM article came out in 1949.


    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)