Of Apple homes and driverless lives

Apple is to announce plans to move into the connected home with a vision of linked domestic appliances, while Google has unveiled the latest version of its driverless car.

I am so pumped about the Apple home. It is going to be great. Better than great; it is going to be beautiful . . . although, now I think about it, I do have some concerns.

We know how seriously Apple takes design and the interface between form and function. Your home will need to be approved before it is deemed suitable for Apple products. For example, the Apple home does not work well with mock-Tudor exteriors, Amazonian timber and shag-pile carpets. The Apple home is optimised for wood floors, white walls and minimalist furniture.

Even if your home passes Apple's 732-point design criteria there are still a number of concerns that can render the service suboptimal. For example, the iVacuum robots that automatically clean your floors each day do not work well in corners because why the hell couldn't you get a rounded house like a normal person?

You will also need to redecorate at least once a year as new product features prove incompatible with designs which are, frankly, so last year. There are also some tensions as the iHome's rapid release product cycle means that some older places will no longer support all its applications and you may need to buy a new house every three or four years. Apple recognises the inconvenience of this so is working to offer upgrades such as loft conversions or makeovers that permit users to increase the life cycle of their home. But some people will be determined to have only the latest Apple home, so expect long queues at estate agents ahead of any product launch.

The challenges are not merely aesthetic, however. Your iFridge may demand a 30 per cent handling fee for all items placed within it. Also any new products must go through an onerous vetting procedures before they will be allowed into the machine. The iFridge is known to take a dim view of smoothies, aside from those prepared in the iJuicer. It is possible to place unapproved content in the fridge but it will never be in one of the featured slots.

Meanwhile, over at Google the driverless cars project is gathering momentum - albeit with a maximum speed of 25 miles an hour. This is all very well but Google is still being rather timid in its quest for things that might be improved if humans could be removed from the process. Perhaps the next thing will be driverless banking or even driverless relationships.

Think how the divorce rate would plummet if humans ceded control of their relationships. Many emotional car crashes might be avoided through driverless relationships.

Humans would still be needed for certain physical activities but all other decisions would be left to a superior intelligence. With a wealth of personal information all choices about birthday presents, whose turn it is to collect the kids and how often you have to see the in-laws can be outsourced to a more qualified algorithm. Perusal of communications will also allow timely personal interventions such as an unexpected gift or flowers when the driver detects stress in a partner's emails or social media posts.

Driverless banking may be complex. With the flash crash and high-frequency trading, machines did not escape blame for the financial crisis. But we may see low-frequency trading in which no trade can travel faster than 25mph - so any fat-finger mistake can be rectified by hopping into a Google car and catching the error at the other end.

But driverless banking is primarily a consumer service. Like the Google car, the driverless banker will be designed with a cute, unthreatening face that offers highly advantageous terms. Customers would enjoy very low interest loans in return for giving Google all their financial data and control of their spending. Cash-strapped online shoppers may discover value brands replacing their first-choice product in their shopping basket. Google search results will automatically exclude anything that might strain their budget, and requests for cash may come to resemble the dialogue from 2001: A Space Odyssey.

"What are you buying, Dave? A new thermostat for your Apple Home? I'm afraid I can't let you do that, Dave. You do not have the funds, and even if you did there are superior Android products that are a more rational choice, Dave."

[email protected]

Twitter: @robertshrimsley

© The Financial Times Limited 2014. All rights reserved.
FT and Financial Times are trademarks of the Financial Times Ltd.
Not to be redistributed, copied or modified in any way.
Euro2day.gr is solely responsible for providing this translation and the Financial Times Limited does not accept any liability for the accuracy or quality of the translation