It wasn't just a transistor radio, of course. It was the first. In fact, it was the first transistorised mass-market device, and it symbolised the central role that technology was taking in the post-war world. Never underestimate the power of such symbols – Thomas Watson Jr., head of IBM, gave his senior managers a TR-1 apiece to kick-start the company's transition from valves. That symbolism had a different flavour ten years later as outfits like Sony and Toshiba used the same technology to smoothly wrest control of the market from its inventors. Outsourcing fears are nothing new.
A lot has changed. The TR-1 had four transistors and cost $50; last week I bought a 256MB SD card – for a radio, appropriately enough – at about the same price. That has two billion transistors in it, or four thousand times as many as were used in the entire production run of the Regency. Factoring in devaluation, each transistor costs around four billion times less. We're living through an industrial revolution of unparalleled speed and reach – and it's all borne aloft on a massive tsunami of transistors.
Where will it go? Let's skip forward to 2054. For the same effective price of a TR-1, a straightforward extrapolation promises a memory card with two exabytes – one exabyte being around 10 to the power of 24 (if you don't like those numbers, feel free to substitute your own). Artificial intelligence will have evolved by then, because there's simply nothing else to do with those sorts of numbers – our hypothetical memory chip will have the same number of transistors as the synapses of around ten billion people. That's practically a planetful.
There are some small problems to overcome on the way. Nobody knows how the brain works, although there's lots of fascinating work being done in cognitive neuroscience – last week, researchers at the University of Rochester announced that adult ferrets used 80 percent of their brain's processing power to think about things after being shown clips from The Matrix. Nobody knows what this means (although the figures may be substantially lower for the sequels), but the fact remains that we are developing some very powerful tools to peer into the workings of mind.
Talkback
Your comparison of a $50 product in 1954 to a $50 memory card today is a bit off. It fails to take into account inflation.
According to an inflation calculator I found via Google:
"What cost $50 in 1954 would cost $328.60 in 2003.
"Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2003 and 1954, they would cost you $50 and $7.61 respectively. "
So a more valid price point comparison would be comparing that transister radio to a low-to-midrange PDA in today's world.
At first, I thought Rupert's calculations had been done on an abacus, since I couldn't make sense of the math, nor of the use of "devaluation". Then I noted that this was a ZDNET UK article, and presumed that "devaluation" meant inflation or some such, so my faith was restored. Ah, english vs. english.
Actually I find such comparisons quite fascinating. I remember reading about a comparison between Eniac and a TRS-80 computer running a Sieve of Eratosthenes back some years ago. The Eniac, pulled out of moth balls for the test, had some thousands of tubes (valves to you Brits), occupied a large room, and consumed a huge amount of electricity. Not only did the TRS-80 run the algorithm faster, it cost less to buy it than it cost to pay for the electricity the Eniac consumed while (whilst) running the program.
A long way, indeed. Interesting article, Rupert.
I factored in changes in currency value. My SD card has 500 million times as many transistors in it as the TR1, and costs round about eight times less in 'real money'. So each transistor costs eight x 500 million times less - four billion.
Magical numbers!
R