July 31, 2006
|
One thing that has intrigued me is the camps in the academic world which gravitate toward the terms "ubiquitous computing" versus those that prefer "pervasive computing". I feel like there is some competition between the two camps to claim the mind-space under one of the two terms, but if I actually think about who is in each camp, I can't actually place anyone in either one. Courtesy of Google however it is possible to see that the two terms are fairly equally represented on the web, although references to both are slowly declining. Presumably that is because technologies originally in "ubicomp" are developing their own communities, like "intelligent user interfaces" or something else. I think it's just a sign of maturing in the field. Also notable is the amount of interest in Asia versus the rest of the world around these terms. |
« Progress Bar | Main | UBICOMP 2006 : Call for Participation »
[Commentary] Posted by djp3 at 9:43 AM | Comments (2)
Are the two terms really interchangeable? Ubiq's philosophy is in being omnipresent but being invisible. Pervasive, as the dictionary meaning goes, also means invasive. Or do both have the same tenets?


Always wondered why people were using one rather than another. I did the exact same search when they released Google trends.
Posted by: Riad at July 31, 2006 3:19 PMI thought that pervasive was a term that was much more popular in Europe but apparently not.