December 21, 2014

1 min read

Google Logo Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAm

What Was the Most Disappointing New Technology of 2014?

Tell us what big tech announcement or new gadget made you roll your eyes

By Seth Fletcher

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Share Your OpinionUpload

Wearable computers, ultrahigh-definition TVs, package-delivering drones: the tech industry promised big things in 2014. Now that the year has come and gone, it’s time to reflect. Which of the year’s new gadgets or big tech announcements impressed us the least?

 Tell us what you think, and we’ll publish the best response on ScientificAmerican.com. Last day for submissions is Tuesday, December 23.
 

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

You will need to enable JavaScript in order to use the Widget.

Seth Fletcher is director of editorial content at Scientific American. His book Einstein's Shadow (Ecco, 2018), on the Event Horizon Telescope and the quest to take the first picture of a black hole, was excerpted in the New York Times Magazine and named a New York Times Book Review Editor’s Choice. His book Bottled Lightning (2011) was the first definitive account of the invention of the lithium-ion battery and the 21st-century rebirth of the electric car. His writing has appeared in the New York Times Magazine, the New York Times op-ed page, Popular Science, Fortune, Men's Journal, Outside and other publications. His television and radio appearances have included CBS’s Face the Nation, NPR’s Fresh Air, the BBC World Service, and NPR’s Morning Edition, Science Friday, Marketplace and The Takeaway. He has a master’s degree from the Missouri School of Journalism and a bachelor’s degrees in English and philosophy from the University of Missouri.

More by Seth Fletcher

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe