The 1990s has always been considered a Gen X decade, along with the 1980s.  Gen Y has generally been primarily associated with the '00s and last 2 or 3 years of the '90s.

Are us Millenials taking the '90s as our own?  Assuming you consider Gen Y to be 1979 to 1994, we all have some '90s credit, whereas the Gen Xers are clinging back to the '80s.  Additionally, the '00s are in many ways an update of the '90s, so that would further the case of the '90s becoming a Yer decade.

I'm still reluctant to include the late 70's(even 1979) as a part of Gen Y. I still think the early 90's belong to Gen X just like the early 2010's will belong to Gen Y IMO.

It's in between, really. I put down coming of age as 16, and so the first Gen Yers came of age in 1995 if you like 1979 as the start year. For kids' things, it was a Y decade: Nickelodeon, Tamagochis, et. al. But I think Gen Y culture really started becoming big in 1998 or so, it was there in 1997 but it wasn't as huge. Generation Xers have been shying away from the '90s because they're retreating from their 20s and into their teens as they age and get nostalgic. The '90s was more Xers dominating as adults and influencing adult culture as performers than peak X teen culture, which was pre-1992. I think the first half of the '90s was the most X culture ever got, though, in terms of total domination, or the pre-1997 time period, anyway.

Yeah I'd split it between X and Y as well. I still say the decade as a whole is more X though with 1997+ being more Y. By 1998 with teen pop becoming huge Gen Y culture was well in by then.

I think the main reason Xers are focusing less on the '90s is that people forget their twenties and look back on their teens for their nostalgia, when things were more "carefree." That's why the '80s have become rose-colored to many Xers and the '90s have lost some of their sheen...part of it is also that it ended in teen pop. The '90s was more adult peak Xers and younger Xers following them, and therefore they totally dominated pop culture in the early-mid '90s for a short while.

Would you say XY cuspers in general have similar tastes as Xers up to the late '90s because I noticed the shift with all the teen pop and felt a little 'old' even though I was 17/18 at the time?

Here again it seems that someone is trying to take my life experiences again.  :( Sorry but I was only a child during the 90's so unless you include 76 as Y, that eliminates my Jr. High And High School experience. To be technincal, the term "Millennial" was invented by Strauss and Howe to denote those born between 1982 and 2000. This is because those born in 82 were the class of 2000 which ushered in a new posistive era of childraising.

Would you say XY cuspers in general have similar tastes as Xers up to the late '90s because I noticed the shift with all the teen pop and felt a little 'old' even though I was 17/18 at the time?


The 1977-1983 faction has the exact same taste as X almost.

I think in terms of political power.etc, the Baby Boomers' are still dominating, but within 10 years we'll probably see the First Generation X American President, and presidents of many other countries (perhaps even Australia), so Generation X still hasn't reached their peak. I've always claimed the 90s as 'my decade', and will always look back on it nostalgically.

Despite the fact that many '90s icons were Gen Xers (i.e. Kurt Cobain), it does seem the average Xer skips right over the decade. I've talked with quite a few roughly 1969-born folks who think it was basically just cr@p and "nothing good came out of the '90s".

You know, I actually think late boomers like the '90s probably MORE than the typical Brat Pack-er. Someone born around, say 1960 would've dug some of it because many many things would've reminded them of their childhood/teen years in the late '60s/70s so much. Also, alot of "adult" things dominated what was cool and prevalent in pop culture in the pre-1997 '90s (Friends, Seinfeld-styled sitcoms).

Gen Xers as a whole, probably had some of the most extended adolescences ever (this is probably what makes them long for their "under 16" or "under 18" years so much, and hence why many are so rooted in the '80s). Hell, at times I've met some 35 year olds who seem to act younger than some 21 year olds! Not irresponsible or anything, just still retaining a youthful edge and you feel like they still want to still be 18, etc.

As much as I love the '80s to death, I wouldn't feel at home without much of the '90s too. I don't know if I'd feel this way if I'd been 20 in 1992 instead of 10? Although I probably still would - my personalty/overall tastes have never really changed too much.

EDIT:
Would you guys agree that Gen Xers (1964-76ers or such) are probably more attached to their teen years, while most '80s born people (such as myself) and '90s born people (many of you guys on here are 1990ers or thereabouts) are more attached to their childhood? ;)

Despite the fact that many '90s icons were Gen Xers (i.e. Kurt Cobain), it does seem the average Xer skips right over the decade. I've talked with quite a few roughly 1969-born folks who think it was basically just cr@p and "nothing good came out of the '90s".

You know, I actually think late boomers like the '90s probably MORE than the typical Brat Pack-er. Someone born around, say 1960 would've dug some of it because many many things would've reminded them of their childhood/teen years in the late '60s/70s so much. Also, alot of "adult" things dominated what was cool and prevalent in pop culture in the pre-1997 '90s (Friends, Seinfeld-styled sitcoms).

Would you agree that Gen Xers as a whole, probably had some of the most extended adolescences ever? (What probably makes them long for their "under 16" or "under 18" years so much, and hence why many are so rooted in the '80s.) Hell, at times I've met 35 and 40 year olds who seem to act younger than some 21 year olds! Not irresponsible or anything, just still retaining a youthful edge.

As much as I love the '80s to death, I wouldn't feel at home without much of the '90s too. I don't know if I'd feel this way if I'd been 20 in 1992 instead of 10? Although I probably still would - my personalty/overall tastes have never really changed too much.

EDIT:
Would you guys agree that Gen Xers (1964-76ers or such) are probably more attached to their teen years, while most '80s and '90s born people are more attached to their childhood? That would fit me, since many (hell MOST) of what I like is pre-1995 - before I was even a "teenager". ;)


Well written. 

I think the '90s are claimed mostly by people in the 1976-1987 birthrange, so basically an equal split of X and Y, like the actual '90s decade is.  The '00s generation is more or less 1988-1996 I'd say, so is basically purely Y-oriented.

But, interestingly enough, even though even in 1999 the youth were referred to as "Gen X" I really think that in time the '90s might be seen as being equally Gen Y. 

I agree that Gen Xers are more attached to their teen years, and the Yers to their childhood.  Probably because Gen Xers were teens in a better time.  ;) They will always, I think, be "young" at heart, even when they're old - in fact, I think people born in the 1930s and upward act this way to some extent because pop culture took off in the '50s.  But, they still act like adults, they're just not as blowharded as their parents and grandparents, ya know? 

Well written. 

I think the '90s are claimed mostly by people in the 1976-1987 birthrange, so basically an equal split of X and Y, like the actual '90s decade is.  The '00s generation is more or less 1988-1996 I'd say, so is basically purely Y-oriented.

But, interestingly enough, even though even in 1999 the youth were referred to as "Gen X" I really think that in time the '90s might be seen as being equally Gen Y. 

I agree that Gen Xers are more attached to their teen years, and the Yers to their childhood.  Probably because Gen Xers were teens in a better time.  ;) They will always, I think, be "young" at heart, even when they're old - in fact, I think people born in the 1930s and upward act this way to some extent because pop culture took off in the '50s.  But, they still act like adults, they're just not as blowharded as their parents and grandparents, ya know? 



Yeah, I think the '90s were more "adult Gen X" and "kid Gen Y" oriented. Even the adults of X were still perceived as young/cool enough to have an influence on pop culture (even a 1964er was still only 30 in 1994! It does make me sad to think of that as being some time ago now), but the Gen Y stuff hadn't really "taken off" for teens/younger adults yet.

So yeah, it's weird how a 1958 person and a 1978 person probably have more in common with each other '90s-wise, than either would have with a 1968-er.

BTW what age would you put the earliest "pop culture influenced" person to be? 1935 perhaps (20 in 1955)? Like I've said, my dad is a 1938er and fits your last paragraph.

BTW what age would you put the earliest "pop culture influenced" person to be? 1935 perhaps (20 in 1955)? Like I've said, my dad is a 1938er and fits your last paragraph.


Yeah, I'd say so.  One of my grandparents was born in the early '20s, and is very nice, but isn't one bit cool.  My other grandmother, born in the mid 1930s is quite "hip" in some ways, because she was into the hippie thing in the '60s.

Yeah, I'd say so.  One of my grandparents was born in the early '20s, and is very nice, but isn't one bit cool.  My other grandmother, born in the mid 1930s is quite "hip" in some ways, because she was into the hippie thing in the '60s.


That's pretty interesting - so your "cooler" grandma was still into the '60s even if she was already around her early 30s at the time? I wonder what your other one was like when she was, say 15 in the late 1930's, or 20 in the WWII era. I know there was "teenage" stuff then (big band/jazz, dancing), but it wasn't overblown like it was in 1955+, and especially 1964+.

That's pretty interesting - so your "cooler" grandma was still into the '60s even if she was already around her early 30s at the time? I wonder what your other one was like when she was, say 15 in the late 1930's, or 20 in the WWII era. I know there was "teenage" stuff then (big band/jazz, dancing), but it wasn't overblown like it was in 1955+, and especially 1964+.


Yeah.  My "cooler" grandma was like a hippie leader or something.  She's still quite a hippie, but in a good way :)

I think 1964-1994 is the peak "pop culture" era.  Pop culture will definitely persist into the 21st Century, but I think it's going to become much more personal as the Internet, satellite radio, etc. expand.

^Yeah, I think aside from some "extremists", pretty much any group is good (or at least can be). I like hippies though, LOL - they're very laid back/antiwar/pot smoking types who just seemed to want to have a good time.

Anyway, I would agree with that. Pop culture in general really kicked into overdrive after the Beatles/Rolling Stones/Kinks and the rest of the British Invasion came into being (things were still a teeny bit too conservative in the '50s for rock to really take off, whereas in the latter half of the '60s, it trickled down to more "household" if that makes sense. I know there were, like 8 and 10 year old kids who liked the Beatles circa 1965, whereas in 1955, parents would've FREAKED out if a kid that age even heard Elvis). ;D

I'd even say up through 1997 people were still relatively "trendy" but in the grand scheme of things, 2006 is kind of an overextended late '90s (you can wear a 1997 shirt or listen to Third Eye Blind in public and probably get away with it fine, if not still be well received).

Despite that I don't care for trendiness in some ways, it's sad to think of it withering away. It'll probably always be around but more like it is now (i.e. there'll be big bands, but probably not that many "household" names as much - i.e. Madonna, Paul McCartney, Bruce Springsteen, Kurt Cobain).

^Yeah, I think aside from some "extremists", pretty much any group is good (or at least can be). I like hippies though, LOL - they're very laid back/antiwar/pot smoking types who just seemed to want to have a good time.

Anyway, I would agree with that. Pop culture in general really kicked into overdrive after the Beatles/Rolling Stones/Kinks and the rest of the British Invasion came into being (things were still a teeny bit too conservative in the '50s for rock to really take off, whereas in the latter half of the '60s, it trickled down to more "household" if that makes sense. I know there were, like 8 and 10 year old kids who liked the Beatles circa 1965, whereas in 1955, parents would've FREAKED out if a kid that age even heard Elvis). ;D

I'd even say up through 1997 people were still relatively "trendy" but in the grand scheme of things, 2006 is kind of an overextended late '90s (you can wear a 1997 shirt or listen to Third Eye Blind in public and probably get away with it fine, if not still be well received).

Despite that I don't care for trendiness in some ways, it's sad to think of it withering away. It'll probably always be around but more like it is now (i.e. there'll be big bands, but probably not that many "household" names as much - i.e. Madonna, Paul McCartney, Bruce Springsteen, Kurt Cobain).


Yeah, I'd draw the line at 1997.  I think pop culturally generally froze around 2001, but 1997 is where you can trace the current, post-trendy culture back to (i.e. South Park).  Not that everything popular in 1997 is still super-hot today, but almost all of it is generally tolerated/liked to some degree.

Wouldn't you say Eminem and Britney Spears are household names?

Yeah, I'd draw the line at 1997.  I think pop culturally generally froze around 2001, but 1997 is where you can trace the current, post-trendy culture back to (i.e. South Park).  Not that everything popular in 1997 is still super-hot today, but almost all of it is generally tolerated/liked to some degree.

Wouldn't you say Eminem and Britney Spears are household names?


Yeah, 1997 is the precursor/originators of the general types of things around today, but 2001/02 is where it basically stopped (well, there's been smaller changes, but nothing you'd notice without paying closer attention. I mean, a 2002 song and a 2005 song is almost interchangable, unlike a 1982 and a 1985 song, which had their own identities).

BTW, yeah Britney, Eminem and Ricky Martin are definitely household names - I think the last of those kind of artists were around 1999/2000, even if trendiness slowed down in '97. ;)

Yeah, 1997 is the precursor/originators of the general types of things around today, but 2001/02 is where it basically stopped (well, there's been smaller changes, but nothing you'd notice without paying closer attention. I mean, a 2002 song and a 2005 song is almost interchangable, unlike a 1982 and a 1985 song, which had their own identities).

BTW, yeah Britney, Eminem and Ricky Martin are definitely household names - I think the last of those kind of artists were around 1999/2000, even if trendiness slowed down in '97. ;)


That's true.  I also think the late nineties was the last period with a large amount of adult-oriented music, such as Smash Mouth and Santana.  If you compare a 1998 chart with a 2006 chart you'll notice a lot of the same sort of stuff (i.e. Master P), but you'll also notice a small amount of adult music as opposed to the totally youth-controlled music of the mid '00s.

Would you say the 20th Century kind of died two deaths, one in the early '90s and one in the late '90s?  For instance, in the early nineties you had the PC revolution (both computers and politics, LOL) and the end of the Cold War.  In the late nineties and wee zeroes you had the Internet boom and the beginnings of a new Cold War.

I also think that the '90s were the last decade with a cultural innocence.  They barely had it, but they still had it. 

What I mean by that is, back in the '90s there was tons of adult-oriented media, but people weren't numbed to it yet.  Today, it's unusual for a band not to swear, and the hip-hop/slut thing has penetrated popular culture so much it's even in toys.

That's true.  I also think the late nineties was the last period with a large amount of adult-oriented music, such as Smash Mouth and Santana.  If you compare a 1998 chart with a 2006 chart you'll notice a lot of the same sort of stuff (i.e. Master P), but you'll also notice a small amount of adult music as opposed to the totally youth-controlled music of the mid '00s.

Would you say the 20th Century kind of died two deaths, one in the early '90s and one in the late '90s?  For instance, in the early nineties you had the PC revolution (both computers and politics, LOL) and the end of the Cold War.  In the late nineties and wee zeroes you had the Internet boom and the beginnings of a new Cold War.


Yeah, I think the average age for most Top 40 performers these days is like 15-24 and maybe a few later 20s. Hell, I wonder sometimes if that's why it feels so "samey" - record execs might not want to push a new star over 30, even if their stuff would probably catch on, merely 'cause they figure "kids" wouldn't be interested?

I agree. 1992 seemed like a big change (not just late '80s-ish to "real" '90s, but very 21st century). The huge essential popularization of the Internet around 1998/99 and especially with the 9-11/War On Terror does make it seem like a different era. Hell, even in 2002 I started to get nostalgic for 1996 and '97 - even if the outside look and some pop culture hadn't much changed, it just "felt" way different.

I also think that the '90s were the last decade with a cultural innocence.  They barely had it, but they still had it. 

What I mean by that is, back in the '90s there was tons of adult-oriented media, but people weren't numbed to it yet.  Today, it's unusual for a band not to swear, and the hip-hop/slut thing has penetrated popular culture so much it's even in toys.


Well, it's the whole thing about wanting/trying to make the current generation push the envelope not done in previous ones, and to "shock" your parents, etc. Even if this partly fits in with being "trendy" (which isn't quite as prevalent now as in 1964-1997ish), I do think it's somewhat around. Perhaps, the powers that be figure that since cussing/porn/violence/sex is so prevalent in pop culture, there's no way anything more innocent could be "cool" anymore?

^I'm starting to think the '90s were the transition between the 20th and 21st Centuries, and that the '80s were the last decade of the 20th Century (hell, in some ways they're more like the '40s than now) and this decade is the first fully into the 21st Century.  Of anything, I'd call the '90s the 21st Century though; even the '80s have a 21st Century element to them.

Here's some examples:

*In the 1990s, the music industry was splintering out, but it wasn't until 1999 or so that pirating really became an issue.
*The Internet emerged, but it wasn't especially useful except for email and research.  Plus, the first half of the decade, up to 1994 I'd say was pretty much pre-Internet times.
*It was the final decade in which people's main outlet to the world was TV
*The decade was generally historically boring, the news consisting primarily of scandals, Cold War leftovers, and the earliest events of the War on Terror.  It was the "calm of the storm".
*The 1990s represented the transition from a rock culture to a hip hop culture.

Well, it's the whole thing about wanting/trying to make the current generation push the envelope not done in previous ones, and to "shock" your parents, etc. Even if this partly fits in with being "trendy" (which isn't quite as prevalent now as in 1964-1997ish), I do think it's somewhat around. Perhaps, the powers that be figure that since cussing/porn/violence/sex is so prevalent in pop culture, there's no way anything more innocent could be "cool" anymore?


Well, my theory is that by the early '00s we'd really pushed the envelope as far as we could.  That's why The Simpsons, South Park, etc. are still quite cool, you can't get much more raunchy then that without us (America) becoming like Japan. Plus, I think Political Correctness kind of puts an upper bound on everything, even if that upper bound is really high.

Well, my theory is that by the early '00s we'd really pushed the envelope as far as we could.  That's why The Simpsons, South Park, etc. are still quite cool, you can't get much more raunchy then that without us (America) becoming like Japan. Plus, I think Political Correctness kind of puts an upper bound on everything, even if that upper bound is really high.


Yeah, there's only so much you can do onstage at a concert before you're actually shooting someone or simulating a porno, so for cases like that, it's a good thing we can't really go any farther. Since the '90s was the last decade where controversy and rebellion seemed cool in its own way, I wonder if that's why people still seem to like/accept the '90s, and why there's really not any backlash against them now?

Of course we're all different, but I have noticed in the last few years (hell, starting probably as early as 1996ish, just from watching Dateline or talk shows at the time, etc), teens seem to be embracing stuff like church, not smoking, less having sex/abstinence before marriage, etc. Perhaps in its own way, that's like rebelling against the "envelope pushing" nature of their parents. Of course they probably still like some "cool" stuff - just more G/PG rated if you know what I mean?

Yeah, there's only so much you can do onstage at a concert before you're actually shooting someone or simulating a porno, so for cases like that, it's a good thing we can't really go any farther. Since the '90s was the last decade where controversy and rebellion seemed cool in its own way, I wonder if that's why people still seem to like/accept the '90s, and why there's really not any backlash against them now?

Of course we're all different, but I have noticed in the last few years (hell, starting probably as early as 1996ish, just from watching Dateline or talk shows at the time, etc), teens seem to be embracing stuff like church, not smoking, less having sex/abstinence before marriage, etc. Perhaps in its own way, that's like rebelling against the "envelope pushing" nature of their parents. Of course they probably still like some "cool" stuff - just more G/PG rated if you know what I mean?


Lol, you should have seen some of the kids I went to school with. So many people smoked, the bathrooms were pretty much a smoking room. Not too mention the drugs and stuff.

Lol, you should have seen some of the kids I went to school with. So many people smoked, the bathrooms were pretty much a smoking room. Not too mention the drugs and stuff.


Same with me (one reason I NEVER used the bathroom in HS unless I totally couldn't hold it). ;D

Of course the people I mentioned aren't the majority, but it seems to be cropping up in "groups" (i.e. I see more churchgoing/religious people now than even in 1997 or so).

^I would say that's one of the main reasons the '90s are still cool.  The cutting-edgeness of the '90s, while it doesn't really match up to today, isn't laughable now either.  For instance, saying "ass" in an '80s song was really controversial then but no deal at all now, whereas people are still shocked by early '90s gangsta rap.

It seems to me like the controversial stuff in the '90s was as bad as the stuff that's around in the zeroes, but it wasn't as common.

I think the '00s is the lowpoint of pop culture that started in the '50s and reached its zenith in the '70s and '80s. I think boomers and generations like them seem to be very into having a unified pop culture within which to transmute their beliefs, not so much Y or the generation before the boomers. My theory is that pop culture will really start up again in its own way in the 2010s. There is definitely trendiness now, but it's not quite as rebellious. My theory for the popularity of emo and "twee pop", which is very into a fake sense of cuteness, is that it's a response to the oversexualization of the media, which there is already starting to be a backlash against. I mean, the hypersexualized culture that's been around since the 1970s, when teenagers started having lots of casual sex and such (though they might not admit it now) is really being pushed to the point where it's redundant and silly.

I think hypersexualization of culture really reached its peak around the fin de siecle, with Britney Spears, et. al. There's already something of a backlash against it except for hip-hop. Does anyone else here agree the 2010s might not be as sexual as the '00s and the late '90s?

I disagree that people aren't trendy now. There're still plenty of trends, but the '00s are more a "hip" as opposed to a trendy decade, pop-culture wise. There have been some notable, strange trends, though: Uggs, moccasins, clogs, North Face jackets, velour and velour tracksuits, paisley tote bags, the "all-over" logo look, pants with lettering on the ass, white belts, Sudoku, Atkins diet, jelly and Livestrong bracelets, thin pants and suits, messenger bags, green tea, knitting, aviator glasses, knit jackets with a zipper, quilted-style knit jackets, suitjackets, etc. Alot of teens I think are returning to the comfort of their childhood because the '00s are in themselves so disturbing. The last time that happened was with the babydoll trend in the early-mid '90s. Teens are being torn to be adults and so try out childhood for a kick. People think they have more "taste" now, I guess.

I agree with you that Gen Xers oftentimes seem like "big kids." They're always redeveloping their pop culture tastes and they seem to act like eternal adolescents, whereas Yers are torn between being little kids and being 26-year old hipsters. My English teacher is a good example-she's about 39 or so, just had her first kid, and still acts like she's a teenager with her musical tastes and mannerisms. Boomers seem to have this weird collision of being kids and adults, like they act very adult but they do stupid things and act immature like a 16-year old, and they're very jaded on the other hand. Gen Xers have a lower jaded-ness factor.

I don't think pop culture is over, I just think it's at one of its lowpoints, and will probably pick up again soon. IMO, it's easier to divide things into eras than centuries. In the US, there was the 1870-1910 "industrialization age", then there was the 1910-1945 "war age/electric age", then there was the "nuclear age" like 1945-1980, and since then has sort of been the "corporation age", which I think is peaking right now just as it is fudgeing up America enough to lose supporters, like the industrial and nuclear ages did. After that maybe we'll go into some new era, it'll be under the overall banner of the "digital age" but it'll be something else, like a sort of "new consciousness age."

^Like I've said, the Internet will become the main medium of pop culture.  There will always be a "mainstream", but they'll be plenty of more personal "subcultures" to choose from.  You won't have to have "connections" or great luck in order to become famous.

News is already gathered primarily via the Internet, and television and radio will probably become part of the Internet within the next one or two decades.  Hell, with YouTube it's slowly beginning to happen already.

^Like I've said, the Internet will become the main medium of pop culture.  There will always be a "mainstream", but they'll be plenty of more personal "subcultures" to choose from.  You won't have to have "connections" or great luck in order to become famous.

News is already gathered primarily via the Internet, and television and radio will probably become part of the Internet within the next one or two decades.  Hell, with YouTube it's slowly beginning to happen already.


I think it'll all be interconnected, like run more digitally, but there'll still be radios, the output system will just be different through wireless technology. However, I think the internet will get more corporatized and more like TV pretty soon, like in order to get famous you'll have to both be on a certain TV show (TV will always be big, whatever the output is) and on a certain website...it won't be as democratic.

I think it'll all be interconnected, like run more digitally, but there'll still be radios, the output system will just be different through wireless technology. However, I think the internet will get more corporatized and more like TV pretty soon, like in order to get famous you'll have to both be on a certain TV show (TV will always be big, whatever the output is) and on a certain website...it won't be as democratic.


I agree.  They'll still be TVs and radios, but they'll be part of the Internet.  The Internet won't just be computers and cell phones.

I agree.  They'll still be TVs and radios, but they'll be part of the Internet.  The Internet won't just be computers and cell phones.


Or some other digital alternative form of communication that ties in with the internet, but is a separate, company-owned web with commercials, etc. Like if you turn on a TV, there will be more options, but you'll still be able to get a channel playing a talk show at 2:00 sort of thing, but the tech will be digital, not analog.

I do think the 'net will get increasingly corporate through the '10s and '20s, and zines and stuff like that will come back in vogue in lieu of corporatized blogs.

My opinion as to the internet, and how it will become increasingly corporate, is that the price of blogs and owning your own website will be driven up so much by "web speculation" (a la real estate speculation) that they become too expensive, and that most websites will become expensive member-only. This will force true alternative culture off the internet sometime in the 2010s and force it into the realm of magazines and other print materials, and make the web and interactive culture like MySpace and blogs relatively trivial. Everything ends up becoming corporate.

I think that a TV will be essentially navigable as it is now, with channels navigated by remote, et. al. It'll be like a member-only private internet, digitalized through cable or wireless satellite, like they have at universities. However, network and cable companies will still have a monopoly over what programming you see via TV, with development companies developing the programming and selling it to your "service"...network TV will be able to be picked up by all wireless via local affiliates, much as it is now, but digital. Same thing with radio.

I also think that movie theaters, CDs, and DVDs will survive, and just evolve with tech, or be forced to become cheaper and more accommodating as more alternatives to them arise.

I'm bumping this so people can say what they think of my last post  ;) .

I wonder if the CD will last until the late 21st Century. 

The vinyl record is a 19th Century technology that lasted until the early 1990s, and the CD is a 20th Century technology that may last until the 2090s.

I wonder if the CD will last until the late 21st Century. 

The vinyl record is a 19th Century technology that lasted until the early 1990s, and the CD is a 20th Century technology that may last until the 2090s.


I think it will, in one form or another...probably it'll evolve with more features to compete through the 21st century. Maybe it won't be the most popular format anymore, but people always love hard copies, they're durable and reliable. Maybe they'll start coming with a download. Also, as Gen Y gets older and has more money, we'll graduate into buying more CDs, with our own large home stereo systems.

^I agree that cd's will live on in some form or another until maybe the late 21st century. As velvetoneo said they probably wont be the most popular format anymore but they'll be around for a long time.

Velvet you made a good point about money in relation to CD's.  I don't necessarily prefer mp3s,  I like hard copies.  But at this point in my life I just can't afford them.

Velvet you made a good point about money in relation to CD's.  I don't necessarily prefer mp3s,  I like hard copies.  But at this point in my life I just can't afford them.


Yeah, CDs are too damn expensive. El Duderino, are you a fellow Joni lover? I do think that when Gen Y, soon to become the biggest generation, gets older, we'll buy more CDs because they'll be more affordable.

El Duderino, are you a fellow Joni lover?


Yes!! She is a genius. :)

Yes!! She is a genius. :)




AGREED!

I own Song to a Seagull, Ladies of the Canyon, Blue, For the Roses, Court and Spark, Hejira, and Don Juan's Reckless Daughters. What should I get next?

I dunno I'm not familiar with her albums. Like I said, I'm an mp3 guy. Honestly the only Album titles by her i knew were Don Juan's Reckless Daughters and Blue..

Personally, I never understood why some theorize that the future is the internet and that it will replace tv and radio.  Is it a large part of the future?  Certainly, the possibilities are endless.  However, I don't think it'll ever replace tv and radio like some say.  Just looking at my school alone, I can tell tons of kids would be uncomfortable with the internet replacing tv.  Most people want to watch their shows in the couch or recliner.  A computer chair isn't exactly ideal for a couch potato.  I do think the internet will play a large part in the future, but it won't do away with tv and radio.  Also, has anyone heard that some companies are considering the possibilities of "internet plans" and "pay per click" systems?  That's just plain greedy right there and I hope it never gets past the consideration stage and actually happens.

I dunno I'm not familiar with her albums. Like I said, I'm an mp3 guy. Honestly the only Album titles by her i knew were Don Juan's Reckless Daughters and Blue..


Try and group them into albums and then do them that way, you'll appreciate them better. Jonimitchell.com is the best source for song listings.

Personally, I never understood why some theorize that the future is the internet and that it will replace tv and radio.  Is it a large part of the future?  Certainly, the possibilities are endless.  However, I don't think it'll ever replace tv and radio like some say.  Just looking at my school alone, I can tell tons of kids would be uncomfortable with the internet replacing tv.  Most people want to watch their shows in the couch or recliner.  A computer chair isn't exactly ideal for a couch potato.  I do think the internet will play a large part in the future, but it won't do away with tv and radio.  Also, has anyone heard that some companies are considering the possibilities of "internet plans" and "pay per click" systems?  That's just plain greedy right there and I hope it never gets past the consideration stage and actually happens.


I agree with that, I don't think the internet, VR, and robotics will be all there is to the future...I even doubt VR and robotics will be any bigger a part of it than they are now. I think that daily life will be similar to what it is now.

Personally, I never understood why some theorize that the future is the internet and that it will replace tv and radio.  Is it a large part of the future?  Certainly, the possibilities are endless.  However, I don't think it'll ever replace tv and radio like some say.  Just looking at my school alone, I can tell tons of kids would be uncomfortable with the internet replacing tv.  Most people want to watch their shows in the couch or recliner.  A computer chair isn't exactly ideal for a couch potato.  I do think the internet will play a large part in the future, but it won't do away with tv and radio.  Also, has anyone heard that some companies are considering the possibilities of "internet plans" and "pay per click" systems?  That's just plain greedy right there and I hope it never gets past the consideration stage and actually happens.



That could happen but in the distant future. The internet wont replace t.v anytime soon.

I agree that the internet won't replace T.V. for a long time, if ever.  People are lazy,  and when you watch T.V. you can veg out.  Can't really do that on a comp because it is interactive.  For people like us who spend a lot of time on the net,  it can be easy to forget that the majority of internet users in this country are still quite casual users.  Only a small portion of people in this country use the internet as their main source of media entertainment(ahead of T.v., movies, video games etc.).  Maybe around 10%?

I agree that the internet won't replace T.V. for a long time, if ever.  People are lazy,  and when you watch T.V. you can veg out.  Can't really do that on a comp because it is interactive.  For people like us who spend a lot of time on the net,  it can be easy to forget that the majority of internet users in this country are still quite casual users.  Only a small portion of people in this country use the internet as their main source of media entertainment(ahead of T.v., movies, video games etc.).  Maybe around 10%?


I think there will still be TVs, but it will be interconnected with the Internet.

For instance, a television would be streamed through broadband, and you could attach a wireless chip to them.  I'm thinking the 2020s is when this will really take off.

I agree that the internet won't replace T.V. for a long time, if ever.  People are lazy,  and when you watch T.V. you can veg out.  Can't really do that on a comp because it is interactive.  For people like us who spend a lot of time on the net,  it can be easy to forget that the majority of internet users in this country are still quite casual users.  Only a small portion of people in this country use the internet as their main source of media entertainment(ahead of T.v., movies, video games etc.).  Maybe around 10%?


Yeah, the internet is interactive and difficult on the eyes.

I don't think it'll really be interconnected with the internet, more it'll be internet tech, like a private company web, but with wireless "network" channels.