Every year, the MIT Technology Review publishes its annual list of Breakthrough Technologies, a tradition that has continued for over a decade. This initiative allows the publication’s journalists and editors to highlight innovations viewed as significant advancements in technology. Recently, David Rotman, the editor at large, revisited the original list to assess the trajectory of these breakthroughs. While each technology remains relevant, many have evolved in unexpected ways, prompting a reflection on their successes and failures. In a similar vein, I guide graduate students at MIT’s School of Architecture and Planning in examining past technology flops, encouraging them to analyze the underlying reasons for these failures and brainstorm creative solutions to transform these setbacks into successes.
The analysis of unsuccessful technologies is crucial, as it unveils the myriad factors influencing their viability. These include not only the technological aspects but also cultural contexts, societal acceptance, market competition, and timing. For example, the concept of Social TV aimed to integrate social media platforms and streaming services, promoting interaction among viewers watching live television. Although it highlighted the potential for digital connectivity, it relied on a declining medium—live TV. Interestingly, the pandemic sparked a resurgence of this idea, with teenagers hosting virtual watch parties on various streaming platforms, showcasing a shift in how shared viewing experiences can manifest organically rather than through a centralized service.
Several notable examples illustrate the disconnect between ambition and outcome. The Helix DNA app store, which offered genome sequencing and third-party analyses, failed primarily due to privacy concerns and a lack of regulatory oversight in health applications. Similarly, the vision of universal memory technology, intended to revolutionize data storage with carbon nanotubes, faltered when the manufacturing process proved challenging, and existing technologies remained deeply entrenched. Lytro’s light-field photography camera aimed to revolutionize photography by allowing focus adjustments post-capture but was ultimately outmatched by traditional camera manufacturers and the rapid advancement of smartphone technology. Lastly, Project Loon aspired to provide internet access via high-altitude balloons in underserved areas but encountered commercial viability issues, highlighting the complexities of operating in low-income regions.
These examples and their corresponding lessons underscore the importance of critical examination in technology development. Understanding why certain breakthroughs do not succeed can inform future innovations, ensuring that they are not only visionary but also feasible and aligned with market needs.
Source: Why some “breakthrough” technologies don’t work out via MIT Technology Review