Let me add some analysis of my own with respect to how Kurzweil's 2009 predictions have fared:

Kurzweil's 2009: ...Most text will be created using speech recognition technology. [Failure: speech-to-text is less comfortable and efficient than typing for the time being, and there'll always probably be a ceiling of comfort considering texting is silent and feels more private]

It's a failure for 2009 and for 2019, but it's important to point out that it was so thanks to reasons of human consumer preferences rather than technology. Several years ago, speech recognition technology got good enough for us to use it to create most of our text. However, most people prefer using keyboards, probably because speaking compromises their privacy and annoys the people around them. I wouldn't like it if I could hear everyone else in my office dictating all their messages. So I think Kurzweil's 2009 prediction was, in an important sense, only 5 - 7 years premature (e.g. - CSR technology reached the requisite level in the 2014-2016 timeframe, buy the market largely rejected it).

Intelligent roads and driverless cars are in use, mostly on highways. Local roads still require full human interaction. [Contention: Did he mean they are common? Or simply 'in use?' If the latter, then he's definitely correct. Level 2 autonomous is an increasingly common thing, and the first commercial Level 3 autonomous vehicle was released last year by Audi]

Again, the prediction was wrong for 2009, but came true a few years after that with the rollout of lower-tech autonomous cars. Tesla's "Autopilot" feature became available in 2014, and its capabilities match Kurzweil's prediction.

People use personal computers the size of rings, pins, credit cards and books. [Contention: Did he mean PCs as in desktop PCs? Or any 'personal' computer? Because the desktop is not changing— the form will remain the same and we'll throw more power into it; we're not shrinking it to remain at a level that existed five years ago. If the latter, then yes: computers take on many forms nowadays, including watches and wristbands]

The book-sized iPad made its debut in 2010, and the Apple Watch came out in 2015. Again, Kurzweil's prediction came true a few years after 2009.

Computer displays built into eyeglasses for augmented reality are used. [Contention: Technically, he's gotten it right. But in case you've not noticed a trend, I can't tell if he meant this was a common, mainstream thing or if smartglasses just 'exist' in the same way graphene exists— it's seen commercial releases, but not to any great success yet]

Google Glass came out in 2013. Again, Kurzweil was only four years too optimistic. And once again, the product didn't attain widespread use thanks to market forces that Kurzweil couldn't have foreseen. The technology is here, just as Kurzweil said it would be, but few people want to use it (for now...).

The typical home has over 100 computers in it, many of which are embedded in appliances. [Contention: I know he must be referring to objects with some level of digital programming including things you might not immediately catch like programmable fans, smart TVs, and exercising equipment. 100 of them, though? Unlikely for right now.]

This prediction failed for 2009 and will fail for 2019, but not because we lack the money and technology to put 100 computers in the typical American home. I think we've discovered that having a smaller number of general-purpose computers in a home that can wirelessly talk to each other and control simple machines is better. By the same token, Kurzweil's "body LAN" prediction--where computation would be distributed among many small, worn and carried devices like rings--was wrong in specifics but right in essence since people started carrying smartphones, which were single devices that could do everything a body LAN could.

Overall, I think Kurzweil's 2009 predictions proved highly accurate, if you give them some sensible leeway for interpretation and extend the timeline to 2015. This fits with my general view of Kurzweil as a futurist: He's on the right track, but his predictions are too optimistically skewed towards the present. I think he does that because he unconsciously wants the advances--particularly those pertaining to radical life extension technology--to fall within his own projected lifespan.

If you want a good idea of what the future will look like, start with Kurzweil's future timeline and then add some number of years to each milestone.