Slashdot Mirror
20 Factors That Will Change PCs In 2002
bstadil writes: "CNN's tech site has posted a list of the 20 most significant factors that will change the PC in 2002. Its not very technical but it would be interesting to get the take on this from the Slashdot community plus what they think needs to be added."
Hard disks that are faster, not bigger. If I need more space, I'll add more spindles. How about giving me a disk that can push 50 or 100 MB/sec from the platters?
Bring back those monitors-with-built-in-USB-hubs.
Cheap SMP. I'll take my dual 550 over a single 1 GHz any day of the week. How about 8x500 MHz on the desktop, instead of 1x4GHz which is still crippled by 1 CPU hogging app?
Less patronizing Windows UI ("My Documents", "My Computer")
A decent NFS client for Win32.
That's all I can think of for now. I'm not terribly interested about vapor markup languages or 1 GHz palmtops. Give me something I can use.
dd if=/dev/coffee of=/dev/geek
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Subscription based Software / Services (games, streaming content etc etc)
----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
Advanced operating systems. Defining technology as a subset of an unresponsive monopoly OS is a waste of time.
Efficient programming tools. If four programmers could write a better Photoshop in two months and distribute it electronically, then things will change.
Human factors driven technology. People will buy more stuff that works easily and makes them happy.
I think that the largest change coming in the next few years, at least for laptop users, will be the increasing prevalence of pervasive, high bandwidth wireless networks based on the IEEE 802.11a-g protocols. I have the pleasure of working for one of the few companies that makes extensive use of these devices (we design them, actually), and I can't imagine working without them. When I go to a meeting, I just plug a card into my laptop and go. In the meeting I can bring up all of the relevant documents and data, check my email and stocks, and, most importantly, read Slashdot.
These technologies will have an even larger impact in academic institutions. At this moment, I know of at least two universities (Carnegie Mellon and, interestingly, Akron University in Ohio) that have essentially omnipresent 802.11b wireless networks. Students with laptops can access the campus network as well as the internet from any point in the university, even the football field.
I think that this will be the area of largest noticeable change because it is not incremental. We expect faster processors, greater storage capacity, faster busses, etc., but the ability to connect to the internet with a broadband connection from almost anywhere, that will be new and therefore more noticeable. However, even though it is novel, it is implemented with mature technologies that have been tried and tested for several years now, at least in the case of 802.11b.
He's been there where M$ want him to be... never knowing he needed it until he got it right in front of him. Him and the great crowds like him is what will give M$ the IM monopoly too, because "everybody else" will be on messenger. Yet another blatant case of M$ extending their monopoly, but I don't suppose that rises any eyebrows here because it happens so often, and nowhere else either because they don't care, in particular the Justice Dep.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
My hope is that the people who were polled to come up with this list were rating the Microsoft Passport with "Impact meter: 8" as a warning, not a subtle endorsement. The Presence Technology rating of 7 scares me. I don't want people to be able to track my every move, and shouldn't have to pay for the right to be left alone. Isn't this a little to close to the conspiracy theory of the government implanting chips at birth? I have never been one to take that sort of thing seriously, but I want to know I can keep on eating and breathing technology without some hacker knowing my life.
People want stuff that they can use everyday. Having a PC with software that uses voice recognition and learn my pattern usage is what I really want. I don't want to have to mess around anymore with DLLs, the registry, LD_LIRBARY_PATHs or .conf files. Applications should learn on how to adapt to my usage and fix themselves when broken. How about an instantaneous boot up people. My g4 with osx wakes up in 5 secs. Boots under 2 mins.
The idea of HyperThreading will create a new breed of applications, both on the client and server side hopefully. The hope of having a reatime application on my desktop is very appealing. No more me waiting for the application to respond to my command!!!
400 gigs and a cloud of dust: AFC hard drives
:)
:)
Not a bad idea. As the average amount of free space per PC increases, software makers will find a way to utilize it. They always have.
PDAs move to another level: The 1-GHz palmtop
Doubtful. Unlike cell phones, the demographic that buys palmtops aren't made up of teenagers. The people who buy and use palmtops aren't obsessed with making them smaller. They want connectivity first, then speed, then glitz. Besides, the typical uses of a palmtop don't extend to high-end computing. Having 1 Ghz under the hood isn't going to allow you to write your term paper any faster.
Scintillating screens: Organic-light-emitting diodes
Vastly overhyped. The intensity of OLEDs fade with time. When compared next to TFT, they look like shit, perform like shit, and go bad far quicker than TFT. They're also more expensive to produce. It'll be a novelty, but, it wont go anywhere in the end, IMHO.
The message is the medium: Next-generation instant messaging
Uhhh.....Ever heard of IRC? CUSeeMe? This is hardly a new technology. Its the same paradox as the video phone. Everyone thinks that videophones would be totally cool, but no one's willing to have their hair and make-up done in order to answer the phone. Pound for pound, text remains the best medium for large groups of people to share information. What good is a teleconference if only one person at a time can talk? If more than one person starts talking, you might as well be listening to a washing machine.
Tireless wireless: 802.11 networks
I absolutely agree. 802.11 is the beginning of something very big. Community networks, and the death knell for wire-provided technologies like DSL, Cable, 56K modems, etc.
In search of a common language: Markup languages for everything
Here we go again, failing to learn from history. People, its like this -- Programmers dont think alike. Thats what makes them programmers. You'll no sooner see people using the same language for markup as you'll see people coding in Smalltalk. People gravitate towards languages based on their ability to be proficient at it. No matter how good XML is, people will still use HTML becuase it suits them better, or PHP, or Perl, or C, or Assembly, or freakin Smalltalk if they want. Name a single time in history when a programmer was considered proficient in his art, WITHOUT knowing more than one language. Get my drift?
Getting a little hyper: Hyper-threading
Big clue for ya, gang--99.9% of your PC's lifespan is spent waiting for your lazy human ass to tell it what to do. Hyperthreading assumes that Moore's Law will flatline. It wont. What good is greater availability of processing power when you're STILL not addressing the fact that for most of your machine's usable lifespan, it's sitting idle anyway? Its like code optimization research. As time goes on, it becomes more and more irrelevant.
And now, my short list of what WILL take off:
802.11 and its offspring
Corporation-controlled P2P trading
P2P For Programmers--Wide and seamless code-sharing environments that replace segmented environments like SourceForge, Savannah, etc. Why not search for a bunch of good 3D engine s to pick from instead of just MP3s?
GUI optimization. Out with the old, in with the new. The need for a more intuitive interface always wins in the long run, over tradition-based designs. (cough)Scrollball(cough)
User-centric computing instead of application-centric computing.
Self-regulating and self-maintaining applications...Just picture it. Your antivirus software is eventually rendered obsolute because each of your applications, independant of one another, monitors its own structure and is aware of viruses that may attempt to exploit it. Also downloads and applies new updates, code patches, etc. Maintenance-free from a user standpoint.
Government requirements for both OS security and application security. Possibly even a ratings system.
Where will it end!
Cheers,
Bowie J. Poag
This sounds a hell of a lot like magnetic core memory. It's funny that they portray magnetic RAM as something new. Yes, I know the new implementation of this will be very different (sub micron scale etc) but the idea was popular decades ago. Does anyone have a good comparison of the old way and the planned new way?
I'm an avid Linux user, but I think this is correct; Linux will not have penetrated the desktop far enough to be a major player in 2004. It will probably have made some pretty great strides by then (I figure both GNOME and KDE will be fully useable for newbies by 2003 - and no, they aren't today), but it will take longer than that (if ever) to become the dominant desktop.
/Janne
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
I was thinking over the holidays about how much I prefer playing games on a dedicated console instead of my PC. PCs have gotten to be necessary evils, especially in recent years. Consider:
1. Upgrading one piece of software or one hardware component (e.g. video card) can easily turn into a cascade of upgrades and a week's worth of evenings. I've gotten afraid to upgrade; I don't want to mess with something that works.
2. The rash of awful virii and worms that get released for whatever system provides the most opportunity (note: If Linux were on 95% of all desktops, there would be just as many Linux viruses; thinking otherwise is like thinking you have developed an unbreakable copy protection scheme). Keeping up with all the security patches and such has been a real headache. And unless I keep up with sites where these things are announced, I'd never know about them.
3. There's still a general unreliability factor associated with PCs. Sometimes my PC doesn't boot completely, and I have to power down and try again. Ever run a game and hear the monitor click indicating a resolution change, and then nothing happens and even if you could kill the game you can't get your video card to reset without a reboot. This is a common occurrence in both Linux and Windows.
4. 99% of the time there's a problem with a game or application, the response is "Do you have the latest video card drivers?" They seem to be released stealthily every few weeks. Who wants to deal with it? And whenever you upgrade there's a high probability of trouble with older software. See #1.
If PCs change in a drastic way, I'd like to see that change in the reliability direction. Yes, yes, yes, Linux is more reliable than Windows 95/98/ME, but Windows 2000 and XP are right up there with Linux. The OS wars dodge the issue. If PCs could be make as reliable as cell phones or PDAs, then I might be interested in them again. Right now I simply view them as mainframes for your home, with all the same system administration headaches.
How about gzipped XML? Or a compression scheme specially designed to compress XML? Really, this isn't that big a problem. In fact, a gzipped XML Word file would probably be smaller than the binary file as the text would be compressed as well. Faster processors make this easier than ever.
Requiring copy-protection to be built in every single computer peripheral capable of storage is kinda significant, yet merits no mention. Maybe nobody's supposed to know about it?
-A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
A new archetecture. No, we're just going to keep using the IBM-PC, with its IRQs and other funky crap that was invented in the early 80s and has to be hacked around to get today's computer working at a decent speed. Eventually, someone's going to have to take the plunge and reinvent the computer. Don't hold your breath.
We're trappist monks, trapped by the bounds of syntax. The time for change is near.
Meanwhile, tons of the image processing code in the application I'm currently working on is hand-coded in MIPS assembly. It's not old code; it's actively maintained stuff. I don't think anyone did that because they thought it'd be fun. I think they did it because it resulted in a better end-product.
Use all the drag-and-drop GUI tools you want. I still believe the things that separate a good program from a bad program lie at opposite ends: the overall design, and the twiddly optimizations. A computer might be able to help with the stuff in the middle-- linking objects to interfaces to objects, or whatever-- but it simply can't generate those two main things for you.
By then, we'll have the ability to connect a number of keyboard/mouse/monitor/removable-drive combinations to a single computer, and OSes will have enough stability and extra power to handle it. A family will buy a single fast computer and 2-3 heads for it, and then they'll never have to argue over it, because each head is really cheap. In fact, they'll probably get extra heads to have in different rooms, just because it's convenient.
Once flat-panel displays are as cheap as CRTs, there's no reason to sit at a desk to use the computer; have something laptop-shaped, but attached to a machine in the closet. Everything that is expensive to make small isn't; everything that's small by default fits on your lap.
Then people will want to ditch the cords, and they'll be out of Bluetooth range, so the heads will turn into 802.11 network appliances; LAN appliances, not internet appliances. You'll buy a computer, and it won't have a monitor or anything; those will be in the appliance. The whole thing will only cost a bit more than having a single unit, and it will be much more convenient.
Eventually, of course, you'll be able to do things like use your home computer from a friend's house; since everything has been designed for having an 802.11 network between the user and the CPU, having the internet in between isn't much different.
So, in 2004, my "desktop" computer won't be on a desk, and I won't be sitting at a desk to use it.
A mid range Sony Vaio can be had today with those specs for $1500, including the docking station. Admittedly the processor is 1GHz rather than 2, but batter life is the principle reason for that. And most people who have the choice today go for smaller machines that are lighter than huge brick like desktop replacements.
What I think will happen is that the laptop phenomena will start to merge with the PDA line. Most people don't actually need or want a laptop, they want a PDA that can read email and do powerpoint presentations.
Another thing to think about is that with 802.11b and the like it is not necessarily the case that you need a powerfull machine in your hand. We may well start to see the portable display tablet becomming detached from the desktop processor.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
I find this fascinating. On the one hand, we have great programming languages, tools, and libraries whose only disadvantage compared to C, C++, Java, and C# is that they are maybe 10x slower. We have the processors to run them faster than we could run assembly a few years ago. Yet, whenever these new processors come out, everybody goes back, wastes lots of time tuning their C/C++ code and then complains that all those cycles are useless. There are still endless debates even in 2001 whether Gnome or KDE is faster. The Linux kernel developers don't even want to move to C++
Folks, those cycles are very useful. Not for some obscure technology that you know nothing about. They are very useful to let you program faster by worrying less about fine-tuning your software and for automating lots of tasks. They are very useful also for making programs safer and more robust automatically by eliminating common bugs like buffer overflows. And they are very useful for component-based software construction, which requires some form of runtime reflection--much better done automatically.
Personally, I'm hoping for a holodeck-like experience. "Computer, give me Victorian-era England. And don't skimp out on the bustiers".
Big Brother Inside: The SSSCA and Digital Rights Management
What is it? A new mandate being legislated as we speak, pushed by the record companies and movie companies (disclosure: CNN is owned by AOL Time Warner, which is also a record company and movie company, which is why they didn't say anything about this) to keep users from copying copyrighted material without "permission."
What's cool? Depends on whether you work for a movie company or record company--if you don't, there's very little "cool" about this. The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (to be introdued by Senator Hollings, R-SC) will mandate that all digital devices contain copyright protection systems to keep people from copying "copyrighted material." What this means is unknown as of yet, but it's for certain that the days of Napster and Gnutella wll be long gone if this comes to pass...and perhaps the days of Linux as well, since it would be impossible to put secure copyright protections into an open-source operating system. The bill also mandates penalties for tampering with digital rights management systems, and for connecting an unprotected digital device to any computer network. If you want to enjoy music or movies on your computer, the movie and record companies will tell you "It's my way or the highway"--and you'll probably have to pay. And pay. And pay. And pay. And pay.
When's it coming? The SSSCA will likely be on Congressional committee agendas early next year. Expect its sponsors (mostly Disney) to try and get it rammed through Congress as fast as they can, with as little review as they can. Then, the "industry" has a certain amount of time to come up with the copyright protection standards that will be mandatory from then on...and if they can't come to an agreement, the government will do it for them.
What's the catch? This will basically be The End Of The World As We Know It for the computer industry. The only beneficiaries of a law like this will be the record, movie, and other "intellectual property" companies, who will expect to see more cash flowing into their already-bloated coffers. Meanwhile, a lot of people are going to get harassed for the crime of using computer systems of their choice...and the average consumer, as always, will get screwed. Repeatedly. Forever. On the other hand, it may still be possible to stop this from happening...write your Congressional representatives and tell them why this law would be a Bad Thing for the consumer, for the computer industry, and for the American economy as a whole. Of course, bear in mind that the record companies and movie companies have more money than you do, and so they're likely to get listened to first.
Impact Meter: 10...no, make that 10,000,000.
This is just a poor and feeble first draft...anybody else out there, feel free to rewrite it.
Eric
Be who you are...and be it in style!