Slashdot Mirror


The PC Is Not Dead

Belle writes "Bill Gates has an op-ed in this morning's BW Online, in which he responds to the magazine's question Is the PC dead? with a resounding "No!" and argues that the most revolutionary years for personal computing are yet to come." From the article: "The result is that the personal computer has become far more than a cog in the machine of corporate computing -- it's an essential tool for every individual in the organization. Take the personal out of computing, and most companies would grind to a halt."

21 of 451 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe next year, eh? by soluzar22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In addition to Bill's reasoning, which I don't entirely follow, there is also the question of the hobbyist/games user. Business users may choose to go thin-client, but in my opinion, the user who is technically-minded will never be satisfied with any of the so-called replacements for the personal computer, and I don't personally think that any of these replacements will ever take off outside of the office.

    If businesses switch to the 'thin client' model, or anything similar, then this will be a step backwards, technologically speaking, and it will be a decision which is based entirely on financial motives. Those who appreciate technology will have little reason to follow this lead, and therefore will not.

    On the other hand, those home users who do not enjoy technology, who simply wish to treat their computer as a dumb interface to DRMed MP3s and the web/email will probably be delighted with a 'thin client'. There will still continue to be money in the other market for a while, though. As for 'thin clients' in the office, then I say, sure, they will take off there - it's a cost thing. They just won't kill the home PC. That's my take on this.

    Last of all: Is it just me or does someone predict this every year? I first heard it in about 1996, and I'm still waiting! This claim wears even more thin with every passing year...

    1. Re:Maybe next year, eh? by plehmuffin · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If businesses switch to the 'thin client' model, or anything similar, then this will be a step backwards, technologically speaking, and it will be a decision which is based entirely on financial motives. Those who appreciate technology will have little reason to follow this lead, and therefore will not.

      Um, no. It's simply a realization that for some users within an organization, a full fledged workstation is not required. If someone is only using their computer for Office, web and email, it doesn't merit paying for a full workstation; a thin client will suit them just fine. Such a move does not imply a failure to appreciate technology.

      Also, I wouldn't quickly right off thin-client server systems as being technologically backwards. It takes some amount of neat tech to make a thin client seem as, or near as, rich as a full workstation.

    2. Re:Maybe next year, eh? by serutan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In addition to Bill's reasoning, which I don't entirely follow...

      You're not the only one. Bill's article distinctly lacked reasoning, at least as would apply to rebutting what Nicholas Carr said. Carr's main point is that modern PCs are ridiculously overpowered for the needs of the typical home or office user. I couldn't agree more, and Bill's predictable road-ahead fluff piece didn't address that point at all. Yeah Bill, we know computers and software are going to keep evolving and all sorts of cool things are going to happen. But does the average desk jockey need a 3GHz processor, 160Gb hard drive and 19-inch LCD monitor to send email, run Excel and Word, and surf the web? No. That's all Carr was really saying.

    3. Re:Maybe next year, eh? by eno2001 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well... I moved my family to a thin client system based on RedHat 9 a few years back. So far it's worked out great. There is very little functionality that most users need that require a fullblown PC sitting in front of them. The current list of apps we use in thin client model are:

      VNC +GDM - Remote Desktop Functionality
      GNOME - Desktop Environment
      Firefox - Web
      Thunderbird - Mail
      Sunbird - Calendaring
      OpenOffice.org - Office Apps
      GIMP - Image editing
      Xine - Media player
      XMMS - MP3/OGG player
      WINE - For those "must have" Windows apps/games
      GAIM - IM
      DOSBox - For old DOS games
      OpenVPN - To remotely access our VNC desktops

      Printing is handled by the centrally attached Epson Photo printer and the "thin clients" are laptops with wireless NICs, custom scripts and VNC clients.

      It works very well for our needs. I would say that the only needs not met by this set up are things like scanning photos (since the server is headless in the basement, putting a scanner down there would be inconvenient) and 3D games that need fast screen performance. This would be better if I moved to 802.11G probably. (hehehe.. I've played Quake 3 using VNC over an SSH tunnel viw a DSL line. Too slow to be playable, but it works) My point with all of this? It's possible to do this sort of thing. The fact that a non-geek like me can set it up indicates that it can certainly be done by experienced developers. It's just that no one has tried hard enough or had a decent plan to do it. Realistically, if the bandwidth was available on a wireless device and it was no more than a display, kb, mouse and audio terminal for a really powerful backend box, this WOULD take off for the home user. Why should our desktops be married to one location? That's just stupid. Your desktop should be accesible everywhere with all functionality available. The only thing that needs to catch up is bandwidth.

      --
      -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
    4. Re:Maybe next year, eh? by wwest4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > A full-powered workstation is *cheaper* than a thin client.

      This is usually false, both in terms of hardware cost, lifetime expectancy, power consumption, and deployment cost, yadda yadda. Any way you slice it, a workstation is not cheaper than any but the most unfairly-priced and poorly-designed thin client.

      > It's stupid to waste all this computing power, only to channel more and more
      > money into more and more powerfull app servers.

      A bunch of single processer machines, each with its own board, memory, IO, fans, footprint and power supply (w/ AC-DC transformer) is neccessarily more "wasteful" in terms of resources than a WTS running on an SMP machine. That's basic physics. When the cost between one and the other becomes insignificant, then you start to have a point; or if you're rich enough, maybe it doesn't matter. Nowadays, though, it usually does.

      > We've got incredibly cheap computing power that would have been unimaginable
      > even 20 years ago, lets not waste it all - design ways to leverage to power of
      > workstations while alleviating the administrative overhead.

      That's exactly what VM clusters and terminal servers do. For workstations, the best you can do is: imaging, or scripted installs with SMS/Netinstall; either case requires a server infrastructure anyway. So you're back to having thick clients AND extra machines in the back room (which are idle most of the time, like fat clients).

      This is an age-old argument, and there are sometimes cases where thick clients are a must-have (3D or even 2D graphics, or non multi-user aware apps, for example). But most users can go without and suffer no loss in productivity; hell, they can even benefit, because it's easier and cheaper to engineer reliability into the system.

  2. Yawn by MoxCamel · · Score: 5, Funny
    Bill Gates says PC isn't dead. In other news, freedom is on the march, and be sure to get your free iPod.

    Wake me when Bill Gates runs Linux on his Mac.

    Mox

  3. semantics really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does a zombie PC count as alive? Can anyone confirm/deny?

    1. Re:semantics really by varmittang · · Score: 5, Funny

      Remember, kill the original zombie, and everyone who is a zombie returns to normal. So if you kill the head PC zombie (the hacker), then all zombie PCs will be back to being normal PCs. Until they get bit again.

      --
      -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
      12345
      -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  4. PC is dead by BigHungryJoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Java thin clients are where it's at. Sun has known this for years, and that's why they are doing so well in the market.

  5. That's funny. by bigtallmofo · · Score: 5, Funny

    When they asked the richest man in the world, who happened to have amassed his wealth in the PC business what he thought about the PC business, he had nothing but positive things to say.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
  6. My head hurts from the market speak. by newdamage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just read that so called op-ed piece and I think my ears may be bleeding from the sheer amount of marketing speak.

    Bill may think web services are the next great thing for the PC "ecosystem" (WTF? when did my office become wild planet?), but quite frankly, he needs to worry about making the PC safe, secure, and usable first.

    --
    ce n'est pas un Sig.
  7. Diverse Ecosystem? by ninjamonkey · · Score: 5, Funny


    The only "diverse ecosystem" I know of lives in my dirty laundry.

  8. The PC is not dead? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can we really believe Gates on this? He's got a vested interest... maybe we should seek confirmation from Netcraft... they seem to be the authority on these matters.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  9. Dumb Terminals For Everyone by Foofoobar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Quite honstly, most users could work perfectly fine with a dumb terminal. All most office workers need is printer access, a web browser and basic office apps. Why do I need to set each of them up with a PC for that?

    And now with Flash memory sticks, you can run entire environments separate from the OS entirely!

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Dumb Terminals For Everyone by The+Amazing+Fish+Boy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Quite honstly, most users could work perfectly fine with a dumb terminal. All most office workers need is printer access, a web browser and basic office apps. Why do I need to set each of them up with a PC for that?

      Administrator Logs: March 22 2005

      Remote Application Usage:
      word.exe 14
      excel.exe 9
      access.exe 3
      powerpoint.exe 53
      sol.exe 13420194

  10. Are you sure the PC isn't dead? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 5, Funny

    What if it's running BSD?

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  11. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  12. Not dead but very sick... by ites · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... the PC as an island of personal data is facing real threats:

    - invasion from parasitical software
    - competition from smaller devices
    - competition from web-based services
    - ever cheaper hardware

    Of course I'm typing this from a PC and I can't imagine any other way of working, but still... in 10 years' time:

    - would I have to move physically to a box somewhere in order to read slashdot?
    - would I have my data sitting on a single hard disk somewhere under a desk?
    - would I be surfing on the public Internet using the same infrastructure as I use to (e.g.) access my bank accounts or write contract proposals?

    The PC as "personal computer" is running out of reasons for being... ... the future belongs to secure virtual infrastructure, secure distributed data, and redundant portable devices.

    The PC will eventually be relegated to a keyboard, mouse, and screen.

    --
    Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
  13. The PC Is Evolving, Not Dying by WombatControl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What we're seeing is really the continuation of the gradual shift from "big iron" mainframes to "microcomputers" to PCs to PDAs to iPods. Technology is becoming cheaper, more flexible, and more diversified.

    I think the traditional PC is close to saturation. Where the money is are in things like media center/home theater PCs, secondary computers, and specialized machines. Since most everyone has a PC, the real quest is to use PC technology to replace other existing gadgets.

    That's why small cheap computers like the Mac mini and home theater systems like Microsoft's Media Center Edition systems are growing while the PC market itself is relatively stagnant in comparison to the boom years.

    Of course, the massive success of the iPod also points to a totally new market for consumer electronics that interfaces with a traditional PC acting like a "digital hub" as Steve Jobs calls it. That's why media features like DVD burners, FireWire and memory card inputs and large displays are the big selling points in PCs these days. It's not about a monolithic device that makes you sit in front of it to do everything, it's about a whole slew of gadgets that work seamlessly together to perform different tasks.

    The concept of the PC won't go away, but the way in which PCs are used is slowly changing. It's like evolution usually goes - the big creatures die out and those smaller more agile ones flourish in the aftermath.

  14. Yet, Windows isn't geared toward business by Himring · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The more you work with their bread'n'butter OS, the more you realize that Microsoft gears their software towards the home user, not the business. Enterprises are challenged to make XP conform to sound security models. Little things such as the fact that Windows Media Player overrides a screensaver lock by default (and good luck getting the group policy to fix this in Active Directory), to the assumption of root access by default on the XP workstation much less in the NOS itself (try changing the default network access from anything but the default -- suddenly, you can't view other machines in network neighborhood and users can't change their own passwords). Bill Gates gives "business" tongue and cheek service whilst his developers write an OS for the home and for entertainment....

    --
    "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
  15. The PC isn't dead, but PC innovation is by pocari · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Typewriters were around for a long time virtually unchanged. There is no doubt that the Intel/Microsoft platform has become the Wang word processor of the 21st century, essential to every office.

    The circumstances that led to the PC revolution are long since past. When the anti-trust case against Microsoft was settled four years ago with no consequences, investors and entrepreneurs were told that there is no reason to bother to do anything Microsoft might have an interest in, because Microsoft would be free to use the Windows monopoly to crush them.

    During the dot-com boom, almost all software talent went to Internet development, sucking the oxygen out of innovation meant for the PC. Bringing things on-line is important and valuable, but the 10,000th brochure website, or even the second on-line bookstore, is not innovation.

    The dot-com crash in Silicon Valley has meant the loss of 400,000 jobs there and 400,000 people moving out of the valley. It's debatable how much of this is due to outsourcing, but for every job lost to some other location, that's one fewer young engineer cooking up ideas in a garage. India and China have gained, but the software industry has lost something by the scattering of young talent; the disappearance of tech veterans has long-term consequences, too.

    There are still business opportunities in cleaning up security messes and customization of enterprise software products, and there always will be, but none of this really counts as innovation.

    When I moved to Silicon Valley in 1995, it wasn't obvious that Microsoft was going to dominate the way it does today, or that the Internet would suck the oxygen out of other kinds of software projects for a while. The smart money and adventurous people have moved on to other things. Forever.