Slashdot Mirror
Will the Desktop PC Live Forever?
concealment points out a rebuttal from PCWorld of the increasingly common claims that we live in a post-PC world.
"It's an intriguing proposition, but don't count on mobile devices killing off your desktop PC any time soon. While mobile gear is certainly convenient when you're trying to conduct business on the go, it's nowhere near as convenient as a desktop when you're trying to complete serious work in an office environment. Sure, your phone, tablet or even laptop might conveniently fit in your pocket or backpack, but all these devices are fraught with compromises, whether it's computing power, screen size, or, well, a really expensive price tag."
Workstations (i.e. where anything important or revenue-generating happens) will always be desktops in one way or another.
What will probably happen is that your average office desktop will get smaller. We're already seeing this, with some desktops using laptop parts, some going as far as using the same power brick as the company's laptop's (HP does this, others too, I suppose).
Having 3 big arse monitors connected to a giant, lint-filled box humming noisily under my desk will always be a part of my life.
I have ipads, androids, smartphones, netbooks and ultrabook and a bunch of game systems. don't matter.
-badford
For now nothing beats a desktop for a gaming PC. I just built a new one and got Steam. Nothing else like it right now.
K Man
Basically this, with a few reasons
As long as desktop hardware is cheaper than comparable laptop/portable hardware, it will have a niche. You can hook up all the docking stations and external monitors in the world to your tablet, but a desktop rig will have more storage, more memory, more GHz and better longevity (if only due to superior air flow) at a lower cost.
That's not even getting into the ability to customize and replace hardware without a dozen proprietary bits.
This signature is false.
These claims of a post-PC world seem based on the fact that the vast majority of the population is fine with the kind of walled-garden content consumption found on nearly all phones and tablets and has no need for the sort of content creation you have to sit down at a workstation for. OK, I'll stipulate to that premise.
But if the shift of that group of people away from the desktop PC means we live in a post-PC world, then what did we have before that group of people started using PCs?
They pretty much didn't come along until we had mainstream GUIs, the World Wide Web, and ubiquitous digital media--all of which came considerably after "the desktop PC".
Their departure won't kill the PC any more than their arrival created it.
And no one said it would. This is a really dumb article which totally misses the point of what the term "post-PC" means. If you click the first link in the article, it says it in black and white:
It started last year...when (Steve Jobs) said that PCs are going to be "like trucks" in that they'll still be around and useful for certain work, but only a smaller percentage of the users will need one
Somehow the author (and submitter) have taken that to mean a world "without desktop computers".
Sure, desktops will have their place for a long time. But we're living in a post-PC world right now.
Kill, no. Mortally wound, perhaps. Think about it this way: right now, you can get cheap PCs for a few hundred bucks. Adjusted for inflation, computers in the mid-1980s ranged from about $3000-$6000 in today's dollars. Now think back to high school economics class and remember the discussion of economies of scale, then think about how few parts from modern tablets are actually used in a typical desktop computer.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
We're going to see tablets that connect to monitors and keyboards.
At which point it's no longer a tablet, it's a PC.
Free Martian Whores!
If all you need a PC for is your calendar and email, then, sure, your idea sounds great.
At the last company I worked at the engineers all got new workstations. Super high end stuff, basically the fastest desktop machines money could buy at the time. And Autocad performance was still just in the "OK, but meh...." range for the stuff they were working on.
Do you want to be the one who has to explain to them that from now on they're going to be doing their work on a phone?
Good luck with that.
I think we'll actually approach the point where you only have one "computer" and that what you carry is the user interface and cache.
In practice, you're going to need a lot of cache, especially if you want to go offline. And this means you're going to have to have a lot of processing on your user interface devices so that they can act on cached data while not connected to a high-speed, high-volume network. Current cellular technology (LTE, which can be thought of as 4G lite) is high-speed but not high-volume, with single digit GB/mo transfer caps being the industry standard. So even though you'll likely have one shared set of documents among all your devices, they'll all need to be "computers" for the foreseeable future.
No part of mainframes has *anything* to do with desktops. It does not correlate in any fashion.
Desktops will always be in use in some fashion - miniaturizing technology only goes so far - so it's not a question of expense alone but also thermals and physical space. Since people tend to have to work on hardware you can't have it all be the size of a mobile SOC to do so or it becomes prohibitive. That's not just a "workstation" situation, but an "All PC's" situation.
No part of mainframes has *anything* to do with desktops. It does not correlate in any fashion.
Desktops will always be in use in some fashion - miniaturizing technology only goes so far - so it's not a question of expense alone but also thermals and physical space. Since people tend to have to work on hardware you can't have it all be the size of a mobile SOC to do so or it becomes prohibitive. That's not just a "workstation" situation, but an "All PC's" situation.
Right; some tasks are better done with a full keyboard and a screen bigger than the palm of your hand.
Even if it's solely in a "docking station"* type capacity, desktop workstations will be around for as long as computers are.
* Speculative Future Vision (patent pending) engaged: Come home from work, the computer in your pocket communicates wirelessly with the display/peripherals in the room you're currently occupying, and activates them accordingly. Kind of like Synergy, but with a full suite of features and, of course, fine location awareness.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Even those $300 non-PC computers would be about $639 in today's dollars, which is still more than six times what the cheapest non-Windows netbooks cost today. And they weren't nearly as capable as PCs. Most of the cost savings (except for the CPU) came from ingenious hacks that reduced the cost of the hardware at the expense of maintainability and the ability to upgrade the design later. For example:
Now you can certainly argue that those things didn't matter, and for most people, you'd be right, but the same argument that says that the $300 computer was equal to the $2,000 computer in the 1980s applies to touchscreen tablets versus desktop computers today.
Also, the only reason prices aren't $100k per CPU today is because of economies of scale. Today, one person could design a basic Verilog model of a 6502-compatible chip in a matter of days or single-digit weeks, and even at the time, it probably took double-digit engineer years. Today, an Intel chip takes engineer-millennia. The R&D involved is orders of magnitude greater, and therefore, the number of chips they have to sell just to break even is also much, much greater.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
The PC industry started with a few tinkerers.
Then PCs became useful to regular folk.
These regular folk have never cared whether they could write software or hack the hardware, or even open the box.
They are moving on... and into a walled garden.
Few of us have anything to say about it, and we are a tiny minority.
The advantage of a 3.5" mechanical hard drive over 2.5" is twice the usable surface area per platter and room to fit 5 of them in a single drive. The common 9.5mm high 2.5" drives only fit 2 platters. Thats why you see 1TB 2.5" drives and 3TB 3.5" drives.
Technology is developed and built on the larger 3.5" platters. It is then further improved and put on 2.5".