Guesstimate of computers in 20 years

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Not sure to even bring it up...

But what about the old Mayan Legend, where the calandar ends 2012, Dec 21st?

We all may not even be around to blable about CPU's anymore. :shock:
 
I think we won't have PC's in 20 years, I think it will all be centralized and we will all be working as/from nodes.
Click to expand...

Or people, as in GITS (Ghost in the Shell) there could be cyberization where people purchase implants so that they can remotely access data whenever they want.

To paraphrase a line from a GITS commercial, "To be fully human is to be obsolete."
 
Does anyone still play RF anymore? I assume all the haxs took over... but who knows.... oh and the Custom maps were the best I have seen yet.... I guess i should reinstall it and play.

<--(deleted) if you ever remember me. I played for about 2 years.
 
I think computers will become more of a commodity than they are now. CPU's will become ubiquitous in all appliances. All appliances will be networked to function in concert.

The growth in the silicon industry is on the mass market angle. Regular users don't care HOW it works, they just want it to function.

One user said that we would all be working from "nodes". Why can't CPU cycles be metered like electricity or gasoline? Central production means cost savings.

$30 per month for a node that kicks the a$$ of any enthusiast PC. Possible?
 
Ma man, RF is still going farely strong, not many ppl but a bit less hacks. And the custom maps are just AWESOME!!! If you reinstall it get all Microfaction, Ratz, Around the world and MF2 maps, also get Jerusalem. Get the maps from

www.levels4you.com

Have fun!
 
Sir Roadkill. Do u play FEAR Combat, that actually has pretty good physics.

In RF there's heaps of new maps, there's like 6000 u can load from levels4you

I wish FEAR had an editor.
 
Not to continue hijacking the thread... but..

Naw, I dont care too much about phyics like in fear. I like destructable physics, like in RF. I will not play another multiplayer fps game other then Sof2 (and RF)... that is untill sof3 comes out.
 
SoF2 stands for Soldier of Fortune, right? If that is so, that game has no destruction physics at all. Seriously, try FEAR. Play MP (which is free) its really good and the Physics are like HL2 grade + better graphics. And guess what, they introduced a new game type called Control which is similar to Conquest in BF2 but it is actually fast paced and doesn't have BF2's many failings (I think I'll get burned for that).
 
Even though Sof2 does not have phyiscs (and outdate graphics).... the game far outshines any FPS MP game I have played. I have tried HL2, Fear, 1942, ... but you cant beat the greatness of sof2.... Its to the point where you realy cant start playing it because the skill curve is too high.

Either way, next MP game im looking forward to isnt on the computer... go SSB!

I hope 20 years from now, they are still making super smash bros.
 
I think the list of things in the mainstream and out of the mainstream is very important here. You can see that in the last 20 years computer hardware/software has adapted to support new applications.

How many 3D modelers and graphics artists did you know 20 years ago? Maybe roughly 0.

So maybe the future of computers depends on the future of human curiosity and imagination. Computers can't change until we think of new applications to use them for.

On a less philisophocal point I'd like to say that I hope computers use something far more sophisticated than the x86 instruction set we know of today. That's why I appreciate companies like Sony/IBM/Toshiba who are willing to stick their necks out and take risks to overcome ruts such as x86 that most CPU developers are only willing to work around rather than fix.

I believe that innovations such as the Cell processor will eventually be realized. There are also quantum computing and optical processors on the horizon.

As Apple once told us: Think Different.
 
Rather than viewing this question from the perspective of what might be technologically possible, I think it’s more productive to seek an answer by being more empathetic to the business objectives of Intel and other producers of silicon.

While the idea of a public computing utility, offering killer power from a remote node (for some nominal fee) sounds intriguing, how would Intel continue to grow and profit from such a strategy? The only way I can see this working for Intel is if they ran the utility.

There are too many vested interests in the networking game to overcome. To succeed you need to control the “wire” to the customer (in whatever form it may take), and that’s a tough nut to crack in a quasi regulated environment.
 
I disagree with your assertion that Intel will be the controlling factor on whether the path to general nodal computing will be followed. I am not an AMD "fanboy" nor do I have an underdog I'm rooting for, I'm just not buying in to the "Intel is top dog and will always be" line. IBM was the top dog before Intel sold something cheaper that would run the rest of the box, IBM got fat and lazy just as Motorola and many other huge cash cow companies. Maybe Intel has a technology "roadmap" or maybe they just have a "company profit" roadmap, I don't know, but it's possible that someone can make a "quantum leap" in technology and not sell it to Intel. If the public at large likes the new tech enough then Intel may not be the big dog it once was.

The companies that control wireless communications will probably be the controlling entities, I'm sure someone will sell them enough hardware to make a "super mainframe" that can provide megaflops to everyone that can pay ofr it.

On another note, do they make "MegaBactine" to put on your megahertz?
 
I don't think you read my post carefully or thoughtfully. I merely cite Intel as an example. I said "Intel and other producers of silicon".

However, Intel is a reasonable example of the point I'm making regarding the unlikely creation of a public computing utility. There too many large companies intertwined in the PC market to see it shrink into what you foresee.

Keep in mind that this concept is not new. It was tried some 30 odd years ago (time sharing) by the likes of Compuserve and several others. It didn't have commercial success then, and it won't in the future. Think about the bandwidth required to realize your vision, where will it come from?

Certainly not in the existing wireless spectrum, and the cable/DSL infrastructure would require so much new investment that it wouldn't be profitable. The existing providers are so focused on the entertainment market that a computing utility is the last thing on their minds.

Think of personal computing vs. a public computing utility, as being analogous to the automobile and public transportation. Public transport makes much more sense and is infinitely more efficient than personal autos. Do you honestly foresee the demise of the automobile in 20 years?

I'm not saying that the auto or the PC will not experience dramatic change over the next 20 years, but it will be evolutionary, much as it has been over the past 20 years.

Think more about your thesis in those terms. It's an interesting dream, but a wet one.
 
Agreed, but you point is hardly entertaining. However, I think we will be approaching a new era of realism in computing. We will be able to smell our games (tech exsists already), we will be able to touch them, and interact with them in a more extensive way. Too bad I will be 42 years old by then... boo.
 
Think of personal computing as being analogous to the automobile and public transportation. Public transport makes much more sense and is infinitely more efficient than personal autos. Do you honestly foresee the demise of the automobile in 20 years?

I'm not saying that the auto or the PC will not experience dramatic change over the next 20 years, but it will be evolutionary, much as it has been over the past 20 years.

Think more about your thesis in those terms. It's an interesting dream, but a wet one.
Click to expand...
Personal comuting is not analogous to the automobile and public transporation.
The cars, 20 years ago were performing similar like the cars today, their efficiency was little less than cars today, their size is same and most important their purpose.
The case with computers is so much different. Their size is reduced by a factor of 500 and at same time their performance is improved by a factor of 500(ex. hand computers), their price reduced by a factor of 10 and the number of purposes and effectivity by a factor of 50.
 
Think of personal computing as being analogous to the automobile and public transportation. Public transport makes much more sense and is infinitely more efficient than personal autos. Do you honestly foresee the demise of the automobile in 20 years?

I'm not saying that the auto or the PC will not experience dramatic change over the next 20 years, but it will be evolutionary, much as it has been over the past 20 years.

Think more about your thesis in those terms. It's an interesting dream, but a wet one.
Click to expand...
Personal comuting is not analogous to the automobile and public transporation.
The cars, 20 years ago were performing similar like the cars today, their efficiency was little less than cars today, their size is same and most important their purpose.
The case with computers is so much different. Their size is reduced by a factor of 500 and at same time their performance is improved by a factor of 500(ex. hand computers), their price reduced by a factor of 10 and the number of purposes and effectivity by a factor of 50.

Funny you mention that because if you know.... the difference between the cars from the 60's and the cars of today (other then the looks, and material)... is the computers inside. Cars today are almost fully computerized, and with each beter instance of carputers, the cars themselves get beter at doing new stuff, such as car-assisted parellel parking.
 
You completely missed the point and the context of my comments. The analogy was the PC to a public computing utility, as the auto is to public transportation.

I replied to a post that suggested that a public utility would be providing all the computing power anyone needed from a remote node, for a nominal monthly fee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom