Are we really in the post-PC era? (hd, monitors, keyboard)

[skinsguy37]

Originally Posted by CHIP72

As I see it, the computer market will likely follow one of the following two paths (and possibly both) over the next 10 years:

1) Smartphones will become the hub for people's personal computing; they will plug into "dumb" terminals (i.e. desktop, laptop, and tablet shells) and people will be able to maintain personal storage on all devices they use while also maintaining great mobility.

2) Almost everything will become cloud-based and there will be a move from device-based OS (not just traditional desktop but also mobile operating systems) and an emphasis on local storage to cloud-based OS (i.e. browser-based OS) and an emphasis on remote server storage. Each device a person uses will sign in a unified account so a person's products (i.e. documents, apps, etc.) will be accessible on any device.

I'm increasingly thinking the second possibility is more likely, but what's most likely is a path that takes some elements from both approaches I described above.

I completely agree with you on that one. I remember years ago, sitting in one of my computer classes at college talking about the future of computing, and even back then, we were talking about cloud storage ( although I don't think it was called that back then) and portable devices plugging into standard terminals instead of having a computer "lab" as they are now.

We already love the idea of sharing all of our files amongst many different devices, so I think a little bit of both is definitely the possibility.

[bchris02]

Originally Posted by CHIP72

Nope, it is actually Google who gets it. I think cloud-based operating systems will replace device-based operating systems over the next 5-10 years as high-speed internet connectivity becomes more ubiquitous. Such operating systems, as illustrated by Google's Chrome OS, are so simple and easy to use that they beat Apple at their own game. Cloud-based operating systems are also easier to maintain and upgrade.

You do realize there are a lot of people still running on DSL with speeds of less than 1Mbps? Even your average cable connection is only at 10mbps. We would need nearly universal fiber connections at speeds of 100Mbps+ before a cloud OS and storing everything online would be feasible. Broadband in the US is also still semi-unreliable. I would hate to be 100% at the mercy of my ISP.

NAS storage will probably become more common and easier to configure before we take everything to the cloud.

The rumor is that Windows 8 is simply here to bridge the gap and that Windows 9 will not even offer the traditional desktop - everything will be in the mobile interface. Everything coming out of Redmond these days seems to be geared towards phones and tablets at the expense of the traditional PC.

Where are these rumors, and what are they based on?

Microsoft has a very very long history of keeping backwards compatibility. What serious evidence is there to suggest that Microsoft is going to break from something that dates back to the start of the company?

And how does the traditional desktop suffer? The desktop is still there and still works pretty much just like always. The start menu is now the start screen, but other than that, desktop usage is essentially identical between 7 and 8, with some behind the scenes improvements in 8. I suppose the charms bar is new, but I'm not sure how making it quicker and easier to handle common tasks qualifies as hurting the desktop experience.

[Konraden]

Is anyone here forgetting that there has to be something for those clouds to run on? The Server will never die as long as we're chasing cloud computing and always-on technology. I don't see the Microsoft Surface running SQL Server anytime soon.

And as long as there are servers, you're going to have traditional workstations. And the traditional workstation is going to be around for a while--maybe not as a desktop, but certianly as a keyboard\mouse (probably) setup where a user sits at a desk, plugs in their core machine, and works. That's not dying anytime soon.

You can develop the same OS and use different GUIs to support whichever device it is on. Unfortunately Microsoft seems to have missed that memo with Windows 8. Android does it well with the TabletUI being different from the standard phone UI (possibly called PhoneUI?). Not to mention, manufacturer-specific GUIs, and third-party GUIs have been developed to overlay on the android platform.

You can develop the same OS and use different GUIs to support whichever device it is on. Unfortunately Microsoft seems to have missed that memo with Windows 8.

Howso?

Desktop Windows is quite far removed from, say, Windows Phone 8. Both have live tiles and the metro interface exists if users want to use it, but it's certainly not required that one use those apps.

I kind of like Microsoft's approach with Windows 8. When I'm using my Surface Pro at my desk hooked up to a monitor/kb/mouse, it works just like a regular desktop. When I'm using it as a tablet, I go to the touch-centric metro interface and work there. It's nice not needing two devices.

The only serious issue I have with Windows 8 on tablets is the lack of proper metro office apps. They need to get versions of word/excel/powerpoint running in metro. The current "tablet mode" (aka make the buttons bigger) in Office 2013 doesn't cut it. It needs to work basically like Office on WP8 with some interface changes. They've done it work One Note. Now they need to get everything else done too.

Microsoft didn't get everything right in Windows 8, but it isn't anywhere near the disaster that people make it out to be. 8.1 takes care of a lot of the legitimate complaints people had.

[nightbird47]

Originally Posted by CHIP72

As I see it, the computer market will likely follow one of the following two paths (and possibly both) over the next 10 years:

1) Smartphones will become the hub for people's personal computing; they will plug into "dumb" terminals (i.e. desktop, laptop, and tablet shells) and people will be able to maintain personal storage on all devices they use while also maintaining great mobility.

2) Almost everything will become cloud-based and there will be a move from device-based OS (not just traditional desktop but also mobile operating systems) and an emphasis on local storage to cloud-based OS (i.e. browser-based OS) and an emphasis on remote server storage. Each device a person uses will sign in a unified account so a person's products (i.e. documents, apps, etc.) will be accessible on any device.

I'm increasingly thinking the second possibility is more likely, but what's most likely is a path that takes some elements from both approaches I described above.

I'd rather not have my whole data base on a phone which can be dropped or misplaced and stolen or found. I'd rather have it be a quick emergency device to watch the storm news if the power went out but no, I don't want ALL my stuff on a phone. And if I update it on one device, then wouldn't you have to update on all the rest? And what if you want or need to make a phone call while its 'plugged in'???

As for cloud, I wish Amazon would just let you download your songs to your computer minus cloud. I'll never listen to anything on a site I have to connect to. I'll put my music on a hard drive I can back up and reload if necessary. And I've found songs sound better if directly from my laptop over cloud.

Do people really want all their personal stuff sitting on a *server*?????

[nightbird47]

Originally Posted by bchris02

You do realize there are a lot of people still running on DSL with speeds of less than 1Mbps? Even your average cable connection is only at 10mbps. We would need nearly universal fiber connections at speeds of 100Mbps+ before a cloud OS and storing everything online would be feasible. Broadband in the US is also still semi-unreliable. I would hate to be 100% at the mercy of my ISP.

NAS storage will probably become more common and easier to configure before we take everything to the cloud.

Outside of urban areas, its going to take a lot longer before service is faster. I use cable since its the most reliable and pay for the medium speed, but at five oclock on Friday it slows a lot. And there is no 4g and it wouldn't be as fast as the faster cable. I don't see universal connections for a long time. For one thing, cable internet is what is keeping cable going with all the competition with satalite and internet availability and they are going to fight hard to keep it like that. And you need something hard wired, not wireless to have it be reliable. I have Dish and the first indication that the thunder storm is close is satalite tv dies as would satalite internet.

And a lot of people are going wireless only on their phone and the phone line based connections are not always possible if you don't have the wires. My house didn't and I'd have to pay for them so said no.

I want an operatiing system ON my devices that is local and I want to be able to customize as I desire. I do not want to have to depend on a connection to even use them.

My state is not heavily populated and 80 percent of the population is in the two large cities. The rest of the state has the other twenty percent. Nobody is going to wire the rest of the state for always on internet. This is true of many places and yes, most everyone here uses it. Don't think cities, but the whole picture.

[Jesse69]

I don't think the PC desktop will die. And I haven't bought a tablet or smartphone yet, and I don't need these. If I want portable computing I prefer a good 17" high resolution laptop, not a tablet where it's cumbersome to type a web page address. I'd only use a tablet to read a pdf in the toilet, as normally I prefer reading pdfs from a desktop computer to a 30" monitor.

PC sales are slowing down, and partly because the new CPUS aren't that much faster than 2 years ago. I'm still happy with my i7 2600K cpu and have no reason to upgrade.

It's better to do most tasks on a desktop PC, not a tablet. Especially engineering software.

[nightbird47]

Originally Posted by Jesse69

I don't think the PC desktop will die. And I haven't bought a tablet or smartphone yet, and I don't need these. If I want portable computing I prefer a good 17" high resolution laptop, not a tablet where it's cumbersome to type a web page address. I'd only use a tablet to read a pdf in the toilet, as normally I prefer reading pdfs from a desktop computer to a 30" monitor.

PC sales are slowing down, and partly because the new CPUS aren't that much faster than 2 years ago. I'm still happy with my i7 2600K cpu and have no reason to upgrade.

It's better to do most tasks on a desktop PC, not a tablet. Especially engineering software.

I love writing, and read a lot of online posted stories. There is NO way I'm going to try to write a hundred page story on a tablet, or even a laptop without my raised ergonomic keyboard. I even made my own table with an extra wide pull out drawer to accomidate it. If all you do is look at videos and play games, maybe you can do without a good keyboard, but I'd guess those who do much typing on bad keyboards will pay later with really sore hands.

[PDF]

Originally Posted by nightbird47

I love writing, and read a lot of online posted stories. There is NO way I'm going to try to write a hundred page story on a tablet, or even a laptop without my raised ergonomic keyboard. I even made my own table with an extra wide pull out drawer to accomidate it. If all you do is look at videos and play games, maybe you can do without a good keyboard, but I'd guess those who do much typing on bad keyboards will pay later with really sore hands.

Completely agreed. I don't have anything against tablets, but they are best used for consuming. I do lots of writing as well, and that's why I still need a Mac. Plus, a desktop OS gives you much more freedom.