MoogleViper Posted December 20, 2008 Posted December 20, 2008 The CPU stuff is ridiculous, we don't need anything more than Dual Core. But we will when newer, more processor hungry things come out.
Nolan Posted December 20, 2008 Posted December 20, 2008 A lot stuff in 10 years looks like the present. The CPU stuff is ridiculous, we don't need anything more than Dual Core. Are you doing intensive Media Encoding? That's where more helps, a quad greatly reduces the time required to do whatever process. Eventually games too will be optimized for more than Dual-Core some already are, but not many. Besides, even before Dual-Cores there were servers running many cores all at once, generally by multiple single-cores in parallel(I think parallel is the right word for it...)
Jackster Posted December 20, 2008 Posted December 20, 2008 A lot stuff in 10 years looks like the present. The CPU stuff is ridiculous, we don't need anything more than Dual Core. There will be a time when the computers we use will look *nothing* like what's in front of us just now. We've got no idea what computers will be like in 20 or 30 years, but whatever happens I'm pretty sure we'll have/need hundreds of cores.
Shino Posted December 20, 2008 Posted December 20, 2008 But we will when newer, more processor hungry things come out. Dual cores are at least 2 years old and they're still pretty capable. Are you doing intensive Media Encoding? That's where more helps, a quad greatly reduces the time required to do whatever process. Eventually games too will be optimized for more than Dual-Core some already are, but not many. Besides, even before Dual-Cores there were servers running many cores all at once, generally by multiple single-cores in parallel(I think parallel is the right word for it...) No I don't do intensive Media Encoding, I suppose people that do would want more cores then. But for general use, maybe even a single core would be enough. People don't realise how much multi threaded and heavy a software has to be to take advantage of 8 cores or something like that. There will be a time when the computers we use will look *nothing* like what's in front of us just now. We've got no idea what computers will be like in 20 or 30 years, but whatever happens I'm pretty sure we'll have/need hundreds of cores. Heh, in 30 years, yeah probably, but whatever is the standard at that time it will probably be exaggerated. As it always have been. And we still have CUDA and Larrabee to mix things up even more.
Nolan Posted December 20, 2008 Posted December 20, 2008 No doubt if all you do is browse the web, watch the occasional youtube vid, maybe type up a paper. A good single core will suit you, unfortunately companies have moved away from SCs so getting a single would probably be less efficent than a DC, and besides OSs are getting more complex. At some point windows will complete the switch to 64bit and you won't have the option of 32bit. So an ancient single-core won't help you if you want to upgrade.
McPhee Posted December 21, 2008 Posted December 21, 2008 Virgin Media will announce it's not going continue building its own network and will instead become an LLU provider over BT lines, massively increasing it's potential customers Apple and Microsoft will have switched places in terms of how they are thought of by people. Apple will be seen as the big bad company and Microsoft will be seen as the cool company. Steve Jobs will be long gone from Apple and everyone will hate Phil Schiller because he has neither the charisma or the cool factor that Jobs had, and people will begin to like Steve Ballmer because he's just a pretty crazy guy... and he'll have had a makeover Neither of those will happen. Virgin media are building their network at a faster rate than BT are upgrading their lines. In 10 years time both will likely still be operating, unless one manages to buy out the other. Apple aren't going to overtake Microsoft. Sure, Apple are gaining consumer base but it'll take a lot longer than 10 years for them to gain market leader. People are brought up on Windows, it's Windows that is taught in schools etc. An increasing number are moving to OS X, but for the majority it's too much effort to migrate to a new OS. You'd have to start teaching OS X in every school in the country and then wait a generation or two for the market switch to occur.
Slaggis Posted December 21, 2008 Posted December 21, 2008 A lot stuff in 10 years looks like the present. The CPU stuff is ridiculous, we don't need anything more than Dual Core. Maybe not at the moment, but people other than the general consumer may do. I mean, when the NES was out, did we need more than that? No. But we still developed the technology to what we have today because we were able to. As long as we're able to develop our technology further, we're going to, whether we "need" it or not.
Shino Posted December 21, 2008 Posted December 21, 2008 Maybe not at the moment, but people other than the general consumer may do. I mean, when the NES was out, did we need more than that? No. But we still developed the technology to what we have today because we were able to. As long as we're able to develop our technology further, we're going to, whether we "need" it or not. My problem is not developing it, its pushing it to the consumer and the mainstream as absolutely needed.
Slaggis Posted December 21, 2008 Posted December 21, 2008 My problem is not developing it, its pushing it to the consumer and the mainstream as absolutely needed. Oh well, yeah I see your point then. But they have to do so, to cover the cost of developing it in the first place. But still, even if they are pushing the tech as being needed right this minute, it's still up to the consumer to decide if they themselves need it.
Nolan Posted December 21, 2008 Posted December 21, 2008 Maybe not at the moment, but people other than the general consumer may do. I mean, when the NES was out, did we need more than that? No. But we still developed the technology to what we have today because we were able to. As long as we're able to develop our technology further, we're going to, whether we "need" it or not. Yes. Even something not even intensive CPU or GPU would run slowly in those days. A simple word program, of course it was the norm but faster was/is nicer. Next paper you have to write or use the internet, get a machine from early 90's and use that the entire time. PCs from 99/00 are painfully slow now too.
Guest Jordan Posted December 21, 2008 Posted December 21, 2008 Try going back and use a PC from 1998/9 today, even try running XP with your usual day to day programs and use your normal sites. It will slog badly. I have a Pentium 3 1ghz still running as a file server thats slowly on its way out and will probably be replaced by an Intel Atom set up. But its crazy how far things have come.
Jackster Posted December 21, 2008 Posted December 21, 2008 Neither of those will happen. Virgin media are building their network at a faster rate than BT are upgrading their lines. In 10 years time both will likely still be operating, unless one manages to buy out the other. I didn't say they wouldn't both still be operating. As far as I knew Virgin weren't installing their lines on any streets which currently exist, only new streets. Anyway, in 10 years time I'm pretty confident every BT line will be Fibre to the Cabinet and a reasonable amount will be Fibre to the Premises. This will pretty much (note the 'pretty much') make BT and Virgin's network equal in terms how much can go down one line. I'm sure Virgin's network will continue to exist and will be used by existing customers, but I'm also sure that Virgin will also become an LLU provider on BT lines and make all their services available to people in non cabled areas, in a similar way Tiscali now offers TV, Phone and Internet through an LLU package on BT lines. An awful lot more people can get a BT line than a Virgin line, and installing your equipment in a few hundred BT exchanges is a lot cheaper than digging up a few hundred streets. I just think it makes sense for Virgin to offer their services to people with BT lines when BT's lines are up to it. Apple aren't going to overtake Microsoft. Sure, Apple are gaining consumer base but it'll take a lot longer than 10 years for them to gain market leader. People are brought up on Windows, it's Windows that is taught in schools etc. An increasing number are moving to OS X, but for the majority it's too much effort to migrate to a new OS. You'd have to start teaching OS X in every school in the country and then wait a generation or two for the market switch to occur. Again, I didn't say Apple would take over Microsoft, I just said they would be seen as the big bad company and that Microsoft would have managed to get a cooler image.
McPhee Posted December 22, 2008 Posted December 22, 2008 I didn't say they wouldn't both still be operating. As far as I knew Virgin weren't installing their lines on any streets which currently exist, only new streets. Anyway, in 10 years time I'm pretty confident every BT line will be Fibre to the Cabinet and a reasonable amount will be Fibre to the Premises. This will pretty much (note the 'pretty much') make BT and Virgin's network equal in terms how much can go down one line. I'm sure Virgin's network will continue to exist and will be used by existing customers, but I'm also sure that Virgin will also become an LLU provider on BT lines and make all their services available to people in non cabled areas, in a similar way Tiscali now offers TV, Phone and Internet through an LLU package on BT lines. An awful lot more people can get a BT line than a Virgin line, and installing your equipment in a few hundred BT exchanges is a lot cheaper than digging up a few hundred streets. I just think it makes sense for Virgin to offer their services to people with BT lines when BT's lines are up to it. Virgin Media already do broadband and phone over BT's lines though, it wouldn't be anything new. All they'd be doing is keeping up with the competition on those lines.
Jackster Posted December 22, 2008 Posted December 22, 2008 Virgin Media already do broadband and phone over BT's lines though, it wouldn't be anything new. All they'd be doing is keeping up with the competition on those lines. Yes I know they do broadband over BT lines but their preference is to do it over their cable network. If you live on a street with cable and BT lines, they'll want to put you onto cable. *My* prediction is that in the future they'll stop focusing on their own network and start focusing their attention on people with BT lines.
Happenstance Posted October 31, 2020 Posted October 31, 2020 Interesting thread to read through now (and hopefully ok for me to bump this time given the subject matter!) 1
Rummy Posted October 31, 2020 Posted October 31, 2020 35 minutes ago, Happenstance said: Interesting thread to read through now (and hopefully ok for me to bump this time given the subject matter!) No, no bumps!!! Oh...ah. Uhh...hmm ok yes this is ok. I'll catch up on some of the posts later and give a post; should be interesting indeed! Think I was a bit off radar late 2008-2009 forumwise.
BowserBasher Posted October 31, 2020 Posted October 31, 2020 Didn’t realise this was an old thread when I started reading it. Was a little confused when reading that @MoogleViper had only just got broadband and it was only 500k then I saw the dates. Lol. Made more sense and was very interesting to see things. 1
Rummy Posted November 1, 2020 Posted November 1, 2020 15 hours ago, BowserBasher said: Didn’t realise this was an old thread when I started reading it. Was a little confused when reading that @MoogleViper had only just got broadband and it was only 500k then I saw the dates. Lol. Made more sense and was very interesting to see things. Certainly an interesting read - wish it had been a bit logner tbh! Curious how on point some bits were; though I guess that sort of bias would happen plus we were likely more one of the 'in-touch with' techy/nerdy groups at the time given this whole community's nebulae. SO! Who's up for predicting the next 10-12 years from now then eh?? Let's hope it hasn't moved so far that we're all still here and able to reflect again - maybe we'll have N-Europe-capable microchips directly interfacing with our brains...
Beast Posted November 1, 2020 Posted November 1, 2020 16 hours ago, BowserBasher said: Didn’t realise this was an old thread when I started reading it. Was a little confused when reading that @MoogleViper had only just got broadband and it was only 500k then I saw the dates. Lol. Made more sense and was very interesting to see things. Same here. I was reading this and wondered when Slaggis came back and read the dates, haha.
Josh64 Posted February 6, 2021 Posted February 6, 2021 I'm shocked and appalled that no one predicted the Wii U. I feel like the form factor and usability of phones won't be widely different in 10 years time but just a lot more powerful and with more storage space, which is kind of what happened the last 10 years anyway. Compare a 2008 iPhone to any current phone and whilst it will be incredibly weak and have a rubbish camera, the general usability and types of apps is pretty much unchanged. I'm really fascinated to see if VR will take off and become mainstream or still be somewhat of a niche, PSVR was a nice window into the future of a casual market for VR and I think if Sony release another more refined and user friendly version at a cheaper price it could really blow up.
Happenstance Posted February 6, 2021 Posted February 6, 2021 4 minutes ago, Josh64 said: I'm shocked and appalled that no one predicted the Wii U. I feel like the form factor and usability of phones won't be widely different in 10 years time but just a lot more powerful and with more storage space, which is kind of what happened the last 10 years anyway. Compare a 2008 iPhone to any current phone and whilst it will be incredibly weak and have a rubbish camera, the general usability and types of apps is pretty much unchanged. I'm really fascinated to see if VR will take off and become mainstream or still be somewhat of a niche, PSVR was a nice window into the future of a casual market for VR and I think if Sony release another more refined and user friendly version at a cheaper price it could really blow up. I dunno, foldable phones are definitely progressing very quickly. Samsung pretty much went from a mess of a phone to a really good one with the Z Fold or Z Fold 2. I’m expecting to buy the Z Fold 3 myself at the end of this year.
Josh64 Posted February 6, 2021 Posted February 6, 2021 11 minutes ago, Happenstance said: I dunno, foldable phones are definitely progressing very quickly. Samsung pretty much went from a mess of a phone to a really good one with the Z Fold or Z Fold 2. I’m expecting to buy the Z Fold 3 myself at the end of this year. foldable phones somehow slipped my mind, my friend recently got one and it looks beautiful and feels really nice to hold. I take back what I said!
bob Posted February 8, 2021 Posted February 8, 2021 What's the benefit of a foldable phone though? They seem like curved screens to me, just a bit gimmicky and not really all that useful.
Happenstance Posted February 8, 2021 Posted February 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, bob said: What's the benefit of a foldable phone though? They seem like curved screens to me, just a bit gimmicky and not really all that useful. To be fair curved screens aren't gimmicky when they are on a 21:9 display (stares at my curved 21:9 screen). I'd think it's obvious what the benefit is though. A bigger screen. It's basically a small tablet and phone in one. I like to read at lunch while at work for example but while it's doable on my current screen, it would be a lot better on a bigger one that can fold out.
Ronnie Posted February 8, 2021 Posted February 8, 2021 I'm still using a 4" screen on my first gen iPhone SE, I love this thing. Any other phone I find too big too use comfortably, so if a foldable screen could mean a smaller footprint that extends to something bigger if you need it, great.
Recommended Posts