Attached Link: http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/20/technology/desktop_PC_death/index.htm

Of course, the great danger of relying on a small portable device as our primary repository of information  is the much greater potential of losing that device and all that information.

Noooooooooooo!! NO! Nobody is taking my desktop! They'll be pulling back a bloody stump, they will!! ;o).

I'm just trying to imagine having to do everything on a laptop or, worse yet, my netbook. Maybe if I had a giant magnifying glass in front of it. Oh, and a usb keyboard, cause I can't stand those tiny keyboards. And the mouse and pen of course....

Laurie

If you look at the graphs in the article, they're really foreseeing the end of
growth for desktops, not the end of sales for desktops.   Sales for this size
will stay relatively steady instead of growing.   So the headline, as always,
is a stretch!

I don't really get the point of trying to do anything internet-related on a 3x2 inch screen and 3x2 inch keyboard.  I still think of pretty much all handheld gadgets as toy items whose real purpose is to have owners brag to their friends about how cool their handheld gadget is, thus requiring those friends to go buy their own (better, more expensive) handheld gadget.  Aside from getting major computing hosepower into a device that small - granted that's only a technical problem and a matter of time - there isn't any great way to get information into your eyeballs or out of your fingertips for tiny devices like that. 

For output here's the projection screen (good luck using those when truly on the go) and VR goggles (again good luck using those while walking around or driving) - for input, basically there is nothing on the practical horizon except maybe voice recognition, which is fundamentally not compatible for things like hypertext link navigation or editing a text document, the two most common practical things that people do with computers.  For entertainment purposes, i.e. playing games or watching video or listening to music, handheld gadgets are pretty great as they are today, but I don't see desktops becoming obsolete for at least a decade or two for practical work tasks.

Quote - Noooooooooooo!! NO! Nobody is taking my desktop! They'll be pulling back a bloody stump, they will!! ;o).

I'm just trying to imagine having to do everything on a laptop or, worse yet, my netbook. Maybe if I had a giant magnifying glass in front of it. Oh, and a usb keyboard, cause I can't stand those tiny keyboards. And the mouse and pen of course....

Laurie

I switched from desktop to laptop over a year ago and I'm never going back to the desktop. I didn't buy a regular model, got top of the line and I don't regret it. It's got everything my desktop had, large(r) screen, full size keyboard with full size keys, plenty of usb ports and such. I like it a lot better then a desktop and I'm mobile now, that's awesome. I can work were ever I like. I can have Poser were ever I go :-)

Smart phones is a different story.... too small. Cool toys, but not for work. The only thing we see were I work is that people get less work done, the more powerful their phone becomes. I don't think most people do realize how much more time a smart phone takes away from your life.

I also see it in my family. Instead of having a good conversation, my daughter will be playing with her phone, talking to friends or whatever. We have phone-less times these days, just think of that. To really have family time, I need to 'forbid' the use of any mobile equipment, that included laptop, psp, nds as well.

As far as I'm concerned, the more powerful this stuff becomes, the less social and human we become. We're slowly turning into machines, not capable of enjoying life with out all of this stuff. It's a shame.....

Quote - We're slowly turning into machines...

Very unproductive machines at that, slowly hunting and pecking with two thumbs and squinting at postage stamp screens trying to read barely-language snippets of text like "jst wnt outsd, sun 2 brt gt brnt ow sux cnt se g2g"

Quote - "jst wnt outsd, sun 2 brt gt brnt ow sux cnt se g2g"

Mst clse cffn lid b4 POOFLAMO!

Quote - I'm just trying to imagine having to do everything on a laptop or, worse yet, my netbook. Maybe if I had a giant magnifying glass in front of it. Oh, and a usb keyboard, cause I can't stand those tiny keyboards. And the mouse and pen of course....

Laurie

Laurie,

I'm currently using my netbook as my main PC simply because a week ago, my desktop crapped out on me. I have my full screen monitor, keyboard, and wireless mouse hooked up to it and I keep forgetting I'm using the netbook. I've also got all my files now loaded on it including Poser Pro 2010 and everything works just fine, except a little slower. The main drive in my desktop had all my Runtimes on it, so I took it out of the desktop, put it in an external Hard Drive case and hooked that up to the USB port so I could access my Runtimes.

Using the netbook isn't as bad as I had feared.

... once you effectively turn it into a desktop, with a monitor, keyboard and mouse, yeah :)

Quote - Noooooooooooo!! NO! Nobody is taking my desktop! They'll be pulling back a bloody stump, they will!! ;o).

I'm just trying to imagine having to do everything on a laptop or, worse yet, my netbook. Maybe if I had a giant magnifying glass in front of it. Oh, and a usb keyboard, cause I can't stand those tiny keyboards. And the mouse and pen of course....

Laurie

I was blown away that I could run P7 on my netbook (recent acquisition, mostly for our trip so we can stay connected with family via WiFi/Facebook in cafes and such) but heavens, I would hate to have that be my primary machine. :scared: I mean, it runs P7 about as fast as my desktop - roughly the same specs... now you know how OLD my desktop is! - but the idea of squinting at something that size for extended periods is giving me a pre-headache headache. I just couldn't be without the mat room and matmatic for that long, and besides, there's going to be all sorts of dead-space when reverse-engineering shaders from mt5s is going to provide much-needed sanity-relief.
But as a main PC? No way. I'm actually thinking about a BIGGER screen, not a smaller one. And maybe an i5... they're more affordable now. And... :lol:

Why would I give up a 23 inch computer monitor for a tiny screen and a good gfx card for something that might be a little better than the PS1?

 My lappy does very well with poser and vue, but I love my desktop and won't give it up just yet.  There will come a day when I will need to become mobile, and I will pack everything into my lappy case and go with it.

you have to be computer illiterate to belive this :

In other words, new gadgets have become cheaper, more functional and offer more bang for the buck than devices like the PC,

a smartphone is more functional and more "bang for your buck" than a PC?  I dont think so.

My best friend has an iPhone and an iPad. I hate them both with a fiery passion that threatens to eclipse the sun itself.

Why, you ask? Because I'm apparently one of those people that doesn't have enough of some kind of nerve dealies in my fingertips. The touch screens do not respond well to my touch. Kinda defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

I much prefer my quad-core desktop, with a mouse and a keyboard that actually respond to my touch, or my super-light little acer that has over 6 hours of battery life with wifi receiver enabled (even if I'm still not totally used to the touchpad), ehehehe.

Quote - a smartphone is more functional and more "bang for your buck" than a PC?  I dont think so.

Yeah, that's marketing nonsense.  The fact is, raw power for desktops will remain way ahead of handheld gadgets for the foreseeable future, because power and heat are not much of a concern - you simply cannot cram the same guts into a laptop or handheld and still have something that is a) comfortable to hold in your hands or lap, and b) runnable for any length of time on battery power.   Now, you might be "satisfied" with the amount of processing power, and the battery might keep it running "long enough", but you will always pay more to get less, when dealing with portable gear.  Weight, heat, juice are all things that you don't care too much about with desktops so money does not have to be spent accomodating them.

Game consoles are doing more damage to PC revenues.  PC software vendors are resorting more towards online retail instead of off-the-shelf dept. store selling.  XBOX and PS3 are filling those shelves more and more.

V5 and M5 will reverse this trend, of course.  :)

How many cores in a smartphone?  Gigs of RAM?  If you want to upgrade, you have to purchase a whole new device.  I want to upgrade my desktop, I shop around, pick my components, order them and install them.  Much easier and cheaper.

I despise those laptop touchpads - I plug a full-sized mouse into my lappy when I'm at the firehouse.  Mine has a decent sized (and glow-through) keyboard.  Dedicated lappy folks would consider it a big heavy clunker, but I want capability.  I'll stick with my desktop at home, until the smartphone can display two 30" widescreens at 2560x1600 pixels each.

the only time I can see this article becoming the truth is when nano-technology is standard place. size wont be an issue then

Quote - Game consoles are doing more damage to PC revenues.  PC software vendors are resorting more towards online retail instead of off-the-shelf dept. store selling.  XBOX and PS3 are filling those shelves more and more.

On the other hand, those devices are becoming more and more PC-like (the Xbox essentially IS a PC but with a dumbed down OS/interface).  The big distinctions right now are the lower standard of graphics resolution, although that is getting closer as consumer HD televisions become more common, and the out-of-the-box limitation of just a gamepad input device, which makes even something as simple as putting your username/password into a service like Xbox Live rather painful.  They're also becoming dramatically more expensive, especially combined with aforementioned HD TV and the miscellaneous controller doodads, batteries and/or chargers for wireless bits, a keyboard, etc.

 desktop cmptr will become extinct, but it's to allow more access to those with few software needs.
it's also to provide more shareholder return, e.g. Apple making more than BP in last quarter.
disappearance of desktops might imply they're too complex for most people's needs, but mean
human intelligence level is not decreasing, rather is evolving in manner not obvious to many.

I made it a point with my very first PC that I would learn to use it AND troubleshoot it if it killed me (it almost killed the computer...lol). Over the years though, I've learned a great deal about how to keep a PC healthy and how to troubleshoot my own problems, install hardware, etc. I'm no super geek, but I'm geekier than most women I know ;o). And I'm of the opinion that if you can't/don't want to learn to use your computer yet still want to have one, that you deserve all the frustration you can possibly get...lol. You deserve to have the Geek Squad rip you off (and still not fix your problem or, better yet, create a new one).

A computer is like anything you buy like a tv or stereo. It's just something you learn to use. Whether or not you can use it well is up to you, but to say desktops will become extinct because they're too complex is just well, silly. Rocket science it ain't. And if you still don't know how to use one properly after having had one for years, then it speaks more to personal laziness than complexity ;o). At any rate, how much easier can you get? Most software nowdays is darn near idiot proof, including the OS - to the point where it makes me mad that I have to jump through hoops just to do the kinds of things I used to do in customizing the OS. Too complex...balderdash ;o).

Laurie

Since I repair my PC myself, I will never change to those tiny things, my fingers are not small enough to repair them. I also prefer to work on a table, the same table and I don't move technical equipment around. I think a lot of people feel this way and at working places I don't see anything else either. All these things will co-exist for a long time. 

Personally, I can't see that being that true. My husband uses a laptop and I hate that thing. I have a blackberry, it works well but not like my desktop.

Hello, my name is Kimberly and my desktop is my bestfriend. :lol:

If you want to play a rap mp3 music, exchange messages about the lost song of Michael Jackson, comment about the pink hair color of the Fox News reporter and send emails with always the same phrases from Revelations, for what do you need a big desktop?

 Fortunately, I don't wanna do any of that. So the smartphone remains a phone/PDA bastard offspring, and the real magic comes from the multiple computers occupying my office space.

Now when Pixar creates and renders their next big CG movie on 5,000  networked Ipads, the clueless dweebs at CNN might have something. Until then......

Quote - If you want to play a rap mp3 music, exchange messages about the lost song of Michael Jackson, comment about the pink hair color of the Fox News reporter and send emails with always the same phrases from Revelations, for what do you need a big desktop?

Have to agree with this.

For very casual pc users - those that use it as nothing more than a jukebox or video player, or mainly to check email or look at youtube - I totally agree with handhelds replacing the PC.

I also feel that handhelds are more of a hip, trendy thing for hip, trendy, traveling people and like others have said, something to brag about.

Maybe I'm a throwback but I don't even text with my phone and frankly, I have the uber-LOW budget one.  Mostly because I feel that it's for, like... talking to people cross-distances.  What can I say?  I have weird thoughts like that in my head! O.o  I have texted people a few times but it takes me 10 times longer than actually dialing them up.

I think the author was refering to what the majority of the Computer Users use their Computer for... email, browsing the web, being a Twit, using Facebook, My Space, etc... For this, the Smart Phone gives a lot of bang for the buck....

The Desktop needs for design and product development, Accounting, etc... will not change, but these uses have not really changed much in the past five years. The big influx of users has been in the Social Users, and for this, you do not need a Desktop, Laptop, or even a Netbook.

I have a desktop (a bit long in the tooth, but serviceable), a laptop (my internet Linux-based computer that I face when I talk to you guys), a netbook for traveling, and a iPhone for checking email (primarily) at work and getting the odd text or phone call from family member asking what's for dinner tonight.
Each serves a purpose. None replaces the other. Whilst I can run P7 on 3 of them, it runs best on my dinosaur because I can see it best (big screen). I don't see any one as a replacement now or in any sort of future, any more than a loveseat is a replacement for a dining-room chair: each has a specific purpose, and does not lend well to any other purpose, really (ever made love on a dining-room chair?? :lol:)

I don't think so, your desktop will be smaller and more powerful.

Gad, I must really be in the dark ages.  I don't even have a cell phone.  Here is why, when I was working, I had to answer the phone within four seconds, when home had to answer the phone etc.  Now that I'm  retired, my wife gets so mad at me for not answering the phone.  Why should I?  I got a new fangled thing call an answering machine and if your call is important to me (it usually is not), I will call you back.

 Now for the cell phone, it great if you don't have On-Star where you run into problems and need help.  The problem is:  there is no such thing as a cell phone (one that has a touch pad for dialing, a mike and a place to hear from).  What it has is the insides of a Boeing 757, a heads up display etc and the buttons are too darn small, I need a pencil to dial and that pencil must be have a sharp point.

As for desktops, I can see the size of the main unit getting to the size of a one inch cube with wireless connections to a 43 " plus screen and to me Wacom tablet and standard size mouse that doesn't have that darn roller ball to move the cursor and a decent keyboard with tabs big enough so I'm not mashing two or more tabs at the same time.   That cube however would have to be mounted to something so that you don't  knock it around or forget where you put it.  Upgrading would simply be buying a new one for the present cost of upgrading.  Jan

What I see potentially happening someday is that smartphones will have the same computing power of a desktop. At home, the smartphone will be plugged into a docking station that has a graphics card accelerator. By plugging the phone into the docking station, users will have keyboards, large monitors etc. HDTVs will have docking adapters so that the TV screen can be either a full monitor or display the phone's info in a window (some HDTVs already have IPod adapters). One could hope that there would be only one broadband internet bill that covers both mobile and connected requirements.

Essentially, the end user experience will be the same as it is today. The only difference would be that the computing power is put into a smaller portable device that the person carries with them. That device doesn't need to have a fast graphics card built into it any more than today's computers require them. Current desktops are built to be expanded with a dedicated graphics card if needed. Today, laptop docking stations have multiple monitor outputs even though the laptop doesn't. Take the same expansion capabilities being used now, add a few more, and make them work with a more powerful smartphone. That phone won't have a quadcore chip, but an adapter could be built to allow it to interface with a quad chip on the adpater. Portable computing needs don't need to be as powerful as what's needed at home. Offload that computing power to the docking station.

Smartphones aren't powerful enough to do that now. They can take the place of having to carry around an MP3 player, a pocket ebook reader, and a few other electronic devices. Why carry around a pile of different things when one might do the trick? I've already abandoned having a laptop for a netbook for my portable computing needs.  The netbook isn't powerful enough for everything I do on a computer, but plugging in a monitor, a keyboard, and a mouse makes it a reasonable substitute. Doing the same with a more powerful smartphone would make it a viable option--particularly if docking stations are beefed up to provide all the additional computing power a person would require.

If wacom Intues 24'' comes up with an Intel 8 core with 4 ghz each, I tB HD drive and 24 gigs of DDR3 ram for 2000 €  tomorrow, then my PC is dead. Quite unbelieveble so my PC lives on.

Yes, smaller devices are getting more powerful. You can do today on a netbook what you would have needed a high spec desktop to do a few years back.

We're just talking physical size after all. A laptop gives more size over a netbook as a deskptop gives more size over a laptop. That size difference is because of more powerful CPUs, GPUs, larger and more numerous drives, RAM and a larger power supply to run them all. That is only going to continue.

Sure, the laptops of tomorrow will be as powerful as the desktops of today but what this and every other report forseeing the demise of the desktop PC forgets is that our requirements will continue to change with the progress. They seem to assume that our requirements and the potential of tomorrows software and computational needs wont be any different from today which is totally wrong. We all know that 640K of RAM wasn't enough... and in ten years time the 4GB/8GB quad cores of today are going to look paltry.

Yes, we could run Poser 1 and 2 on a netbook today probably better than when it was released on a fast desktop - but we don't run Poser 1 today and that is going to be the case for the forseeable future.

The choice of PC format is a size limitation. We run desktops because they give us the most power we can achieve in a home situation - racks of blade servers are not really practical. These reports are just as naive as that 640K RAM will be more than enough statement and those of IBM who predicted a computer in every town of the future...

You do have to consider that for a whole lot of people, maybe even a slight majority of those who use smartphones, a powerful cellphone is good enough for their particular needs. Let's face it, all of us here (I presume) aren't representative of the average PC user. And for those average users, the portability and small size is useful to them.

For those of us with more high-end needs, a smartphone or laptop will never replace the good old reliable desktop PC.

I think an increasing amount of people will think of their phone as a PC, however...the only thing that size that gets 'bang' for the buck requires ammunition...;)

The idea is to make a lot of money making you believe that you have a Star Trek smart phone.
A computer without software is nothing and even to play music you need speakers with accoustic enclosures.
Software requires storage and every day software is becoming bigger and bigger. Also you need storage for your data that also becomes bigger and more bigger.
The storage requirements increase much faster than the CPU power. Some years ago a computer with 1.6 GHz clock and 40GB disk was a good computer, today we have 3 GHz clock CPU and 1 TB disks. The clock increased only two times and with some core optimizations let me say that the CPU is four times faster, but the storage had increased 25 times.
Mass storage requires physical space, it are mechanical devices and 1 TB disk is no way to fit into a cell phone. The day that will be able with nano mechanics to make 1 TB fit in so small space the current mechanical devices will have 1000 TB that also will not fit into the cell phone.
Solid state storage capabilities, that requires very little physical space, is increasing every day, but mechanical storage also does, so the ratio remains more or less 1000 times.

The solution to solve these problems and maximize the profit is that if a computer requires software and space for storage and there is no way to fit the storage requirements into a cell phone the solution is simple: Your computer will not have software nor mass storage.
The age of purchasing software is gone and no more software available for sale.
If you need to do something that requires software, for example resize an image, you call by internet a service provider that has photoshop in their servers and you are charged automatically in your credit card for the service. As your cell phone has no storage the resized image is stored into another server and you pay too for this service.
You want to hear a song?, you link to another service provider that transfer in real time the mp3 music and is debited into your credit card, want to hear again the same music? pay again and you will hear it.
If you have no credit card you don't generate profits for the banks, so you are not a citizen and you have no rights to have a computer, go to some charity institution maybe can help you.
As the servers that have photoshop must serve hundreds of millions users are in a bottle neck, you will receive the next week an email notification that your image has been resized successfully and has cost $xx.xx.

Quote - The idea is to make a lot of money making you believe that you have a Star Trek smart phone.

That's really the brilliant thing about these devices, they turn their owners into salespeople more than nearly any other type of commercial item since you're supposed to carry them everywhere and the damn things are made to be as obtrusive and "notice me" as they can possibly be.

I damn well hate cell phones.  A phone is for my convenience, not for anyone else to bug me.  Besides which, I firmly believe they are there for making and receiving calls.  If I want to take pictures, I'll use a camera.  Listen to music, I'll use my stereo.  Play games, I'll... oh yeah, I don't play games.  Years in the industry killed my interest.  :) 

I can't imagine wanting to do graphics on a teeny screen and until flat monitors have a better gamut, I'll stick with CRTs.  Can't really stick one of them in a netbook or smart phone. :lol:

I'm ready to trade in my desktop. In exchange, I certainly won't settle for less power. I'll need a thought controlled view-port implant, as I won't be inconvenienced by a small screen. Of course input for the computer will have to be thought controlled as well. I'll be quite happy to have a mobile system at that point. You simply can't fit 6TB storrage inside a lappy. External storage is slow and bulky still.  Eventually, storrage will be airborn- but not slow like now.

Quote - The solution to solve these problems and maximize the profit is that if a computer requires software and space for storage and there is no way to fit the storage requirements into a cell phone

You can buy an IPhone today with a 32gb solid state drive. While that's getting small by today's standards for all the photos, videos, and Poser content we've all accumulated, it's still more than enough space to store all the software that even a 3D fanatic could want.  I forget what the biggest runtime reported here was, but it would probably fit in that amount of space along with all the graphics software most of us need. It's not enough to store all the 3D content I've downloaded across the last decade, but 32gb is a very adequate amount of space to handle all active projects.

You are right that there will be software vendors trying a "pay as you use" approach to remotely offer software. Depending on how they cost the software usage, it might be a very viable change for software distribution--particularly for niche software that most people would only occasionally use.

I'm a little surprised at the reaction here because everybody in this forum is fairly computer savvy. Anybody using Poser enough to want to regularly visit forums is to some degree a technology geek. I doubt that we're going to lose any functionality that is already available. Nobody is going to be doing detailed graphics work on a smartphone screen. A desktop CPU may be a mobile component, built into a phone, that gets disconnected from a desktop docking station so that it can be used remotely. Instead of carrying a notebook or netbook, a person would carry a smartphone and a dumb tablet screen/keyboard to use as a monitor. They'd either connect physically or more likely through a wireless/bluetooth arrangement.  A person would still be carrying a phone and something approximating the size of a laptop/netbook/tablet, but it wouldn't have to have its own completely independent set of hardware/software.

Instead of having three different computers with a mix of duplicate/different information on them, you'd always have all your information with you. That information will be mirrored on the desktop docking station, so a smartphone loss isn't a catastrophic loss. I don't know about anybody else, but I'm often missing something that I wish I had with me when I'm travelling with a notebook or netbook. This isn't a radical concept. It's a matter of having everything with you wherever you are so that you're not maintaining multiple disparate configurations of your computers and constantly copying information onto flashdrives from one device to another.

A phone will probably be the vehicle for carrying all that information around because it is the single electronics device that most people have with them (at least in the US). It's just a matter of beefing up the device that nearly everybody is already carrying. 

For the sake of disclosure, I'm the only person I know that has neither a smartphone nor even a cellphone. In a year or two, I expect that to change, though I'm way too cheap to ever pay $60/month for a smartphone internet service.

I wouldn't be surprised if something like this happens within a decade. Look at where computers were a decade ago.  Who would have imagined a decade ago that a phone would be able to connect to the internet from nearly anyplace in the civilized world, play thousands of songs, watch TV shows, have GPS maps, etc.? Weren't we still on Pentium computers with 1Gb drives just starting to come out? Sandisk is working on a 128 Gb micro SD card that they expect to have on the market next year. Amazon has 64 Gb SDXC cards for sale now for $220. We're a little ways from having a fairly powerful CPU in a smartphone, but it's not too hard to imagine that being conquered within a decade based on how far we''ve advanced from a decade ago.

Windows 7  alone requires 15 GB disk space, too much if you have a disk with only 32 GB.
The limiting factor of speed is temperature, the released heat is proportional to speed.
Turn off or cut the wires of yours CPU big fan and see how many seconds your computer is alive.
The active area of a CPU is very small, the square block with a lot of pins is only the casing and it must have a big surface to dissipate heat generated by a tiny area inside the casing. Over the CPU is a big aluminium heat sink to dissipate the heat produced by the CPU and over the heat sink is a big fan for dissipate by forced air circulation all the heat released by the heat sink.
The CPU itself can fit inside a cell phone, but where do you put the big heat sink and big fan?
The only way to make work a CPU inside a cell phone is that the CPU release very few heat and if you want the CPU release few heat the CPU must run at very low clock speeds, 20 MHz will be OK, welcome to the 386....!

Laptops or notebooks are not saved from the heat problem, as the available area becomes smaller with little space to put a heat sink and fan the CPU used are not not the same as used in tower casing computers. The notebook CPUs have lower specs with reduced capabilities and speed to keep the released heat low.

Quote - Look at where computers were a decade ago.  Who would have imagined a decade ago that a phone would be able to connect to the internet from nearly anyplace in the civilized world, play thousands of songs, watch TV shows, have GPS maps, etc.? Weren't we still on Pentium computers with 1Gb drives just starting to come out? Sandisk is working on a 128 Gb micro SD card that they expect to have on the market next year. Amazon has 64 Gb SDXC cards for sale now for $220. We're a little ways from having a fairly powerful CPU in a smartphone, but it's not too hard to imagine that being conquered within a decade based on how far we''ve advanced from a decade ago.

But that assumes our demands and expectations wont change from now. Yes, the power we have today could well be available in a handheld device in 10 years time, but unless we are also running the software we are today in 10 years time then it's not going to matter. We'll still want the fastest thing that is practical and that will be restricted by size in 10 years time just as it always has. The power available from that handheld device will not be able to match the power available in the laptops of 10 years in the future and, likewise, the desktops in 10 years time will be correspondingly more powerful again simply from basic physics of having more physical space to house larger processors.

And the software requirements of 10 years in the future will still require those fast machines just as they always have since cutting edge graphical and processor intensive applications are written with the fastest consumer level hardware available in mind and that will be the desktops of tomorrow rather than the smaller devices. It's why the latest version of Poser was written with a powerful desktop in mind rather than as a phone app - that principle is not going to change.

You still have the basic problem of getting information into your eyes and out of your fingertips.  There is nothing on the practical horizon that really looks like it's going to revolutionize either of these things - what has been changing is that mass market consumers are being taught that they don't need these things, that nearly-illiterate pidgin talk is fine ("omg u dnt hv 2 typ 2 1mil wds 2 say hi how r u") and that all you really need the screen for is looking at movie trailers and laughing at the latest funny cat picture.

Quote - You still have the basic problem of getting information into your eyes and out of your fingertips.

Only if it's not hooked up to a monitor. How big that monitor will be will depend on whether its at home or how big a portable monitor a person wants to drag around on the road.

Quote - The CPU itself can fit inside a cell phone, but where do you put the big heat sink and big fan?

I'm seriously hoping that chips will get more energy efficient. Goodness knows humanity is sucking up fossil fuels in centuries that took nature millions of years to create. The first netbooks had a 2-3 hour operating time on battery. Today, a slightly faster chip uses much less energy and the netbook can get upwards to 14 hours runtime on battery. Netbooks don't need fans anymore because they don't run hot. Years ago, high end Pentiums ran with two chips. I'd imagine that the phone CPU will be underpowered and hooking it up to the desktop dock will couple it with a more powerful chip in the dock where both chips would operate together as an overall faster computer. Give it a few more decades and maybe that won't even be necessary.

I didn't realize that Windows 7 was such a hog. I won't be upgrading my computer for another 5-6 years, so I've been marginally paying attention to the new operating system. I cannot imagine why an operating system would be 15 gb. Is that the top of the line version with every possible bell and whistle? A cut-rate version of Win 7 already comes with netbooks.

Quote - And the software requirements of 10 years in the future will still require those fast machines just as they always have

That depends. The bulk of software used by most people, outside of games, doesn't tax even low end computers. Browsers, word processors, office suites, and even a high end program like Photoshop work fine on a netbook. Games and 3D rendering programs will need more power. That work will be offloaded to the desktop dock CPU/graphics cards. That would mean that the phone CPU won't be able to do everything that it can do on the desktop. We make compromises today with the laptops and netbooks we take on travel today. Skip a few more decades into the future and maybe the chip in the phone will be able to do what 99.9% of the population does. If that happens, the market may only have those devices and anybody that wants a powerful standalone desktop or laptop will be stuck paying big bucks for a workstation. Sam says he wants to stick with a CRT. I just did a quick search on Amazon and there aren't any new CRTs for sale. Either he's going to have to buy a used one, keep repairing what he has, or get assimilated in the consumer market and buy the monitors that are available. I haven't looked to see if anybody is making new CRTs, but I'd imagine that they would be very expensive.

We're all speculating based on our experiences with PCs. In the end, we'll have to wait and see what the future brings. If this happens and there is no compromise to the computing experience we want, we'll jump on board. If not, it'll be a passing fad. Based on the number of things phones have been doing in the last few years, it seems very possible that they'll be the most flexible and important electronics devices we own in the upcoming years.

Quote - Only if it's not hooked up to a monitor. How big that monitor will be will depend on whether its at home or how big a portable monitor a person wants to drag around on the road.

I don't necessarily disagree with that, but that's contrary to the "bang for buck" selling point for handheld doodads - you are paying for two display devices, one of which can't be used while mobile.  Cost goes up, and function while mobile is not improved, function while stationary is definitely not as good as a dedicated stationary widget for similar price (compact, low heat/low power display adapter).  Full blown monitors are not really in the "portable" category, not when you have to sit down and essentially make a desktop out of your portable widget.

I'm not crapping on the idea of laptops or handhelds in general, just the idea that they're every bit as functional or that they have a better "bang for buck" is pretty obviously nonsense and will be for the foreseeable future.

Quote - I'm seriously hoping that chips will get more energy efficient.

It will not, released heat power is proportional to speed. Why do you think that are doing quad core cpus?
A single core 12 GHz CPU is much faster than a quad core 3 GHz CPU, but it will require a liquid nitrogen cooling system.
Some things can still be done to reduce heat production, one thing is to lower the core voltage, they are lowering it. My Pentium I 200 MHz had a 3.3V voltage, today my Athlon II has 1.4V, but it getting near the limit of silicon (0.7V) and then nothing elese could be done.
Germanium (the first transistors) is much better than silicon, only needs 0.2, but germanium is fragile, don't support temperature and is impossible to do large scale integration.
Other things can be done and are done as lowering the CPU clock when the CPU is idle, for example, when you are reading this post, your computer does nothing until you move your mouse or hit the keyboard. You can run the cpu at very low speed when the computer is doing nothing, return to full speed for some microsecond when you hit a key and then return again to low speed. In this way the heat production will be very low.
This is fine when you read and send emails, twit, send messages, hear some mp3 and your cell phone will keep very cool, but if you try to run Poser the cell phone will melt in your hands in seconds.