i was just forming a wish list about elite 4 (when it is released) and top of my list would be a linux native version, but it got me to thinking about the pc i will need to play it on, because this certainly will not cut it. I reckon mr braben is writing a game for hardware that doesnt exist yet (which must be a bit hard). What do you think the average home users pc (hardware) will be like in 5-10 years time?

10ghz processor
2gig ram
1 terabyte hd
$599 us

That is if they continue on with the same architecture.

no, 13ghz processor. were at around 3ghz average today. with moores law being applied twice, we reach 12 and then there are some extra months so 13 seems reasonable.

3 gigs of ram(we have 512mb-1000mb today, 5 years ago they had 64mb. im being conservative)
agreed
agreed

i think they are gonna start cramming more processors into the boxes they sell the public, sorta like the dual proc macs. as video demands go up, i think bus size will increase drastically at some point. not sure how much a 13 ghz proc would relative to faster and wider buses, and maybe home computers with 16 processors or so.


big numbers sell better though. im thinking multicore processors and the such....the new 16 processor megaslap 1600XXXT, only $1699, plus a free color laser printer!

Let me just look in my crystal ball...


Is it really possible to make an educated guess about this? The rate things move in the IT world, who knows.

--Shade

speaking of dual procs

i dont think that will ever happen in the pc world. its not cost-effective for the average pc.

however, within the next year, we will see a dramatic increase in performance with dual core cpu's.

the diff between dual core and dual processers is that in dual cores, if you have two 3.2ghz cores, you get 6.4ghz of performance. on the other hand, a dual 2.0ghz G5 is only marginally better than a single 2.0ghz. not all apps take advantage of two cpu's, and since they are so expensive, it will never be widespread.

What about parallel or quantum computing?

not for 10-15 years.

I wouldn't say mine was educated. I just took a swipe at it.

What about distributed computing.. It will be much more efficient because of the insane bandwidth most of us will have in that amount of time. Sympatico is talking about a goal of 15-25mbs. Perhaps in the future we will be one gigantic beowulf cluster!! (been reading lots of slashdot latley..)

have you used the new mac yet? i have a sister who is majoring in art, uses macs for all her work done on a computer, etc. gotta check out the new mac, handles large media waaaaaay better than any pc ive used. they are quite expensive though. in fact, i wouldnt be surprised to see pc makers start to selling something similiar and claiming better media performance.


forgot link, http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

from the ponies mouth

htats like bush saying he would make a better president not hte most reliable source...

alienware is selling single processor computer with dual bideo cards, im sure that gotta be better than dual procs and a last-gen video card.

which mac are you talking about? the imac?

how does the G5 handle digital media better than a pc runnning linux/windows? is it just software? for video encoding, its all about Ghz, so a cheapo 2.8ghz celeron can outperform a singleproc 1.8ghz G5(would take the g5 over the celeron any day though...).

anyway, i know its a little off topic, but i think taht adobe and the other big graphics companies should port their software into linux. its a better platform than windows in terms of memory management and large files, so i dont see why not. it also can run on a wider range of hardware than OSx because the high performance pc's (dual-opterons with 4 gigs of ram and dual geforce 6800GT's ) and cheaper workstations.

its hardware, and proc speed doesnt equal preformance. the g5's are dual proc with over 1ghz fsb, etc. it smokes anything single proc ive seen, not sure if the osx and mac software has a lot or little to do with it. they are 64 bit also i think, with 64 bit software. regardless of where the info comes from , the numbers are a lot better, similar to why bush is a better pres than kerry would be, spin doesnt count, results please(kerry has one of the worst, most pathetic records ever documented in congress, not showing up etc. why didnt lieberman win the nomination??) <- best way to ruin thread..

i agree adobe should port to linux, real nice software. removes red eye from all my shoddy photgraphy(when im at home to use my parents copy legit copy )

i've been thinking about this...

I think, as far as laptop computers go, we might be seeing the end of the spindle-era.

Think about it, SD card sizes are increasing all of the time.

My favorite would be a hologram display instead of a flat-panel or CRT. I could only imagine the beefy kind of video card and math coprocessor that would be needed for that.

A lot of people are saying a network-districuted computer, I don't figure that as much as a disposable computer.

Think about it. In the early days of automobiles, they were an expensive hobby. Then came mass-production, they came out for everybody, but still being kind of pricey, they were built to last. Now, I challenge you to buy any car, and run it as long as the cars of 30-40 years ago were meant to be run (assuming you could afford the gasoline.)

I think, that it'll go that way with computers, especially if people stick to wintel architecture, or even; in some cases mac architecture.

the only insurance against this kind of thing I believe is linux. When the operating system isn't commoditized, true source code freedom can exist, and true computer durability may not follow too far behind.

i personally hope for a corresponding (and quite dramatic) reduction in price rather than any massive increase in hardware capacity. I know that you can get cheapo hardware quite easily, but the quality is somewhat lacking, and lets face it even a few hundered bucks is a lot when you can barely feed and clothe yourself.

I remember my very first pc, it was a 486dx with a 500mb hard drive. I dreamed of the day when i would have gigabytes of hd space, and ghz processors. Now i have (had) them, i realize that the corresponding increase in both hardware requirements, and disk space requirements for programs pretty much makes the increase redundant for the average pc user. (average install size of an os then was a few hundred mb's, now its pretty much a few gigs) I think that any future increase will quickly be taken up by software makers (elite 4 a prime example), and thats got to be good for more realistic graphics (in games), or for having massive amounts of bandwith to play with (netwise). God i cant wait for elite, until then i wont be upgrading my little ol k6.

I wonder if x86 arch is reaching the end of its lifetime

i never even thought about that. tha would be very nice