I have expressed in several other threads my general dis-satisfaction with the way things are going, Seems like you need 10 times the processing power to do the same things you could do 10 years ago. How many new features does a word processor need? And I don't like the they are trying to make you dependent on the internet - product activation, help files that can only be accessed online, cloud computing............

It seems that the future of IT is very well attached to the future of capitalism.

The way big companies are focused on creating the need for they products, instead of creating products for what people need, can not go on for much longer unless at the same time people become increasingly dumber, which , I'm afraid, could be actually happening... This is why I'm completely certain we are heading towards the M A T R I X

😈

Well that is exactly it - Microsoft keeps coming out with new versions so that can keep the money rolling in. I'd be willing to bed that Office 97 probably did 99% of what people needed it to do.

Operating systems I can understand a bit more.... there have been huge advancements in hardware...but still....

Maybe ReactOS will mature enough by the point of Windows 7's end of life.

thats if MS doesn't sue'em, yet

snorg wrote:

What is the logical endpoint of this computing revolution we are all collectively participating in? […]
Show full quote

What is the logical endpoint of this computing revolution we are all collectively participating in?

I think the current state of the art is chips with 28nm features. How much smaller can things get? 10 nanometer? 5, or even 1? Do we do 3d chips from there? Chips made of exotic materials, like diamond (exotic in that we don't make chips out of it currently)

How much power would a typical laptop have 25 years from now? A supercomputer? If we go by past trends, laptops 25 years from now will be equivalent to supercomputers in the top 500 now, I hate to think what a supercomputer of that time would be like. An Exaflop system? What would you use that for? Climate modeling? Drug research? Can we build the next order of magnitude beyond that, or are we reaching hard limits? Would there ever be such a thing as a Yottaflop (yottascale?) system? What would we even do with that much computing power?

I've just been thinking how many changes we've seen since I first got into computers in the early 80s, and where things might be going. Certainly we are in for some strange times ahead. What do you all think?

The chips are already 3d that is how we are achieving 28 and 22nm and yes we will use exotic materials they are trying to convert to Graphene which blow silicon out of the water.

I'm kind of wondering how long we can keep going coming out with new releases of programs every six months, continually adding new features most people don't need or want, and deliberately making everything more complicated, just so microsoft can keep the money rolling in

That model is failing them pretty badly everywhere except the business world - but even there, it's starting to falter. How many businesses do you know that jump on every new Windows release rather than riding out the versions they already have, because they're cheaper and are a known, well-used system that's not likely to suddenly change and introduce new problems for IT.

The "other businesses use MS Word so I have to use MS Word to interoperate with their documents/presentations/etc." lock-in is the strongest thing they have going for them, but even then, they're playing a dangerous game with that. You can use a pretty good online document editor/spreadsheet editor/presentation maker that works on any internet-connected computer and doesn't lock you into MS formats. Apple computers are massively popular with people in colleges and universities. It's not a good place for them to be.

But Microsoft HAS launched their version of the App Store now, with clauses that give them a hefty cut of every sale, same as Apple. They've clearly seen the success Apple has had there and want a piece of that pie. It's semi-optional right now in Windows 8... desktop apps can be downloaded and installed as per usual, but any "Metro" (or whatever they call it now) apps can only be purchased through the windows store. I see that as the direction they're going to push. The split desktop/metro interface thing is incredibly counterintuitive and stands in stark contrast to a lot of the design ideals and aesthetics on the "Metro" side of things - I see that as a stopgap measure so people can still use their existing software and they don't suffer a huge backlash when everything suddenly stops working. Likewise, I see them heavily pushing the "Metro" apps and eventually transitioning to them (and the windows store) exclusively.

They've invested a lot of developer time, money, and resources into building a whole new set of core software libraries, infrastructure for the windows store, and a whole new class of devices based on it (surface) - they wouldn't do that for something they thought would be a one-release sidenote and then abandon it all to go back to the old win API and classic desktop.

The Gecko wrote:

That model is failing them pretty badly everywhere except the business world - but even there, it's starting to falter. How many […]
Show full quote

That model is failing them pretty badly everywhere except the business world - but even there, it's starting to falter. How many businesses do you know that jump on every new Windows release rather than riding out the versions they already have, because they're cheaper and are a known, well-used system that's not likely to suddenly change and introduce new problems for IT.

The "other businesses use MS Word so I have to use MS Word to interoperate with their documents/presentations/etc." lock-in is the strongest thing they have going for them, but even then, they're playing a dangerous game with that. You can use a pretty good online document editor/spreadsheet editor/presentation maker that works on any internet-connected computer and doesn't lock you into MS formats. Apple computers are massively popular with people in colleges and universities. It's not a good place for them to be.

But Microsoft HAS launched their version of the App Store now, with clauses that give them a hefty cut of every sale, same as Apple. They've clearly seen the success Apple has had there and want a piece of that pie. It's semi-optional right now in Windows 8... desktop apps can be downloaded and installed as per usual, but any "Metro" (or whatever they call it now) apps can only be purchased through the windows store. I see that as the direction they're going to push. The split desktop/metro interface thing is incredibly counterintuitive and stands in stark contrast to a lot of the design ideals and aesthetics on the "Metro" side of things - I see that as a stopgap measure so people can still use their existing software and they don't suffer a huge backlash when everything suddenly stops working. Likewise, I see them heavily pushing the "Metro" apps and eventually transitioning to them (and the windows store) exclusively.

They've invested a lot of developer time, money, and resources into building a whole new set of core software libraries, infrastructure for the windows store, and a whole new class of devices based on it (surface) - they wouldn't do that for something they thought would be a one-release sidenote and then abandon it all to go back to the old win API and classic desktop.

I can tell you there is going to be a lot of business users that will NOT be switching to Windows 8 simply because of the cost of having to retrain their workforce to use it. I don't know where Microsoft got the idea that making a radical alteration to Windows was in some way going to endear them to anyone. They ditched Longhorn in favor of Vista because it was too radical a departure from what people were used to and it seemed like they learned their lesson and then after the fiasco with Vista itself Microsoft cannot afford to be taking risks with their bread and butter product.

They sold us this bag of crap at work - well we have to upgrade to the new version of office because students will have new computers with new versions and what will happen when a student sends you a file you can't read? I fought that "upgrade" bitterly but got it forced on me. Oh, and the other argument is "security" - Microsoft will not longer be "supporting" XP.

ncmark wrote:

the new version of office because students will have new computers with new versions and what will happen when a student sends you a file you can't read?

So far the Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack "FileFormatConverters.exe" solved this issue nicely. So that is not a good reason unless something changed in the office 2013 format.

If Microsoft fails, that may be a good thing, but where to go then? It would be a better world, when the main OS Interface and Program compatibility would not change much over years, or could be customized entirely and easily. Currently it is like the exact opposite. And forced upon users by marketing and company monopoly.

ncmark wrote:

I'm kind of wondering how long we can keep going coming out with new releases of programs every six months, continually adding new features most people don't need or want, and deliberately making everything more complicated, just so microsoft can keep the money rolling in

As long as "they" can keep convincing you that you need the new releases, creating the need for it, you will keep buying. It's happening all over the place, take the auto industry: Do you realy need to switch car every 4 ou every 2 years? I don't think so, but they keep 'em coming, like hot bread!
Isn't the market to be saturated?

Can an economist explain this to me? I don't understand 😖

sliderider wrote:

The Gecko wrote:

That model is failing them pretty badly everywhere except the business world - but even there, it's starting to falter. How many […]
Show full quote

That model is failing them pretty badly everywhere except the business world - but even there, it's starting to falter. How many businesses do you know that jump on every new Windows release rather than riding out the versions they already have, because they're cheaper and are a known, well-used system that's not likely to suddenly change and introduce new problems for IT.

The "other businesses use MS Word so I have to use MS Word to interoperate with their documents/presentations/etc." lock-in is the strongest thing they have going for them, but even then, they're playing a dangerous game with that. You can use a pretty good online document editor/spreadsheet editor/presentation maker that works on any internet-connected computer and doesn't lock you into MS formats. Apple computers are massively popular with people in colleges and universities. It's not a good place for them to be.

But Microsoft HAS launched their version of the App Store now, with clauses that give them a hefty cut of every sale, same as Apple. They've clearly seen the success Apple has had there and want a piece of that pie. It's semi-optional right now in Windows 8... desktop apps can be downloaded and installed as per usual, but any "Metro" (or whatever they call it now) apps can only be purchased through the windows store. I see that as the direction they're going to push. The split desktop/metro interface thing is incredibly counterintuitive and stands in stark contrast to a lot of the design ideals and aesthetics on the "Metro" side of things - I see that as a stopgap measure so people can still use their existing software and they don't suffer a huge backlash when everything suddenly stops working. Likewise, I see them heavily pushing the "Metro" apps and eventually transitioning to them (and the windows store) exclusively.

They've invested a lot of developer time, money, and resources into building a whole new set of core software libraries, infrastructure for the windows store, and a whole new class of devices based on it (surface) - they wouldn't do that for something they thought would be a one-release sidenote and then abandon it all to go back to the old win API and classic desktop.

I can tell you there is going to be a lot of business users that will NOT be switching to Windows 8 simply because of the cost of having to retrain their workforce to use it. I don't know where Microsoft got the idea that making a radical alteration to Windows was in some way going to endear them to anyone. They ditched Longhorn in favor of Vista because it was too radical a departure from what people were used to and it seemed like they learned their lesson and then after the fiasco with Vista itself Microsoft cannot afford to be taking risks with their bread and butter product.

Considering XP lasted 10 years in the business environment, I may be able to ride out the win 7 thing until retirement (being a bit optimistic).
I don't see the business world adopting win 8 at all.

Filosofia wrote:

Can an economist explain this to me? I don't understand 😖

It's all about the money...

agree with Tetrium - it's all about the money

I really think that if certain people/companies get their way PCs will be reduced to data terminals, with all storage and applications accessed over the internet.

In the future we will be making war for ressources...

h-a-l-9000 wrote:

In the future we will be making war for ressources...

Just like in the present and the past 😜

h-a-l-9000 wrote:

In the future we will be making war for ressources...

In the future, Skynet will create Terminators... 😮

Well let's look at the way things are going even now:

1. It started with the product activation for XP (which was why I stayed away from it)

2. Office help files placed online - so you can't even pull up help without having an internet connection - the next step is you won't be able to install or use it without an internet connection

3. CD-ROMS for games that turn out to be glorified install disks requiring an internet connection for downloading and installing the "real" program

4. Dropping backwards compability with older programs

5. Changed file formats requiring you to purchase the latest versions

The pattern is clear: (1) they want to make it impossible for you to do anything with a computer without an internet connection (so everything you do can be monitored) (2) they want you to have to buy not just a new computer every year, but all new software as well.