In 10-15 years...?

[~Shard~]

umm.No.
Nevertheless, the larger point remains. We may have moved beyond even tactile interaction by then. Thought-screens and the like...

I know where you're coming from, and I enjoy speculating on unthinkable things of that nature as well, however keep in mind the OP is saying the next 10-15 years, not 50. I think there will indeed be great advancements and breakthroughs in the next 10-15 years, but nothing too extreme, such as thought-screens. Not yet at least.

 

[Peyton]

OK, I'm 20, I've never known a time without a computer in the house.

Call me old fashioned but not having a shiny box, the physical presence of a comp is not quite as fun as it is now. Something is quiant about buying a comp the way they are now. Its just a lot to think about, think about where we were 10 years ago. 1996. steve wasn't even at apple yet, computers were ugly, slow, etc.

10 years from now I can imaging people having servers in their houses. Instead of a comp for each room/kid they'll have wall jacks for a monitor (electical outlet most likely) and that's it. All wireless everything. I hope to high heaven they come out with a way to charge batteries wirelessly. Something huge has to happen though. nothing revolutionary has come out in a while, once it does the who computer industry will be upside down, internet will be a lot better (scripts etc).


AS FOR THE THOUGHT SENSING COMPUTERS! YIKES! Can you imagine searching google and seeing pictures of what ever thoughts pop in your perverted little head? Ummm, parental controls?

Something about a computer having the ability to read what I'm thinking, and the ability to store that information isn't as cute and cuddlely as what we see at the apple store 2oo6. Here's hoping for another 5 years of shiny little boxes and then another 5 years of amazing touch screens.

I'll be 30 when the 'thought comps' come out, maybe I'll be able to harness my mind by then.

 

[Timepass]

the hertz speed of a processor has absolutely nothing to do with the "speed of an electron". hertz is a unit of frequency; i.e. how many electrons pass a point in a given time. this can be increased by speeding up the electron, if it is not already at the speed of light, or by increasing the number of electrons in a stream. for instance, gamma radiation has a higher amount of energy than x-rays. is this because the gamma radiation moves faster? no. it is because the gamma radiation's frequency is much much shorter; the gamma radiation contains much more energy.

gamma rays, for example, range in the exahertz range. one exahertz is 1000 terahertz, where one terahertz is 1000 gigahertz. theoretically, the only possible limitation on how high frequency could in reality go would be defined by the planck length, a concept that's really not worth getting into here. and in theory, the frequency could be infinite.

to sum it all up, it's possible that in 10 years we will have made massive advances in heat reduction and we will be running 10 THz (terahertz, 1000 gigahertz) processors. however, this is pretty friggin' unlikely, as well as pointless.

</physics rant>

edit: oh yeah, i'm a highschool junior

umm yeah about that. might like to correct some things for you. For exampe eletrons obiting a hydrogen atom at about 1/5 the speed of light if I rememeber correctly and right now it is to late for me to bother trying to calculated it. Also noghting can go the speed of light and yes that includes eletrons. Electrons have mass and as you approuch the speed of light mass goes to infinenty. Theorry of relitivity such a pain to wrap you mind around it.

Also computer clock speed is not measured in the same since as light is message in (well very a lot the same). 1 hz I want to say is 1 step a sec if I rememeber right. It all based on how many steps the CPU takes given amount of time. Steps/sec is the formal I believe. 1 hz of light is 1 wave lenth per sec. For example sound it also messure in hz. not just light computers are no differnt. The thing you run into is the limiting factor is how fast electrons can move though metal and that is the speed I stated. They just dont move though atoms any faster than that. It not physicly possible.

Now take you poor high school phys and go learn some more. You are talking wiht some one who has gone well be on that little bit you learned in high school. HS phys is pretty much covered in the first half of phys 1408 (cal base phys) and does not even really get into dealing with eletrons and all those really fun calucations. That is in the next course.

So sorry to ruin you day in thinking you are right but I sorry light and eletrons are very differnt in how they be have.


Oh btw we have gotten an eletron up to over 99% the speed of light but things get very very heavy and take a ton of engery to do that and the electron was not attach to any atoms. It was in a valcum.

Up until a little past 1/5 the speed of light the formal F=MA works out just fine. After that you have to start using a formal dealing with reltivity saddly the my phys book that has that formal in it is about 600 miles away.

When you get to college you will learn that high school physic is a joke and a cake walk.

Man did I hate cal based phys II not my favorit thing to do.

 

[plinkoman]

in 15 years, the powermac(whatever they'll call it then) will have a brain in it, one thats telepathic. it will sense what you want it to do and do it before your even really sure thats what you wanted to do.

seriously, everyone here still thinks everything will be on the same architecture as it is now? there's only so much we can coerce a transistor to do. i think/hope in 15 years, pc's will be made completely different, and wont be in terms of GHz/FSB/GPU/RAM/hard drive etc...

 

[~Shard~]

When you get to college you will learn that high school physic is a joke and a cake walk.

Not to stray off-topic (but I'll do it anyway ), but physics itself isn't perfect. It is simply a model of only a fragment of the universe which we, primitive humans, are trying to grasp an understanding of. Physics is only half the picture of how the universe really works, and we have much to learn. Our understanding of light, electrons, atoms, time, etc. is very rudimentary and we by no means know how everything works. So in that respect I would argue that physics itself is a joke. Or at least, it is to anyone who thinks that it is absolute and blindly accepts it.

 

[johnbro23]

in 15 years, the powermac(whatever they'll call it then) will have a brain in it, one thats telepathic. it will sense what you want it to do and do it before your even really sure thats what you wanted to do.

seriously, everyone here still thinks everything will be on the same architecture as it is now? there's only so much we can coerce a transistor to do. i think/hope in 15 years, pc's will be made completely different, and wont be in terms of GHz/FSB/GPU/RAM/hard drive etc...

In the early 90's, computer architecture was very similar to what it is right now. Same input devices. Same basic functionality. Still has a hard drive, processor, memory, etc.

I don't think we will have computers in our carpet and paint or anything crazy like that.

Eventually, the number of computers will fall, with people replacing them with servers. Each new home will come standard with a server, just as each new home today comes standard with cable and telephone lines.

And look at what they were like in 1984 with the first Macintosh. If you really look at the big picture, it's not too much different than the iMac.

 

[plinkoman]

In the early 90's, computer architecture was very similar to what it is right now. Same input devices. Same basic functionality. Still has a hard drive, processor, memory, etc.

I don't think we will have computers in our carpet and paint or anything crazy like that.

Eventually, the number of computers will fall, with people replacing them with servers. Each new home will come standard with a server, just as each new home today comes standard with cable and telephone lines.

And look at what they were like in 1984 with the first Macintosh. If you really look at the big picture, it's not too much different than the iMac.

well, call it wishful thinking anyway. i just don't see the current way of doing things being able to get that much faster. there's only so small we can make a transistor. i imagine in the years to come, dual core will become much more common, and then quad core etc... as we really are reaching the limit of what a single cpu can do.

 

[zach]

umm yeah about that. might like to correct some things for you. For exampe eletrons obiting a hydrogen atom at about 1/5 the speed of light if I rememeber correctly and right now it is to late for me to bother trying to calculated it. Also noghting can go the speed of light and yes that includes eletrons. Electrons have mass and as you approuch the speed of light mass goes to infinenty. Theorry of relitivity such a pain to wrap you mind around it.

Also computer clock speed is not measured in the same since as light is message in (well very a lot the same). 1 hz I want to say is 1 step a sec if I rememeber right. It all based on how many steps the CPU takes given amount of time. Steps/sec is the formal I believe. 1 hz of light is 1 wave lenth per sec. For example sound it also messure in hz. not just light computers are no differnt. The thing you run into is the limiting factor is how fast electrons can move though metal and that is the speed I stated. They just dont move though atoms any faster than that. It not physicly possible.

Now take you poor high school phys and go learn some more. You are talking wiht some one who has gone well be on that little bit you learned in high school. HS phys is pretty much covered in the first half of phys 1408 (cal base phys) and does not even really get into dealing with eletrons and all those really fun calucations. That is in the next course.

So sorry to ruin you day in thinking you are right but I sorry light and eletrons are very differnt in how they be have.


Oh btw we have gotten an eletron up to over 99% the speed of light but things get very very heavy and take a ton of engery to do that and the electron was not attach to any atoms. It was in a valcum.

Up until a little past 1/5 the speed of light the formal F=MA works out just fine. After that you have to start using a formal dealing with reltivity saddly the my phys book that has that formal in it is about 600 miles away.

When you get to college you will learn that high school physic is a joke and a cake walk.

Man did I hate cal based phys II not my favorit thing to do.

i never said a thing about electrons moving at the speed of light. and yes, what you're saying is true, it is "impossible" to truly get an electron moving at the speed of light. i still don't see how this is relevant though, HERTZ DOES NOT MEASURE SPEED, END OF STORY.

if hertz speeds were limited by the speed of an electron, as you say, there would be no such thing as a 600 GHz transistor.

it's what portent said. all you have to do is move the components in a proc closer together, it has nothing to do with speed.

oh, and no need to bash my physics knowledge. i took basic highschool physics last year, then i took AP the first half of this year, now I'm in advanced physics that's dealing with nothing besides elementary particles (first half) and quarks (second half).

 

[plinkoman]

how did this turn into a violent physics debate?

 

[zach]

how did this turn into a violent physics debate?

sorry, it's my fault

 

[Kingsly]

I don't think Quantum computing will be available to anyone (besides perhaps the NSA and other alphabet agencies) because they are specifically suited for high end cryptography and such.
On the other hand, I do see us using DNA based computers (though not within 10-15 years).

One pound of DNA has the capacity to store more information than all the electronic computers ever built; and the computing power of a teardrop-sized DNA computer, using the DNA logic gates, will be more powerful than the world's most powerful supercomputer. More than 10 trillion DNA molecules can fit into an area no larger than 1 cubic centimeter (0.06 cubic inches). With this small amount of DNA, a computer would be able to hold 10 terabytes of data, and perform 10 trillion calculations at a time.

As for battery life, Lithium based batteries are getting better every day, and with this new portable fuel cell technology I can see people getting over eight hours of battery life. What would really be great would be if Steve's DNA was used in the processor and channeled to a miniature RDFA for power.
Also, I do believe a new UI will be implemented. Based on recent evidence (i.e. Shard's link) I can see people using Minority Report like UI's in 5/10/15 years...
Exciting Exciting Exciting Exciting Exciting Exciting Exciting Exciting Exciting!

Not to stray off-topic (but I'll do it anyway ), but physics itself isn't perfect. It is simply a model of only a fragment of the universe which we, primitive humans, are trying to grasp an understanding of. Physics is only half the picture of how the universe really works, and we have much to learn. Our understanding of light, electrons, atoms, time, etc. is very rudimentary and we by no means know how everything works. So in that respect I would argue that physics itself is a joke. Or at least, it is to anyone who thinks that it is absolute and blindly accepts it.

Lets not forget: Apple has already broken several laws of Physics.
Case in point:

At just one inch thin, MacBook Pro defies reason — and probably several laws of physics.

So, in a nutshell, I agree with ~Shard~.
Humans have just scratched the surface of understanding the physical world. We've got a long way to go-and I'm sure some amazing discoveries ahead of us. My only regret Is that I will die before they are all discovered... sigh...

 

[e-clipse]

Well...today, quadropalegics can perform simple tasks of a computer through their mind, with the help of electrodes. Who knows where we will be, that far in the future.

I can't wait to see the quantum technology!

 

[codom]

2016 Prediction

The top end Apple tower will have the following spec

AMD 125000 processor
600Gb RAM
125Tb Hard Drive
NVidia 17700GT with 1Tb RAM
HD-DVD 2 Extreme with 2TB storage per disc

MacOS XI 11.0 "Spinal Tap"

Price $999

 

[Timepass]

i never said a thing about electrons moving at the speed of light. and yes, what you're saying is true, it is "impossible" to truly get an electron moving at the speed of light. i still don't see how this is relevant though, HERTZ DOES NOT MEASURE SPEED, END OF STORY.

if hertz speeds were limited by the speed of an electron, as you say, there would be no such thing as a 600 GHz transistor.

it's what portent said. all you have to do is move the components in a proc closer together, it has nothing to do with speed.

oh, and no need to bash my physics knowledge. i took basic highschool physics last year, then i took AP the first half of this year, now I'm in advanced physics that's dealing with nothing besides elementary particles (first half) and quarks (second half).

I never stated it did. All I stated was the max speed that a CPU can go is is around 7ghz. That not messuring how much infomation is done. All that messuring is how fast the CPU goes completes 1 step.
There are several ways to increase a CPU speed. One meathod Intel been using for a while is to increase the number of steps it takes for a CPU to complete a task. The older PPC where a 4 step. AMD for a while was at 10 steps. Intel was higher. Increase the number of steps is one way to allow you to increase the clock speed (aka Mhz) easier and increase the total speed of a chip. Problem is this way is not very effect and keep doing it you are going to hit the brick wall in clock speed (around 7 ghz). The other way is to make the chip more efficent so it can move more data at a lower clock speed. Problem with this way is heat becames a bit harder to handle as you start pushing up the clock speed.

Right now 7 ghz is as fast as we are going to be able to do. It all a matter of how effenct the chip is. AMD and PPC are general more effeince than intel chips (this is a general rule. there are exationstion to it.)

All the hz speed messure is clock speed. Not how fast a chip is. In the oringal post I was just pointing out that the max clock speed is around 7ghz. That in no way tells you have fast a chip is. If you havent noticed everyon does not really measure there chips in their ghz speed so much. AMD name system was only really there because of intel marketing for a while clock speed was everything so they named there chips to show what speed of intel chips they match.

Reason I attack you in you high school physic knowleged is because you attack me stating you are ONLY a in high school trying to show me up with that limit HS knowleged so I going to attack it and insult you using it. The post would of lack that entire part if you never stated you where in HS and brag about only being in HS trying to make me look dumb. I sorry to say but that plan of your back fired big time.

 

[~Shard~]

<snip>

<snip>

Alright you two, no need to get into an OT argument. Timepass has more physics education, zach has better grammar and spelling skills. Can we just call it even?

Plus, as I said above, physics is only an attempt at understanding how things in the universe work anyway, so it's futile to take anything too seriously and as if it is written in stone when it comes to physics.

 

[Timepass]

<snip>

Alright you two, no need to get into an OT argument. Timepass has more physics education, zach has better grammar and spelling skills. Can we just call it even?

Plus, as I said above, physics is only an attempt at understanding how things in the universe work anyway, so it's futile to take anything too seriously and as if it is written in stone when it comes to physics.

theroy yes. As for what units stand for now that stuff is writen in stone :-D.


But more on topic. in 10-15 years where do I see use.

Hmm I going to have to say that we will no longer be using DVDs as a storage based media.
we would of left 64 bit by then moving on to 128 bit. Current way of doing processor will no longer be used. Maybe something dealing with biologic stuff or something we makes that emluates how things like brains work.

It be insteasting because law that computering power doubles everything 18 months still holds true and I expect it to still hold true for a while longer. I still find it prettying intersting how techological advance ments grow expontionally. Figure out one it makes makes new ones even easier to do.

 

[zach]

shard's right, no need to prolong this. i give up.

 

[WeeShoo]

Apple could very well be out of business.

Maybe, something better than Computers will be out, or we'll have something similar to the Computers in ''Minority Report'' with Tom Cruise.

 

[~Shard~]

Apple could very well be out of business.

Maybe, something better than Computers will be out, or we'll have something similar to the Computers in ''Minority Report'' with Tom Cruise.

I'll once again point you to my above post, if you haven't already viewed it.

 

[dsharits]

Simple - they will look like this.

After all, Apple already has patents on this technology.

Now THAT is awesome!

 

[generik]

In the early 90's, computer architecture was very similar to what it is right now. Same input devices. Same basic functionality. Still has a hard drive, processor, memory, etc.

All I can say to that is..

People in 1900 don't go "hey look, 100 years ago we don't even have machines. Heck, in fact for the most of human's existence through the past millions of years we had to produce through our own manual labour"

Progress is exponential, there is no telling what the future holds from the past

 

[sam10685]

The top end Apple tower will have the following spec

AMD 125000 processor
600Gb RAM
125Tb Hard Drive
NVidia 17700GT with 1Tb RAM
HD-DVD 2 Extreme with 2TB storage per disc

MacOS XI 11.0 "Spinal Tap"

Price $999

are u on crack?

 

[XraggedX]

What are you spoking too?

In 15 years quantum computers will be slated to be out in the market. *Everything* based on our 1s and 0s computers will look absolutely pathetic. We are talking about future computers that can crack any <1 billion zillion> bits encryption instantly, I should say so too.

Ram chips will probably be worth pennies on the dollar by then.

MMMMMMMmmmmmm. Quantum Computers, Nano Technology..... yummmmmmy. i cant freaking wait. My kids will look at me like im crazy when i tell them about about the old days when we computers that took 30+ min. to render a simple 3D animation or a few seconds to apply filters in photoshop and how our music came on round peices of plastic.

 

[MacTruck]

Simple - they will look like this.

After all, Apple already has patents on this technology.

Ummmm, WOW!

I think I just saw the computer my son will want in college.

 

[~Shard~]

Ummmm, WOW!

I think I just saw the computer my son will want in college.

How old is your son? This technology may come out sooner than we think...

I'm just wondering what type of graphics engine you need to drive something like that, let alone what type of preocessing power in general, and then ultimately what the overall cost would be, especially considering the size of the monitor you would require!