Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel on track for 90nm technology

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
August 13, 2002 10:30:53 AM

<A HREF="http://hardocp.com/article.html?art=MzM4" target="_new">http://hardocp.com/article.html?art=MzM4&lt;/A>. Looks like the super fast processors for next year are right on schedule. 4GHz, here we come!

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
August 13, 2002 9:08:29 PM

4 ghz too easy 6 ghz will be hard to get

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 14, 2002 3:44:54 AM

Not really if you take into consideration that the P4 can be scaled up to 10 GHtz without any major changes made to the general architecture.

Knowledge is the key to understanding
Related resources
August 14, 2002 7:36:31 AM

Intel estimated that, although I'm not really too sure about that one. It may be just the ALU at 10 GHz. In a 5 GHz P4 (or Prescott), the ALU would run at 10 GHz.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
August 14, 2002 1:51:51 PM

I have to admit that while I don't like the idea of falling for a fluff-bunny marketting love-in, I am admittedly a <i>lot</i> more impressed by this than I am by anything I've seen on AMD's Sledge Hammer (sorry <i>Opteron</i>) so far.

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 14, 2002 6:20:13 PM

I think but let say it will be socket compatible but maybe not for the chipset.

Now the big question what after presscott there nothing on the roadmap

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 14, 2002 6:20:41 PM

I think but let say it will be socket compatible but maybe not for the chipset.

Now the big question what after presscott there nothing on the roadmap

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 14, 2002 7:19:57 PM

I just find it funny how many idiots pop up when announcements like this come out...
Taken from a Yahoo finance post yesterday:
"AMD is 100% on 0.13u technology, Intel is about 50%.

AMD sampling 0.09u in Q4 of 2002 and moving to full production of 0.09u in 2H2003, Intel is talking about sampling 0.09u in the Oregon R&D fab in 2H2003.

With each press release Intel shows itself to be falling further behind in technology. "
-- c5th_e_n

He he he, people crack me up.

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 14, 2002 7:37:09 PM

Yeah me too. It seems the way Intel is doing it, it's taking years of competition into one single upgrade of physics. It feels like they want to just kill whatever is out there. I almost get a bad aura of monopoly feel.

AMD better have some innovation soon, because the more Intel talks, the more they gain. AMD has yet to speak much these days, and often nothing but bad news comes out. Not a good year as I first predicted.

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 14, 2002 11:03:58 PM

Nah, if Intel would have wanted to kill all of the competition, they would have dropped their ASPs by 100 bucks a piece. Intel likes having companies like AMD around to keep them out of the goverment's sights.

I believe AMD tried to break away from the idea of following Intel around and tried to approach .09 micron technology by themselves and hit the wall so to speak. So they've had to backtrack a little, and as a result have had to delay major releases. However why they have yet to refine their .13 micron technology is beyond me. When you're the underdog, you have to keep moving or die and I don't think it's quite time for them to die yet. But seriously, why the lack of .13 technology? You go to pricewatch and their are almost 2 pages for .13 products (completely the 2200), while Intel has 8 pages (a variety of different speeds and generations of processors). And i have no idea what AMD's flash is running on (possibly still .18). IMO, AMD needs to get moving fast, because there is hope in sight for the technology sector, and when the boom comes through, AMD will want to ride it just as much as Intel has set themselves up to. The 2.66 and 2.8 chips have got to be coming out soon, and rumors seem to be the only thing from the AMD sector right now. I say 2-3 weeks and either AMD will do something awesome and incredible, or Intel will, or both....who knows :)  It certainly is interesting though...

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 14, 2002 11:53:54 PM

I don't know really - PCs have saturated a good share of the US market. Performance leaps in technology haven't been breathetaking. PCs are still big old boxes, so general people don't see much of a difference except a bigger "hertz" number. And for email and AOL alot of people are learning they don't need a faster machine for it. In fact faster internet connections make the difference anymore. I had an old PC with broadband connection, and it sufficed just fine. My friend got a Pentium 4 1.5GHz with DDR when it first came out. I noticed how much faster things opened, but it was only a sec or two faster and when I got on the net with 56K connection my old clunker was a speed demon in comparasion. It's not a secret that the future of computing is in small, mobile, easy to use systems. People who are most interested in technology, people in the IT industry are getting laid off like bloody mad. IBM just announced it's axing 5% of it's work force, some 15K people over the next year. This and many other lay-offs are leaving the employed enthusiast group small. Yes, a tech push will happen again, but will it really be in the desktop sector? Will Intel and AMD be important in say 10 years when a good number of people will be able to have a handheld PC with tons of computing power, a fast wireless connection that is simple to use anywhere on Earth? Seems like companies making handheld chips may come out on top, like motorola and IBM.

I'll be honest, I love building computers and get excited at any release of faster technology. I do admit though that when handhelds become the desktop replacement and more appliance like (meaning little to no system tweaking and upkeep) I'll switch. Why sit in a dark corner of my home when I can be at the beach doing the same thing? The technology is coming together, and I seriously have my doubts about another PC buying spree by US customers unless something revolutionary happens and people can make a huge distinction from their current beige box from the next beige box. And as we've seen recently fast CPU's and new a windows version won't cut it.

"Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one"
August 15, 2002 3:36:33 AM

This hasn't been a good year for either company, but more so for AMD. They lost $185 million last quater.

Knowledge is the key to understanding
August 15, 2002 3:52:10 AM

The reason .13 micron Athlons are in short supply and aren't of very good quality is because AMD doesn't make them themselves. They pay UMC to make them. And I'm sure UMC is a very competent semi-conductor manufactuere, no general-purpose manufacturer can do something as well as a dedicated fab plant. AMD only has 1 fab plant currently working on processors, the one in Dresden, and that one's solely dedicated to Hammer production.
In short, the reason AMD's .13 micron tech is not what it's hyped up to be is because AMD isn't focusing on it. They're focusing on Hammer.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
August 15, 2002 7:15:17 AM

your are right herrr i dont like that but that MS job longhorn will put major pressure on CPU/VPU and on top lack of optimization so P6 16.0 GHZ will be need geforce 66.



The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 15, 2002 8:13:38 AM

it's fun routing for the underdog. but when reality hits, we'll just have to face it and move on.. what i'm interested in knowing is why Moore hasn't revised his stupid fake law yet? there is such a thing as over designing. semis sweat it out to get better things to market so fast (slow to some people, ah an example of the theory of relativity) that makes computers 1 year old obsolete. its nice, but do we need it that much faster that much sooner? of course, they think so. why? capitalism=greed! nothing new.

moore already revised it a couple times already, i'd think this kind of economy would be a good time to rethink it again or abandon it altogether.

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>
August 15, 2002 12:11:32 PM

Quote:
The reason .13 micron Athlons are in short supply and aren't of very good quality is because AMD doesn't make them themselves. They pay UMC to make them. And I'm sure UMC is a very competent semi-conductor manufactuere, no general-purpose manufacturer can do something as well as a dedicated fab plant. AMD only has 1 fab plant currently working on processors, the one in Dresden, and that one's solely dedicated to Hammer production.
In short, the reason AMD's .13 micron tech is not what it's hyped up to be is because AMD isn't focusing on it. They're focusing on Hammer.


UMC won't start making AMD CPUs until next year according to AMD. AMD's .13 process technology is just fine. The problem they ran into was an unexpected issue with the TBred die shrink itself, NOT with the process.

Probably the reason why 2200 XPs are in short supply is AMD is culling the better speed chips for 2400 or 2600 release in the next few weeks or month.

Mark-

<font color=blue>When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!</font color=blue>
August 15, 2002 1:59:37 PM

Damn! The server must be going through some crazy shiznit. Hopefully I got the right icon. Since I only speak English, it's kinda hard to tell which selection under "Ikon til indlægget" is crazy. Heh heh. Oh well. Should be interesting.

Anywho...

Quote:
I just find it funny how many idiots pop up when announcements like this come out...
Taken from a Yahoo finance post yesterday:
"AMD is 100% on 0.13u technology, Intel is about 50%.

AMD sampling 0.09u in Q4 of 2002 and moving to full production of 0.09u in 2H2003, Intel is talking about sampling 0.09u in the Oregon R&D fab in 2H2003.

With each press release Intel shows itself to be falling further behind in technology. "
-- c5th_e_n

He he he, people crack me up.

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games

Can you provide an URL for us? That's just too insane to believe that anyone could be saying it with a straight face.

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 15, 2002 2:49:43 PM

Hmmm, looking over the news report apparantly AMD is venturing into a joint owned 300 mm wafer fab plant with UMC scheduled for 2005. Must've gotten that mixed up. One wonders where they're producing Athlons then. Of that I'm aware, Dresden has been completely converted towards Hammer production and the one in Texas has been converted to flash memory production.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
August 15, 2002 2:51:16 PM

Quote:
I don't know really - PCs have saturated a good share of the US market.

True enough, but then a lot of that saturation is with really old clunkers, and most of those aren't going to survive for much longer. With the way people treat their PCs (mostly, with the way that they <i>never</i> clean out the dust) they're bound to start failing sooner or later.

Quote:
And for email and AOL alot of people are learning they don't need a faster machine for it.

While true and a good thing, sadly there are still a lot more people who <i>don't</i> know that. They just go by what the salesperson tells them that they need, which is usually something insane like an extremely over-priced Wilty (P4 Willamette Celeron) with 100MHz SDRAM and a TNT2 graphics card.

Quote:
In fact faster internet connections make the difference anymore. I had an old PC with broadband connection, and it sufficed just fine. My friend got a Pentium 4 1.5GHz with DDR when it first came out. I noticed how much faster things opened, but it was only a sec or two faster and when I got on the net with 56K connection my old clunker was a speed demon in comparasion.

Umm ... that's the point. Internet performance is driven primarily by bandwidth and secondarily by hard drive speed. CPU has virtually nothing to do with the internet, nor even memory. After all, 56K doesn't even come close to saturating a PCI bus, not to mention memory bandwidth or CPU power. (Though if you have an old enough PC, you can find that your hard drive is slowing you down.)

Quote:
It's not a secret that the future of computing is in small, mobile, easy to use systems.

No, it's a farse that the future of computing is small, mobile, and easy-to-use systems. It's a myth. There is barely even enough market for PDAs for all of the vendors to keep from tearing into each other like a pack of wild dogs. And that isn't likely to change even in ten years.

Just like the myth of the PC becoming a replacement for the TV as a home-entertainment center, the future of PCs is not voice-driven pocket PCs. There will always be niche markets for the strange, but it is not likely to <i>ever</i> be more than a niche market, no matter how hyped a story you get from Bob The Marketting Drone.

Quote:
People who are most interested in technology, people in the IT industry are getting laid off like bloody mad. IBM just announced it's axing 5% of it's work force, some 15K people over the next year. This and many other lay-offs are leaving the employed enthusiast group small.

What great logic that is. A whole 5% get laid off (meaning that a whole 95% are still employed) and suddenly the majority of computer enthusiasts are unemployed? In case you haven't been keeping tabs, the whole US economy is verging on the fringe of a recession. Almost <i>every</i> company is 'restructuring to eliminate unnecessary overhead'. It isn't <i>just</i> the IT sector being hit.

Quote:
, a tech push will happen again, but will it really be in the desktop sector?

Damn straight it will. With the excessive prices and limited upgradability of laptops and the near-uselessness of PDAs (as a regular computing device that is) companies are still (and at this rate <i>always</i>) going to be looking for the good old Beige Beastie. (Even if a lot of them are black instead of beige these days.)

Quote:
Will Intel and AMD be important in say 10 years when a good number of people will be able to have a handheld PC with tons of computing power, a fast wireless connection that is simple to use anywhere on Earth? Seems like companies making handheld chips may come out on top, like motorola and IBM.

1) Maybe you haven't noticed, but INTEL MAKES PDA CPUS AS WELL. So even if your warped view of the future were to somehow astound the world by becoming true, Intel at the least will still be a part of that game.

2)Handhelds will <i>never</i> have even a quarter of the computing power of the most modern desktop PCs, and they don't even begin to compare to a workstation. So long as people need computational power to do their daily work, no PDA or tablet PC will ever suffice.

3) I highly doubt that there will <i>ever</i> be such a thing as "a fast wireless connection that is simple to use anywhere on Earth". It's a ludicrous concept. First you would need actual coverage of everywhere on Earth. Satellites don't even come close to covering that, <i>and</i> they would require you to be completely stationary while using them.

Then you would need it to actually be fast. Satellite internet connection imposes a serious delay which makes internet gaming virtually impossible. No matter how fast they are, you still have to somehow beam data from and to the satellite, which takes time. (Unless someone can somehow design a faster-than-light comm unit.)

Wireless radio networks are extremely range-limited and require millions if not billions of access points if you were to cover the whole world. It's a worthless persuit as well for sheer price and complexity alone.

nja469, I don't know where you get your information from, but you're only parroting the drivel of marketting zombies. Your views on the future of PCs are just as warped as the ludicrous claims made during the dot-com era. (And we've all seen how <i>that</i> turned out.) The whole point of hiring a marketting staff is to have expert liars weave the web of a ludicrous future into the believable so that they can hock useless wares.

If you want to stick to them and hang on their every word, go right ahead. Meanwhile the rest of the world will continue to go on using desktop PCs. They <i>might</i> get smaller (maybe even the size of a Game Cube, though that's many years off still) but they'll <i>never</i> be replaced for the pure simple reason that handheld PCs will <i>never</i> have the computational power needed.

Just to give you something to mull over, in case you haven't heard, one of the next major operating system breakthroughs (even if it is an extremely old idea that is only finally being implemented) will be using 3D acceleration in the OS's GUI. Primarily it will be to run 'windows' as textures, but it should also allow for things like 3D icons as well as other nifty eye candy. Microsoft is working on it, and Linux might even follow. (If the open source community can ever really get it's act together and decide on a universal scheme for a GUI that is.) PDAs, having <i>no</i> 3D acceleration, would never get away with this. Heck, they can't even run full versions of Word or Windows! They're extremely storage and memory limited and processor-hindered. They're good for writing email, but damned if you could ever play a decent game on them or dare I suggest actually <i>work</i> on one.

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 15, 2002 2:55:56 PM

From what I've picked up, the complete conversion to Hammer is a future goal and not a current reality. As is the Texas no longer kicking out CPUs. (I believe that they're still kicking out some Durons for some odd reason.)

Of course, should I be wrong on either of these accounts, I would appreciate the correction. :) 

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 15, 2002 5:09:06 PM

Gosh i wish i did, i only got the post, not the url. I like to keep really dumb posts in a txt file for whatever reason. There have been things from this forum that made it into there, lol. But the financial boards are much more exaggerated and hilarious :) 

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 15, 2002 5:18:48 PM

That hurts, I would never sell one of my customers some over priced peice of crap. Just couldnt bring myself to it. Your perception of sales persons is very clouded i would seriously rethink your views on them. Cause there are honest ones like me out there.

-Jeremy

<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue> :smile:
August 15, 2002 5:40:54 PM

Quote:
That hurts, I would never sell one of my customers some over priced peice of crap. Just couldnt bring myself to it. Your perception of sales persons is very clouded i would seriously rethink your views on them. Cause there are honest ones like me out there.

Don't get me wrong, some salespeople are cool. Usually those are the ones who actually have a clue what they're even selling. Heh heh.

Unfortunately, I've met <i>way</i> more uneducated clods pushing tin than I have skilled PC salespeople. I even had a Rad-Shak drone try to tell me once that 100MHz RAM (PC100) is a perfect match for a 100MHz FSB CPU. I suppose I should have at least been impressed that he even knew a P4 was a 100MHz FSB, not the typical marketting misnomer of 400MHz. Still, would <i>you</i> want your P4 running on PC100 RAM?

As of yet I have a single salesperson that I've met <i>in person</i> who even knows what CAS Latency means, not to mention can actually tell me what CL RAM is in their system.

The local OEM seems that my company bought my PC from seems to be completely clueless how to install a simple case fan. (The first PC of theirs the fan wasn't even attached. It was swinging around inside the case freely. The second PC had the fan facing the wrong way, thus killing my air flow.)

The OEM that I bought my home computer from tried to sell me a 145 watt power supply for an insane amount of money when I diagnosed that my 120 watt power supply was vastly underpowering my system.

And then there are the tons of sales droids pushing XP <b>HOME</b> on their PCs.

But my absolute favorite one of all, is Best Buy. When the brand new hard drive failed to work at all, and when Scandisk revealed countless surface errors, they actually tried to blame the problems on the fact that Scandisk was run and took an extreme amount of convincing to even get them to replace the obviously faulty hardware as they tried to blame it on improper installation.

I'm sorry, but I've been to plenty of PC shops to browse and occationally upgrade my Celeron 500. (It needed a LOT of upgrading when I first bought it.) I've yet to meet a <i>single</i> salesperson at <i>any</i> PC shop that is both knowledgable <i>and</i> honest.

So far the <i>only</i> knowledgable and honest PC salespeople and techs that I've ever met are over the 'net. And sadly, even those are rare.

If you're hurt, then I'm sorry. However, if you actually believe that there are many friendly, educated, and honest PC salespeople out there, then it is <i>you</i> whos "perception of sales persons is very clouded".

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 15, 2002 6:22:37 PM

Okay, my warped little view will try to explain things better for you since your brain seems very narrow if not closed. While you're sitting at home on your gamecube sized computer when your old, everyone else will be mobile and having a life. As for the economic part, it isn't just IBM, intel recently cut jobs and many other tech companies have laid off or plan to. I'm not making up the lack of tech sales.

I know computers will get smaller. They will also have enough power to replace the desktop. It won't happen overnight, and unless you're the CEO of Sprint, Verizon or other big name wirless companies don't even try to tell me what won't be invested in for the future. Maybe the "Earth" was overstating the fact, but in any non-3rd world country should have service. You've totally ignored WAP servies and bluetooth. Any decent sized city could setup a wirless internet network in a decade or two. But cell technologies by then will also have greatly improved, they already are twice as good in Japan than here.

Granted PDA's right now suck, but I'm not talking about PDAs. I'm talking about PC's the size of PDAs. It's your view that is warped and lacks any imagination of progress in technology if you think things won't shrink significantly in a decade or two. We went from a computer the size of a room 50 years ago, to desktops that are countless times faster. But now you say we have to stop, no more progress? Sorry to bust your bubble, since your opinion won't always be right, the technology is already in the works buddy boy. The EUV light process, expected in 2007 will carve transistors in silicon wafers which will lead to microprocessors that are up to 100 times faster than today's most powerful P4 chips and much be much smaller. I'm not making this up, google search it for yourself. Memory chips will have similar increases in storage capacity with this process. Do I even need to explain nanotechnology that IBM is working very deligently on? Eventually they could make harddrive platters and heads smaller than human hair. They already have made press releases with pictures of working clock gears smaller than the human eye can even see. Here's directly from IBM news "In the computer industry, the ability to shrink the size of transistors on silicon microprocessors will soon reach its limits. Nanotechnology will be needed to create a new generation of computer components. Molecular computers could contain storage devices capable of storing trillions of bytes of information in a structure the size of a sugar cube". And unless you missed this bit of news a month or so back a company is refining the process of being able to write computer circuitry on glass and other solid objects.

We'll see what happens in 10-15 years, and I'm betting it's a lot smaller and mobile than your dream gamecube sized computer.

"Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one"
August 15, 2002 6:56:30 PM

Do you have something against XP Home PCs?
I have it, but I am wondering what seems to be the prob owning it?

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 15, 2002 7:06:31 PM

Yeah, why's XP home so bad? I've tried XP Home and I use XP Pro, and I really don't see a difference.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 15, 2002 7:46:35 PM

Quote:
While you're sitting at home on your gamecube sized computer when your old, everyone else will be mobile and having a life.

Funny how you seem to assume that you need to have a computer in order to have a life. Why, to listen to your gibberish I would think that it was against the laws of nature to go to the beach and actually swim or fish or walk or <i>anything</i> other than use a computer.

Man with PDA: "Hi honey. I'm having a great time at the beach!"
Man's Wife: "What have you done so far?"
Man with PDA: "Oh, I went to a chat room where we discussed the dangers of swimming with real live fish. Then I checked my email, placed a bid on a new swimming suit on eBay, and then called you."
Man's Wife: "Sounds like a great time. When will you be home?"
Man with PDA: "Oh, as soon as I finish writing up my journal on how fun my day at the beach was. I should be home soon."

Is it me, or is there an inherant flaw in your logic here...

Quote:
As for the economic part, it isn't just IBM, intel recently cut jobs and many other tech companies have laid off or plan to. I'm not making up the lack of tech sales.

Der! Hello? Welcome to the fringes of a recession! Tech sales aren't the <i>only</i> sales that have gone down. Nearly <b>all</b> sales have. Tech companies aren't the only companies cutting jobs. <b>Many</b> companies are. Do you live in a bubble or something to have not noticed this?

Quote:
and unless you're the CEO of Sprint, Verizon or other big name wirless companies don't even try to tell me what won't be invested in for the future.

1) How do you know that I'm <i>not</i> the CEO of Sprint, Verizon, or some other big name wireless company?
2) Why <i>should</i> you believe the marketting drivel of a wireless company? They're only going to lie to you to hock their wares. If you listen to anyone, listen to an engineer. They don't get crap for all that they do for a company. They'll give you the <i>real</i> dirt.
3)When did I ever state that these technologies won't be invested in? Look at how much investment has gone into 3G services. Yet now it looks like those investments are going to go completely to waste. Hmm. But that <i>never</i> happens in your warped view of the world, I'd imagine.

Quote:
Maybe the "Earth" was overstating the fact, but in any non-3rd world country should have service.

Overstating the fact? Even suggesting that any country that isn't a 3rd world country would have complete 100% coverage is ludicrous. Do you realize that even in the USA, the technical marvel that they supposedly are, there isn't even 100% coverage of cable and/or DSL yet? Yes, that's right. You can actually live in places in the US without having any sort of an option for a high-speed internet connection other than sat. (And I've already gone over the problems with sat.) And you think that in a mere ten years every respectable country will have complete 100% coverage of <i>all</i> of their land for some sort of wireless internet connection? Can you hear my laughter from that far away?

Quote:
You've totally ignored WAP servies and bluetooth.

Uh huh. And what exactly do you think I was talking about when I said "<font color=blue>Wireless radio networks are extremely range-limited and require millions if not billions of access points if you were to cover the whole world. It's a worthless persuit as well for sheer price and complexity alone.</font color=blue>"? I already made my argument for just why they won't do any better than a satellite would.

If you would like me to add to that though, I can also go into the complexity of a dense overlapping of wireless networks to keep their radio signals from interfering with each other. Or I could go into the very simple fact that even cel phones don't have 100% coverage in the US. So what makes you think that 10 years from now wireless networks will not only cover that much, but practically the whole world?

Quote:
Any decent sized city could setup a wirless internet network in a decade or two. But cell technologies by then will also have greatly improved, they already are twice as good in Japan than here.

Yes, any decent-sized city <i>could</i> set up a wireless internet network in a decade or two. However will even <i>every</i> major city do so? Debatable. Will <b>every</b> "decent sized" city do so? Fat chance. We can't even get decent celular service away from the major cities yet.

You see, there is this little thing called cost. It costs a crap load to put up a cel phone relay. On top of that, you also have to actually find someone willing to allow you to put one on their property and/or have to buy your own property. There are numerous places where this is not worth either the effort or the cost, and so you have to live with either a really crappy cel phone connection (which would <i>never</i> suffice for an internet connection) or no service at all.

Quote:
Granted PDA's right now suck, but I'm not talking about PDAs. I'm talking about PC's the size of PDAs.

Do please explain the difference between a PDA with a decade or two of advancements and a PC in ten or twenty years that is the size of a PDA. I'd love to hear this one.

Quote:
It's your view that is warped and lacks any imagination of progress in technology if you think things won't shrink significantly in a decade or two. We went from a computer the size of a room 50 years ago, to desktops that are countless times faster. But now you say we have to stop, no more progress? Sorry to bust your bubble, since your opinion won't always be right, the technology is already in the works buddy boy.

Oh really. Well, why don't we look a decade or two into the past then, shall we? Let's see, we had the C=64 and the C=128. We had the Amiga, all manner of Apples, even an Atari PC. We had Tandy. We even had the Commodore Pet. If you recognize even half of these, then you will notice that they all have two things in common. The first is that they're all extinct, having been replaced by something more powerful. The second is that they were all <b>MUCH</b> smaller than computers are today.

So the trend over the <b>last twenty years</b> has been for computers to get <b>larger</b> in size. Even with all of those great technological advancements that allow us to build small computers, we keep making them bigger and bigger and bigger.

Why do you suppose that is?

It's quite simple really. A larger computer has less proprietary interfacing and/or built-in devices. This makes it much more upgradable. A larger computer also has more <i>room</i>. This allows for more functionality and more <b>power</b>.

Computers never have and never will be primarily driven by size. They are driven by processing power first, expandable functionality second, and upgradability third. Frankly, except for the rare few fanatics, size doesn't matter.

(Hey, that almost sounded dirty... Heh heh.)

So to correct your great innacuracy, we went from concept computers the size of rooms to computers the size of large keyboards. THEN we went from such small computers to computers the size of small filing cabinets. Given this trend, why would anyone expect to see everyone walking around with PDAs and wrist-watch computers in just ten years? In even twenty years?

Quote:
We'll see what happens in 10-15 years, and I'm betting it's a lot smaller and mobile than your dream gamecube sized computer.

And I'm <i>sure</i> that the typical PC in 10 years will <i>not</i> be any smaller than a Game Cube.

As for nano-technology, what makes you think that it will even be legal by the time that it becomes reality? It is an extremely contravercial topic and at this rate, it is also highly likely that if nanites ever do exist, it will only be illegally and/or for a very brief period of time.

Quote:
Molecular computers could contain storage devices capable of storing trillions of bytes of information in a structure the size of a sugar cube".

And if you had asked someone twenty years ago how many bytes of RAM they would have expected us to be able to have in our time now, do you think they would have come even close to 4GB? (And I won't even go into the extreme amounts that servers can have.)

Now, answer this for me. Your first post stated that palm-sized wireless computers will be networked <b>anywhere in the world</b> in just <b>ten</b> years. Now you've changed from coverage over the entire Earth to just in 2nd and 1st world countries. You've also changed from 10 years to as far as <b>twenty</b> years.

For someone who believes so strongly in their fluff-bunny marketting bologna, you sure do keep changing your scope a <b>lot</b>.

I'm sorry, but so far your limited attempts at providing actual logic to your rebuttals have been pretty lacking. If you intend to continue this debate, please do try to give it a little more effort and not just parrot the typical garbage that marketting people have been feeding you without giving reasons for <i>why</i>.

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 15, 2002 8:51:57 PM

lol, good discussion here guys. though, in 20 years, i'd rather be sporting wrist watch or a pair of shades than carting a server for all my computer needs. i don't know much about technology, but i'd think it can easily improve dramatically with the current infrastructure. with the right technology in a couple decades (that's 20 years for the thickheaded) who says i can't d/l a full-length movie from a satelite in the time it took you to read this. who says i can't give a presentation at the beach wearing a nice pair of shades to a group of board members sweating away where the servers are kept. ok i know i know, just let me dream a little sheeshers.

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>
August 15, 2002 9:35:12 PM

LOL this guy is insane, and I don't have time to argue with people who have a lack of imagination and think they know it all. Anything contradictory to this guys point of view and you'll get reemed since he has to be right. He's God, and he knows what is going on inside every tech company and he somehow know their secrets and the next 20 years of technology evolution. I cannot keep a straight face when reading the replies of this loon, so I won't comment on this post anymore. It will be a redundant "IM RIGHT GO AWAY, COMPANIES DONT PLAN ON INNOVATING EVER"

So I'll concede, GOD you win. No more innovation people. The ball stops here. If all of mankind was as narrow minded as him we'd still be cavemen. LOL..

Caveman: "Look I'm making a wheel, one day it might have many uses"

SLVR: "Umm no I don't like that, it's illegal. So go away and don't try to improve life ever again, no more inventing either, damn you and your imagination"

SLVR you crack me up. How can you discredit every single new technology just to say you're right and in 20 years nothing new will take place? Yes you are a god, a goddamn moron.

"Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one"
August 16, 2002 3:56:01 PM

Quote:
lol, good discussion here guys. though, in 20 years, i'd rather be sporting wrist watch or a pair of shades than carting a server for all my computer needs. i don't know much about technology, but i'd think it can easily improve dramatically with the current infrastructure. with the right technology in a couple decades (that's 20 years for the thickheaded) who says i can't d/l a full-length movie from a satelite in the time it took you to read this. who says i can't give a presentation at the beach wearing a nice pair of shades to a group of board members sweating away where the servers are kept. ok i know i know, just let me dream a little sheeshers.

Oh, there <i>will</i> be such handy little toys. And that's exactly what they'll be, are toys. Just like PDAs are today. The sheer computational power just won't compare to a typical PC made from the same technology.

However, it should be then be enough for a CEO to give a presentation at the beach to all of his lackies back at HQ.

You could even do it today with a sat relay and a laptop. (And if you're lucky, with some of the new cel phones that come out, though the quality of the images there will be crap.)

The point is, while these handy devices will always exist (there were PDA-like devices long before the actual PDA existed) they simply will never be able to replace the desktop PC, no matter how good technology gets. They will always be a niche market only.

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 16, 2002 4:07:32 PM

nja469, buy a clue already. I never once said "RIGHT GO AWAY, COMPANIES DONT PLAN ON INNOVATING EVER". If you actually took the time to read what I said instead of acting like a spoiled fifteen-year-old, you'd have noticed that.

I said that despite the innovations that companies will try to endevor into, miniature computers will always be a niche market only and the resources that went into those innovations will be generally wasted. Look at VIA's C3. Look at 3G. Look at Transmeta. None of them had <i>bad</i> ideas. However, none of them either had ideas that the majority of the public actually <i>wanted</i> or had the means to properly hook up customers either.

And in only <b>10</b> years there is no way in hell that the entire Earth, or even 100% of all 1st and 2nd world countries, will be under a magical blanket of wireless networking.

One of us has actually been providing logic, backed up by previously-proven trends. One of us has been parroting the crap that a marketting department feeds the ignorant without providing any real logic to back up that crap. One of us has been constantly broadening the originally-stated time frame while simultaniously narrowing the scope of coverage. It's pretty clear who the "goddamn moron" is.

Quote:
LOL this guy is insane

Thank you for the complement. Only sane people believe the lies that the world feeds them without bothering to question them or even look for the truth.

And nja469, do have a <i>nice</i> day. :) 

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 16, 2002 11:35:31 PM

O-oh ... Somebody has had a little less then nice day apparently ... Though the things you say are not entirely un-true ... Come on! Let there be room for imagination (and it's inaccuracies)! Let there be room for the language to have it's freedom (and it's inaccuracies)! Let there be room for the power of a rough estimation (and it's inaccuracies)! You really are too harsh, Slvr (at least in my humble opinion). Anyway, I have got some short things to say:

What about UMTS? That thing is only two or three years away from getting used in every (new) cellphone you buy, and does promise us (yes, the merketing guys tell us, but why not believe them on this one?) quite a bandwidth for a mobile device.
What about Europe? In the to most of the world-citizens unknow country I live in, Belgium, about 95% of the homes is connected to the cable-network and thus 95% of the people do have access to broadband-internet. Count in ADSL in, and you get up to 97 or 98%. Gets quite close to the 100%, no? Also concerning the cell-phones, here in Belgium Proximus, our major cell-phine-provider, offers a 99.5% coverage of our terretory. Not bad, huh ...
What about current sattelite telephone? Ok, it is tremendously expensive, but you can make a phine call everywhere on earth, nowadays already, providing a true 100% coverage, even in the middle of the Sahara. Ok, it is no broadband connection, but ten or twenty years is quite long, so it might get broadband. Who knows ... (Though it is certain that it will remain tremedously expensive)
Ah, well, I could go like this quite some bit more, but in one way or another, I do not like to correct and break down everything the other people say, and, en plus, I don't have enough English-skills to do it as eloquently as you do.

Goodnight, gentlemen, let's go and dream of the bright future ahead ...

Bikeman
PS: Just found out that actually 99% of the Belgians has Cable-television ... Cool, huh?

<i>Then again, that's just my opinion</i>
August 17, 2002 12:04:28 AM

Well, ya know what? If people decided to stop buying PC's tomorrow, there would be no PC's. Consumer need dictates everything. So if everyone wants PDA's that perform like desktops, and don't want to own desktops......then you will see PDA's that perform like desktops. Let's also keep in mind at some point CPU technology will top off. That will be due to the cost to improve manufacturing processes. Then you will have a more level processor playing field. Similar procs in handhelds, and in Desktops. I understand your point of PC's will always be faster than any handheld device.....but supercomputers are faster than handheld devices also, and there isnt one of those on the avg. desktop. I think the point being made by others is that the PC will become obsolete......Yes, they will exist, but not as many people will own em. Could be internet appliances w/ a pair of 3D goggles, or some sorta hologram, who knows what will be commonplace. Ever read Tom Clancy's Net Force? There's some interesting concepts there. Another thing.......10-20 yrs? Some of you could be dead.....we all could be dead. Here's what I think. Governments all over the world will outlaw all electronics cause of new "thinking" software invented 5 yrs from now that threatens world domination.....That statement is as true as everyone elses in this thread. You can't base the future of technology on past trends. PCs are in more households now than they were in the 80's because of multimedia advancements, and the internet. Something may come along that proves to be more practical, and cost effective than PC's. X-Box Live! is coming, and that threatens PC Gaming.......A lot of people here use their rigs for Gaming alone. Not saying one is better than the other, but a selling point for the PC as a game machine was internet play. Things along those lines can hurt the PC in the future, and make it less mainstream like it was in the 80's.

This sig runs too hot.
!