OT: Even More Proof That PC's Are Dying

[Spectarofdeath]

"Unlikely to occur; if it was all on-demand, etc., it would be far too easy to avoid commercials...and as you no doubt know, they can't allow that to happen. Quite possibly it'll be on-demand, but AFTER it has already been broadcast in a (relatively) conventional fashion."

Sadly, the way I see this going is two ways, you pay a higher price for no commercials, where you will still get a few commercials, maybe 2 60 second spots for the sponsors, and a cheaper version that would be the same as watching tv now. This way, the networks will still get $$, the sponsors will still get some advertising time, and you as the consumer will not get anything "free". As far as the corps. and networks are concerned this would be the win-win scenario.

[MrToxin]

One of the problems with PC sales is something that was actually predicted a few years ago by a few experts.

The problem is, you can only make a CPU so fast with current architecture before it just quits getting faster. That's why there's all the hype over dual- or quad-core processors. When you can't make one gadget faster, stuff a few extra in. The problem is, we're getting into diminishing returns. This is also partly because of the speed.

Remember when 1 Ghz was fast? I remember when 200 Mhz was fast. I had no idea that I'd be sitting here with my 2.5 Ghz processor. Of course, adding 2 Ghz right now wouldn't be as drastic as the first 2 Ghz being added. Plus, the only way to do that now is to add a different processor, which only makes things more complex. You need to have multiple threads running with multiple processors, which some programs aren't equipped to handle.

On top of that, the most high-end computers are used by gamers, the movie industry, and musicians. There's the point where you have "enough" processing power and memory for word processing, e-mail, and intarnets. Somebody that only wants to check their e-mail, arrange a digital photo album, and maybe reduce some redeye here and there doesn't need a $3,000 monster machine with a high-tech video card with 4 GB of VRAM. No, the bargain bin computer will do them just fine. Of course, with all of the competition, computers keep getting cheaper and cheaper.

Meanwhile, the person that has no need for super high-end gear is most likely going to stick with that bargain bin computer until it explodes ten years from now.

Companies that realize this and are focusing on making more gadgets are thriving. Those that are not are starting to feel the pressure to make gadgets.

But, whatever...so long as I can buy a GPS/navigation system for my car for $20 in three years it's cool.

[capnq]

On a marginally related tangent, I've never heard of someone not getting two days worth of voicemail messages because they misplaced their land line.

I can only think of three occasions in the last two years where having a cell phone would have been helpful to me.