On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:52:58 Carl Turney wrote:
(Back before Windows 3.1) Hewlett-Packard released a
touchscreen system -- after great expense and much hoopla. (Light
sensors along top and right edges. LEDs along bottom and left edges.)
Immediately, the "real world" user base developed severe "gorilla
and the entire phenomenon was quietly strangled in a dark alley. Don't
know how many scapegoats lost their jobs at HP as a result.
The idea of a traditional desktop PC with a touch screen was a bad one.
However there does seem to be some benefit for a touch screen on a shared use
system (EG a PC used in a meeting room). Also the MS research that led to the
"Surface" tablet apparently started with a coffee-table touch display which is
also an idea that has some potential. I'd like to see a 4M*2M table that's
entirely a touch display for use in a meeting room.
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:59:23 Petros wrote:
I cannot see this working out in a world where more
and more people
using tablets, which are not really great devices for, let's say, a
person working with Excel or Word most of the day.
That really depends on what they are doing. Someone who is primarily reading
(EG proof-reading word documents) would probably find a tablet to be quite
Also a tablet can be placed into a stand and act like a desktop or laptop.
There's no technical reason why a tablet couldn't connect to an external
monitor of FullHD or better resolution and a full size keyboard. Being able
to use such a device with a full size monitor and keyboard at your desk and
quickly and easily carry it to a meeting room to use as a tablet would be a
significant advantage over the current way of doing things.
I am pretty sure MS does not want to lose this market
but Windows 8
does not seem to be the answer.
And I don't have a clear picture how a company network (and ours)
could look like in a few years time. I also wonder what bigger
companies, banks, big retail companies (the Coles head quarters in
Toronga must have close to 10 000 Windows PCs) do about it (to foresee
AutoCAD, e.g. is a market leader in CAD software for 20 years or so.
What will they do if the "Windows PC" disappears? How could the
engineer's workplace look like then?
The history of AutoCAD is worth reading. Apparently the first versions of what
later became AutoCAD were developed in a proprietary language to run on
PCs are getting really cheap $699 for an entry Dell PowerEdge tower server
(probably the minimum hardware for AutoCAD - you want ECC RAM for such
things). So if Autodesk was to sell specialised PCs for running AutoCAD it
would be a repeat of what they already did and it would be something that
would probably suit the market needs - any company that hires someone for 40
hours a week of AutoCAD work will probably be happy to pay extra for a PC
dedicated to AutoCAD use.
Also AutoCAD has cloud based versions of their software and support iOS and
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:41:13 Jason White wrote:
UNIX workstations were also expensive in those days;
Linus, according to
accounts that I've read, wanted to run a UNIX-like system on commodity
hardware, hence the Linux kernel project began.
In 1992 I offered to buy an unused Unix server from my university. The system
was outdated and unused but they still wanted $1000 for it. So I used an old
386 system with a value of about $300 running Linux.
64-bit ARM CPUs are under development for server
environments. Perhaps the
future of the high-end desktop workstation ultimately lies in that
Noise pollution has a significant impact on productivity. As hard drives are
being replaced by SSDs the main noise problem from a workstation is now the
CPU cooling fan and the PSU fan (which can idle if the CPU doesn't draw much
My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 with K-9 Mail.