> Does anyone actually *need* a gigahertz on the road?
I assure you that I am an infinite computation sink. I need quantum array
processors just to handle the UI for the really compute-intensive stuff.
A gigahertz starts us on a path where you can do significant DSP (even in
CISC IA32) , which is even more interesting in a laptop than a desktop,
because of the audio/video field recording and performance possibilities.
It's a pity there are no power-saving Alphas.
My cousin's DJ setup can today migrate to a laptop with a DJ-style hardware
interface (or maybe just a couple of trackballs). I'd love to have all my
sound engines in a laptop and just carry a simple MIDI keyboard or guitar.
DSP is old hat at this point. I don't know what the next killer app will be.
It will probably have a UI that is 3D and contains rather good AI. And your
portable computer (even if it is built into your handkerchief probably still
won't go on a cross-country plane flight on one battery.
I just do not understand people who think we've hit a pinnacle, or at least
the most performance that anyone really needs. History shows that software
emerges that will make use of it. I live in anticipation of that software,
so I'm always in favor of performance increases.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 27 2001 - 23:14:21 PDT