Future computers

[Catfish_Man]

Lately I've been thinking about what future (5-20 years future) computers are going to be like if some current research projects are succesful and current trends continue (this doesn't really involve Apple, just the industry in general). Here's what I came up with:

Current trend: Standardization (for example, all the ports have been simplified down to USB, Firewire, and Ethernet, as opposed to all the wierd ports that computers used to have. PS2, parallel, ADB, serial, etc... Also, everyone uses PCI and ATA now, there used to be LCIII slots and built in SCSI and all sorts of other things)
Result: Universal connector. Basically you take 10Gb ethernet (wireless ethernet?) and modify it so that you can hook peripherals to it as well as network (printers already can be hooked to ethernet networks, I think some drives can too). This makes it so that the computer only has one type of port that you can plug almost anything into (you'd probably make it a powered port like FW/USB also).

Current trend: Using parallelism whenever possible (MAJC, Hyperthreading, SMP, Crusoe, VLIW, Itanium, etc...)
Result: Multi-core VLIW processors similar to Sun's MAJC. (go to http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/majc/majc-1.html for more info on MAJC. It's really cool)

Research: Carbon nanotubes
Result: .001-.002 micron circuitry (if I remember correctly [I got this from a Technology Review article) and non-volital super high density ram. This would make it possible to do a 4 core processor in much less space/power and higher clockspeed than a single one of today's processors. Also, it would make booting up obselete, and make ram a useful storage device (no more hard drive?). Carbon Nanotubes should also bring flat displays down to the price of CRTs, but at higher resolutions.

What you get when you put these together is a very simple machine. Think of a laptop, then take out the hard drive. Replace it with more ram (ram that stores data when the power is off). Replace all the ports (and all the motherboard connections for those ports) with a single type of high speed one. Reduce the price. Make it ridiculously fast. Desktops would be essentially the same as laptops, but with a stand, and *maybe* a magnetic storage device of some sort (desktops tend to need more storage space).

 

[teabgs]

I don't know about 5 years, mayeb 10-20....but how's this for future computers....

A brand new Desktop 2.4GHZ DP G5 (I hope) w/ an LCD, DDR, faster bus sitting on my desk in the next 6-8 months. MMmmmmmm....Drool

 

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by teabgs
I don't know about 5 years, mayeb 10-20....but how's this for future computers....

A brand new Desktop 2.4GHZ DP G5 (I hope) w/ an LCD, DDR, faster bus sitting on my desk in the next 6-8 months. MMmmmmmm....Drool

'

I feel you brother!

 

[cb911]

yeah!

i would the sort of G5 you're talking about, but in 6-8 months?
lets be realistic.

 

[krossfyter]

In 5 years mhz wont matter any more. In 10 to 20 years quantum computing will hit the mainstream.

 

[mymemory]

I do not know about computers, but for sure by that time I may have abou 10.500 post in Mac Rumors. I may have some kind of the share in the stuck market "MRC", if I survive this year in my country. I hope my US citizenship papers get here in the next two months.

 

[menoinjun]

I'm actually looking forward to Ram based Harddrives. Maybe a usint with 20 gigs of ram in it that has a battery so that you wouldn't lose your data. This would provide amazing write and read times, and have no moving parts.

-Pete

 

[nigel_t]

10-20 years

In 10-20 years MHZ will not bother anyone PC or MAC, companies like SGI will not exist anymore, well if they don't change their business model they won't be around. Almost everything will be realtime. Those huge rendering and simulation mainframe stuff will be possible on a desktop and liz taylor will still be alive because she regrew her entire body via genetics and dna thingies
It will be interesting to see what role M$ will play, because I assume this is when Bill would have thought he would have ""taken over the world"

nigel

 

[mischief]

I'm suprised no one has mentioned this.......

Moto and IBM have been sitting on independant Patents for LIGHT based computers. No quantum interference, no need to synchronize the resonance of a processor, Mobo, RAM and device I/O. The whole thing works on Light and solid state storage. No RAM, no HD, no moving parts. The only electric parts'd be the power supply and screen. All connectors would be Fibre optics of varying bundle counts. There would be no Mhz/Ghz to count cuz the thing doesn't work that way. Imagine: all your processing and storage done at the speed of light.

 

[Macmaniac]

Quantum

Yes soon all codes will be irrelevent, and we can predict the future of disease. Welcome to Quantum computing where u can live 60 years longer then we do now. This will be a scary age, but as long as there are Quantumacs I will be happy.

 

[mischief]

QUANTUM WON'T WORK.

It's too delicate to be practical outside a lab.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by ptrauber
I'm actually looking forward to Ram based Harddrives. Maybe a usint with 20 gigs of ram in it that has a battery so that you wouldn't lose your data. This would provide amazing write and read times, and have no moving parts.

-Pete

Yes, this technology should be amazing once the price comes down. You can get 1GB drives now for around $1,000. So it's not practical yet, but once it's here, we'll wonder how we ever dealt with the slow read/write times of the hard-drives we have now.

 

[krossfyter]

Re: QUANTUM WON'T WORK.

Originally posted by mischief
It's too delicate to be practical outside a lab.

They will eventually solve the problem.

 

[macstudent]

Biological Computers

I have always thought that the future of computing would revolve around biological computers. Circuits can only get so small. The future is in biology.

 

[mischief]

By the time Quantum is practical.........

We'll have Light Based machines at 1/10th the cost of an entry QC. I think QC will replace server farms and mainframes but LBC is much more robust in a wider variety of environments. By the time we see both of these in the mainstream we'll be spending enough time off-planet for QC to be pretty land-bound.

 

[teabgs]

Re: Biological Computers

Originally posted by macstudent
I have always thought that the future of computing would revolve around biological computers. Circuits can only get so small. The future is in biology.

I agree. If biological computers could be produced it could revolutionize everything. Think of how much your brain does without you even thinking about it and how fast that is. If we had a computer that worked in a similar way and even half if not less the speed it would be so fast, and have so much memory and so much storage space.

I read an article in Science News about 2 years ago about a Student who was able to encrypt and then decode messages using DNA. A far way from biological computers but proof nontheless that it IS possible.

 

[mischief]

Bio-processors.

Makes good sci-fi but I don't think the culture could take it. There'd be the whole "Master Race" scare and the religious zealots screaming about "playing God" ........... It'll be messy enough just getting medicine to where bio-science can take it.

 

[teabgs]

Re: Bio-processors.

Originally posted by mischief
Makes good sci-fi but I don't think the culture could take it. There'd be the whole "Master Race" scare and the religious zealots screaming about "playing God" ........... It'll be messy enough just getting medicine to where bio-science can take it.

That's why WE as apple users need to unite and lead the culture to a new level of open-mindedness. Why do we restrict ourselves to doing anything the way the culture is now? That's Gates talk. We need to change the collective mindset andlead the way to a better, newer culture.

I think my History of Revolutionary Socialism class is getting to me...I need to go do some more reading about the Communist International

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: Bio-processors.

Originally posted by mischief
Makes good sci-fi but I don't think the culture could take it. There'd be the whole "Master Race" scare and the religious zealots screaming about "playing God" ........... It'll be messy enough just getting medicine to where bio-science can take it.

They're already starting to experiment with bio-circuitry...and until they start implanting your computer inside you (a la Johnny Mnemonic) I don't see why people should get upset. Using organic agents to create smaller, faster circuits is the way to go.

 

[mischief]

I'm all for Bio-circuitry......

I just think it'll spook the Sheeple. The average citizen has no imagination and is easily frightened. If I came right out and said I was an Anarchist/Communist who believes in freedom of information and custom Organs through Cloning exactly how flamed/murdered would I be?

Just because it makes sense doesn't mean society will accept it. If that were the case the global "bio-diversity" groups'd be moving species around as fast as the can to allow the whole system to find a new equilibrium through straight Darwinian competition.

Sheeple don't understand Logic any more than they understand Compassion.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: I'm all for Bio-circuitry......

Originally posted by mischief
I just think it'll spook the Sheeple. The average citizen has no imagination and is easily frightened. If I came right out and said I was an Anarchist/Communist who believes in freedom of information and custom Organs through Cloning exactly how flamed/murdered would I be?

Just because it makes sense doesn't mean society will accept it. If that were the case the global "bio-diversity" groups'd be moving species around as fast as the can to allow the whole system to find a new equilibrium through straight Darwinian competition.

Sheeple don't understand Logic any more than they understand Compassion.

I agree, people are closed minded and will jump to conclusions/extremes. Take cloning for example. People are doing it now on animals and I would not be surprised if humans hadn't already been cloned (maybe not completely successfully; it took them 20+ tries just to do that cat). Eventually people will get used to it and later embrace it as they see the benefits outweigh the negatives.

It takes people time to adjust to new things. Give them time and it will happen. <-- that's a smiley. what's the deal with all the emoticons being down?

 

[mischief]

Cloning whole organisms is a waste anyway.

Even in plants, the more generations you grow from a given sample, the less vigorous the plants. It's WAY more dramatic with Mammals cuz we're WAY more complex.

Cloning, as it exists when combined with modern DNA tech could make growing, editing and replacing Organs easy and reliable. A lot of the resistance has to do with maintenance of an ailment being more profitable than actually fixing the problem. I find that attitude ****ing repugnant.

 

[krossfyter]

its an emotionless forum!

 

[teabgs]

Re: Cloning whole organisms is a waste anyway.

Originally posted by mischief

Cloning, as it exists when combined with modern DNA tech could make growing, editing and replacing Organs easy and reliable. A lot of the resistance has to do with maintenance of an ailment being more profitable than actually fixing the problem. I find that attitude ****ing repugnant.

What about all the lives it could save? All the people who need livers or kidneys? What if the only way to save someone from death is a new organ? Its so hard to get one now, if we could produce them through cloning it would be able to save so many people. Maybe its not curing the ailment, but it allows them to live a healthier and more fullfilling life, maybe not in pain.

 

[mischief]

absolutely correct.

The research and tech exists to do exactly that. I'm Athsmatic..... say I wanted lungs that're less picky about air quality. I could start with a sample of my own lung tissue and "turn off" the associated allele (gene-site) before cloning new parts. Of course this is a vast simplification. There would be no rejection because the tissue is my own. The proceedure would be relatively inexpensive (Thoracic surgery isn't but the actual Cloning would be).

The problem is: How would the 3 or 4 drug companies that own THE WHOLE medical industry make money off me for the rest of my life?

The average American has between 2 and 6 prescriptions. Each prescription is worth 50-100 dollars a month. If we could just fix the parts that aren't working right, that money would evaporate.

Cancer treatment is the one that really pisses me off though. Bio-science and good nutrition coud solve that one in about 5 years if there wasn't such an industry in "treatment". Try to find an organisation looking for a CURE. You won't find it. They're all looking for "better treatments" which translates to "treatments that will drag it out long enough to extort the GNP of a small nation". These leaches are extorting terminal patients out of TONS of money to perpetuate their suffering because they CAN. HIV is the same way. It's easily cured, but there's no money in a CURE.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR..........