*Edit: I sure hope that cloud storage isn't the ONLY future, because I hate sending my data to a remote server that I can't control/secure, requiring an internet connection to share files between computers in the same room, etc. I like the idea of cloud syncing, but I want the option to have the actual server on my local network.
As long as the demand for local computing exists, there will be people who will accommodate it. My guess, though, is that as internet access becomes more ubiquitous and users become less attached to physically holding on to their data, cloud computing will become the mainstream and most hardware will be reduced to terminals that access one company or another's solution.
Maybe there is a way to create a personal cloud?As long as the demand for local computing exists, there will be people who will accommodate it. My guess, though, is that as internet access becomes more ubiquitous and users become less attached to physically holding on to their data, cloud computing will become the mainstream and most hardware will be reduced to terminals that access one company or another's solution.
Sure; you already can for a lot of stuff. You can host your own email/file server right now, for example. Where you're going to eventually get stuck is for proprietary stuff, like video game consoles. Eventually I can foresee a future where the Xbox is just a terminal that connects you to an Azure data center where game data is processed and streamed to the gamer; not unlike playing Xbox games on a Surface tablet at home works right now, for example. You won't be able to host the games at home, so you'll either be using the proprietary cloud system or you won't be playing.Maybe there is a way to create a personal cloud?
An honest future? You say that like something is wrong with that.Sure; you already can for a lot of stuff. You can host your own email/file server right now, for example. Where you're going to eventually get stuck is for proprietary stuff, like video game consoles. Eventually I can foresee a future where the Xbox is just a terminal that connects you to an Azure data center where game data is processed and streamed to the gamer; not unlike playing Xbox games on a Surface tablet at home works right now, for example. You won't be able to host the games at home, so you'll either be using the proprietary cloud system or you won't be playing.
Think about how that would impact gaming piracy; if the code never leaves the data center and can only be played on authenticated terminals that have no processing power on their own, piracy would be all but eliminated. I guarantee that license holders are clamoring to get us to this future.
I'm not sure why you took it that way. I'm just pointing out why companies would be very interested in adopting this model when broadband is ubiquitous and reliable enough to support it.An honest future? You say that like something is wrong with that.
yeah that's true. I thought it was a very good point quite frankly.I'm not sure why you took it that way. I'm just pointing out why companies would be very interested in adopting this model when broadband is ubiquitous and reliable enough to support it.
That's basically my problem. I need a way to build apps on the iPad but I don't have a clue as to how Apple would add such a feature as app creation. Usually apps have a web component to them.Maybe. Only problem is pro apps and usability isn't there. If I could have Xcode on my iPad and easy access to everything I would need to code, sure. Maybe with the introduction of the pro, we will see something like that. Can you imagine iPad apps being created and uploaded for submission...from an iPad? That would be amazing
I'm not sure why you took it that way. I'm just pointing out why companies would be very interested in adopting this model when broadband is ubiquitous and reliable enough to support it.
I think this'll happen eventually, but it won't be something we see become commonplace within the next 5 years. Ubiquity and reliability aren't exactly two words I'd use to describe broadband internet outside of cities.
And one thing you're disregarding that's the true lynchpin of a successful terminal based internet future: it needs to also be inexpensive. As long as people have to pay considerably more to get a more decentralized version of what we're enjoying now, it'll need to cost, at the very most, equally as much. If people have to pay more, it won't happen.
That's not necessarily true either. iPads outsell any single computing tablet or laptop. Secondly, cheaper in initial price doesn't necessarily mean cheaper.I think this'll happen eventually, but it won't be something we see become commonplace within the next 5 years. Ubiquity and reliability aren't exactly two words I'd use to describe broadband internet outside of cities.
And one thing you're disregarding that's the true lynchpin of a successful terminal based internet future: it needs to also be inexpensive. As long as people have to pay considerably more to get a more decentralized version of what we're enjoying now, it'll need to cost, at the very most, equally as much. If people have to pay more, it won't happen.
That's not necessarily true either. iPads outsell any single computing tablet or laptop. Secondly, cheaper in initial price doesn't necessarily mean cheaper.
That's not true either especially if maintenance is cheaper and can somewhat be shifted to Apple at no to low cost.Considering you're talking about an initial payment, vs. a series of ever ongoing ones to access your media (internet access + cloud storage/subscription service, etc.), the chances of it being more expensive over the long term are pretty great.
Though the one advantage of sub services is that you do have a much wider access to a larger catalog than you otherwise would. But I doubt any of the big media companies are going to rid themselves of selling music, movies, and games individually, and go entirely to a Netflix/Spotify business model. For now anyway, they make far more money doing the former than they do the latter.