appleretailguy said:
Yeah, it's called buy two computers. The logistics of multiple simultaneous users is much too complicated to have any real personal computing benefit.
I think you are entirely incorrect. The logistics of handling multiple simultaneous users are OLD hat. That's how machines worked in the begining. The dumb terminal is a very useful system, and is still used today in the range hundreds of thousands of users daily. This is what UNIX computers where designed to do in the early days of computing.
Most modern personal computers sit around idle while someone is using them. This is of course not true in many proffesional settings, such as graphic design workshops, or CAD departments, etc. But, at home, a PC is going to be mostly waiting on you, not the other way around.
The dual CPU architecture of the modern Mac desktop is also largely wasted. For the most part, a home user, even a gamer or 'power-user', can get most of what they need done on a single fast CPU, like a 1.8 or 2 ghz G5. Of course there are some poeple who need and use this extra power, but, for example, someone who would be perfectly happy with a G5 iMac, wouldn't really use a dual CPU PM.
There is also the time savings of having to administrate just one machine. Software and hardware upgrades, intstall, etc are cut in half. In a lot of cases thats a big help.
The ony real missing piece of the puzzle is sound. You would have to install a second piece of dedicated audio hardware for the second user, which would be no big deal if each one was dedicated to a discrete user, so there wouldn't be any problems with sound 'stacks' getting jumbles up.
