Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 418 posts

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#171

Post by 9rx »

officeplant wrote: post #165
9rx wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't so much the five seconds, it is the muscle memory. You become accustomed to blindly hitting "Yes" every time you've accidentally typed something into the text box, and then that time when you actually put a lot of effort into something... Boom. Its gone. I have been bitten before. Something like the parent described would be a huge improvement. Granted, it seems the even better UX is to save what th…

>You become accustomed to blindly hitting "Yes" every time you've accidentally typed something into the text box, and then that time when you actually put a lot of effort into something... Boom. Its gone. I'm not sure we need even local AI's reading everything we do for what amounts to a skill issue.

You're quite right that those with skills have no need for computers, but for the rest of us there is no need for them to not have a good user experience.

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#172

Post by nottorp »

ericmcer wrote: post #125
wavemode wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ideally the alert would only happen if the comment seemed important but it would readily discard short or nonsensical input. That doesn't sound ideal at all. And in fact highlights what's wrong with AI product development nowadays. AI as a tool is wildly popular. Almost everyone in the world uses ChatGPT or knows someone who does. Here's the thing about tools - you use them in a predictable way and they give you a…

But... A lot of stuff you rely on now was probably once distracting and unpredictable. There are a ton of subtle UX behaviors a modern computer is doing that you don't notice, but if they all disappeared and you had to use windows 95 for a week you would miss. That is more what I am advocating for, subtle background UX improvements based on an LLMs ability to interpret a users intent. We had limited abilities to look…

> There are a ton of subtle UX behaviors a modern computer is doing that you don't notice, but if they all disappeared and you had to use windows 95 for a week you would miss.

Like what? All those popups screaming that my PC is unprotected because I turned off windows firewall?

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#173

Post by nottorp »

bluGill wrote: post #122
yndoendo wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Magic in real life never works 100% of the time. It is all an illusion were some observers understand the trick and others do not. Those that understand it have the potential to break the magic. Even the magician has the ability to fault the trick. I want reproducibility not magic.

It is magic that I can touch a swith on the wall and lights come on. It is magic that I have a warm house despite the outside temperature is near freezing. we have plenty of other magic that works. I want more

If your light switch doesn't turn on the lights any more it's probably broken.

If your "AI" light switch doesn't turn on the lights, you have to rephrase the prompt.

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#174

Post by jimbokun »

neilsimp1 wrote: post #5
weird_trousers wrote: post #3

Finally companies understand that consumers do not want AI products, but just better, stronger, and cheaper products. Unfortunately investors are not ready to hear that yet...

I agree with you, and I don't want anything related to the current AI craze in my life, at all. But when I come on HN and see people posting about AI IDEs and vibe coding and everything, I'm led to believe that there are developers that like this sort of thing. I cannot explain this.

If you develop software you can’t be as productive without an LLM as a competitor or coworker can be with one.

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#175

Post by robrain »

anthonypasq wrote: post #82
everdrive wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using such an expensive technology to prevent someone from making a stupid mistake on a meaningless endeavor seems like a complete waste of time. Users should just be allowed to fail.

if somone from 1960 saw the quadrillions of cpu cycles we are wasting on absolutely nothing every second, they would have an aneurysm

As someone from 1969, but with an excellent circulatory system, I just roll my eyes and look forward to the sound of bubbles bursting whilst billionaires weep.

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#177

Post by angulardragon03 »

tecoholic wrote: post #119
yalogin wrote: post #27

They nailed it. Consumers don't care about AI, they care about functionality they can use, and care less if it uses AI or not. It's on the OS and apps to figure out the AI part. This is why even though people think Apple is far behind in AI, they are doing it at their own pace. The immediate hardware sales for them did not get impacted by lack of flashy AI announcements. They will slowly get there but they have time.…

Nailed it? Maybe close. They still have a keyboard button dedicated to Copoilot. That thing can’t be reconfigured easily.

Required for Windows certification nowadays iirc

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#179

Post by bitwize »

kenjackson wrote: post #140
pseudosavant wrote: post #133

I don't know how many others here have a CoPilot+ PC but the NPU on it is basically useless. There isn't any meaningful feature I get by having that NPU. They are far too limited to ever do any meaningful local LLM inference, image processing or generation. It handles stuff like video chat background blurring, but users' PC's have been doing that for years now without an NPU.

I'd love to see a thorough breakdown of what these local NPUs can really do. I've had friends ask me about this (as the resident computer expert) and I really have no idea. Everything I see advertised for (blurring, speech to text, etc...) are all things that I never felt like my non-NPU machine struggled with. Is there a single remotely killer application for local client NPUs?

"WHAT IS MY PURPOSE?"

"You multiply matrices of INT8s."

"OH... MY... GOD"

NPUs really just accelerate low-precision matmuls. A lot of them are based on systolic arrays, which are like a configurable pipeline through which data is "pumped" rather than a general purpose CPU or GPU with random memory access. So they're a bit like the "synergistic" processors in the Cell, in the respect that they accelerate some operations really quickly, provided you feed them the right way with the CPU and even then they don't have the oomph that a good GPU will get you.

Re: Dell admits consumers don't care about AI PCs

#180

Post by addaon »

9rx wrote: post #146
wrl wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ideally the alert would only happen if the comment seemed important but it would readily discard short or nonsensical input. That is really difficult to do in traditional software but is something an LLM could do with low effort. I read this post yesterday and this specific example kept coming back to me because something about it just didn't sit right. And I finally figured it out: Glancing at the alert box (or th…

The problem isn't so much the five seconds, it is the muscle memory. You become accustomed to blindly hitting "Yes" every time you've accidentally typed something into the text box, and then that time when you actually put a lot of effort into something... Boom. Its gone. I have been bitten before. Something like the parent described would be a huge improvement. Granted, it seems the even better UX is to save what th…

> You become accustomed to blindly hitting "Yes" every time you've accidentally typed something into the text box, and then that time when you actually put a lot of effort into something... Boom. Its gone.

Wouldn't you just hit undo? Yeah, it's a bit obnoxious that Chrome for example uses cmd-shift-T to undo in this case instead of the application-wide undo stack, but I feel like the focus for improving software resilience to user error should continue to be on increasing the power of the undo stack (like it's been for more than 30 years so far), not trying to optimize what gets put in the undo stack in the first place.

Post reply on HN