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

The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

idiallo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 401 posts

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#211

Post by csense »

Touche wrote: post #166
colanderman wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regular users don't know or care about memory management, they don't even close old windows or tabs, its about convenience. Why should they? If a tab's "dormant", the browser can just quiesce JS timeouts and let the tab's memory get swapped out. Not a problem anymore. That most (all?) web browsers don't do this currently isn't the user's fault.

That's not interesting idea, but I'm not sure any browser is designed to be able to fully restore the state of a tab that it's swapped out.

Do you even know what swapping is? The whole idea of swapping is that the OS pages out memory without the application being aware of what's happening!

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#212

Post by x0x0 »

carterschonwald wrote: post #45
fiatmoney wrote: post #23

"For what" is the obvious question. Web development with a remote testing environment, office applications, email, web browsing - sure, a Core 2 Duo is more than good enough if your software environment is kept in order. Audio / video / photoshop, gaming, developing software that does math, data analysis - you can never get fast enough. The limiting factor is if your computer's feedback loop is tighter than your brai…

Emphatic agreement. I wind up helping folks a lot with writing high performance software, and it's very easy to get to the point where the time to run a model is totally determined by how fast the CPU and IO are. I'm talking problems where naively written C would take an hour, but if I'm careful and use some blend of very clever c or Haskell, the computation is done in 2-5 minutes

in machine learning, as soon as you stop using linear models which are normally quite fast to compute, models will be as slow as you can tolerate.

for example: random forest, gradient boosting, gam, etc -- you will typically do parameter searches and the models you get are as good as your willingness to wait. Good software will run at a significant fraction of memory bus speed and the faster that bus goes the better your models will be.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#213

Post by textminer »

simonsarris wrote: post #96

I've felt this way since I built my last desktop in 2008. I was sort-of waiting for the "gee its time to upgrade" mark to roll around in 3 or 4 years, but it hasn't happened yet. Any games I want to play it still runs very well, and it still feels very fast to me even compared to modern off-the-shelf systems. When my friends ask for laptop-buying advice I tell them if they like the keyboard and screen, then its just…

This is a common generational worry, right? We learned X a certain way, that pedagogy was necessarily linked to the technology at the time, we worry in retrospect that that specific technology was a necessary condition for ever learning X.

I'm only 28, and I do it, too-- e.g., how will kids expand their imagination and learn about the world without only having paper books to immerse themselves in for hours at a time? How will anyone learn the basics of programming without finding QuickBASIC on an old Packard-Bell 386, playing around with Gorillas or Snakes, or entering their own code from books in the library?

I think there will be a sufficient number of hacker types around for the cynical and simple reason that corporations need to inspire kids to learn how to code so that they can hire folks in two decades. This ought to inspire a token amount of educational support and tool building so that entry-level development will always be accessible to kids.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#215

Post by kazagistar »

textminer wrote: post #213
simonsarris wrote: post #96

I've felt this way since I built my last desktop in 2008. I was sort-of waiting for the "gee its time to upgrade" mark to roll around in 3 or 4 years, but it hasn't happened yet. Any games I want to play it still runs very well, and it still feels very fast to me even compared to modern off-the-shelf systems. When my friends ask for laptop-buying advice I tell them if they like the keyboard and screen, then its just…

This is a common generational worry, right? We learned X a certain way, that pedagogy was necessarily linked to the technology at the time, we worry in retrospect that that specific technology was a necessary condition for ever learning X. I'm only 28, and I do it, too-- e.g., how will kids expand their imagination and learn about the world without only having paper books to immerse themselves in for hours at a time?…

These days, everyone has access to an excellent cross platform learning platform for programming: the browser. So yeah, I think if anything programming is more accessible then ever.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#216

Post by zalzane »

simonsarris wrote: post #96

I've felt this way since I built my last desktop in 2008. I was sort-of waiting for the "gee its time to upgrade" mark to roll around in 3 or 4 years, but it hasn't happened yet. Any games I want to play it still runs very well, and it still feels very fast to me even compared to modern off-the-shelf systems. When my friends ask for laptop-buying advice I tell them if they like the keyboard and screen, then its just…

>because people do not need $2000 Facebook and email machines

Devil's advocate: if that is true, then why are macbook pros such a hot sell? I'm typing this here in a college library's lobby. When I look around, I see roughly 3/4 of the laptop-using students are using a macbook pro, with a few macbook airs littered around. If I were to walk around and glance at what people were working on, it'd probably be something like 70% youtube/facebook and 30% using some word processor.

My point is that the consumer's decision to buy or abandon a product isn't solely driven by how good the product is, the value of the new item as a "status icon" also has to be taken into account. All you need to get the customer to justify that $2000 price tag is a culture of rabid consumerism and the garauntee that they will be cooler than their friends if they buy this extremely expensive laptop that does all sorts of things they will never ever use.

In your example involving the 2006 PC and the new iPad, I would argue that a huge contributor to the consumer's abandoning of the PC is because it's nowhere near the potency of a status icon as an iPad is.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#217

Post by 001sky »

GuiA wrote: post #190
johngalt wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We would be better off steering into the skid. History has plenty of examples of people who've tried to hang onto the old ways 'because that's how I learned it'. The way forward isn't to try and keep cheap PCs viable for creativity's sake, but to ensure that creative desires are being met on the newer devices. Would I have learned memory management and dual booting if I'd had a tablet instead of a 386? Probably not.…

As a kid, my parents were really anti-videogames (except for a few educational ones), anti-TV (we had one, but it was in its own room and rarely used), and would only let me use the home computer for homework. As a result, I spent all of my childhood and teenage years reading (mostly fantasy and sci-fi; several books a week, at my peak) and programming. I taught myself programming in 7th grade because I really wanted…

I am thinking of getting rid of my iPhone when my contract runs out (and just get a dumbphone as a replacement for emergencies

Iphones are great for tourtists. Unneccesary otherwise.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#218

Post by crgt »

handzhiev wrote: post #65
evo_9 wrote: post #35

The PC is dead, it's just not dead for computer professionals, and never will be. But for the rest of the world - think mom, dad, gramps,grammy - why on earth do the need the headaches of a full PC (mac or windows)? A good tablet is basically enough for almost everyone else.

I'll never get this point. Laptop - fine, yes, but a tablet? How do you chat, post FB status, or write an email from the virtual keyboard? It's painful. Especially if you are 50+. I don't see my mom or dad using these devices.

My grandmother is 90 and she does all of those things from her iPad. She's also almost blind and has arthritis, and yet she finds the tablet meets her needs - which mostly involve keeping track of her grandchildren and great-grandchildren via email and FB.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#219

Post by jl6 »

kazagistar wrote: post #215
textminer wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common generational worry, right? We learned X a certain way, that pedagogy was necessarily linked to the technology at the time, we worry in retrospect that that specific technology was a necessary condition for ever learning X. I'm only 28, and I do it, too-- e.g., how will kids expand their imagination and learn about the world without only having paper books to immerse themselves in for hours at a time?…

These days, everyone has access to an excellent cross platform learning platform for programming: the browser. So yeah, I think if anything programming is more accessible then ever.

Not that I disagree with what you've said, but browsers aren't a platform for learning to program on a tablet.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#220

Post by ChuckMcM »

Interesting to watch the uptick in 'retina' laptops. Basically people don't need a new PC but will pay for a better PC 'experience' that means longer battery life, 'better' screen (usually retina/IPS/etc), better ergonomics.

Interestingly it seems like some would love to run their old OS on them. My Dad sort of crystallized it when he said "I'd like to get a new laptop with a nicer screen but I can't stand the interface in Windows 8 so I'll live with this one." That was pretty amazing to me. Not being able to carry your familiar OS along as a downside. That reminded me of the one set of Win98 install media I had that I kept re-using as I upgraded processors and memory and motherboards. I think I used it on 3 or 4 versions of machines. Then a version of XP I did the same with.

I wonder if there is a market for a BeOS like player now when there wasn't before.

Post reply on HN