The Death of MS Windows?

[Chosonman]

Originally posted by: Smilin
I can PXE boot WinPE off RIS right now in 5 minutes. It's not a really new or brilliant concept. Why don't I use this lightweight OS off the network? Because the inherent limitations of such a thing suck when compared to it's heavyweight counterpart.

Pulling down apps on the fly from the net is a great idea, but the OS? dumb.

WebOs would not eleminate the computer gui it would enhance it.
I agree booting a computer off a network is a dumb idea, but that's not what this is talking about.

You can boot your system (PDA, laptop, desktop, cellphone) whatever using Linux, Windows, or whatever basic system OS suites your needs (maybe even a small Google client) and then access your apps and files via the net.

This would be more benificial for smaller gadgets but would inevitably enhance the whole computing experience by eliminating the need to be at a location (home/office) to access your information.

Again, games and CPU/Graphic/RAM intensive apps may still need a place on the PC but WebOS would enhance their functionality. IMHO

 

[stash]

But the majority of people own a phone.

A phone is pretty close to a necessity. If you don't have a phone and you need emergency services, you're kinda screwed.

Broadband is a luxury and will most likely remain that way.

By it's very nature, a discussion about operating systems assumes the user owns a computer.

That's part of the problem: having this discussion in a tech forum causes there to be way too many assumptions. We all have computers and most of us have broadband, but we do not necessarily represent society as a whole. Many of us probably couldn't imagine life without computers and high speed Internet, but to a great deal of people, those items are luxuries and they either can't afford them or they are uninterested.

And for those that do have computers, why would they choose to pay a subscription to do the things they can already do? Especially when they won't be able to do the things they can already do as well.

Or what if you have some files stored online somewhere, and you need to get to them immediately. But your cable connection is crapping out. Consumer level broadband providers don't have any kind of SLAs in place that will help you in this situation.

Maybe it would be nice to store files online as a supplement to files stored locally, so you can access them anywhere. But with remote access to your home network being fairly simple to do, and with the issues of synchronization between the local and Internet copies, it seems more trouble than it would be worth.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: STaSh

But the majority of people own a phone.

A phone is pretty close to a necessity. If you don't have a phone and you need emergency services, you're kinda screwed.

Broadband is a luxury and will most likely remain that way.

By it's very nature, a discussion about operating systems assumes the user owns a computer.

That's part of the problem: having this discussion in a tech forum causes there to be way too many assumptions. We all have computers and most of us have broadband, but we do not necessarily represent society as a whole. Many of us probably couldn't imagine life without computers and high speed Internet, but to a great deal of people, those items are luxuries and they either can't afford them or they are uninterested.

And for those that do have computers, why would they choose to pay a subscription to do the things they can already do? Especially when they won't be able to do the things they can already do as well.

What is very difficult and technically oriented today... is going to be dead easy and common place tomorrow.

That's the odd thing about being a computer guy. Everything you know, all the technical details, the stuff you work hard for... It's all going to be nearly worthless 2 years from now because some 12 year old will be able to do a better job by downloading some random program and clicking on a big red button.

Everything is that way. From ripping cdroms to designing complex applications.

At one point just simply connecting to the internet required a masters degree and probably 25,000 dollars worth of equipment. Nowadays people can do it with a 150 dollar electronic device they can stick in their pants pocket. Not only is it cheaper, it is faster and more relaible.

The thing about 'broadband' is that right now people buy telephone service, long distance service, cable tv service, and run down to the local store to buy music, computer programs, and other things.

All of these things can be replaced with a single high speed internet connection. Not only will it be faster, it will be cheaper, be more reliable and have more features. Also the services you use will not tie you to a single location anymore. Current barriers such as emergency services like 911 are mere technical hurdles, not show stoppers.

As it stands right now I can run any program on my computer at home on any other internet connection computer on earth that can boot knoppix. It may not be the best, but it's possible.

In another year or year and a half or so I will be able to run full multimedia applications with 3d acceleration and the whole ten yards over a network connection. Again it won't be easy, and it won't be fast, but it will work. Eventually it will be easy and it will be fast.

As of right now I can easily, although a little bit expensively, setup a network of computers were accessing data over the network is _faster_ then local storage. Even with a nice RAID array.


Just a few years ago people would of laughed at you if you told them that you could build a computer that is nearly as powerfull as the average super computer out PCs that you could buy at walmart. Now it's certainly possible and people do it everyday.

Technology marches on.

 

[AmigaMan]

That's part of the problem: having this discussion in a tech forum causes there to be way too many assumptions. We all have computers and most of us have broadband, but we do not necessarily represent society as a whole. Many of us probably couldn't imagine life without computers and high speed Internet, but to a great deal of people, those items are luxuries and they either can't afford them or they are uninterested.

As drag alluded to, you're thinking in todays terms not tommorrows. Go back 5 years ago when broadband was starting to take off and I'd have said no way I'll spend $45/month for Internet when I can get it for $19.95 for dialup which is good enough.

And for those that do have computers, why would they choose to pay a subscription to do the things they can already do? Especially when they won't be able to do the things they can already do as well.

Surely you don't use Windows 95 on a Pentium 60, I mean, it does most of the things you can do now. 😉 It's called upgrading. Technology changes, gets faster, does more, etc. Switching to a subscription based model may not make sense for everyone, but if vendors price it right, it would work. I barely use Office, so why should i have to pay $500 for it? I should be able to pay per use, maybe $.99 or so. Or, if I use Office all the time, it may be cheaper to pay $10/month. If you figure a new version comes out every 2-3 years, you'll save money that way if you're a power office user who likes to stay current.

Or what if you have some files stored online somewhere, and you need to get to them immediately. But your cable connection is crapping out. Consumer level broadband providers don't have any kind of SLAs in place that will help you in this situation.

You're still thinking of today, not tommorrow. My service has gone out maybe a handful of times in the 4 years I've had Earthlink Cable and once in the past two years. ISPs are getting better. Besides, who's to say you don't have a local cache of all of your files on high-speed flash?

You're not a visionary, which is ok, but that's what this thread is about. Don't constrain yourself by saying what isn't possible, but what is.

 

[stash]

Go back 5 years ago when broadband was starting to take off and I'd have said no way I'll spend $45/month for Internet when I can get it for $19.95 for dialup which is good enough

You aren't listening. There are a lot of people who don't care about broadband and computers. They simply do not have any use for it.

Switching to a subscription based model may not make sense for everyone, but if vendors price it right, it would work. I barely use Office, so why should i have to pay $500 for it? I should be able to pay per use, maybe $.99 or so. Or, if I use Office all the time, it may be cheaper to pay $10/month. If you figure a new version comes out every 2-3 years, you'll save money that way if you're a power office user who likes to stay current.

Subscription models will work for some people. But you don't need the app on a website to do what you propose. A subscription based application model will work just fine with computers today.

You're not a visionary, which is ok, but that's what this thread is about. Don't constrain yourself by saying what isn't possible, but what is.

lol, I'm not a visionary. Anything is possible. I certainly think there will be a limited market for this. Both Microsoft and Google appear to be willing to invest in it. But I don't think web based computing will be replacing 'real' computers any time soon.

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: STaSh

Go back 5 years ago when broadband was starting to take off and I'd have said no way I'll spend $45/month for Internet when I can get it for $19.95 for dialup which is good enough

You aren't listening. There are a lot of people who don't care about broadband and computers. They simply do not have any use for it.

Switching to a subscription based model may not make sense for everyone, but if vendors price it right, it would work. I barely use Office, so why should i have to pay $500 for it? I should be able to pay per use, maybe $.99 or so. Or, if I use Office all the time, it may be cheaper to pay $10/month. If you figure a new version comes out every 2-3 years, you'll save money that way if you're a power office user who likes to stay current.

Subscription models will work for some people. But you don't need the app on a website to do what you propose. A subscription based application model will work just fine with computers today.

You're not a visionary, which is ok, but that's what this thread is about. Don't constrain yourself by saying what isn't possible, but what is.

lol, I'm not a visionary. Anything is possible. I certainly think there will be a limited market for this. Both Microsoft and Google appear to be willing to invest in it. But I don't think web based computing will be replacing 'real' computers any time soon.

Sigh...why do you keep bringing up people who don't care about computers? This thread isn't about them and no one is talking about them except you. If we all implant chips in our heads and have virtual sex with HAL it won't matter to them so quit bringing them up.

Second, no one said this was going to replace real computers anytime soon. But the Internet has only been around for a little over a decade and has advanced relatively quickly. Think how far we will be in another decade. Why do you insist on being so negative and pessimistic about all of this?