In 3 years desktops would be irrelevant?

[Martial-law]

Google says that in 3 years desktops would be irrelevant:

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/news/article/15446/business/in-three-years-desktops-will-be-irrelevant-google-sales-chief


Do you think desktops really would be irrelevant? And if desktops would be irrelevant what would be the major appliance replacing it? Today desktop seems to be the major appliance. If it would be replaced by something else or many things what would be the major thing replacing desktop? Post your thoughts?:confused:

[pwnst*r]

He's a sales chief in Europe. And even though he has a responsibility spouting his mouth, I'm sure Google as a company does not share this view.

[kevin11951]

Doesnt he mean the OS? Google has said before that in a short amount of time all applications will in some way be server based... this sounds like that.

[RiceMonster]

I think laptops and netbooks are becoming increasingly popular while desktops are slowly becomming less popular, but I really don't think desktops are going to go away any time soon.

[Paqman]

Apparently, by the mid 1980's, we'll be able to have a completely paperless office. Amazing!

I'm always wary of predictions made by people who have a vested interest in the outcome they're predicting.

[sikander3786]

Hi.

Google is correct half of the phrase I think.

They say that mobile devices will soon be the main source of information and entertainment, Correct! But these devices will be able to replace the desktop, Not Possible!

What do we prefer to read news, blogs, check mail etc? Mobile devices or desktops? Obviously desktops. Devices are used only when we are in a hurry or we don't have a desktop near around.

All that gaming stuff, DVD's, AVI's, Multimedia, can mobile devices handle those? Can the performance of mobile devices, netbooks and desktops be same? Never.

So what I think is "It is not possible". And there are many many many reasons that can easily be listed in favour of desktops.

Let's see what happens in three years :p

[Iehova]

If he means the OS, insofar as everything will be shifted to the cloud, I think it's unlikely but not totally unreasonable. If he means, as the article says, that we'll all switch to mobile devices then I find that very unbelievable indeed.

Mobile devices are inherently limited so I highly doubt we'll see any sort of radical shift in favour of them. Perhaps the desktop will be replaced by other types of computer, like laptops, netbooks, tablets or even TVs etc. Mobile devices will, I think, simply refine and bolster their corner of the market.

[Sporkman]

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1471275

[gnomeuser]

The desktop as we have known is is no doubt dying.

Computing is now in my pocket, e.g. with the comfortable hardware keyboard on my N900 I now write posts to these very forums on the bus. (yes I am an addict.. one problem at the time)

The web is taking over big time and as a result delivering an easier and wider experience. I've been using GMail for years, yesterday I tried using Evolution and honestly the web experience was far nicer not to mention faster and had a lower overall system impact (thank you CPU hungry spamfilter and annoying filter based organization).

Likewise I found that more and more of my tasks have moved to the web, I haven't used a news reader app in ages since google reader is a much better fit an doesn't have to be installed with my preferences on which ever machine I sit down at.

I think 3 years might be a bit to quick for the desktop to die or at least for it to be buried. The trend is clear though, it is about delivering the web. There are still things a desktop application does best and likely always will do. E.g. I don't see myself removing Banshee anytime soon but I do also find myself thinking of media more and more as a service I expect to be there rather than an application. Never say never.

[spupy]

Google believes that in three years or so desktops will give way to mobile as the primary screen from which most people will consume information and entertainment.

Yes, I think it is quite possible in the consumer area. But I don't see how you can do work on anything other than a desktop/laptop.

[Ebere]

If he means the OS, insofar as everything will be shifted to the cloud, I think it's unlikely but not totally unreasonable. If he means, as the article says, that we'll all switch to mobile devices then I find that very unbelievable indeed.

Mobile devices are inherently limited so I highly doubt we'll see any sort of radical shift in favour of them. Perhaps the desktop will be replaced by other types of computer, like laptops, netbooks, tablets or even TVs etc. Mobile devices will, I think, simply refine and bolster their corner of the market.

If the whole world switches to 'the cloud', instead of having individual OSs... Won't we be as vulnerable as those aliens that are documented in Independance day ?

;)

[Zyrtec]

I won't be getting rid of my desktop build any time soon, but if desktops become "irrelevant", they had better make laptops much easier for people to build themselves :P

[oldsoundguy]

Physically, the desktop is going to be around in some form or another for a LOT longer (work stations especially, IF for no other reason than the need for full sized keyboards or ergonomic keyboards).
BUSINESS drives computing .. gadgets notwithstanding. There has to be a local server or mainframe for proprietary data and trust that most business operations that have SENSITIVE data are not going to trust that data being stored OFF SITE in a cloud. Not as long as MS can not keep servers SAFE and solid. (that means as long as MS is in the server software business.)
MS no longer is king of the hill there, but it will be a bit of time until they are gone from that portion of computing.
And there is the aspect of software that is designed for the specific use of ONE business and one business ONLY .. to fit their profile. Seriously doubt that the business would let some off site agency control that aspect, either.
NOT YET!

[uljanow]

In 3 years we all will be living in google's cloud.

[Frogs Hair]

Sounds like marketing in action, to sell mobile you first have to convince they need it. One way to do that is telling people that their current technology will be irrelevant in three years. The desktop is solidly in place in many industries.

[Iehova]

If the whole world switches to 'the cloud', instead of having individual OSs... Won't we be as vulnerable as those aliens that are documented in Independance day ?

;)

We'll be safe so long as we don't let Jeff Goldblum near any macbooks. That man is leet. ;)

[Paqman]

What do we prefer to read news, blogs, check mail etc? Mobile devices or desktops? Obviously desktops.

I actually prefer to do most of that on my phone while commuting.

[Roasted]

Absolutely not. A lot of people are only beginning to catch on to how productive dual screen systems can be. Desktops have a huge lifespan left. Plus I'm sure desktops will always be preferred for higher processing power and laptops for mobility.

[lisati]

If the whole world switches to 'the cloud', instead of having individual OSs... Won't we be as vulnerable as those aliens that are documented in Independance day ?

;)
You keep your laptop away from my laptop's USB ports, thank you! :)

I must get round to replacing the copy of Independence Day that someone "borrowed" :)

[SoFl W]

As much as I disagree with it I think we are moving to a software as a service based system, data and applications won't be stored on personal computers but on a server. Your computer will be something simple with a browser to get to the service.

[Ebere]

You keep your laptop away from my laptop's USB ports, thank you! :)

I must get round to replacing the copy of Independence Day that someone "borrowed" :)

Me too.

Making me want to watch it again.

I'm thinking that the next person who wants to borrow mine, will be told to go borrow my copy that Mike borrowed...

[Ebere]

As much as I disagree with it I think we are moving to a software as a service based system, data and applications won't be stored on personal computers but on a server. Your computer will be something simple with a browser to get to the service.

I strongly dislike that idea.

And I am thinking there are enough of us out here, that that statement, as an absolute, will never be true.

I do think it could be likely that there will some sort of 'compromise' between the two.

With people using the cloud only for what makes sense to them, personally, and the rest of the apps still being available as stand-alone on their own desktop OS.

[malspa]

"In 3 years desktops would be irrelevant?"

Not at my home. I don't care what other people do but I won't be storing all of my stuff in the cloud, and simply prefer a desktop pc over a laptop or notebook or netbook.

[Dragonbite]

After building a simple application in PHP on my 12" notebook I'll have to say so long as there are nice, large screens for the desktop then they will stick around some. For development and graphic work.

Now that doesn't mean it won't change to using a device like a mobile-phone or netbook size and have them include docking stations that hook them up to full-sized keyboards and monitors. THAT may change thing, but they aren't there yet.

[Johnsie]

well I for one don't want to spend 9-5 looking at a tiny mobile phone screen. Desktops are here to stay. They might get smaller at the base unit, but the screen will stay because people like a big screen to work on.

[del_diablo]

Apparently, by the mid 1980's, we'll be able to have a completely paperless office. Amazing!

Give it 2-3 more years and we are there, I can't think of any office moving paper except for the old habit of delivering in paper.

[JDorfler]

"Experts" have been predicting the death of the desktop for years. As long as there are hardcore PC Gamers, there will always be desktops.

[McRat]

It is amazing that the concept of Cloud Computing has arrived. Where you use a terminal to access data, resources, and applications remotely.

Wait. That's what we were doing in 1970. :P

I can understand do reruns of Get Smart and Dukes of Hazard, (no, not really, but stay with me) but to actually de-evolve computing seems a touch silly.

We going to start hand cranking our cars now?

I doubt whether the desktop will die in our lifetimes, and I doubt that cloud computing will displace local computing. Simply because what we are currently doing works well.

Now think of the SuperDesktop instead. It has so much storage space and speed, that it can replace all the libraries of the world. It's OS is hardened against intrusion, so it does not need 30 updates a month to keep running. And it's so fast, that it does not need to load 2 GB of background applications to survive. When a service is needed, it will load and launch in microseconds.

Ridiculous? When the SSD's go "run in place", multi-tasking as we currently know it won't be needed at the CPU level.

Cloud computing will be great for mobile computing. But it will be cheaper and faster to do it on a desktop.

[oldsoundguy]

Apparently, by the mid 1980's, we'll be able to have a completely paperless office. Amazing!

I'm always wary of predictions made by people who have a vested interest in the outcome they're predicting.

What REALLY stopped that movement was the COURTS in their requirement for HARD COPIES of documents. Electronic copies were NOT acceptable.

the idea of 3 years to end the desktop in idiotic. Original writer of that article must be totally oblivious to reality. NO major business is going to run off a tiny screen smart phone that connects to the cloud.
PERSONAL computing and PERSONAL accessing is a VERY small part of computing in general. Right now, NO CEO/CFO is going to go for computing that is no longer in control of THEIR IT department. It WILL NOT HAPPEN in any 3 year time, nor in any time near that.
Since business computing makes up the bulk of desktop sales, you will NOT see the change predicted. NO WAY, SHAPE or FORM!

[McRat]

For large software companies, a problem is about to occur.

Software has a unique permanence about it. A word processor written in 1990 works pretty good today for writing letters.

Unless the O/S or hardware forces you to change your WP application, you can keep using it for 50 years.

But how will MS make a living then? Only if they can go "per month" will they be able to survive. You're going to see more and stuff you used to purchase (like HDD space?) go to rental instead.

[Chronon]

Isn't this just the same desktop vs. thin client discussion that happens every decade or so?

[Dragonbite]

It is amazing that the concept of Cloud Computing has arrived. Where you use a terminal to access data, resources, and applications remotely.

Wait. That's what we were doing in 1970. :P

Except those mainframes were silos, while the Internet is a much broader spectrum. Admittingly it will seem like the same thing when we are either introduced to the wide world of space by aliens, or just start colonizing the rest of the planets.


We going to start hand cranking our cars now?

Well, back when cars were started there WERE electric cars and they were better than the gasoline ones. Seriously. Problem was, there were no stations to recharge, and then gasoline engine's increased efficiency with more power-per-pound.


Now think of the SuperDesktop instead. It has so much storage space and speed, that it can replace all the libraries of the world. It's OS is hardened against intrusion, so it does not need 30 updates a month to keep running. And it's so fast, that it does not need to load 2 GB of background applications to survive. When a service is needed, it will load and launch in microseconds.

Isn't that the internet?


Practically infinite storage space
=> haven't heard anybody say the internet is running out of room

hardened against intrusion without needing 30 updates per month?
=> there will always be updates and challenges. Hacking is a way of thinking, not a profession. And our updates are going to be to new versions of the browser.

does not need to load 2 GB of background applications
=> it may not be 2 GB yet, but when it is the connection speeds will be closer to 8GB/ms or something

will load and launch in microseconds
=> how is "always on"?

[mickie.kext]

Main reason why goggle says that desktop will become irrelevant is the fact that Microsoft owns monopoly on desktop. Many tried to break that monopoly and failed, but with little or no fault of their own. Microsoft is just to dirty player, they always find a way to scare customers into staying with them, and they always find a way to destroy competitor without actually competing. So Google now wants to kill whole desktop thing down and Microsoft along with it.

It might work, but it is like saying: "Cockroaches are all over the place, so lets burn whole house to the ground, rather than killing cockroaches only".

I think that companies need to sit together and find a way to destroy Microsoft only, not the whole desktop.

[Kai69]

Just my 2 cents but I think the desktop is already dead with the average joe, High power desktops are built for gaming. What about PS3 even higher power and its through your own TV 5 foot wide anyone , you can also go online store vids and music/photos with it so why sit at a desk in a corner of a room when you could be slouching on the couch and 90% of people I know have got rid of their desktops and brought lappys Its just more mobile.
I think the next generation is more mobility and touch even cars are now coming with touch screens with everything built in including using it to go online.

[pwnst*r]

I think that companies need to sit together and find a way to destroy Microsoft only, not the whole desktop.

What a grand idea.

[malspa]

the desktop is already dead with the average joe

Glad I'm not "average."

[ptviperz]

As much as I disagree with it I think we are moving to a software as a service based system, data and applications won't be stored on personal computers but on a server. Your computer will be something simple with a browser to get to the service.

We already had dumb terminals and mainframes a long time ago. The 'cloud' is just a new name for it.

I personally use some cloud stuff but I prefer most of my information local. What would happen if your network or provider goes down and all your stuff is in the cloud? Also, who do you trust to hold your data?

[standingwave]

I don't think that desktops will ever completely disappear for a couple of reasons.

1. Cost. I worked for a notebook and handheld computer manufacturer for a number of years and making things small costs money. Chipsets, thermal control, power supplies and batteries all add cost. And if there's one thing the average consumer cares about, it's price.

2. Display. I like having a couple of big LCD screens on my desk and I'm looking to add a third. I just can't see (literally) doing everything on a laptop. Granted, I can attach a large monitor to my notebook but then we're back to point #1 again. Cost.

3. Ease of maintenance. A couple of thumb screws and I'm into the case of my desktop to swap out a dying card, adding a hard drive or increasing memory.

Industry analysts have been predicting the end of desktop ever since laptops first appeared. Hasn't happened yet and it's not going to happen in three years.

[pookiebear]

1 thing that will keep desktops or at least huge monitor sales alive is
PHOTOSHOP. or gimp
especially for people that are graphic designers.
One of the guys I work with has 3 desktops all doing different types of graphic design.
Sure a laptop could probably work, but he would use it just like a desktop by hooking up a huge monitor, drawing tablet and trackball to it.

[malspa]

I don't think that desktops will ever completely disappear for a couple of reasons.

1. Cost. I worked for a notebook and handheld computer manufacturer for a number of years and making things small costs money. Chipsets, thermal control, power supplies and batteries all add cost. And if there's one thing the average consumer cares about, it's price.

2. Display. I like having a couple of big LCD screens on my desk and I'm looking to add a third. I just can't see (literally) doing everything on a laptop. Granted, I can attach a large monitor to my notebook but then we're back to point #1 again. Cost.

3. Ease of maintenance. A couple of thumb screws and I'm into the case of my desktop to swap out a dying card, adding a hard drive or increasing memory.

Industry analysts have been predicting the end of desktop ever since laptops first appeared. Hasn't happened yet and it's not going to happen in three years.

#1 and #3 are my big reasons for sticking with a desktop pc. My friend tells me his laptop can do everything a desktop can do, but he paid over twice as much for his laptop as I paid for my pc. And let's see him try to fix something on it.

[jerenept]

Does anyone here who thinks desktops are dying have three hdds in their laptop, netbook or phone like i do in my desktop?

[lancest]

Main reason why goggle says that desktop will become irrelevant is the fact that Microsoft owns monopoly on desktop.

I agree with this. They aren't saying that desktop computing is going to disappear. Just moving more to the cloud and devices becoming important.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

BUSINESS drives computing .. gadgets notwithstanding. There has to be a local server or mainframe for proprietary data and trust that most business operations that have SENSITIVE data are not going to trust that data being stored OFF SITE in a cloud.

True; however, companies are building their own private clouds. A data center they own and manage. They are not going to use something like Amazon Cloud Service. With their own private cloud, they can limit access to only trusted employees, just like traditional servers and workstations. They are moving to blade servers and thin clients; which I will show examples of before I end this post.

Edit: forgot to mention that Canonical is trying to get into the private cloud business. Check out the Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud...http://www.ubuntu.com/cloud/private

Three years is not realistic. Large companies move slowly, and for good reasons. For example, there are a lot of companies that use Windows XP on most or their workstations. It will take some large companies three years just to fully switch to Windows 7. Getting rid of their workstations will take even longer.

At my company, we are going to blade servers. For example 100 blade servers, with each blade running two quad core processors, and 64 GB of RAM. The blade servers connect to networked storage. The networked storage is on the order of 100's of TBs. The workstations are replaced by thin clients. The thin clients are small computers with just enough processing power to run a virtual desktop. All the real processing is done on a Virtual Machine running on a blade within the private cloud data center.

Here is an example of a blade data center and a thin client. The person in the suit is standing in front of the networked storage. The 128 blade servers are to his left and right.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

I think, to the general user, desktops as we know them will become irrelevant. There is incredible diversity in computer hardware, and finally it is possible to tailor software to that hardware without having to start from scratch. Finally, all that diversity with all those form factors can be leveraged properly. I think this is helped by the rapid improvement of mobile hardware and the Linux ecosystem, which is providing an excellent common base for manufacturers to do amazing things.

The desktop hardware and software is always going to make sense for someone, but one-size-fits-all does not work.

[BigCityCat]

Not for me. Unless you call my laptop a mobile device. I hate the small screens on mobile devices and I hate touch screen. I don't like looking at a screen that is dirty and scratched from touching and over use. I like a clean screen. I prefer my laptop because I have access where ever and a large enough screen. I want my phone to make phone calls and thats it.

[handy]

Google is working with Intel & Sony to bring its Android system into the TVs & other appliances. The internet has been in the ever quickening process of moving out of the server initially to the desktop via Apple, then IBM & the clones caused the explosion of the desktop into our houses.

A similar progression followed with laptops, notebooks, smart-phones, net-books & the growing variety of other devices just keeps on growing.

The internet is spreading its tentacles into every corner of our lives.

The next major move I think will be the move into the entertainment centre, where a computer or console will no longer be needed for internet access as it will be built in to devices with other primary functions, such as TVs.

Google wants in on this, as does Apple. Google having allies such as Intel & Sony in combination with its data handling & search expertise, will I expect allow Google to expand into the entertainment area more effectively than Apple. They will be cheaper, & the hardware will come with Android pre-installed quite often without the customer even being aware of the fact.

As I've said before, the internet that exists at the end of this decade will be a far cry from what we are used to. Though I fear for the loss of freedom & the ever increasing effects of the marketroids who want to blinker peoples' minds.

[juancarlospaco]

Desktop is irrelevant, i can use my PC on the plain floor, no problems...

[KiwiNZ]

Main reason why goggle says that desktop will become irrelevant is the fact that Microsoft owns monopoly on desktop. Many tried to break that monopoly and failed, but with little or no fault of their own. Microsoft is just to dirty player, they always find a way to scare customers into staying with them, and they always find a way to destroy competitor without actually competing. So Google now wants to kill whole desktop thing down and Microsoft along with it.

It might work, but it is like saying: "Cockroaches are all over the place, so lets burn whole house to the ground, rather than killing cockroaches only".

I think that companies need to sit together and find a way to destroy Microsoft only, not the whole desktop.

You need to get over the Microsoft monopoly thing . It does not exist. Also what you propose here would be illegal.

[KiwiNZ]

The issue with Cloud computing and thin client as I see it and I confess I am not an expert is the risk of single point of failure. And please correct me if I am wrong. But , if your cloud goes down , you are dead in the water with most thin client set ups unless you have smart terminals.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

The issue with Cloud computing and thin client as I see it and I confess I am not an expert is the risk of single point of failure. And please correct me if I am wrong. But , if your cloud goes down , you are dead in the water with most thin client set ups unless you have smart terminals.

That's why html5 is so exciting :)
This showcases a lot of it:
http://apirocks.com/html5/html5.html

Essentially, a web app is able to store data on your computer (with your permission), just like a regular native application. The difference is that web apps are inherently more secure (they are under the close scrutiny of your web browser), really cross platform, and built on a software stack that is incredibly nice to work with. Some heavy number crunching happens on an external service, of course, but that doesn't need to be a web server. Google's Native Client stuff is one way about that. Besides that, remember that any Internet-connected computer can upload as well as download anything. Unless you have a terrible ISP, you can run your own Internet-facing web service, or even your own local web service. The infrastructure here is incredibly flexible and resilient, so you can mix and match freely with a bit of know-how. I think we'll see that idea become very normal as momentum picks up. (It could fit smoothly with home automation stuff, if that ever becomes a mainstream thing).
The fear that “the powers that be” want you to put all your data on the web and your privacy is being destroyed is an understandable fear, but not really accurate.

I think the client side has a big role to play in that, being the intermediate layer that people can inherently trust no matter what. Through the client, it is possible to back up anything (and be certain it is backed up) and to move data from one service to another. It's just a different role from what the client serves right now. (A very reduced role).
(And my opinion is that desktop computers today are miserably awful at helping people manage files. No matter how pretty of a file manager you throw at a casual user — and it doesn't matter how many window management paradigms it supports — that person is going to be completely stumped).

[KiwiNZ]

I think I know what my reading subject for the next week or so shall be. I will ask my sweet wife to bring home all the info home from work on the subject or get her to teach me she has all the qual's.

[ell02]

Thanks for the 5 pages of opinions (really i'm not being sarcastic).I like my desktop but probaly wont buy another.I like my lil itouch a lot but even though its quite fun and usefull in my pocket i cant connect to the web most places i go.Perhaps the cloud wont take over untill its as evrywhere as the clouds in the sky.

[McRat]

I know cloud computing would not work in the business sector I deal with, which for the most part is small to medium businesses in the aerospace and medical manufacturing industries.

CAD/CAM crunching is localized. Files are large, and there is a lot of floating point math done in parallel (co-processed). The hit you would take running on a server would be intense. Servers are used to share the database. You could not do the processing remotely with current computer technology unless you were willing to give up a lot of efficiency. Even the most powerful desktops have a lot of room for improvement in the CAD field. More speed = More work.

Now, in large companies who own their own internet infrastructure or can buy/create anything they need, sure. You could have >10 gbps connections to the CAD machines. Not for the rest of us though.

[aaaantoine]

Sounds interesting. I imagine this will play out a lot similar to the "paperless office" that Paqman joked about, in that we may never have a truly paperless office, but over the years a lot fewer people print out their emails than before.

Likewise, a lot more people will be getting their information through mobile devices, and hosting more and more services over the cloud, as time goes on. That is, until the last of us old-timers die out that prefer to keep our data in-house. ;)

[cprofitt]

Other famous quotes:


I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.
- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943


I have travelled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processings is a fad that won't last out the year.
- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice-Hall, 1957


There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.
- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of DEC


So we went to Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to Hewlett-Packard, and they said, 'Hey, we don't need you. You haven't got through college yet.'
- Steve Jobs, cofounder of Apple Computer


640K ought to be enough for anybody.
-Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates, 1981

Perhaps this statement will join the list

[3rdalbum]

I'll happily dump my desktop when you can get 2 TiB of storage, two DVD burners, a 6 core CPU running at 3 GHz, a full-sized keyboard with numeric keypad, a GPU equivilant to a desktop GTX260, and a 22 inch monitor in a notebook.

Until then, portable computers are only appropriate for a bit of light web surfing.

[NMFTM]

Having a laptop sure would be nice, as I go to a LAN party almost every week and having to lug my 22'' monitor, cables, and full ATX case around is a huge pain. As is hooking and unhooking it up when I get to the party and get back home.

I recently built my system from the ground up (excluding keyboard and mouse) late last year and spent about $1400 on it. 2TB of hard drive space, high end quad core CPU, high end GPU, expensive motherboard, surround sound, and a 22'' WS monitor.

If I tried to build something similar to my desktop rig as a laptop, I'd be looking at about $2500 based on a very quick trip to Alienware's website. Not to mention that laptops tend not to last as long as desktops from what I've heard and this is the price for a laptop today and my computer was build about 6 months ago. So, had I wanted to buy something equivalent to it 6 months ago (as technology power goes up and prices go down) I'd be spending even more.

So, as much as dislike having to lug my giant setup around with me all the time. I'll gladly make the mobility sacrifice in exchange for saving over $1000. It might take 15 minutes to setup once I get somewhere, but it'd better than the alternative of spending a ton more money. Plus, if something goes bad or I (for some reason) wanted to upgrade. I can just swap out parts and customize to my heart's content. Not so with a laptop. Maybe if/when I get a really good job that will put me in the position of financial security I'll drop several thousand on a really high end laptop and use it as a desktop replacement. But for right now I don't want to spend that kind of money.

Also, I consider iMacs to be in somewhat of the same category as laptops. Because like a laptop, you can't just put standard desktop parts in them.

But I do agree that in the future we'll see the desktop market turn into a specialty niche market with the overwhelming majority of computer sales being laptops/netbooks. People on this forum may not believe it because we think about computers from our point of view and not the POV of your average Joe Computer User. But, go to a store that sells computer and look at the ratio of laptops vs desktops. It's (and this is a conservative estimate) at least 50-50 and as the years go by it's only going to get more biased in favor of laptops. Desktops will probably never go away completely, but they are a dying breed.

[lykwydchykyn]

People talking about the paperless office reminded me of something that happened at work recently.

I wrote a web app for another department for use in storing and processing some employee data. Naturally, there were some bugs in it, and the users got some database errors. This being a web app, the error messages were just text in a browser window, nothing special.

However, to report this bug to me, they:
- Took a screenshot of the error
- Pasted it into a word document
- Printed it
- Scanned the printout to PDF
- Emailed me the PDF

Not just once, but on at least 5 different occasions (yeah, my software has a lot of bugs).

This, plus the fact that Windows XP is STILL the most used OS by leaps and bounds after two subsequent Windows releases, should inform anyone in the tech sector who thinks seismic changes in the computer landscape will happen in the next 3 years.

[Groucho Marxist]

Apparently, by the mid 1980's, we'll be able to have a completely paperless office. Amazing!

I'm always wary of predictions made by people who have a vested interest in the outcome they're predicting.

Absolutely; predictions become prophecy when the outcome occurs in a person's favor. Google is attempting to pitch a product, the same way that Steve Jobs pitches HTML5; if there's money to be had, you had better believe they will do everything in their power to convince others of the rightness of their business model.

[handy]

@Groucho Marxist: I agree, business models are usually more right than correct. ;)