>if 10 ghz is the best that intel can do by 2011, amd or somebody else is going to eat their lunch. intel better pick up the pace
>we won't even be runing silicon chips at all by then. maybe we'll all be running dna computers, where mhz and ghz and thz are irrelevant. just think. what kind of computer were you running in 1989? i never dreamed of computers like the one i have (which is low-end, by today's standards) back in 1989.
> by 2011, it will be necessary to have expansion cards (i.e. graphics cards, sound cards, or whatever) at all. the future computer i envision ... would be a box, with ports, that could be configured to do any number of functions ... added just-in-time…
>by 2011 we will have implementation of quantum processing that will make the xhz debate look like the colonists debating over sucession from the uk.
this is sad, where did we go wrong?
Isaiah Harris
She just posted that pic
Do you stalk her?
Parker Nelson
shes my wife idiot now please talk about cpus
Christian Kelly
who is she (male)
Lincoln Carter
intel shanking AMD 2 years into their 10 year contract
Logan White
Lack of investment. Same goes with the federal government. Now is the time to issue bonds and build heavy national infrastructure.
Jack Sanchez
I want to lick her feet
Jace Perez
She looks cute!
Dominic Watson
tell me who this is right now.
Leo Kelly
you idiots are fooled by makeup
this is an 8/10 dressed up
Dylan Flores
No competition happened. Tho 10ghz is pushing it.
Brody Reed
But why invest in anything when you're number 1 since no one else can go up? (And everyone is going down)
Christopher Turner
thats just what she looks like r*tard
Grayson Phillips
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 19,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and perhaps only weigh 1.5 tons. - Popular Mechanics, March 1949.
Benjamin Lee
>r*tard you have to go back
Mason Hughes
...
Caleb Parker
back in grad school i worked on computing with light and transistors that had ten states (0-9 or base 10) rather than 2 (0 and 1 or binary). anybody who doesn't think that these types of technology won't be commercially available by 2011 is kidding themselves. in addition, new os capability to scale up and out will radically change how we compute. maybe clock speeds will only be 10 ghz by then but dozens and dozens of processors may coexist on a single chip that process data in base 10 (or hex) instead of base 2, effectively performing hugely more complex computations with fewer transistors and (relatively) lower clock speeds than would currently be needed. i have seen the future and it rocks!!…
Robert Garcia
jews
Jeremiah Bailey
>i have seen the future and it rocks!!… and everything went to shit thanks to the jews like cuckerberg and datamining
Parker Williams
who is this semen demon?
David Harris
Liyu0109 on twitter
Evan Sanchez
>Liyu0109 bless your soul, user. my cock is eternally grateful
Owen Thomas
>moors law >pretty much law
anyone with half a brain knows that that kind of progress is not sustainable. maybe the first few jumps but there are diminishing returns after a few of the cycles. I guess the internet wasn't as informative as it is now.
Tyler James
This guy was actually on to something >short sighted (5:32pm est wed jul 26 2000) >i think that thinking about where the desktop pc is going to be in ten years is a little short-sighted. we're already moving away from the desktop with all manner of specialty appliances that focus on one area of computing. from game consoles to internet appliances to cell phones with email, we're getting away from the all-in-one computing unit. i, for one, doubt that in 10 years computing will still revolve around a single central processing unit and function as we now know.
The mighty desktop is still useful and popular but has to compete with tablets, phones, a few game consoles, smart TV's and other devices.
Liam Rivera
The market shifted towards normie social computing, then stagnated as their needs were met.
Carson Lee
>>moors law The Moors were driven out of Spain during the Reconquista. Their laws haven't applied for a very long time.
Andrew Rodriguez
but they were right? my CPU is 18 x 2.8 GHz = 50.4 GHz
Jordan Evans
>where did we go wrong?
In predicting ridiculous shit like having DNA computers in a 10 year time frame while having absolutely no starting point for the technology outside of a concept in some sci-fi geek's head.
Predictions for the future are almost always wrong and when they're right it's usually only in a vague sense.
Daniel Rogers
That's not how that works.
Julian Jenkins
I'm still waiting for a better battery tech that doesn't rely on lithium ions for years and there's still no progress on making it consumer ready.
Benjamin Mitchell
for software that scales linearly with core count and clock speed, it pretty much is, but obviously i was trolling
