Jericho: Bits and Bites with bits and bytes
I have a running file in my head of alternate ideas for computers. I started when I was a kid thinking about computers embedded in desks. The last few years I keep thinking about modular computers. Why does a computer need to be a big case? Why do you need to throw away the whole thing when you want a faster processor or more memory or to run the latest OS? Sure, if you know what you are doing inside a case you can replace a mother board. If I knew what I was doing inside the hood of my car I wouldn't have to go to Jiffy Lube. Computers are supposed to become simple appliances - yet they seem to be getting more and more difficult as we move forward.
This idea seems to be going in the right direction. If done right, a system like this should be the ultimate in plug and play. Connect two parts together, they detect each other and start working together. The user need do nothing but wait for it to all boot up. If I were to buy a simple system, then want to add more features later, I could quite easily. When a new feature comes out, just buy the new module. Old modules get assembled into less capable computers for kids or whatever.
If you are like me, you have had multiple systems in the last decade. Think over those systems, there were parts in each system that were working fine when you got rid of it. Imagine if you had them all back until they really died. I keep looking at this concept thinking I'd have a CD ROM, a CDR, a DVD and a DVDR. Not to mention a couple of extra (smallish) hard drives and a Zip Drive.
Then there are processors! In my short time as a computer owner, I have thrown away or given away a 233 MHz Power PC, a 500 MHz Power PC and a 1 GHz Pentium. I have bought others as gifts, had two laptops stolen, etc. We now have a 2+ GHz Power PC and a 2+ GHz Pentium. Most modern operating systems have no trouble with multiple processors. If I had a module based system, I could have at least 5 processors doing all kinds of work. When I bring up something processor intensive, like Photoshop, I could give it its own processor.
Take this one step further. We are all used to installing our operating systems onto our hard drives. This is okay, hard drives are getting faster. But, hard drive speed has never been able to keep up with RAM speed. So, what if your OS came in a module that you just plugged in? The module would have your core OS installed in just enough RAM to let it run. Yes, if there were updates, those would go to the hard drive (Flash Memory on the module?). But, installing a new OS would be as easy as plugging in a new module. Further, you could have multiple OS modules. It would be like having one machine that could run Windows, Linux and Mac and none of them would be emulated. You could even keep older OS modules. Every piece of software you have ever owned would still work because you still have the OS!
Major applications, like Photoshop, could also be loaded on a module. I could actually see something like Photoshop come in a module, running on RAM, with a flash memory partition for updates and even its own processor. Photoshop retails for several thousand dollars - this module could be made on industrial levels for less than $100. Considering it would take no time to install and come with all of those performance improvements, most buyers would fork out the extra dough.
I think the best possible way a system like this could work out would be if it were licensed or open source. This way, multiple manufacturers could make modules that all (attempt) to work with the same standards. This way, you could have the best modules from the best manufacturers. You'd have lots of choices for color, style, materials, etc. Your computer could be a little work of art.
This idea seems to be going in the right direction. If done right, a system like this should be the ultimate in plug and play. Connect two parts together, they detect each other and start working together. The user need do nothing but wait for it to all boot up. If I were to buy a simple system, then want to add more features later, I could quite easily. When a new feature comes out, just buy the new module. Old modules get assembled into less capable computers for kids or whatever.
If you are like me, you have had multiple systems in the last decade. Think over those systems, there were parts in each system that were working fine when you got rid of it. Imagine if you had them all back until they really died. I keep looking at this concept thinking I'd have a CD ROM, a CDR, a DVD and a DVDR. Not to mention a couple of extra (smallish) hard drives and a Zip Drive.
Then there are processors! In my short time as a computer owner, I have thrown away or given away a 233 MHz Power PC, a 500 MHz Power PC and a 1 GHz Pentium. I have bought others as gifts, had two laptops stolen, etc. We now have a 2+ GHz Power PC and a 2+ GHz Pentium. Most modern operating systems have no trouble with multiple processors. If I had a module based system, I could have at least 5 processors doing all kinds of work. When I bring up something processor intensive, like Photoshop, I could give it its own processor.
Take this one step further. We are all used to installing our operating systems onto our hard drives. This is okay, hard drives are getting faster. But, hard drive speed has never been able to keep up with RAM speed. So, what if your OS came in a module that you just plugged in? The module would have your core OS installed in just enough RAM to let it run. Yes, if there were updates, those would go to the hard drive (Flash Memory on the module?). But, installing a new OS would be as easy as plugging in a new module. Further, you could have multiple OS modules. It would be like having one machine that could run Windows, Linux and Mac and none of them would be emulated. You could even keep older OS modules. Every piece of software you have ever owned would still work because you still have the OS!
Major applications, like Photoshop, could also be loaded on a module. I could actually see something like Photoshop come in a module, running on RAM, with a flash memory partition for updates and even its own processor. Photoshop retails for several thousand dollars - this module could be made on industrial levels for less than $100. Considering it would take no time to install and come with all of those performance improvements, most buyers would fork out the extra dough.
I think the best possible way a system like this could work out would be if it were licensed or open source. This way, multiple manufacturers could make modules that all (attempt) to work with the same standards. This way, you could have the best modules from the best manufacturers. You'd have lots of choices for color, style, materials, etc. Your computer could be a little work of art.
posted by Jericho Brown at 9/11/2007 10:51:00 AM
3 Comments:
Pretty.
I don't care for the idea of needing a module for each app, though. Right now, if I need something I do a little Googling to find the right FOSS app, fire up apt-get and I am ready to rock. The idea of running out to by some module (or waiting for Amazon to deliver such) doesn't appeal. The rest sounds like fun, though.
I don't think that every piece of freeware should be its own module - that's why you have a hard drive. But, when it comes to pieces of software like Photoshop, which is extremely memory and processor intensive, it might be nice to get dedicated hardware.
Yes, I know there are alternatives to both those programs. I've tried a few Photoshop clones and they need to re-cook the clone, IMHO - they are not as good.
I've often thought about giving Photoshop its own RAM disc on the various Macs I have owned, but I have never had that much memory. Since I don't use it everyday, it's not important. But, for someone who makes their living off it, I bet they would love a performance boost.
I see your point. For someone who truly needs Photoshop, only Photoshop will do. Being able to just walk around and plug in modules for Photoshop/Etc would be damn handy in design and ad departments/firms.
Post a Comment
<< Home