Re: Some thoughts on a fortune
On Wednesday 14 November 2001 3:22 pm, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> On 11/14/2001 09:05:59 AM Mike Dresser wrote:
> >> Saw this in fortunes:
> >>
> >> Imagine that Cray computer decides to make a personal computer. It has
> >> a 150 MHz processor, 200 megabytes of RAM, 1500 megabytes of disk
> >> storage, a screen resolution of 4096 x 4096 pixels, relies entirely on
> >> voice recognition for input, fits in your shirt pocket and costs $300.
> >> What's the first question that the computer community asks?
> >>
> >> "Is it PC compatible?"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> You know, that was written like.. how long ago? And letsee.. we have
>
> the
>
> >> processor, ten times as fast, we have the ram, by ... well, some people
> >> have five times as much in their machines. We have the disk storage,
> >> sometimes fifty times more. There's almost half decent voice
>
> recognition
>
> >> software
> >> out there.
> >> Won't fit in the pocket, and doesn't cost 300 bucks, but it's not THAT
>
> far
>
> >> off either.
> >>
> >> But. Where's our high resolution screens?
>
> Assumes the quotation has useful meaning. If it "fits in the pocket" it
> can't really have a screen more than perhaps 6 cm wide or long. Think
> cellphone screen. As a sweeping generalization, most people have trouble
> seeing anything smaller than 0.1 mm. So, a screen with 0.1 mm resolution
> and 4096 pixels wide would have a physical width of about 41 centimeters,
> which is not really pocket sized anymore. Unless you have a fold up screen
> there is no sense in a 4096 pixel pocket sized display.
>
> An obnoxious reply to the quote would of course be that if Cray made that
> palmtop, it wouldn't be battery powered, it would have a plug on the back
> for 30 amps of three phase 440V and require a liquid cooling system.
>
> Another way of looking at it, is my three year old palm pilot with 10 meg
> memory expansion card comes within 1 to 10 percent of those various specs,
> and it meets all my needs, so what is to gain by upgrading? I'll never
> know the difference if it sorts my address book in 1 ns instead of 1 ms.
> That's why there's been approximately no technological progress in palmtops
> for a couple years, no demand.
Re the hi-res display issue - obviously, screens aren't going to be much use
in a pocketable device. Instead, a direct projection system could be used.
Fitting the projector to a pair of spectacles is just about state-of-the-art
right now but in the future it should be possible to fit the projector in to
the device itself.
This would require some neat tracking algorithms so that the device could be
hand held and still give a stable display.
Might as well build in retina recognition too, for security. Such a device
would be then able to identify several people simultaneosly and display
customised content to each of them, securely.
The biggest problem, as always with portable devices is power but a
combination of battery development and much more efficient silcon i.e. not
x86, will eventually get it there.
LeeE
Reply to: