griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) (04/08/91)
>In article <2wBuZ3w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP> vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solanoy) writes: > Personally, the home market doesn't need anything like a 14 mip 68040, a > SPARC-2, or an RS-6000... most businesses probably don't need it either. Why not?! Something as simple and mundane as Desktop Publishing benefits greatly from a fast machine! And many, many people are starting to do 3D raytracing and animation for small but important projects, demonstrations, what-have-you. Nothing as fancy as a dedicated graphics junkie or professional would do with $$$, but still nice stuff. A 68040 machine sitting in your spare bedroom will allow you to do rendering at close to real time so you don't spend hours, days, weeks on something every time you change your mind because it didn't turn out exactly the way you wanted. -- Dan Griffin griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu
vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solanoy) (04/12/91)
griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) writes: > >In article <2wBuZ3w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP> vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solano > > > Personally, the home market doesn't need anything like a 14 mip 68040, a > > SPARC-2, or an RS-6000... most businesses probably don't need it either. > > Why not?! Something as simple and mundane as Desktop Publishing benefits > greatly from a fast machine! And many, many people are starting to do > 3D raytracing and animation for small but important projects, demonstrations, > what-have-you. Nothing as fancy as a dedicated graphics junkie or > professional would do with $$$, but still nice stuff. A 68040 machine > sitting in your spare bedroom will allow you to do rendering at close > to real time so you don't spend hours, days, weeks on something every > time you change your mind because it didn't turn out exactly the way you > wanted. > > -- > Dan Griffin > griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu You seem to have missed the point... there are people who use computers, and those that just use computers.... if you are getting at what I'm trying to say. The majority of people who do use the computers in the here and now do their homework on it, do simple tasks on it, etc.... In other words, the everyday Joe really doesn't have a need for the extreme computation speed for raytracing and graphics work. As far as graphics goes, I think the majority of computer users use their computers for gaming... which may explain why the gaming market is one of the largest. I do understand that possibly in the near future (or sooner) that computers will change to be faster and better than it's predecessors. That's been the case so far.... it really wouldn't make any sense to have a world of AT class machines (or Amiga 3000 class) and reintroduce the old IBM PC (or the C-128). Victor
griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) (04/13/91)
vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solanoy) writes: >griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) writes: >> >In article <2wBuZ3w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP> vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solano >> >> > Personally, the home market doesn't need anything like a 14 mip 68040, a >> > SPARC-2, or an RS-6000... most businesses probably don't need it either. >> >> Why not?! Something as simple and mundane as Desktop Publishing benefits >> greatly from a fast machine! And many, many people are starting to do >The majority of people who do use the computers in the here and now do their >homework on it, do simple tasks on it, etc.... In other words, the everyday >Joe really doesn't have a need for the extreme computation speed for >raytracing and graphics work. As far as graphics goes, I think the majority >of computer users use their computers for gaming... which may explain why >the gaming market is one of the largest. The majority of computer users don't know what working with an inexpensive powerful compuer is like, either. Even people who are old PC users don't catch on to multitasking right away sometimes. Give people fast computers and good software and see what happens. One thing that benefits users are these user-friendly GUIs. You also said most businesses don't need a fast computer, either. -- Dan Griffin griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu
Harvey_Taylor@mindlink.bc.ca (Harvey Taylor) (04/15/91)
In <y829Z1w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP>, vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solanoy) writes: | |griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) writes: | |>>In article <2wBuZ3w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP> vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solano |>> |>> Personally, the home market doesn't need anything like a 14 mip 68040, a |>> SPARC-2, or an RS-6000... most businesses probably don't need it either. |> |> Why not?! |> [...] | | You seem to have missed the point... there are people who use computers, | and those that just use computers.... For that matter, they could probably do it by pencil, paper & slide rule. Your statement hangs by the criteria of need. I am reminded of Dylan's line "She knows what you need, but I know what you want." I would like a massively parallel optical computer with a neural interface, please. [Of course, if CBM makes it, it will just be a games machine.] On the other claw, don't overestimate present hardware. "While today's digital hardware is extremely impressive, it is clear that the human retina's real time performance goes unchallenged. Actually to simulate 10 milliseconds of the complete processing of even a single nerve cell from the retina would require the solution of about 500 simultaneous nonlinear differential equations 100 times and would take at least several minutes of time on a Cray supercomputer. Keeping in mind that there are 10 million or more such cells interacting with each other in complex ways, it would take a minimum of 100 years of Cray time to simulate what takes place in your eye many times each second." - John K. Stevens Byte, Page 287, April 1985, Reverse Engineering the Brain -het "This is not the world. This is a sophisticated AI simulation of a bunch of nerds running around and complaining at each other." -D.Zerkle Harvey Taylor Meta Media Productions uunet!van-bc!rsoft!mindlink!Harvey_Taylor a186@mindlink.UUCP