|
General Hardware General hardware related questions. |
View Poll Results: will quantum computers your replace your desktop PC within your lifetime? | |||
Yes | 2 | 9.09% | |
No | 9 | 40.91% | |
I don't know/care | 11 | 50.00% | |
This is a stupid question | 0 | 0% | |
Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
I don't know much about the subject, but considering such a system will fundamentally change the world of computing... where will Unix fit in?
I try avoiding the subject.. mostly because I can't wrap my head around it. |
|
||||
I honestly don't know what the current status is on quantum computing, but I do know this. If I am lucky, within my life time I might see 32-bit systems become like 16-bit ones are today among computer users. With how far away that will probably be, assuming I even have kids - maybe my great great grand kids will see quantum computers make the same headway that 64-bit systems are making now.
64-bit capable systems are everywhere, but at home how many copies of Windows XP/VISA do you see running x86-64 on store shelves? One of my friends threw out the 64-bit version of WinXP and Ubuntu some time ago, they just couldn't bare his gaming rig. I can just imagine what horror the change over to quantum computers will bring users, even NetBSD might take sometime to reach that level of portability, let along most peoples everyday software lol.
__________________
My Journal Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''. |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Will we ever get it as a desktop? If you're working for the government, in cryptography, in a company with a technology budget large enough to buy a few small islands in the pacific, maybe. At a university ... maybe, depending on what you do. For home use? As much as I hope, which I suspect is responsibel for my "maybe," I doubt it. |
|
||||
Quote:
One of my friends tried upgrading to XP 64-bit a few months ago. Between flash player, games, drivers, and micro$oft, he gave up and went back to 32-bit XP. So he is still using 32-bit systems, never mind how long they've been around! Am I the only person who finds it kind of odd, that more or less the same processor design being evolved for performance over the years, has ruled the market share for desktops for so freaking long? Once the technology is sorted, the issues ai-danno has touched on become history, there's still going to be a mass of dual/quad core 64-bit computers to oust from the desktop. Or as I like to say of computers, if it can't run vi, I won't use it.
__________________
My Journal Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''. |
|
||||
I really doubt it. Perhaps we'll see something TerryP said - QC being something like 64-bit systems today. Then again, you never know.
__________________
If it moves, crypt it. Unless it's static - than you should double-crypt it. |
|
||||
The move to QC will be nothing like the 32->64 bit transition.
Infact the move to 64 bit is quite painless. If you are running a 64 bit OS on intel/amd then you have the flexibility of running 32-bit software (at full speed with no performance penalty) or 64-bit software where needed. Software that doesn't require 64b capability can be expected to perform slightly worse if compiled as a 64b app and this holds true for other architectures too. The key point here is that 32b software can happily co-exist with 64b software on a 64-bit OS. Now, QC with its qbits and other jargon is beyond my grasp but I have a feeling that code for QC software will look nothing like what we have today and thats the scary bit. Last edited by ephemera; 14th October 2008 at 04:30 PM. |
|
|||
64-bit processors have existed since the 60's, only the introduction into the modern PC market was recent..
There is a lot of backwards compatibility though, for instance.. many 64-bit architectures are LP64, this means char, short, int in the C language are the same size as the x86 counterpart.. only long and pointers are 64-bits wide. Quantum computing, as I understand it.. is a fundamental redesign of computing... heck, it won't even be 1's and 0's anymore.. it'll be more like "maybe 1" or "maybe 0" or both. Software will change, porting seems unlikely... I don't want quantum computers in my life time. |
|
||||
Quantum computers will have high-level programming languages such as Python or Java, where you don't really need to worry about the underlying hardware.
Low level programming however, will be quite a different story.
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things. |
|
||||
Well, you sure can use your Lamborghini to go shopping at WalMart. Matter of ego.
Quantum desktops, ditto. Just define "desktop". I trust there won't be many desktops around in a couple of years.
__________________
da more I know I know I know nuttin' |
|
||||
If QC becomes the norm, qbits and an understanding of quantum superpositions will probably become your new bit twiddling buddies.
__________________
My Journal Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''. |
|
|||
I would not like anything that represents a dumb terminal tied to a central M$ server, and they forcing you to pay monthly fees to "rent" their apps and access the data you produce with those apps and store in their cencorship-ridden servers to replace my beloved PC's and the OS's and apps I run on them and data I store on them.
P.D: I admit it, I'm quite frigtened of the mere though of that type of future ever happening. |
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." -Philip K. Dick |
|
|||
Quote:
BTW: I know you were joking, but if what I said does happen ALL OF US *NIX LOVERS are gonna be in for a world of pain. |
|
||||
Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm willing to go out on a limb here and say that the next awesome leap forward in computing will be grey matter as a storage device.
In the end, humans are computers, and we could learn a lot about computer design by studying how we ourselves are designed. |
|
|||
You're crazy.
I saw or read something recently that said the human brain really is nothing like a computer and people should stop talking like that and I'm here to stop you right now. A lot of things I've read about those working do indicate to me that it is most certainly just a big bag of chemicals that help with interactions between nerves, synapses and all those terms I don't recall, but not in any way resembling a computer. |
|
||||
don't be limited to just electron movement in nerves
I remember few years ago I've read that (if i'm correct, Israel) scientists did experimet, that solved mathematical problem using DNA, the speed was incredible.... further experiments could make it possible to build organic computers.... |
|
||||
I was looking for an article about that earlier today. I read it in ACM along with the quantum article...
__________________
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." -Philip K. Dick |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Need a lightweight browser to replace Fx3 | TerryP | General software and network | 15 | 12th February 2009 10:45 PM |
Do you build your own computers? | JMJ_coder | Off-Topic | 28 | 28th July 2008 03:04 AM |
sh replace string | graudeejs | Programming | 2 | 24th July 2008 06:37 PM |
proxy : replace gif with local gif | milo974 | OpenBSD General | 4 | 17th July 2008 06:45 AM |
Support lifetime | Quitch | FreeBSD General | 2 | 21st June 2008 08:14 PM |