Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- From: André Thieme <address.good.until.2008.oct.24@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2008 05:32:50 +0200
Raffael Cavallaro schrieb:
On 2008-10-04 02:21:04 -0400, André Thieme <address.good.until.2008.oct.24@xxxxxxxxxxx> said:
Don’t you see a use for Adobe to basically kill all illegal copies
of Photoshop running around, and forcing people into subscriptions?
They would like to do this but the bandwidth costs of a server based Photoshop are prohibitive and will continue to be for many years.
Sure, you are right, and I agree. That’s why I originally excluded PS
in my previous posts from the applications for which I see that they’ll
find their way soon into the web.
But still, I remember very well how people paid $700+ per month to play
EverQuest (an online role playing game) in 1999, and that traffic costs
were much higher than todays.
But I believe there is still the chance for traffic costs going down.
I don't think you're considering Adobe's core market - graphics professionals who routinely work with 30+ MB images. This means transfering many megabytes for each whole image edit, something that will take many seconds to a minute or more for something that now happens often in less than a half second. The people who actually pay for Photoshop in order to earn their living will not pay for a new version that is 10 to 100 times slower.
Also right.
But let’s not forget that connection speeds will go up. Nine years ago
I had an extremly fast access to the internet.. isdn. I was able to
upload more than 6 kb/s, and this made me a hero.
Today I can upload nearly 20x as much. And 100 mbit/s will come.
And please let us see the bigger picture. People will be online 24 hours
a day, everywhere they are, via their mobile phones.
While the photographer takes his shots the camera begins to transfer the
pics to the Adobe server. Until he is home the pictures are already on
his online disk.
So, in fact it will be faster than it is already today.
But sure, not tomorrow, not 2013.
This market also drives the purchase of high end desktop machines, so PC manufacturers (e.g., Apple) will be quick to point out and painfully demonstrate how brain damaged it is to do high resolution image file processing on a remote server.
Until 2015 I see no new application coming for our homes.
When I buy my next computers I will make sure they will be fast enough
to watch movies, play games that run well on a 60 dollar graphics card
and which will be so silent that I feel the need to open the tower to
understand the compi is still working.
But at the same time AMD will offer me their 32-core CPU with 4 GHz each.
With current home software we reached basically the limits of what is
needed. Now the hardware evolves too fast.
Only up to date games and video editing needs these CPUs. Probably
there are several users, but I guess 98% of all people don’t need that.
When the first retina displays become available (which might be in
2015 according to Ray Kurzweil) it will change. We then have a need
for faster PCs again, and we will want that 32-core beast in our mobile
phones as well. Even later more intelligent applications will come that
will also need tons of CPU.
I think Adobe will be more interested in their own needs and won’t listen
too much to what apple says.
André
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- From: Cor Gest
- Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- From: Raffael Cavallaro
- Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- References:
- Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- From: André Thieme
- Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- From: Vend
- Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- From: André Thieme
- Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- Prev by Date: It's all my fault, Was: OT: Google requiring login to just to read usenet?
- Next by Date: Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- Previous by thread: Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- Next by thread: Re: compiling a Lisp source to exe
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|