They are not all equal

[rmitz]

This means that the concept of needing a powerful PC to get work or play done will become obsolete for most consumers.

 

For example, I used to use Microsoft Excel to track my investments and for my number crunching.  Now I use Google Docs, which runs through the browser.  I only need a very simple machine that can run my browser (Firefox) to get most of my investing work done.

 

It's important to note that today's web browsers require a pretty good chunk of horsepower; and as more functionality goes online, complexity will continue to increase in that area. 

 

While it has gotten more efficient, running javascript in the browser is still a lot more computationally expensive than running native code.  I haven't run tests, but certainly it takes more computing power to run google docs than an older version of MS word.  It has always been somewhat frustrating to me that MS Office 97 did everything I really needed and ran quickly on a simple pentium laptop...while today's software would not even start on a machine with only 64M of ram. [MSFT has made billions on locking people in to an upgrade cycle they don't actually need].

 

So while huge number crunching may move away from the desktop, those "lightweight" interfaces aren't necessarily that lightweight.  Just *try* running Firefox or Safari on a machine only a few years old. 

 

The general point is that it seems that computing capacity has always increased to fill whatever you've got available, and I don't really see an inflection point yet.  There are some possible ones, but nothing that is a done deal.

[txlaw]

This means that the concept of needing a powerful PC to get work or play done will become obsolete for most consumers.

 

For example, I used to use Microsoft Excel to track my investments and for my number crunching.  Now I use Google Docs, which runs through the browser.  I only need a very simple machine that can run my browser (Firefox) to get most of my investing work done.

 

It's important to note that today's web browsers require a pretty good chunk of horsepower; and as more functionality goes online, complexity will continue to increase in that area. 

 

While it has gotten more efficient, running javascript in the browser is still a lot more computationally expensive than running native code.  I haven't run tests, but certainly it takes more computing power to run google docs than an older version of MS word.  It has always been somewhat frustrating to me that MS Office 97 did everything I really needed and ran quickly on a simple pentium laptop...while today's software would not even start on a machine with only 64M of ram. [MSFT has made billions on locking people in to an upgrade cycle they don't actually need].

 

So while huge number crunching may move away from the desktop, those "lightweight" interfaces aren't necessarily that lightweight.  Just *try* running Firefox or Safari on a machine only a few years old. 

 

The general point is that it seems that computing capacity has always increased to fill whatever you've got available, and I don't really see an inflection point yet.  There are some possible ones, but nothing that is a done deal.

 

Your point is well taken.  I don't mean to suggest that the newest devices to be adopted will be a step down in computing power.  The latest versions of the iPad or Android tablet/netbook will use much better hardware than previous computing devices.  So perhaps calling these "dumb interfaces" was a mistake. 

 

But I do think that the computing power that we will need locally -- in front of our faces -- will be very, very low cost and much smaller in proportion to total computing power used because of the ability to shift  computing power to remote areas.