PCs optimize

Poll: How long will desktop computing matter?

Justin James predicts that the desktop computing model has five years maximum left for mainstream business use. What's your prediction about the desktop model?

The desktop computing model (and the client/server model) is in its dying days, with the exception of certain specialized applications, and a few holdout companies and industries that will stay with desktop computing for much longer than the mainstream. But for the most part, I feel that desktop computing is practically dead in the consumer space, where mobile and Web have become the norm. In the business space, I think most businesses have only one or two applications (other than Microsoft Office) which the bulk of their workers count on and that keep them tied to the desktop model.

I know of very few developers doing non-Web development for business applications at this point. I give the desktop model five years at best for mainstream business usage.

J.Ja

About

Justin James is the Lead Architect for Conigent.

125 comments
kbeelitz
kbeelitz

Read a bunch on comments above and I just hope the desktop computer never goes away. However, computers once occupied rooms and completed simplistic task, but now fit in the palm of your hand. I see it going away over time -even though I don't like it but that day will probably come soon. Thanks for the insight guys!!

Charles Bundy
Charles Bundy

If you define desktop as something that has separate display and input devices then the desktop will be around forever. It's just easier to create content that way. The typewriter may have all but disappeared, but the keyboard hasn't changed a whole lot in 150 years... I can see a future in which I'll pick up the monitor off my desk and use it as a tablet on the road. While on my desk it's processing power will be amplified through aggregation of services available in local high speed networks. Hence "client/server" will be around for the long haul as well...

jimbobbru
jimbobbru

Why does "Desktop" mean Microsoft to everyone? Nothing MS puts out is as good as the alternatives. I will be on a (*nix) desktop probably forever, they will always be faster, more powerful and more flexible in the hands of anyone who knows what they're doing. This mobile market is aimed at the dumbest users, which in turns makes anyone using it dumber. (Apple has been aiming for the dumb users ever since they came out) A simple example of how this works: an inline spell check or Google's auto-complete. Use those tools for a couple weeks and just watch your typing suffer. Using crutches when you aren't injured will only make you lame and weak. Making crutches the everyday standard will create generations of lame and weak. The mobile market exists to make money and create dependency, not to be useful. These devices are designed to profile you so they can sell you more junk easier. Not to mention the health risks of many wireless systems. Who knows when or if the US will admit to it, but in 5-10 years many other countries will be changing their policies on wireless pollution based on medical studies which are currently illegal in the US.

paul.ob.tech
paul.ob.tech

I still use a laptop/desktop for niche areas like EPROM programming, having switched from ISA boards to USB in the last 20 years. I see Android will be able to do this via the accessory expansion, just need the programs. There are still very many areas where there DOS/Windows programs will be needed for years, or get someone to write a new program for old equipment. Would be cheaper to replace the equipment in many cases than pay a programmer to do it.

puffybelly
puffybelly

Professional or office environment aside, how about average consumers? Check out the CES 2012 and you can see TV manufacturers putting more and more "apps" into your normal television set, while other PC manufacturers trying to find new use for your old fashion desktop - like the push on the "Multimedia PCs" to attract non-professional PC consumers. Who is not to say someday they will choose to merge together? Imaging your TV running iOS, Android, or Metro, with touch screen and wireless keyboard, or even with motion sensing capability like xbox kinetics - who needs a remote control when you can just "finger" literarily? (Plus you can probably consider xbox/playstation as a gaming desktop.) The technology for a "PC-TV" are out there - just waiting for some one like Steve Jobs to put it together. And no one hates big screen - at least I don't :)

oldbaritone
oldbaritone

I believe desktop computing will continue to "matter" for many years, in certain areas: Accounting, Order Entry, Telephone Support, Engineering, Manufacturing/MRP/ERP, Process Control at high levels, and functions that "live" in an office setting, rarely moving from their desk or work station. I think they're already dead and gone, or going fast, in outside-the-office applications like sales, order fulfillment, inventory control and monitoring, factory floor control, and functions that "live" with people who do not sit at a desk to get their job done. Back in the early 80's, some said that the PC foreshadowed the "death of the mainframe." 30 years has shown that to be somewhat overstated. Mainframes do not "rule" as they once did, but neither have they gone the way of the dinosaurs. Desktop PCs will continue, like the mainframe, in a niche. Newer technology will create and carve out new niches for itself. It's already happening. It's not a zero-sum game. New technology opens new opportunities and expands the potential for fast, accurate information flow. Applications that were completely unsuitable for a PC (or a mainframe) are perfectly fit to new devices appearing on the market. But the desktop PC's days as a cutting-edge technology are gone, barring some revolution like Quantum computing if it needs a big box with lots of power to run it. IT will change, but the desktop PC will not die.

scooter8511
scooter8511

I just want to take a second to point out the reason that desktops are still more powerful (for the price) and are able to remain as a necessity for some. I am talking about the meaning of mobile. Desktops are always there, always ready, granted I meant literally always THERE in the one spot. But they don't rely on mobile power (ie: batteries). I am just a student going to a local community college, but I was a tech intern at my high school, and when we tried to introduce a "mobile computer lab", a.k.a a laptop cart with an access point, our biggest trouble was keeping the laptops charged due to students not caring to plug them in when done. To end the long version: mobile devices are only less powerful than the desktops because we have to limit their hardware to maximize batter life, or else what is the point of it being "mobile"? So in closing, unless something new is found where either 1. Batteries contain vast amounts of power, or 2. Hardware is adapted to use absolute minimal power (though this would cause the performance capacity to drop in theory), desktops will always be sought after for at least a small margin of users who need power. Or else, for the desired power, you'll merely be able to put a laptop with massively over spec-ed components on a desk and call it "mobile" because it is light and convenient to be able to move when necessary, as opposed to using on the fly. Just my $.02

seanferd
seanferd

What is with the constant harping on "When will the desktop die"? My guess is that you all want it to die, and you need to keep that idea active and floating around to reach as many people as possible. Why don't we see how fast it dies if everyone shuts up about it? If you are pro-kill-desktop, just say so. Stop making it a poll, or relating it as a question. We all know nothing has changed since you asked the same question differently two months ago. I will candidly state that I don't want desktops to die. I don't want open architecture to die. All other models just plain suck. And I don't want the software that runs on them, or to do processing in the cloud. I don't want metro apps, google apps, or apple apps, or web apps. And I don't want ISP rates to go up because everyone is pointlessly sending even more bits across networks - this will surely be their next excuse for higher rates and bad service. I hardly expect the world or anyone to bend to my reasons, but I have no compunction about calling other people's ideas bad, either. This has nearly nothing to do with a better experience for users, and everything to do with a better experience for some vendors. If MS would really, actually ever improve their OS, you wouldn't have to worry about user problems half as much.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Cobol, and just before the paperless office arrives.... I mean please...

SkyWlf77
SkyWlf77

...and all other posts like it. Dozens of postings like this one I have read, laughing the entire time I'm reading them. People think that just because THEY don't have a need for desktops that they are just going to go POOF and disappear. The not-so-surprising thing is that these posts do NOT show up in gaming forums. There are a massive number of gamers out there, but they aren't polled by these types of questions because most of them aren't programmers or professional IT persons who follow sites like this one. Therefore, their voices aren't being heard and would like be a major factor is reversing any pro-death-of-the-desktop results. Laptops are inherently more expensive than desktops, cannot be custom-built, very little can be user-upgraded or replaced, and are also generally lower-performing than desktops (unless you step into ultra-expensive specialized systems like Alienware, et al.). Then there are people like me. People that refuse to run Linux or the Mac OS because no one around me uses it, so I have no local assistance if something goes wrong. People that use Microsoft Office every single day of the week for work AND personal use and need to be able to see more than just 3-4 lines of data on Excel (due to ridiculously small screen sizes on mobile systems). People like me that want to build our own systems so that I know what's in it and I know it's built with quality for the same price as some cheapo system from Dell. People like me who own a cell phone, but have the internet and multimedia messaging shut off on it to save money on the monthly bill. The point is that, until I am forced with no other choice, I'll never move away from a desktop. I'm not really even a power user anymore. I don't work in the IT field anymore and I've stopped building and repairing computers except for myself. Short of Firefox, Microsoft Office, and occasionally the game "Skyrim," I really don't have any applications that I absolutely have to have. But, I have one hell of a computer. Why? I have 4 cores of power that, when not in use by me, burn through units for Folding@Home to help find cures for currently incurable diseases. I have an 80+ Gold rated PSU for efficiency. All the fans in my system are low-speed, energy efficient models. My keyboard is backlit so that I can work on my computer with every light in the house off to save energy. If a part dies, I can replace that part and only that part, saving money and landfill waste. And all of this cost less than my friend's generic cheapo Acer laptop. The desktop isn't dead and it isn't going to die until you can custom-build one, play any game currently on the market on it without paying over $1000 for one, and until mobile options are available with every application currently used by consumers. Sorry to burst your bubble.

bboyd
bboyd

At work, as soon as a hand held device hooks to the input and output I use and runs the high end CAD software to boot. Software that continues to challenge high end desktop never mind heat limited laptops.

Simon Bramfitt
Simon Bramfitt

20% say dead within 5 years 80% say more than 5 yrs The number one lesson of Y2K (you do remember that don't you?) was not to use a four digit year field, but that software lasts. What you "feel" and what you "think", matter far than what enterprise IT does. Simon

8lackie
8lackie

I would agree with pmishler. I love sitting in my easy chair w/ my desk top. I built it myself, it runs like a dream and it cost pennies. I might be more excited about smart phones and other geegaws if i could build them myself or if the cost was somewhat reasonable. I currently use a cellphone that does nothing but make and receive calls. So old school, i love it!

qspamalot
qspamalot

and 1 year after the year of the linux desktop

pmishler
pmishler

I have been desktop computing since DOS. I am now retired and have no particular use for the current fads. Desktop computing is easy, private, stable and allows me to sit and think while I am working. I am not distracted by texting, sexting or other interfering distractions. I also do not have to carry my work around with me. I do take my laptop with me when I will be out of the home for a week if I think I will need to do desktop-type work.

grayknight
grayknight

But a household will probably only have one desktop, several laptops, a few tablets, and at least one mobile phone per person. So the number of mobile devices will continue to rise, replacing the secondary desktops. So mobile will be the main devices, but the need for more advanced graphics, larger screens, faster content creation will not go away and will still be best on desktops.

andrew232006
andrew232006

As long as my work is at a desk, and I don't see that changing, I see no reason to spend more money for less speed and a smaller screen.

Slayer_
Slayer_

There will always be a place for desktop computers and a client/server relationship. You think star ships are going to use mobile apps? "Raise shields" "Sorry sir, it takes 3 days for our communication to reach earth and back" "Shit...." *Blows up*

Justin James
Justin James

Charles - "Desktop" computing is not about the hardware per se, it's about the computing paradigm, which is why so many in this discussion are confused. Right now, the dividing line happens to be along hardware lines because that's where it originated, but with Windows 8 that division is erased in large part. If you shoved OS X on an iPhone with only minor changes to the UI to accomodate the smaller screen (a la Windows Mobile 6.X), I'd call it "desktop computing". If you put Windows 8 on a full blown PC and only used the native Windows 8 apps and UI, I'd call it "mobile computing". I really need to 1) stop using the terms "mobile" and "desktop" because they are extraordinarily confusing and 2) write something that fully elaborate on the topic, that I can just point people to when it comes up. J.Ja

andrew232006
andrew232006

It's already out there except the touch screen. TVs and game consoles can do alot. But even tough I have a wireless keyboard and mouse and can work from the sofa, I'd rather sit at my desk when I'm working.

dogknees
dogknees

Are you saying the next generation of mobile devices will be faster than current PCs? I'm looking forward to have thousands of times the current power at my disposal in about 10 years, and another thousand in another 10 years. Why on earth would we stop? There are so many things that will become practical when we get to that point. I don't get it. We seem to be throwing away the future.

Justin James
Justin James

... they are very eager for this to happen, because the TCO of the mobile devices is so much lower. Really, they don't have to mess with trying to "fix" anything or "reimgage" (always followed by a reconfiguration of a zillion applications and settings), etc. Instead, they just put the dead machine in a pile to be RMAed, give the user a new device, and within a few minutes of turning it on (and transfering a Flash and/or SIM card), it's set up, apps are downloaded, settings are transfered, etc. That's a VERY powerful argument in favor of these things. That said, there is one really bright spot for the desktop paradigm, and that is Windows 8. Windows 8 delivers the same sort of experience, at least when using native Windows 8 apps. Of course, that means an abandonment of the legacy apps anyways, and Windows 8 is really optimized for tablet use. Personally, I was in the exact same school of thought you guys were, up until the summer. Going to the TechRepublic Live event, and getting to spend my time with a lot of systems folks from a wide variety of backgrounds, industries, etc. really changed my mind. They were all saying the exact same thing: we're headed to tablets and smartphones as fast as we can, because they provide the escape hatch from the problems of the Windows desktop OS with features and functionality that our users substantially prefer. So, if the people who drive the decisions are headed this way... and the people who make the decisions are headed this way... then doesn't it make sense to stop trying to resist it, and try to find a way to work with it? J.Ja

oldbaritone
oldbaritone

COBOL just won't die. And neither do paper printers.

JLogan3o13
JLogan3o13

I agree, Simon. 49% disagree with the "predictions". I think that says a lot.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

More computing power, and better user-interfaces. When they get those two solved, then mobile can work for everything. And by solved, I don't mean just improved -- something that makes the desktop truly obsolete. Whether that's holographic projection or something else, I don't know.

rduncan
rduncan

A desktop is a stand alone computer - it got some ram, a cpu or two, input/output devices and some 'peripherals' (it's not an operating system such as Windows 7 ) - so If I can run my operating system on a tablet or phone why would I buy a desktop. would I buy a desktop ever again- never tbh it is quite fortunate that Africa has not created the same infrastructures as the west that can simply embrace the new model- MUCH more cheaply, now all that is needed is a broadband network. still Billions I know but not nearly as much as all the LAN devices they would have needed

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

... the Internet will have spread across the galaxy, and the starship will be hosting its own local cloud.

Charles Bundy
Charles Bundy

It means two things to me 1) Non mobile 2) More cycles and peripheral capability So yes using the term desktop does imply hardware differences irrespective of OS or application software. My point is unless the desk disappears with its swath of physical space and unlimited power the desktop computing paradigm will remain solid. Could you substitute "office" for "desktop computer" in your vision of the future?

James.carroll
James.carroll

Then enters the real world... I am sure we would like junk food to keep us in shape too. In the end the corporations who make a product and have needs are the drivers in this market. I need AutoCAD, full functioning oracle and actually work as well as multitasking without my tablet crying. More users are being forced to work more in the same amount of time. Networking admins love this idea, reality is not there yet.

oldbaritone
oldbaritone

"...they don't have to mess with trying to 'fix' anything or 'reimage'..." What planet is that? I'd sure like to find those users, who have no 'pet' settings, self-installed apps, and don't care what data is lost. "... they just put the dead machine in a pile to be RMAed, give the user a new device, and within a few minutes of turning it on ... it's set up, apps are downloaded, settings are transfered, etc." Sounds like "Terminal Server" all over again. The be-all, do-all to end-all, forever-and-ever amen. Your troubles are all gone. Just give the user a new inexpensive PC, throw the old one on the junk pile, and in just seconds everything will be peachy again. Now remove the word "PC" and substitute "tablet" or "mobile device." Been there, done that, got a tee-shirt. It was a disaster. Don't want another tee-shirt. "History repeats itself because no one was listening the first time." Anon.

jfuller05
jfuller05

That still doesn't eliminate the need for desktops in business. The argument is only aimed at "on-the-go" employees who are hardly ever at their desk. These are the employees who are running to meetings locally in the building, on the road, and out and about with customers...not the users who are stuck at their desk creating content, scheduling, and other things around their desk (the bulk of users where I work); these employees don't need their desktops taken away because their desktops work great for them. As I said in another comment in this thread: tablets and smartphones work best as "glance-and-go" devices and for traveling employees who need low-end devices. Can you dock your tablet to a keyboard and mouse setup? Yeah, but why would you when the employee can use dropbox or some other cloud technology to access her/his file(s) from any internet-ready machine? A desktop PC can access those files too as long as it has an internet connection. So, there's no need to be crippled by the limitations* of a tablet docked to a keyboard and mouse. *Limitations being smaller screen size and arguably, weaker hardware - notice I said: ARGUABLY :)

andrew232006
andrew232006

I have no use for a tablet other than as a toy (bridge architect is fun). It can't do anything my phone can't and my phone has the added advantage of being with me 24/7. It can't do most of the things I use my desktop for. I'm sure it would suffice for many casual computer users as a desktop replacement. But for many it simply does not work. And it doesn't matter how many people want it to work. It's not just resisting, desktops are the only reasonable choice for many.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

than fill out our RMA paperwork (which, incidentally, is a couple of MS Word templates, and an SAP transaction which I'm not authorized to perform and must find someone with the time to do so for me). RMA doesn't do any good when the machine's out of warranty. As you noted, 'with features and functionality' is the key. I don't see too many users where I work who would benefit; for us, the apps and need for mobility aren't there. Toss in the screen size and the existing investment in hardware and peripherals, and in five years the majority of systems I'll be supporting will still be conventional desktops.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

Why wouldn't these benefits of tablets be available for a desktop? Sure, it's not a commodity product, usually, but that's only because it has more processing power locally. I wrote before about the problems of going all-out this way... if the desktop goes out of use to a large enough extent, it will make it expensive to get one. So if you, as a developer, have tasks that are best handled on a desktop, consider what it will mean on a world-wide societal level, if this kind of development work becomes difficult to afford for private people. It means giving up the freedom that the PC offered. It means going back to corporate controlled computing, to be leased by the people. Then imagine government control over that, as per SOPA. It's not something to speed up.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

"The Printer is Dead, Long Live the Printer (we vainly hope)" :D

pmishler
pmishler

You make a point, Simon, but I believe you mean "not to use a two digit year"

Charles Bundy
Charles Bundy

but a grid tied power supply and a chassis capable of handling thermal loads necessary to supply those cycles. Heck even with SFF desktops you sacrifice power for space. Until we get a wireless power and communication infrastructure capable of supporting ad-hoc "cloud" computing requests with no worry about "juice" the desktop can't be discarded. That is about the only way to beat thermodynamics backing you into a corner wrt to form factor... I think JJ is right he's just really really optimistic wrt time frame. Plus you have a non-tech paradigm to overcome and that is offices & desks = work... :)

andrew232006
andrew232006

By then desktops will be cheaper and more powerful and may have features we haven't even thought of yet. There's a cost to miniaturization that I don't think is going away.

mikewor
mikewor

I do not see the networks in remote areas becoming anywhere near as good as the first world in my lifetime. Some very rough thumbsuck numbers, but based on actual expenditure: One of the mobile operators in South Africa is believed to have spent in excess of $4 billion to cover 50% of their subscriber base (total subscribers are 16 to 20 million depending on who you believe). But that will only upgrade around 20% of their base stations. If they are to reach 80% of the subscribers, they would need to upgrade 50% to 60% of the base stations - say another $12 billion. So far we are at $16 billion to reach about 14 million subscribers. Now consider the rest of sub-Saharan Africa - total population in excess of 1 billion How much to reach these people with 3G - I gues in the order of $1 - 2 trillion. And I think that's low end - how does one get a network (cable or wireless) through a tropical jungle like the Congo? So no, we will not see high speed networks in Africa (and I guess the rest of the develoiping world) in the forseeable future.

dogknees
dogknees

Try running 3d accelerated code in Zen, Citrix, ... The vendors specifically tell you not to.

dogknees
dogknees

Show me full featured 3D modelling and animation software on a cloud device. Show me highend gaming on the cloud, that is 2560x1600 res serious graphics,....

rduncan
rduncan

Of course you are right, I am referring to the thing under/on the desk being replaced by something that can be unplugged from the keyboard/mouse and carried away - but which gives the exact same 'desktop' experience and performance anywhere there is an internet connection- which of course is a proven reality in VMware, System Centre 2012, Zen desktop etc. and not a 'paradigm shift' within traditional working environment, i.e. a desk!

Charles Bundy
Charles Bundy

http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-366517?p=2&messageId=3577009 I think you will be correct when necessary power, communications and protocols that you tout are a pervasive reality. I don't think many would stand behind your claim of [i]tablets can do anything desktops can do[/i] currently. Technology aside the worst hurdle is management???s insistence that work = office = desk. As far as Tablet versus Desktop we must agree to disagree. If we posit that the desktop computer disappears, something must fill the vacuum. That is most definitely a factor in the argument. I chose ???tablet??? as a mobile metaphor for content consumption. On the desk it is called a monitor and part of a content creation system called a ???desktop???. Peripherals at a minimum would be mouse, keyboard, and printer. Thus I see a world where ???no laptops??? would be more likely in the near future than ???no desktops???.

rduncan
rduncan

More cycles is irrelevant since you can can more cycles from the cloud. the argument is that Software and hardware will be available centrally and managed centrally- given this pending reality - where does the desktop fit? consider Software as a service- as in virtual desktops that run on the cloud- virtual apps, virtual storage. THE ARGUMENT IS NOT TABLET V DESKTOP already there is nothing that cannot be done on a tablet that can be done on a PC (since the tablet is only a window onto the cloud)

Justin James
Justin James

I've NEVER had to do that much work to RMA something. You're dealing with the wrong vendors. J.Ja

terjeb
terjeb

Here is the current problem with your argument. At the moment my ability to create data evolves significantly faster than most providers ability to move that data around. Storage people have caught up, but only just. My DSLR creates images that are 25M a piece, and it does so at the speed of 7 images per second if I want to. Sure, not all cameras do this, but point-and-shoots are going to approach the 20MP barrier in the next couple of years, and people are going to want to keep the images as high quality. For those of us shooting RAW that means we are going to approach 50M per image, for the JPEG shooters, we are talking 15-20M per image at best quality. Multiplied by thousands of images. The next video format is approaching. 4K video is right around the corner. We are talking at least four times the space requirements of HD video, and people who buy expensive 4K TVs are NOT going to be happy with massively compressed junk. For most people, who currently think the 1080i/720p GARBAGE that cable companies sell as "HD TV". Please alert my great, great, great grand children IF the infrastructure has evolved to the point where I can put any of this into the cloud and manipulate it using my tablet.

rduncan
rduncan

People are getting hung up on the capabilities of the local desktop - these capabilities are not going away (cpu intensive apps etc). The argument needs to be balanced with the current capabilities of the cloud computing model- it's not longer about the local hardware but about 'doing things' in the cloud- not just 'cloud storage' - cloud servers and cloud 'desktops' need to be factored in here too. for example- I want the desktop to continue evolving because otherwise how will I use - (resource intensive apps here)- besides my tablet only has 16gb storage, 2 gig ram and an 2ghz chip- how could I be nearly as productive on that??? Answer- you use your 'device' to connect to a cloud based 'desktop' -this is highly configurable by you as to what resources it has/needs in terms of hardware- you are no longer working within the confines of the tablet- but on a fully fledged 4 core 16 gig 'desktop instance' while you take the bus to work. yes you can do this with a traditional destop but you loose, Touch UI and mobility. this doesn't begin the cover the great benifits for people managing multiple desktops instances, hardware, firmware, software updates and deployment.

Mark Miller
Mark Miller

It appears to me that the major appeal of these devices that Justin is speaking to, besides their mobility, is they model a locked-down IT environment (excepting Android). The software is strictly IT-approved. Users can't download and install apps. on them. The system is pre-configured to install certain apps. and IT-approved updates. It makes system maintenance very simple, because if you have a problem, then everyone has the same problem. You can lab test solutions and apply them everywhere with predictable results. Schools have been doing this for several years with Windows PCs. They somehow configure them to a locked-down state, so all people can do with them is run a pre-configured set of apps. User data is stored on the network where students have accounts. It's not that different. The problem, I imagine, is web access, what with security vulnerabilities that lurk there. I think the way they handle that is through imaging. If a system gets corrupted, they just download a standard image onto the system. Increasingly, as the mobile device market grows, the web is being replaced by apps., which are created by content providers. This removes most of the web vulnerabilities, unless of course a content provider happens to design their app. in such a way that it can be hacked. This is addressed by the mobile device manufacturer forcing approval of all apps. that can be downloaded onto the device, and they look for vulnerabilities. Even though content providers create their own apps., they are funneled through a single channel by the device maker. This is the main difference between the current desktop/laptop model and mobile devices. This is what's also changing on Windows and Mac, by folding mobile app. compatibility into these platforms. It's not that the web will be forbidden. It's anticipated that people will just want to use it less, because they'll be able to get what they want through apps.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

The number one lesson of Y2K was that software lasts.