As a daily user of a multi display (4 monitors on 2 machines) quad core (and a 6 core) 64 bit machines, I agree. After being spoiled on first 2 monitors, then 3, then 4, I find that I am able to multitask at a much greater efficiency level. Processor speed and ram. Yes, as a happless technoweenie I enjoy that I can talk about transfer rates of an OS running on a ramdrive on a 6 core machine with 16gb ddr3 ram and which kernel patches I recently installed etc, But what it really boils down to is I'm impatient. I like my email application to load instantly. I don't want to wait for a file to copy. And if the phone rings and I can't have the callers contact information, work history, recent emails, etc on my screen within a second or two, I'll be downright irritated.
The Industry needs to realize that mobile computing, desktop computing, smart phones, tablets, etc. all need to meet very simple criteria:
Will it let me do what I want (find, read, write, exchange data)
Will it do that faster, smarter, and more efficiently than what I have now. (bigger screen, more intuitive interface, faster processor, etc)
What is the convenience factor. If I could carry around a dual monitor that folded into a clipboard sized package with gigabit lan, terabytes of storage, and high end processing power, etc etc.
then it would have much greater appeal.
I'll use RDP off my android to access my box while mobile, but it's barely useable. sure it helps when you have a bluetooth keyboard, etc but its not an engineered solution.
You can have my desktop machine when you can replace it with a mobile device of equal power, display size, ultra high speed wireless connectivity (4g/wimax is a minimum and will shortly be inadequate for the public information stream.), and storage capacity. Oh, and make it lightweight.
Keep Up with TechRepublic