To totally defeat the PC (desktop) you also have to totally defeat that philosophy.

On the one hand, PCs give office workers more flexibility and independence by being able to run programs locally as well as communicating with the mainframe.

And on the other hand, PCs bring the computing power of the office into the home, enabling a whole new wave of "freelancers" and giving the individual a data store and computing functionality that is personalized, and as secure (or private) as the home environment can be made to be.

Politically, this tended to enable and "free" individuals.

There is a competing social-economic-political philosophy. In this vision of the future, security from some vague external threat ranks above all else in importance. So the group is reigned in and put under much tighter control. Any stepping out of line can cost you big; the survival of the whole group depends on each member staying in line.

I can see how this would be the preferred approach in certain settings. But for all of humanity? I am seriously unconvinced. And so were the inventors of the PC.

Will the PC "become less popular" or will it be FORCED out of existence? This will indicate to me the direction society is taking.