IT Employment

General discussion


Where do you see IT in 100 years

By Majestic12forlife ·
I'm new here to this discussion board. However, I wanted to choose an IT board where visionaries and people knowledgeable in IT are in abdundance, so I want to know your opinion as to how you see the Information Technology world in 100 years.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Totally satisfactory answer.

by jardinier In reply to Print view and titles

I have just tried the "print" thing and it works fine for a quick pre-scan.
I hope I didn't sound too pompous: I like to contribute a joke sometimes myself. It's just that when you have to be somewhere in half-an-hour, it's frustrating to have to switch off leaving postings unopened.
However, by following your advice, the problem is solved.

Collapse -

Projections...View 2

by generalist In reply to Where do you see IT in 10 ...

I think that you can assume that, in a hundred years, all of the 'mundane' applications that IT has handled will be at the point that the only thing you'll have to do is apply the latest patches that deal with changes in the 'rules' that affect the system.

These 'rules' would deal with the political, social, technological and physical environments that impact the systems handled by IT.

The 'automatic' updates from Microsoft and various anti-virus companies are a hint of how this would work.

Then add in object oriented programming and its offspring. It takes advantage of the fact that there are patterns in how things work and strives to eliminate having to reinvent the wheel every time you need to do something. In a hundred yearsentire business systems will be 'simple' objects that you can drop into place.

I suspect that the cutting edge of IT would be improving how people interact with the technology. I wouldn't be surprised if 99% of IT oriented work is done with 1% of the available functions in any given software package.

Collapse -

Firstly I was led to believe

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Projections...View 2

That computers would cut down on wasted paper, so far I've seen no evidence of this and if anything they generate more waste paper than before. As far as the rest of the above posting goes wasn't that what we where susposed to be at now only I doubtthat 1% of the softwares ability is actually being used presently. We currently have learning systems where word processord auto correct, programs like Dragons Naturally speaking get better the more you use them. Thats a form of self learning isn't it? Sure in the future things will get better it only stands to reason like the first word processor is only fit as a musum piece now in comparision to whats currently available. What I think will happen is things will get smaller and become more user friendly so people need few if any computer skills to use a computer but the basic problem will remain the sorce code will get so complex and bulky that you will need TB just to load the OS/Program and then you will have to run the thing as well. Maybe one day we will reach the stage that Xerox got to with the Lidia long before Microsoft was a company of any note and Apple rulled the PC market. Can any of you see a way for computers networked together to share anything more than files in the forseeable future, Xerox had the problem solved years ago with a system that could share CPU resources Memory and whatever else was required across the network. We are still a long way from that yet.

Collapse -

Goodbye Bill Gates.

by jardinier In reply to Where do you see IT in 10 ...

Currently the IT industry, like any other, is dependent for its growth on continual updates (but not necessarily upgrades, if you get my drift). Leaving Linux and Apple out of the picture, it is necessary for Bill Gates to release a new OS pretty well every year, along with associated software (MS Office e.g.) and one that requires a faster and more powerful computer to run it. This ensures continuing growth in the hardware industry.
In business, most people are obliged to update to the latestversion of everything so that they can communicate with other businesses.
The fact is that each update is 90% useless crap. So if we could eliminate this largely unnecessary growth factor out of the equation, then IT might head off in different directions altogether.
Perhaps some of you who have been in the industry from the beginning might suggest at what point in time software and hardware reached adequate functionality, after which time money-making become much more fundamental than functionality.
Guru tells me that, using a 486 with WFWG 3.11 DOS 6.22 and Word 1.1 he can boot up, write a document and print it out before a Pentium IV can get started.

Collapse -

Slight exaggeration

by TomSal In reply to Goodbye Bill Gates.

I'm not arguing any of your points except the last sentence about a 486 w/ WFWG and Word 1.1 being a P4 before it boots..

Thats more than a slight exaggeration if I ever heard one. Knowing that I have an Athlon XP 2200 at home with XP Pro on it -- from a cold boot to the welcome screen its about 15 seconds.

another 15 seconds to load AND type a sentence or two (I can average 90 WPM if I really want too) AND print it out.

Total time 30 seconds.

A cold boot from a 486, doing the same thing - I'd like to see it.

Collapse -

Boot this

by jkaras In reply to Slight exaggeration

Cold boot? How bout from a warm boot? A cowboy boot, a baby bootie, or just a big fat bootie? Man I gotta stop taking this Paxil medication.

Collapse -

Well it all depends

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Boot this

On what you have got. Sure a single processor whatever will boot faster than a multi processor with built in SCSI but will it work faster when up and running I think not. But then again I'm biased as I 've been using at the very least Dual ProcessorM'Boards for a very long time now and on more occasions than I care to think about Quad Processor M'Boards of first the 200 MMX varity and now the Xeon type and they certinally do manage to crunch numbers very fast however they do take time to load particuarly as the more SCSI bits you have on the longer they take to load but they have to look at more drives or whatever than the average computer just as the humble single CPU with 8 IDE drives takes longer to boot than the same thing with only 1HDD.

Collapse -

But the point here is not so much

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Slight exaggeration

The office applications although they are growing out of all proportion but the gaming side thats where the high powered high graphic applications actually are. Sure a humble 486 could just do about everything required in any office with the execption of the graphic intensive places but then its not so much a hardware question there as an econimic question as computers are not replaced {on most occasions} because they don't do the job required but because the accountants have devalued them downto nothing and they have to be replaced if only for taxation purposes after all you can't claim a tax rebate for something that already has been devauled to zero but you can claim a siginifint tax advantage on a new computer/software combination. Atpresent business computers have a life expency of about 5 years after which time they have no real value to the company because they have already been devalued to almost nothing. The company then goes out and buys the latest biggest thing that they can afford bearing in mind that the more that they initially spend the more they will be able to write off. In business its all econimics and very little to do with actually whats required. Recently I was asked for a 386 that was to go into a sawmillas the program would not run properly on any other CPU {at least thats what I was told} and they where willing to spend anything to get a 386. But this is the execption that proves the rule rather than anything else. But if you want to play games just look at thier requirments they make the minimun system requirments for XP/2000 appear as the most basic machine one game that my son bought over to try out on one of my computers had a mininum system requirment of a 2.4 Ghz with 1.5 Gig of Ram and20 Meg of HDD space. Now thats something totally over the top and before anybody asks I can't remember what it was.

Collapse -

Right on.

by jardinier In reply to But the point here is not ...

It was quite recently that I read an article which stated that the gaming side of computers was the only thing that was keeping the industry afloat. I also know that many professional people outside the IT industry, who can aford to buy the latest, use games as a form of relaxation after a hard day at the office. I also hear from many people that their children demand the latest so that they can play their games.

Collapse -

Actually the only time I've

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Right on.

Ever used a game on one of my computers was after I broke my wrist and had to undergo physio. I played Freespace with a Forcefeed back MS Joystick, intially I had it on the lowest setting possible and then could only use it for a few minutes. But after about 1 week I had it up to the highest setting and was playing for hours at a time. I found this better than the painful treatment that the sadastic person who was susposed to be helping me. Anyway after only 2 weeks I had the full use of my hand/arm back and it was all down to that Force Feed Back Joystick and a game, the poor physio theripist couldn't understand my progress.

Related Discussions

Related Forums