24-Apr-2024 23:12 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 13 items in your selection
[Web] Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing"ANN.lu
Posted on 14-Feb-2004 06:27 GMT by Raffaele (Edited on 2004-02-14 09:56:24 GMT by Christian Kemp)13 comments
View flat
View list
There are 3 articles on OSNews by Nicholas Blachford talking about how he sees the "Future of Computing". Part 1 Part 2 Part 3. Part 4 is up to come. Truly interesting articles! Do you remember the discussion we had on this thread last 13 January?

Topics: More security on internet in order to provide online sales, prevention of piracy, the abandon of computers in favour of dedicated set-top boxes, etc., etc., etc.

It seems that this Genesi employee has a lots of visions about the future of IT world (some of them are very interesting), and that he shares some of these visions (but only *SOME*) with BBRV.

Blechford wrote 3 really interesting and big articles.
The discussion is about: new degrees needed to realize commercial software, the future of e-patents, the superiority of PPC and Prescott architecture, 64bit architecture, Micro$ to take over our computers, multiple CPU based X-BOX 2 with virtualPC, Palladium, embedded computers, computer obsolescence, low-cost computers, PDA Vs Smartphones, "Battle Royale" between the OSes of smartphones, 3G phones, Smartphones Vs PC's, TV-PC's convergence, the "death" of the PC's.

Available also in german language at PPCNux site:

Part 2
Part 3

Sorry I cannot found a translation of Part 1. Seems not translated.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 1 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 14-Feb-2004 06:51 GMT
> Uh, to be accurate, his name is spelled "Blachford". More info at his home page.

-- gary_c
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 2 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 14-Feb-2004 08:00 GMT
What I've been wondering about though when reading the summary in this news item: is Nicholas still a Genesi employee in any kind of way (or technically, was he ever, considering that people working in France seem to have been employed by Thendic France)?
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 3 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 14-Feb-2004 08:28 GMT
I think he is dead wrong about many things in this artical,
the problem is that computer industry is where conservative when it comes to hardware, manly due the software used, you might not think this how ever there are computers in the workplace that are 486 or 386 used as printer servers and label print consoles, nearly 99% of all software is designed for i686, while PDA or embanked device, TV and video boxes, printers only run one program the firmware, the computer can use billions of different software packages, if an company have one program that they can't get for a new computer or operating system, they simply continue using the old OS/Computer or an compatible,

The part about young and old developers, he is probely right, it's where common to see job advertising for developers whit 5 years experience here inn norway, the problem whit software is that you can make software for one task, that really easy, how ever when the software is started being used, the user might think of new ideas that developer never expected, this forces the developer to implement something inn that old code, while the old code incompatible whit the new idea, as an exsampel we can take the, a/web project,
Aweb3.5 light - Aweb4.0 split, updating the old program whit the new features, can prove to be about impossible, unless you start from scratch, if you really like make a good program, then you most be very experienced or have be where lucky, if you restart your project about 3 times then I say be generating quality code.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 4 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by minator on 14-Feb-2004 10:35 GMT
There are 3 articles on OSNews by Nicholas Blachford talking about how he sees the "Future of Computing". Part 1 Part 2 Part 3. Part 4 is up to come. Truly interesting articles!

Thank you :-)

Most of the articles I've written over the last year have been connected with Genesi (OK, technically Thendic-France) but this series was done purely on my own.

>Blachford wrote 3 really interesting and big articles.

And there's another 2 parts on the way both of which are more adventurous:-)

>Available also in german language at PPCNux site:

I knew it was there but I didn't realise there was a translation, cool!

>Sorry I cannot found a translation of Part 1. Seems not translated.

It's there but searching doesn't reveal it on OSNews either - weird (you have to look in news for last 7 days).

I didn't get Part 1 quite right (I said everything but not quite in the right way), so I'll be editing that some time.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 5 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Raffaele on 14-Feb-2004 13:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (minator):
Mr. Minator "aka" Nicholas Blachford wrote in answer to the things I said:

R.>>Sorry I cannot found a translation of Part 1. Seems not translated.

M.>It's there but searching doesn't reveal it on OSNews either
M.>- weird (you have to look in news for last 7 days).

Well, I read all the german ppcnux old articles search page on that site upto January and I did not notice there is also a part 1 translated.

Maybe I had to check by going back from news page to news page and do not rely about the search back articles page.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 6 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Raffaele on 14-Feb-2004 13:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Kjetil):
Mr Kjetil wrote:

>I think he is dead wrong about many things in this artical,

Maybe, but the imoprtant is that he is speaking on a large base of arguments, which could be interesting.

No matter his ideas (he is free to have his opinions about it), but the fact these things exists, and deserves to be discussed.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 7 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 14-Feb-2004 17:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Raffaele):
Time will tale, I only know one thing most predations turn out out to fail, even if they are interesting to read,

I think the industry and users are where aware of power usage, this is some thing that can not continue, in the future,we will need to Se colder CPU's, no one will use computer whit 20db fan noise, this is area where AMD and INTEL need to catch up whit PowerPC, I think inn the future we se TV's and computers & internet marge,
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 8 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Raffaele on 15-Feb-2004 01:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Kjetil):
Mr. Don Cox wrote:

>Time will tale, I only know one thing most predations turn out
>out to fail, even if they are interesting to read

No, Don. What I intended is not to see his points of arrive.

What I intended is:

Does Blachford speaks of truly ongoing phenomena in the world of IT?

And the answer is yes.

He speaks of things that are happening now. Maybe some of these phenomena are already resolved or finished, or mutate into something new.

But Nicholas points to some very interesting topics there.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 9 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by minator on 15-Feb-2004 03:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Raffaele):
Posted by Raffaele

>In Reply to Comment 7 (Kjetil):
> Mr. Don Cox wrote:

> >Time will tale, I only know one thing most predations turn out
> >out to fail, even if they are interesting to read

Which is the first thing I said in Part one...

> No, Don. What I intended is not to see his points of arrive.
> What I intended is:
> Does Blachford speaks of truly ongoing phenomena in the world of IT?
> And the answer is yes.
> He speaks of things that are happening now. Maybe some of these phenomena are
> already resolved or finished, or mutate into something new.
> But Nicholas points to some very interesting topics there.

I've given my opinions on a number of areas but I have in all cases tried to back up my opinions or at least given reasons why I think something is going to happen. My point of view does tend to differ from the norm at the best of times but I have tried to justify it.

Part 4 and 5 are more difficult as they are more speculative but even they are rooted in current technology or research.

Nobody can be sure what the future holds, I can thus offer at best, informed speculation.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 10 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by minator on 15-Feb-2004 03:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Raffaele):
Double post: please delect first, has wrong email address.

Posted by Raffaele

>In Reply to Comment 7 (Kjetil):
> Mr. Don Cox wrote:

> >Time will tale, I only know one thing most predations turn out
> >out to fail, even if they are interesting to read

Which is the first thing I said in Part one...

> No, Don. What I intended is not to see his points of arrive.
> What I intended is:
> Does Blachford speaks of truly ongoing phenomena in the world of IT?
> And the answer is yes.
> He speaks of things that are happening now. Maybe some of these phenomena are
> already resolved or finished, or mutate into something new.
> But Nicholas points to some very interesting topics there.

I've given my opinions on a number of areas but I have in all cases tried to back up my opinions or at least given reasons why I think something is going to happen. My point of view does tend to differ from the norm at the best of times but I have tried to justify it.

Part 4 and 5 are more difficult as they are more speculative but even they are rooted in current technology or research.

Nobody can be sure what the future holds, I can thus offer at best, informed speculation.

Maybe I'm right, perhaps wrong, only time will tell.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 11 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Raffaele on 15-Feb-2004 03:21 GMT
For example I don't share point of view of Blachford regarding the fact the programmers of the future will need a degree to be allowed to partecipate important projects.

IMHO programming architecture is important, but to program something is almost something like art, not engineering.

The problem is: «Future programs will need proper design BEFORE programming and precise techniques to be adopted DURING programming and a severe debugging AFTER programming».

And this all will be all handled by computer specialists formed with proper study degree in programming.

But not a degree in programming as we intended now. The programmers of the future will be EXPERT IN STANDARDIZED TECNIQUES OF PROGRAMMING.

Why this?

because (said Blachford) the computer market needs a new generation of reliable and LEGALIZED software.

In order to be sure it will accomplish: secure internet, reliable computing, and mainly to perform always the same actions which can be predicted...

...BUT MORE... the actions of the programs MUST be predicted by starting from every single event... ...and this prediction and its verify MUST accomplish the specifies by an authority which will CERTIFIES THESE PROGRAMS AS SECURE PROGRAMS.


I think this is very funny.

Because it is clear to all of us, that this situation is caused by one UNIQUE company on the market.

Microsoft.

And I want to made an example.

We all know that Windows is an OS built of many parts assembled thru the years to form a complete system.

I think (for example) of Internet Explorer.

IE is an add-on, and is not integrated into the OS (despite what Microsoft wants to let us believe that IE IS INTEGRATED INTO WIN).

This will mean that in the interaction between the web-browser and the rest of the OS could be some leaks.

A solution? Create the "software technician"

By continuing in this example:
So to prevent leaks in the interaction between the OS and the browser, a new generation of programmers will be formed to follow precise directives of programming and they will use standard tools and standard code segments to let the Microsoft OS (Integrated with the Browser) will accomplish both the tasks to be reliable and legalized.

***BUT***

Use standard code segments, without the possibility to manipulate the code, or reduce it and make it small with a programmation based on fantasy and elegance of coding... it will mean only one thing then:

Programs and OSes will became HUUUGE, ENORMOUS, more than now!

The new programs made with compasses will stole all the CPU's computing power...

This will mean:

1) That the CPU clock speed must be again incremented in order to keep the performance at high levels.

This will break the actual paradigma: "the red queen race" (*) between new bigger and elephant-like OSes and new faster processors

and will introduce the new: "red queen race elevated to cube" between new OSes big as whales and the new faster processors.

Think of a dinosaur. It required enormous bones, because the weight to be carried.
If the weight doubles, it needs the support (the bones) to grow in proportions of the cube.

Think of Windows98 and XP and the past and actual processors...

...and now imagine the new WIN-Longhorn overweighted with Palladium technology, xml-based file structure, protections to provide identification to achieve the task of performing on-line sales, etc., etc.

And this run to use standardized segments of code will also introduce two problems with the programmers:

1) While the time passes, the new technicians will be lesser capable to adopt programming tecniques apart of the known ones, to resolve possible problems.

2)They will require more specialization to be capable of understand the complexity of the code...
Code that will be worst, due to the difficulty to be interpreted by a human.

So instead of semplificate the things, the necessity for graduated programmers to deal with reliable and legalized software will introduce a new "red queen race"...

...not only into the couple program<->processor (or OS<->processor) but even into the couple program<->programmer.

Programmers with higer degrees and more specialized will be needed in order to code programs which will grow in complexity and difficulty to be interpreted.

And here my discussion ends:

Due to the incapacity of Microsoft to realize good reliable and secure programs...

...in the future...

He who will desire to program, and to join important teams, then he must graduate and became a specialized techician.


---------
Addendum
---------

We have the fortune to be Amigans.
In our discussion there is a place to insert the Amiga as an example of how things can be different and easier.

Now if you all had the patience to follow my entire discussion (I hope I was clear) then, you will understood how Amiga (A1-Pegasos) could be useful to break this insane logic of requiring graduated programmers.

AmigaOS is an OS with a small compact kernel, easy to be programmed, and the programs realized to run on AmigaOS are smaller than their counterparts in other OSes.

Sure it could be taken as example of how an OS should be.

Amiga could preserve in the future a free-zone for talented and not graduated programmers.

Also they can discover with Amiga that the duty to realize a program could be reduced and the entire process of programming became easier...

...and more they not will require to graduate in order to realize important projects.


With respect,

Raffaele

[Excuse me I I was unclear. I need to join more concepts in only one discussion and the english is not my mother language.]


P.S.:(*)="red queen race" is the race made by Alice in the wonderland where you run faster to keep staying in the same place.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 12 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by Raffaele on 15-Feb-2004 03:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (minator):
Mr. Minator show me some typos I made.

Whoops that is what happens when a person is too long asleep during nights...

Then during the morning that person (/me) wrote stupidities.

For example I am writing now and here are 5:29 AM.
Nicholas Blachford speaks about the "Future of Computing" : Comment 13 of 13ANN.lu
Posted by 3seas on 15-Feb-2004 17:53 GMT
the future of computing is really very simple.

thanks to MS we have instilled in the computer industry population and target markets a few unsavory elements that greatly hinder advancement of this tool we call a computer.

The future, its time line, is based upon how well we are able to overcome such distortions and any continued efforts to maintain or continue such distortions. Of course such distortions are all based upon the making or extraction of monies from the consumer or user population.

What really does amount to honesty vs. deception in the most fundamental POV.

While the FreeSoftware Foundation promotes the benefits of FreeSoftware and there is a spectrum between purely proprietary and public domain..... there is what is somewhat outside of this spectrum, regarding "Free".

Software is only as free as it is in how easy it is to produce.

Once it becomes easy enough that the typical user can do it within their available resources of time and knowledge, and thru a FreeSoftware foundation of dynamic database of functionality, will software be inherently, by its very nature, as free as speech.

The building up of complexities of the mechanisims of deception and false constraints only lend to the attraction of the simpler, more productive and more natural process of which the FreeSoftware Foundation promotes, that of the human right to take what others have dne and improve upon it in order to improve the productive ability and quality of human life in general.

Proprietary software intentionally applies false constraints as a trade off of these better values in exchange for monitary value focused to a few.

Its naturally not a good trade off for the human population.

The future of computing is very very clear as mankind in general does and will strive for overall improvements in the productivity and quality of life for itself, the deceptions will wearout, become exposed and eliminated.

The only question is regarding the timeline.... Will you or will you not be around to gain the benefits of deception and false constraint removal of this technology?

It took 300 years for the much easier to use Hindu-Arabic Decimal system to become mainstream over the far more limiting roman numeral system....

Why do you suppose that was?
Anonymous, there are 13 items in your selection
Back to Top