From an efficiencies perspective, I really like the idea of high-performance compute being centralized and low-power devices at the edge.
Essentially going back to the dumb terminal method. Or like BBS’s. Local-ish but consolidated.
But the idea of pooling all that compute into the hands of a few giant corporations is horrifying.
I’d much rather have, say, a competitive marketplace of service providers in local datacenters selling a specific service. I.e., I could subscribe to a Moonlight service that some dude sells on a pool of high-performance gaming servers at a colocation data center/carrier hotel (the type of places where businesses rent space and can get really fast connections to internet service providers, because they have their hubs in the same building)
Essentially the same idea as, say, Xbox Cloud Gaming, or even Google Stadia (it was ahead of its time and honestly shouldn’t have even allowed wireless)…but less closed.
As a filthy casual, I don’t want the arms race of graphics cards. I don’t want to do 30 minutes of patching to play a game I only have an hour to play. I just want to pick up the controller and go with as little friction as possible.
i saw this view a lot on pcmr when i was using reddit. but it doesn’t make sense,there is no evidence thin clients are the future. internet speeds aren’t even good enough for most people worldwide for that to be the future.
I would say cost because of capitalism. It’s very cheap to run, subscription based, low cost entry, push ads, data gathering, and just about any device can run it regardless of OS or performance.
It doesn’t need to reach everyone, just the ones willing to pay for it.
I’m not in favor of it but I do see why it would make sense for some people
This future, unfortunately, appears to be rented thin clients and smartphones/tablets, for most people.
So… technically, yes, the future is ARM? As those things will often use that.
From an efficiencies perspective, I really like the idea of high-performance compute being centralized and low-power devices at the edge.
Essentially going back to the dumb terminal method. Or like BBS’s. Local-ish but consolidated.
But the idea of pooling all that compute into the hands of a few giant corporations is horrifying.
I’d much rather have, say, a competitive marketplace of service providers in local datacenters selling a specific service. I.e., I could subscribe to a Moonlight service that some dude sells on a pool of high-performance gaming servers at a colocation data center/carrier hotel (the type of places where businesses rent space and can get really fast connections to internet service providers, because they have their hubs in the same building)
Essentially the same idea as, say, Xbox Cloud Gaming, or even Google Stadia (it was ahead of its time and honestly shouldn’t have even allowed wireless)…but less closed.
As a filthy casual, I don’t want the arms race of graphics cards. I don’t want to do 30 minutes of patching to play a game I only have an hour to play. I just want to pick up the controller and go with as little friction as possible.
i saw this view a lot on pcmr when i was using reddit. but it doesn’t make sense,there is no evidence thin clients are the future. internet speeds aren’t even good enough for most people worldwide for that to be the future.
so why do you think its the future?
I would say cost because of capitalism. It’s very cheap to run, subscription based, low cost entry, push ads, data gathering, and just about any device can run it regardless of OS or performance.
It doesn’t need to reach everyone, just the ones willing to pay for it.
I’m not in favor of it but I do see why it would make sense for some people