JP,
You have made a couple of errors (IMHO) in your post!
1) Hardware is ALWAYS ahead of software. You have to have 'hardware' to write the 'software' on! Hardware always advances incrementally, that is the changes made in the past provide the ideas as to what can be done in the future. Presently the changes are being made in the display (CHROME) area.
2) The comparison between the 180 and 300 is interesting, but when you consider that CHROME 'must' be run on a computer speed of 233 or greater, you see that the 180 has just become a 'door stop' while the 300 still has a 'life'! (For how long is another question!) CHROME may be a 'big' seller by Christmas which is the rollout time, I think!
3) Others have responded to the fact that 'cheap' computer has network problems, but they can be corrected by adding the necessary hardware, but buy then the systems are more expensive than DELL.
4) I would comment that even though you might not personally 'see' the speed difference, it is there and it DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE. With the speed the software can do more to insure the integrity of the system. The 'kernal' has more time to do the mundane tasks that it must accomplish so that 'we' the user don't have to wait. Humans are the most impatient animals on the earth!
5) As for 'Killer Apps', there are some now that require that kind of 'heat'! It may not be widely used, but the results benefit all of us each and every day! Currently many 'killer apps' are run on 'killer computers' (have you heard of CRAY) but with the 'super workstations' coming, 'killer computers' are being replaced by 'killer networks'! You know we look at $100,000 as an expensive system, but when that system is replacing an older $2,500,000 system, it seems like a 'bargin'! It also allows companies that could not afford a 'killer system' get into that area. (I wonder how fast a scanning computer - in HOSPITALS - is?)
6) You must not miss the point that DELLs JIT process will never be obsolete! As long as the others continue to support 'channels', they cannot lower there prices to compete because the 'channel' has to make a 'profit' in order to stay there! (The companies could 'subsidize' the channel, but would that be an effective use of capital, and from what area of the company would the funds come from?)
Regards,
Ken |
