CGTalk > Main > General Discussion
Login register
Thread Closed share thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-08-2013, 04:35 AM   #16
CGIPadawan
Part-Time Blenderite
 
CGIPadawan's Avatar
Giancarlo Ng
Quezon City, Philippines
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,879
Send a message via Yahoo to CGIPadawan
I honestly cannot see any of these new things as being "forced".

Even if software devs stop allowing Non-Cloud applications, people can just stick to the older ones if, as you have been describing, there are no new features by going to Cloud.

Cloud is coming to the fore now because it seems now that it realizes the vision of "Software as Services", a paradigm I first heard about back in 1996. It's not a new idea, but its maturity seems to be at hand. The storage, the memory capacity, the on-set of Supercapacitors and the development of a number of technologies means that this is feasible now.

I can understand why people like yourself like to think that technological roll-over is motivated by Greed.

But if such is the case, then the people at HP back in 1996 were very poor at being greedy, as they were conceptualizing things that would obviously only come true many years after they've either left HP or been moved to another aspect of the organization that is no longer working on this "Cloud" thing.

The punchline there is in spite of the fact I heard it from HP first, the leading Cloud providers are now SAP and Oracle, so if we judge them by your standard, HP must be the dumbest corporation on Earth for thinking long-term and engaging in the kind of intellectual and community-based exchange of ideas that brought on the development of Cloud services.

SAP, Oracle, Rapidshare, Dropbox, Google Drive, Autodesk, Steam.. wow.. all these people must have some conspiracy to try and get rid of disk-based local storage so that they can push this Cloud money-grabbing agenda.

Yet, as I have described, in the march of competition not all of them will succeed. So how does such a conspiracy work?

The answer is simply: It is not a conspiracy.

Has it occurred to you that a better vision of the future may be what leads to the creation of new technology?

I'm not saying there are no business goals involved. But let's not kid ourselves, when Thomas Edison finally saw his first working lightbulb... he did think to himself: "Yes... I'm going to SELL this." Is he greedy for thinking that?

But he can't go about it backwards - thinking of how to make money and then make a lightbulb - that just doesn't work. You start from consumer experience, or your own experience... the problem back then was it was difficult to have light during night time and there were drawbacks to using fire to do it. Electricity could provide the means to improve the experience of people upon it.

It's been that way ever since. With the automobile, with the television, the Personal Computer, the Internet, mobile phones, tablets. The list goes on.

Personally, I'm very selective about what tech I bring into my life... If you see no value in new offerings? Don't be a buyer.

It's that simple.
__________________
"Your most creative work is pre-production, once the film is in production, demands on time force you to produce rather than create."
REVERSION

Last edited by CGIPadawan : 07-08-2013 at 04:43 AM.
 
Old 07-08-2013, 09:10 AM   #17
Dillster
Always Learning
 
Dillster's Avatar
portfolio
Dylan Saunders
Dublin, Ireland
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP88
How is it redundant? Are you saying its redundant for your needs?

When SD tvs were commonly 20-30 inches in the 80's was it redundant to make 12 inch sets? I think you've limited yourself to the current day in your thinking. What about tomorrow? A decade from now? What if the goal is for the 8 foot display to become the most commonly sold display? There was day when the largest tv set available was smaller than 32 inches. Should we only make 42 inch displays because some people think thats enough for anyone's use?

How many people could afford a 60 inch flat panel 12 years ago? They were in the thousands of dollars then. What are they now $800 on average now? You can't get the price for these things down if you don't sell a lot of them. You can't sell a lot of them if you don't make them.


That's the thing, it gets relatively affordable in time and then the masses buy in. My Dad paid €3,000 for a 37" LCD TV about 10 years ago. Christmas 2011 he bought me a 42" and it cost only €450. Most of my friends have 40"+ TVs in their bedrooms, for gaming and watching movies.
Once 60" TVs get cheap enough, everyone will want them.
__________________
I like to learn.
 
Old 07-08-2013, 03:50 PM   #18
circusboy
Expert
Raonull Conover
Montreal, Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dillster
Once 60" TVs get cheap enough, everyone will want them.

Not everyone. My wife for one.
We have the 46" tv oriented in our family room so its as far from the couch as possible. I might be able to upgrade to a 4k set someday. But not a bigger set. If its too big she feels it does more harm than good. Also we make a point to have 1 tv in the house and its in the basement family room.
So a bigger room for a bigger tv? I am not upgrading my house for a TV!

And there is something about Apple-I was just talking to my sister about new computers.
My wife is a Mac girl-and her computer is always getting 'too old' to run her software 'just before' the hardware starts to deteriorate. Like every 3-4 years Mac users are 'out-of-date'. Thats just not kewl!
On PC the machines die before the OS is obsolete at least. So that is my one caveat for going Mac!
 
Old 07-08-2013, 04:12 PM   #19
theta2
3D Generalist
 
theta2's Avatar
portfolio
Full Real Name
New York, USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 143
Just on the topic of TV's I dont think size is the only attribute to look at. I think by the time 8' TV's would be possible for everyone, some other tech for viewing would come along and redifine the 32", 50" flat screens that we see. Something like HDR, holographic, paperthin, translucent screens, something other than just making the current tech we have BIGGER.
 
Old 07-08-2013, 10:42 PM   #20
Dillster
Always Learning
 
Dillster's Avatar
portfolio
Dylan Saunders
Dublin, Ireland
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by circusboy
Not everyone. My wife for one.
We have the 46" tv oriented in our family room so its as far from the couch as possible.....


Good point, and I've done the same. 42" TV one side of my bedroom room, my couch right over the other side.
__________________
I like to learn.
 
Old 07-09-2013, 02:27 AM   #21
JoeyP88
PRO
portfolio
Joey
Hampton, USA
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dillster
Good point, and I've done the same. 42" TV one side of my bedroom room, my couch right over the other side.


I have no doubt that not everyone is interested in an 8 or 10 foot display. But I also have no doubt that there are enough man-cave engineers in the world to make this size of display very profitable.
 
Old 07-09-2013, 08:07 AM   #22
paintbox
Waiting for pixels to dry
 
paintbox's Avatar
portfolio
PT PT
Artist / Illustrator
Intergalactic Freelancer
Netherlands
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,373
Truly skeptical of "no-offline" mode software / services. My internet just died (working tethered with iPhone, but it's slow and expensive) and so I will need to go find a wi-fi spot somewhere.

Redundancy is key here, and the always on-line paradigm is a stupid one. The benefits of Cloud are there, just the "Always need to be on-line" aspect is a no-go for me.
 
Old 07-10-2013, 12:50 AM   #23
ebbandflow
Veteran
portfolio
USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP88
How is it redundant? Are you saying its redundant for your needs?

When SD tvs were commonly 20-30 inches in the 80's was it redundant to make 12 inch sets? I think you've limited yourself to the current day in your thinking. What about tomorrow? A decade from now? What if the goal is for the 8 foot display to become the most commonly sold display? There was day when the largest tv set available was smaller than 32 inches. Should we only make 42 inch displays because some people think thats enough for anyone's use?

How many people could afford a 60 inch flat panel 12 years ago? They were in the thousands of dollars then. What are they now $800 on average now? You can't get the price for these things down if you don't sell a lot of them. You can't sell a lot of them if you don't make them.


I'm just talking about being practical. Sure a screen size can get bigger and bigger but how many people have a place that can house a screen of such magnitude? It's not about impeding progress of technology but when a company launches 4k TV's and unless you can afford a TV of 60" or better, not many people can take the full advantage of having the features of 4k. A few theatres I'v gone to movies to lately display on screen before the movie starts how their theatre is shown in glorious "4k digital projection." Which is great because the audience can take advantage of the quality of 4k projection. But unless everyone has a giant theatre at home one can't really take advantage of what it has to offer. It's sort of like having an IMAX TV at home but the screen is only 60" so you're not going to get much of that IMAX experience at home.



Of course TV prices go down in time but that also usually happens right before the "next big thing" hits the market. Even so a quick look at amazon flat screens show that TV prices for 60" screens or bigger are still pretty high. You could always buy an off-brand TV but good luck seeing how long that lasts. On the average it looks like the price of one is still around $1500. Also it depends on if the TV is LCD, LED, OLED or plasma as well as the company that makes them. And don't forget about the Hertz rate either.http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_2?rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3A60%22+TV&page=2&keywords=60%22+TV&ie=UTF8&qid=1373329662

Digital Download it good to an extent and can be listed both good and bad in that you can download a program anywhere from any computer with an internet connection but if you have no internet you’re screwed. It’s nice to have a hard copy of something so you can always install or reinstall programs without using the internet but the downside is if you lose that disk or whatever. For some reason it’s more reassuring to have something tangible you can touch versus everything being virtual and with cloud storage it seems more like you don’t own a copy but you are forever leasing the software. Though technically you don’t actually own the hard copy of something either as according to the User Agreements. Plus, buying digital things online are so uneventful as I always enjoy going to the store to buy things. Anyways…


Still, with the way things are going and the storage capacity of flash drives maybe movies and TV shows will be sold on flash drives and those round discs will go the way of the floppy disks.



P.S. I tried posting this yesterday and the server went down so some of the font size is all wonky because I saved it in a word document.
 
Old 07-10-2013, 01:42 AM   #24
JoeyP88
PRO
portfolio
Joey
Hampton, USA
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebbandflow
I'm just talking about being practical.


But heres the problem. Whats practical to me may be a luxury or need to someone else. What size home someone has only matters to those who want to enjoy a massive display size. If they build it and it flies of the shelf then Sony, Samsung, etc risk being profitable. If the venture is successful why should it be discouraged if someone thinks its impractical? I understand that you think from you original post that there might be no perceivable return for the increase in resolution, but thats all relative to each individuals needs or wants.

Take your case about Bluray for example. By every historical example BluRay should be selling like crazy, but it isnt. It''s market performance is dismal compared to VHS or DVD. Is Netflix part of that equation? Sure, but its not the only part. Habits are changing, people are deciding it's impractical to pay the cost of what BluRay prices were demanded. But people also decided it was more practical to get their media on the web. I don't agree with that sentiment personally, I prefer hard media. But the reality is that media rental stores are closing at an incredible pace. As much as i don't like the pattern I see, its only a matter of time.

The point here is that while hard media is practical for me, its impractical for someone else. The market will dictate the success or failure of any product. I wouldn't worry about the industry improving products. Start worrying when they decided to stop improving them.
 
Old 07-10-2013, 01:42 AM   #25
CGTalk Moderation
Lord of the posts
CGTalk Forum Leader
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,066,481
Thread automatically closed

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
Thread Closed share thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.