> I'm not saying that I would put a word processor embedded on a PCI board.
> But if, say, operating systems were so bad they couldn't run a word
> processor reliable, then somebody would probably make one!
Actually it already happened long time ago. Ever seen card-punching
or tape-punching machines? Or, a bit later, 3270 terminals? The
difference, of course, was that it never was the issue of performance or
reliability -- just the input devices and interfaces weren't suitable for
"dumb" terminals at those times. Later when both communication hardware
and OS design became ready to support first dumb terminals, then
character-cell terminals and later graphical terminals, with no
significant "cost" increase, dedicated devices that performed text editing
became unnecessary. However the concept of having text input processing
"somewhere else" still exist -- you use it every time when submitting form
in a web browser, a heavily mutated software-implemented modern descendant
of 3270.
With modems for relatively low decrease of cost (that will become less
and less significant over the years) the price is either introduction of
"harder" realtime or decrease of reliability, and in both cases increased
CPU load and amount of bus transfers. CPU and bus resources won't become
cheaper over the years because "modems" (or network cards) speed increases
at the rate comparable to CPU speed increase and at higher rate than bus
bandwidth increase. So I don't expect WinEthernet to ever appear (even
though some [^G] definitely will make WinISDN or WinDSL card), and the
whole trend will die after modems/network cards will become cheaper and
faster. The same applies to video cards -- don't hold your breath for the
glorious emergence of $15 AGP-whatever dumb framebuffer.
Another possibility is the increased flexibility of I/O devices that may
(or may not) make them more "intelligent" or even interchangeable (such as
high-quality modem that can be reprogrammed to become a high-quality
soundcard), and the whole thing will (or will not) be turned into some
kind of asymmetric cluster over NUMA (and will kill a monstrosity called
SMP in the process -- rejoice lock-haters ;-)).
-- Alex---------------------------------------------------------------------- Excellent.. now give users the option to cut your hair you hippie! -- Anonymous Coward
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/