Well, I would call this a special interest, even if it will have many users
out there. According to statistics from any source, this will be only a fraction
of all the computer users altogether. Email seems to be number one, and that
will not demand computer power of any kind. Any computer from an XT and up
will do, depening on what OS you put on it. So the computing need vary from
user to user, and nothing wrong with that. I for myself bought a system tailored
for digitally remastering of old anlog recordings. I have a some audio equipment
that many ordinary user don't need, and OTOH, I don't need the fastest CPU
on earth. What I wanted to say is that a special interest can not be a starting
point in any computing decision, applicable to any user. The starting point
must be a specific need, and what the specific user plans for the future.

BR,
Hans

Pat wrote:
> "hyubso" wrote in message
> news:3EFDD9E2.7020703@prodigy.net...
>
> > no one needs any of this speed anymore at this point in time...

>
> I need it. Why do I need it? I am doing MPEG-2 Encodes of 2 hour videos

that
> can take 15 hours of processing time for a Multi-Pass with Variable Bitrate.
> That means I have to WAIT 15 hours to check my results and keep it or

toss
> it.
>
> Am I the only one with this need? There are many users out there. Check

this
> out:
>
> http://forum.doom9.net/
>
> All these people need the speed and disk space. My last capture of a Digital
> Video created a single one-hour video that was a 12.5GB file. The best

Video
> and Audio applications will not run on Windows 98 and require Windows

XP
> with 512MB considered entry level. Some of these people have 1GB of memory,
> and even higher.
>
> Who are these users? You'd be surprised how many novices are trying to

learn
> but there are all levels and it ranges from hobby to professionals and
> engineers. With all the consumer, prosumer, and pro camcorders out there,
> more users are capturing their videos and authoring them onto VCD, SVCD,

and
> DVDs.
>
> > computers are fast enough as stand alone devices...but progress is
> > progress and it is nice to have faster newer stuff as long as you can
> > afford it...

>
> Remember when Intel came out with its first 1GHz processor? It seemed

like
> the speed war was back on the front burner with AMD. Then, the P4 broke
> through 2GHz and now you can get a 2GHz PC for one-third the cost of a

386
> PC 12 years ago. As the speeds climbed to 3GHz, it seemed it would keep
> escalating forever. But that has not happened. The CPU speeds have peeked

at
> around 3GHz and Intel is opting to spend time re-engineering the Front-Side
> Bus speeds so that memory access will be vastly improved with delays
> falling. So we are taking a break in the processor speed war to fix the
> Memory to CPU bottleneck problem. During this period, the cost of over

2GHz
> PCs will come down further. The end result will be a vast improvement

in the
> average PC handling complex and difficult applications. Not too many years
> ago, you needed a Silicon Graphics workstation to do what is now reachable
> to a wider audience.
>
> Who benefits:
>
> (1) Networkers (ie. Gigabit Ethernet)
> (2) Multimedia Applications (eg. MPEG compression algorithms)
> (3) Database Access
> (4) Gamers
>
> The above includes a lot of users, especially if you have read Variety
> recently where Games is a huge money makers and game revenues exceeds

movie
> box office revenues in the US.
>
> > what people really need in "first world" countries is faster online
> > access into every home.. it is the last mile that is the bottleneck.

56
> > k modems should be obsoleted just like 14.4 modems were...

>
> I can't disagree that its what the majority wants. But its not the only

hot
> item on most hot item lists!
>
>
> > Pat wrote:
> > > Supply and Demand are always at work in determining pricing.
> > >
> > > But the sweet spot is what governs the general pricing on memory from

> the
> > > manufacturing point of view.
> > >
> > > Sweet Spot = What memory types the manufacturers are tooled up for,

to
> crank
> > > out in large quantities, at the lowest per unit price. Not too long

ago,
> it
> > > was DRAM in 72-pin SIMM packaging. Then it changed to SDRAM in DIMM
> > > packaging. Now DDR-SDRAM, and that's also changing as the mobo

> Front-Side
> > > Bus speeds ramps up to 800MHz and higher (overclocked version of 1200MHz

> has
> > > been announced). Why? Apple is going that route, Sun is going that

> route,
> > > IBM is going that route. Its engineering trying to ring-out bottlenecks

> in
> > > design and memory bus speeds definitely slow down the coupling between

> CPU
> > > and memory access. Cache is like a band-aid to help alleviate the

> problem
> > > but the better solution is to make the highways bigger and faster.
> > >
> > > The reason for the speed is not to help GeoWrite or Word be quicker

but
> its
> > > for Networking and Video.
> > >

> >

>
>
>