Why would you have to upload a 40GB image daily? What would you be taking an image of? Your OS's would just be like a router, you can just click a button to get back to the factory defaults and your data would already be in the cloud, so you could just reset your computer and have things back in minutes...without using images.
I don't like the idea of Cloud and don't intent to use it. With me, it seems like my personal data is somewhere out there in no-man's-land.
Lot's of people. Look at the numbers of people going to laptops and tablets. Look at the people who have moved to Google apps....even businesses (shocking to me!). Businesses like this concept as a work laptop that is lost or stolen contains no actual business data.
From a personal standpoint, I think it would be nice to be able to access the same apps and data from my desktop, laptop and droid.
But even if you did some stuff in the cloud, doesn't necessarily mean that you wouldn't keep local storage or at least local backups. So, I don't see pushing images to the cloud.
I mean if the OS goes to the cloud, wouldn't it necessarily follow that your apps would be there as well too?
I guess, but that is a completely different way of operation - from a "Terminal". I think whilst it is useful to have some applications upstream, there are serious limitations from the web speed.I mean if the OS goes to the cloud, wouldn't it necessarily follow that your apps would be there as well too?
I could very well see e.g. Video editing applications upstream - especially for the tabs and phones. But then you are talking about a lot of data that has to be moved around. I just made a video of a class I teach. It is 740MBs and takes forever to upload to Vimeo.
For other applications, e.g. a matrix inversion, the amount of data may not be such a big problem and the power of the upstream processors could be very helpful.
But my own data I want in my office (with a backup in my bank vault) - but not upstream.
I don't give a rat's butt about what people do with their smarphones tablet pcs and intelligent micro wave ovens.
I was talking about my regular desktop pcs.
And in the same way I can decide for myself if I use Google apps or not I want to decide for myself what runs on my pc and where the data goes (which ultimately means who has access to it). Dumb terminals can't be the future otherwise they would have stayed (In the 80's/90's we had all desktops connected to our UNIX servers through some nifty terminal emulation but that was then..I don't want those times back. Let them do what they want..I'm sure they find enough sheeples to come along...just don't expect to see me on the cloud
Not to forget the valid point whs raised. in terms of affordable internet speed the u.S. is superior to pretty much the rest of the world...I just can't see them catching up in a timely fashion. So IMHO it's way too early to worry about being forced into the cloud.
Yes, you obviously will have a choice. If Windows 8 was strictly in the cloud, nobody would force you onto it. You could keep using what you have today.
The cloud discussion always stirs great fear and response from people, but I don't think people realize how much they are already doing in the cloud without really even thinking about it. And I honestly think the "average" person would be the one most willing to just blindly jump in and do even more in the cloud. Us techies and enthusiasts may have the hardest time accepting this type of change.
It's my understanding that other countries like Europe and such actually offer much faster speeds to the Internet than what is available in the US. I could be wrong, but it seems like lots of friends and acquantances in other countries have way faster connections that I do.
True, but what happens when support for that product is stopped?
I for one am not sure what to think about the whole "cloud" idea. My cable is 18/2. Plenty fast enough for what I do now, but, like more and more ISP's, it's now capped, with possible termination if it goes over the cap. Something would have to give, with some smaller ISP's having even lower caps than what I have now. The cap, from what our ISP has said, includes up and down stream, which means, if you do a lot now,and are close to hitting the cap, it could cause a major issue for a lot of people.
First off, I don't like the idea of "everything in the cloud".
Secondly, I sure as hell ain't going to pay twice as much as I am now just to get a business line so I don't go over the cap.
Problem is that in a few years there will not be many PCs around any more. The cloud is for the "new world" and PCs we will admire in the Smithsonian museum.I don't give a rat's butt about what people do with their smarphones tablet pcs and intelligent micro wave ovens.
I was talking about my regular desktop pcs.
I don't know from where you get this idea. In Germany I have a much faster DSL than here in Florida - and for $20/month (versus $36 for slowpoke DSL 3000 here). The US is usually trailing behind the other high tech countries (in some areas as much as 50 years - see high speed trains). But for Africa you might be right.in terms of affordable internet speed the u.S. is superior to pretty much the rest of the world
My son has DSL 56.000 in Germany - just as an example.
Sorry for not voicing my point understandably. What I meant wasn't that the US internet is the fastest, but compared to other countries the cheaper (more affordable) one. I for once had to pay in GE for dial up about what I'm paying for cable now. Granted those prices have changed in the years since ADSL came to be but still in general you pay more for fast internet elsewhere (esp.the smaller countries that don't belong to the G8 or G11. Besides not all countries have the necessary infra-structure (yet).
So I say 'No worries...my W7 still works just fine and if W8 or 9 tries to force me into the cloud...sorry..that's just not for me.
Quote