![]() LOL @ old article! - Printable Version -Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net) +-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58) +--- Forum: Skype & Technology (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9) +---- Forum: Tech Talk (/forumdisplay.php?fid=17) +----- Thread: LOL @ old article! (/showthread.php?tid=33376) LOL @ old article! by .blade// on 10-20-2004 at 06:17 PM
I was looking @ some old shit I found in my colset and came across a 1995 PC gaming magazine. For the hell of it, I skimmed through it and found an article about the PC of the new millenium. RE: LOL @ old article! by toddy on 10-20-2004 at 06:24 PM
quote: ![]() quote: ![]() RE: LOL @ old article! by Millenium_edition on 10-20-2004 at 06:35 PM
lol yeah i've had a magazine when pokemon gold and silver were leet, dead or alive 3 looked amazingly good (not out yet) and they were comparing halo to starship troopers on a beach... RE: LOL @ old article! by Guido on 10-20-2004 at 07:03 PM
quote:You have to admit though, they are quite good predictions given the constant changes in the technology and its industry... RE: LOL @ old article! by user27089 on 10-20-2004 at 07:22 PM
I suppose iut was a pretty good estimate, but we'ren't those pc's in '98 very rare, or didn't they exist at all!! Thats hilarious.... RE: LOL @ old article! by Anubis on 10-20-2004 at 07:33 PM
When you read it a lot of that article is true, and a good prediction for the time, just a few years out maybe...but well predicted pattern wise... quote:It didn't say anything about 4ghz processors... RE: LOL @ old article! by RebelSean on 10-20-2004 at 07:53 PM I'm not a computer expert or anything, but whats the highest ghz you can get today? RE: LOL @ old article! by saralk on 10-20-2004 at 08:41 PM
with over clocking you could probably get to 4ghz. RE: LOL @ old article! by .blade// on 10-20-2004 at 08:58 PM
quote: Na, not that high. Maybe 50-100 Ghz TOPS RE: LOL @ old article! by Black_Forky on 10-21-2004 at 04:39 AM err.....50 ghz? RE: LOL @ old article! by .Roy on 10-21-2004 at 07:54 AM
lol.... in 98 there wasnt even 1 ghz and they expected 3!! RE: LOL @ old article! by Pipish on 10-21-2004 at 08:36 AM wow yer the future sound great lol i looked at this mag from round about 95 and it was like the top 10 nintendo games lol RE: LOL @ old article! by aptiva on 10-21-2004 at 10:39 AM
"withing the next 4 or 5 years: RE: LOL @ old article! by saralk on 10-21-2004 at 02:26 PM
quote: I just did a search on the net, and there is a 8.1 terraflop supercomputer. These supercomputers run on loads of pcs linked together. RE: LOL @ old article! by .blade// on 10-21-2004 at 02:40 PM
lol @ Saralk RE: LOL @ old article! by .Roy on 10-21-2004 at 02:56 PM
well i mean a commen ammount RE: LOL @ old article! by saralk on 10-22-2004 at 01:16 PM 1024mb is increasingly common now, and iirc 8gb is the max ram you can have on a 32bit pc RE: LOL @ old article! by .blade// on 10-22-2004 at 03:55 PM
quote: Then get a 64 bit one ![]() ![]() ... ![]() RE: LOL @ old article! by user27089 on 10-24-2004 at 09:53 AM I just can't believe that they expected such results in the future of computing back then... I know that it was just a theory but its an incorrect theory.. RE: LOL @ old article! by CookieRevised on 10-25-2004 at 03:07 PM
quote:What are you talking about? Like people said before in this thread, those predictions were very accurate. RE: LOL @ old article! by ayjay on 10-28-2004 at 09:17 AM It's weird to think how rubbish the computers seemed when they made those predictions and in a few years, the computers we see as completely amazing now will just seem so slow. |