On 4 Nov 2002, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > Leave the machine with serious crunch power at home on your > network. When you need to get to that data from the field, the apps on > your wearable should be able to get to the computer in your home > pretty transparently. This isn't really much of a stretch -- I do most > of my work this way now, though I use a laptop, not a wearable. Unless of course you want to analyze data that you're collecting with your wearable. Which might be an awful lot of data in some applications. That's either going to need CPU/memory grunt in the wearable itself _or_ a ubiquitous high bandwidth network connection back to your desk bound number cruncher. I've a sneaky feeling that CPU cycles and bits in memory chips are likely to get cheaper faster than network bandwidth, especially if you're "in the field" and have to use public data networks. And its worth remembering that even if you have a multimegabit public data network you might find that between you and your number cruncher there multi-million other users. Again, its the classic "horses for courses". Some folk will be able to number crunch remotely and display a little bit of summary data over whatever datalink they can get (you seem to fit in to that category). Other people won't be able to. This is the problem with designing general purpose systems for large (ie popular) user communities. Tatty bye, Jim'll -- Subscription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" toWear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org Please, *PLEASE* don't subscribe through a forward/expander/false domain
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail