I clicked a link earlier today which led me to a blog (which, for now, will remain unnamed) in which the author began talking about personal computing, tech people, “regular” end-users, and the ultimate future of computing. I really don’t want to rehash everything he said, because it was a rather lengthy post full of logical fallacies, so I’ll just explain the basic premise.

The days of multi-purpose computing are over.

What that means according to this particular author is this: computers which can do “everything” and run full fledged operating systems like Windows or Linux are going to slowly fade from our lives only to be replaced with “computing devices” that perform one or two specific tasks extremely well. The iPad and iPhone are cited as examples of devices that will move us into the “New World.” The author (who clearly thinks Apple is going to be the vehicle by which world hunger is solved) surmises that end-users don’t care about things like multitasking, file systems or formats, or understanding how computing works (and on and on). While the last of those statements may be partially true, I’ve met more than my fair share of “average end-users” who care very much about those things. They care about being able to organize their lives into files and folders (because honestly, that system makes sense).

Take a paper-based system for instance. We don’t throw all of our important documents into a big box and hope that we can find them later because that’s stupid and doesn’t make any sense. Instead, we categorize everything, file things away in file folders, cabinets, drawers, safe deposit boxes, and so on. What about that system doesn’t make sense? Hmm…I’m not sure. But I can see how someone long ago thought–”Hey, this paper filing system works pretty well. Why don’t we apply that to computers?” And boom–you have a system of files and folders on modern PC’s that the world just understands. You don’t need more than 5 minutes to figure out that the files and folders on computers are remarkably similar to the ones in your filing cabinet. Except you can search through the digital kind–which is a huge reason as to why they’re better.

Okay, honestly…how can you think that multitasking is completely unnecessary to regular people? How many people type emails, converse via IM, and listen to music all at the same time. Umm…maybe like everyone? (Okay, okay–almost everyone). To do that, you have to have the ability to run multiple applications simultaneously. Plus, if suddenly you decide that nobody needs multitasking abilities, you begin to throw away billions of CPU cycles along with processors having multiple cores. What waste.

Should I go on? Or have I made my point? Task-specific computing is Old World Computing–cause it’s certainly not the new enlightened way. Don’t get me wrong–there are cases in which computers meant for a specific purpose are necessary–perhaps in medical or government situations this would be the case. Perhaps in automobiles, although I would argue that as “traditional” computers continue to decrease in size and increase in power, the more generically applicable these systems become.

To believe in task-centric computing for everyday people is to place yourself in the unique position of spending $25,000 on various “computing devices.” One to do simple things like email, web browsing, and editing documents. Another for banking. Another for developers. Yet another for doing X and another one for doing Y. It’s total lunacy.

You don’t need multiple cars for everyday life. One for the grocery store, one for the gym, and yet another for taking the kids to Grandma’s??

Or do you?