PC of the year 2010?

Why are we still using so ancient computers? I hope that the PC of the year 2010 will have

• 200 ppi monitor


• ECC DDR3 FBDIMM memory


• Display card with GDDR5 memory


• PCI Express 3 with, at least, one x32 slot


• Single Level Cell Solid State Drive


• USB 3.0


• 8-core CPU + multithreading


• (U)EFI


• 100 gigabytes re-writable optical disc drive


• 10 Gbit/s Ethernet


• Keyboard with a fingerprint scanner


• 6.0 Gbit/s SATA and SAS


• EATX, BTX or WTX motherboard


• 1080p high-quality webcam with stereoscopy support

What do you think?

Three things I definitely want next year are:

1. 200 ppi monitor


2. SLC Solid State Drive


3. EATX, BTX or WTX motherboard

Why? Let's see:

1. Displays used today are not even near the quality of printed magazines. So, why not to upgrade from about 100 ppi:s to about 200 ppi:s? I want more stuff/information to my OS desktop without having to buy a bigger table for some colossal 30+ inch monitor! 204 ppi monitor should give some neat WQUXGA resolution (3840 x 2400) in a small 22.2 inch monitor (16:10). I just don't want to pay over 8000 dollars for a display like that! Why cannot the price be, say, 800 dollars? I also don't want to use 4 DVI-cables to feed that display. Why not to use ONE DisplayPort cable? Maybe DisplayPort 2.0 is enough, or not.


2. I don't like HDDs at all anymore, because they are noisy, slow and unstable. I also don't like MLC Flash, because SLC Flash is far better (more stable and faster). So, why not to introduce, say, 120 GB SLC SSDs (with SAS/SATA 6.0 Gbit/s, of course) with an affordable price tag in 2010?


3. ATX form factor may be too small for, say, 2 processors, 6 DIMMs and 7 PCI/PCI Express connectors + all the other stuff on a motherboard. Why not to lower the price tag of EATX or WTX motherboards in 2010? BTX is probably dead, but at least it had far better thermal design than ATX has.