Anything thats small I would imagine capable of doing most anything. I liked the bracelet one but not the necklace because they are too easily lost. Perhaps more things built into stuff you already use, coffee cup and map design are more or less useless imo when you have a map on your computer. The coffee cup is cool, but i mean really its just a trend if it sets off. Something practical powerful and highly portable. I wear glasses so maybe special lenses that i can view a computer with the bottom half of my lenses or the entire lenses if thats what i choose. Of course it would have to also be usable on other monitoring devices. Wouldn't it be fun? Something that connects to the sound in your wrist the nerve that heads up to your brain for sound. You wouldn't even look like your doing anything. I guess I'm just waiting for the brain implants Lol.

The zen one was very nice as well as many of the other designs however most of them just came off as just that. You know what would be cool, tattoos. Somehow wired into them in a touchpad / keypad you can put on your hand or forearm. If there is a nerve that goes to your brain for sound in your wrist maybe theres another one for sight without having to mess with your eyes?

---

Read the latest DigiYumi cartoon "RIP Gateway" here

I think that a helmet with a screen inside that is controlled by two gloves that you were and each glove has a touch pad like on a laptop but it can only be controlled by the other glove, The helmet look kinda like the master chief on HALO and it would have a camera and led lights on it and you can see throu the screen somewhat would be awsome.

I've been saying for a few years now that the future of home computing is in networking.

I would not be a bit surprised to see, in the next few years, computer clusters being commonplace in homes, allowing people to leverage the super-computer power from their home network, while interfacing from an energy efficient laptop, or even smart phone-like device.

Since most computers typically use far less than their maximum available processing power, it makes sense to allow load balancing among the computers on the network. This idea could be extended to external networks, such as the wireless network at the local coffee shop, or even specific LANs accessible via the WAN, whether that network is located next door, or across the globe.

Essentially the idea is to efficiently utilize available CPU power in the same manner that bandwidth is utilized efficiently with bittorrent. Projects like Folding@home and SETI@home do such CPU sharing on a large scale. Implementing the same idea on a LAN would allow tasks best suited for powerful computers, such as those powered by multiple processors, each with multiple cores, to be completed in a timely manner by much less powerful, yet far more common computers that exist on the same LAN. Thus, CPU power would be available when needed, but without the need to purchase high end computers.

Mac OS X v.4 and later include Xgrid, which allows "easy" implementation of distributed computing with networked Macs. Unfortunately, Apple does not provide a GUI controller for Xgrid in the standard client OS X install, so it requires use of the command line. (Apple provides a GUI as part of Server Admin Tools, a free standalone download. Xgrid@Stanford also offers such a GUI, called GridStuffer.) I'm not sure whether Microsoft offers a similar tool to allow networked computers to easily engage in distributed computing, nor do I know if such a tool is readily available for Linux or other *nix operating systems.

Another stumbling block is application compatibility. For example, I use handbrake for most of my video format conversions, but I'm not sure that Handbrake currently supports such task distribution.

Still, I don't think it will be long before home networked (or even ad-hoc networked) grid computing will be extremely easy and widely available and utilized. I can even envision being able to buy clusters in the same manner and similar form factor as servers are currently available. That is, instead of multiple processors for the same computer in one case, there would be multiple single processor computers in the same case, which could be used independently or together, or some combination thereof, depending on the users needs at a particular time.