So the interesting thing to put in here is that 1tb/s might on paper look like it'd make things more innovative, but it might not because of two things:
1) latency
2) congestion
Now, lets ignore power for the moment, thats a tricky thing. For example if I could connect a laptop at 1tb/s without draining the battery in 5 minutes, I could just not bother with a CPU, RAM or anything else locally. just have a dumb terminal.
But
Latency is the killer here, as is congestion.
If your internet actually ran at 500megs a second, and with <10ms latency, you could offload a whole bunch of things. You could have network storage (as in NFS) you would be able to load things instantly, up to 5mb in size. (5mb is about as much as you can download in a blink of an eye at 50 megabtyes a second.)
If you look at some of the concepts for windows 95, microsoft wanted "networked" computers, based on files and applications, rather than web pages. If you apply that to modern life, thats what 1tb/s could get you.
1) latency
2) congestion
Now, lets ignore power for the moment, thats a tricky thing. For example if I could connect a laptop at 1tb/s without draining the battery in 5 minutes, I could just not bother with a CPU, RAM or anything else locally. just have a dumb terminal.
But
Latency is the killer here, as is congestion.
If your internet actually ran at 500megs a second, and with <10ms latency, you could offload a whole bunch of things. You could have network storage (as in NFS) you would be able to load things instantly, up to 5mb in size. (5mb is about as much as you can download in a blink of an eye at 50 megabtyes a second.)
If you look at some of the concepts for windows 95, microsoft wanted "networked" computers, based on files and applications, rather than web pages. If you apply that to modern life, thats what 1tb/s could get you.