This all made sense to me until the end. It sounds like the author wants to just build pc’s that are customized, which one can totally do without trouble. I’m not sure what there is to lament except maybe a lack of processor and OS variety?
> In high-tech domains, an engineer could readily have a toolchest of suitable computers in the same way that a mechanic has different tools for their tasks. This one has an FPGA connected by both PCI-E and JTAG to allow for quick hardware prototyping. This one is connected to a high-throughput GPU for visualisations; that one to a high-capacity GPU for scientific simulations.
Thats just different PCIe cards. You don't need a dedicated vendor for that, just a screwdriver.
I worked in companies where EDA, HDL, EE instrumentation machines were purposefully left running 24*7 just because the lengthy ritual of applying the needed set of hacks to get them running. Or because Windows update was killing a certain Labview function.
My favourite was a PC with a sticker "DO NOT PLUG INTO INTERNET UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, WINDOWS UPDATE PIRACY DETECTOR WILL TRIGGER CADENCE ANTIPIRACY DETECTOR"
This has been the case sometimes, Apple, Digital (VMS), and NEXT are good examples of this, but from what I've seen, in most cases the user experience was pretty poor anyway.
Yeah, but that's something we should lament; we're stuck at a local maxima for both. The ability to try out new ideas and architectures has been curtailed because no competitor can get enough momentum to stay alive long enough to displace the entrenched incumbents.