Yeah, I didn't put in quite enough time into the definitions. But, there is a fundamental difference that I was trying to describe. Micro/mini computers were c

Yeah, I didn't put in quite enough time into the definitions. But, there is a fundamental difference that I was trying to describe. Micro/mini computers were computers at a different price/size points. I agree. But, the reason for buying a minicomputer was not that you didn't have room for a mainframe. It was because of price & power. They were the same category of thing just at different prices & power. Once power on all of them became enough to power everything most users needed, the lower priced form factor (microcomputers) became the only form factor that mattered. By making that analogy Jeff is implying that smartphones, tablets & PCs are the same category of thing and that the thing at the lower end of the price/power chart will eventually become the thing of the future. What I am arguing is that he's got it wrong: the form factor is there for the its own reasons. It's not there to facilitate power and its not there to facilitate price. Laptops have keyboards and mouses. Smartphones fit in your pocket. There is overlap in what they do, but phones won't get awesome enough to replace laptops. This is unless they become laptops. Maybe eventually everyone will have a keyboard that snaps onto their tablet when they need it and a screen at home/office that plugs into it too. That's cheating. It doesn't count.