nice post man. quote.. Mr Brownell comments: "How many trillions have been invested in classical computing? How many innovations and iterations of hardware since John Von Neumann and the Bletchley Park folks? "How much algorithm work and research around software and applications and compilers and efficiency? We've come up with something in 10 years that performs just as well, and maybe outperforms in some narrow cases that entire ecosystem.
So it's powered by an infinite number of Shrodinger's cats at an infinite number of typewriters... or some such?
The problem is that quantum computers are not good at all tasks. Some tasks really benefit, like searching through data, sorting, and things like factorisation, but many algorithms we use today are not suited for quantum computing. Tasks that are sequential or work in O(1) are going to be quite slow on a quantum computer. Our classical computer systems are very good at this kind of work, and aren't going to be replaced any time soon. The things that classical computers are not good at require complex algorithms. More efficient algorithms are always sought after, since without them processing data can be quite slow. It is these cases that quantum computers will really help with, since they can represent all possibilities at the same time and when observed yield the correct answer.
