If you run basically the same software, you're going to run a lot faster now than back in 1998.
But there's issues, definitely. Part of it is lousy programmers, part of it is lazy programmers, part of it is Microsoft having to support such a large legacy base, part of if is feature bloat
, part of it is useful features, and part of it is the need for security (bounds checking, address space randomizations, etc. aren't computatoinally free).
VS2008 starts up about the same time as VS6 did... that is, VS2008 on a [email protected]
/8gig/WD Raptor system, and VS6 on an Athlon700/512meg/whatever-UDMA66disk. But obviously VS2008 featureset is a lot bigger, it has a much better compiler, etc. Worth it? Yeah. Do I wish it was faster? Yeah.
Office2000, on the other hand, starts a bit faster. But it already started quite fast on a Pmmx-200/64meg (without the "office speed launcher" startup item). It runs
a lot faster now, though
. On the other hand, OpenOffice starts + runs slower on my current powerhouse machine than Office2000 did on the pmmx-200.
Really, is it surprising that an assembly coded 3D game fits in such a small size and runs so well?
It's not that we need assembly programmed games, we just need programmers that care a bitmore about what they do... and management that isn't so obsessed with time-to-market. Btw, kkrieger is C++, not assembly (well, for the main part, anyway). They use a custom EXE compressor to get the size so small, along with procedurally generated textures and geometry. You can't do that generically for everything, though, and it does
impose a startup-time speed hit.