Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Why are computers getting slower (and what we can do about it)?

<< < (4/5) > >>

cmpm:
Most are just links though some are actively working.

Firefox is the highest mem and resource eater I have.
Mostly because of the addons I think.
I tried FF RC2 and it is much better.
But the addons need to catch up mainly.
I have it on another computer.

cmpm:
Mainly no google toolbar compatibility yet, is the hold up for me.

J-Mac:
Personally, I think the biggest hit - not counting rich multimedia files - is the visuals.  The "skinning" of many, if not most, applications today seems to take an inordinate amount of memory.  High-end graphics cards with massive gpu's gobble up memory and CPU.  As the technology allows, many developers skin their programs with graphics that take time to render.  Some developers - and I won't get into THAT bitch session now - add a lot of graphics rather than features to the applications.  They figure that if they make it visually stunning a lot of users will be impressed.  And it is much cheaper and easier for them that adding features/functionality.  How many programs are you running where their last so-called "major" version upgrade consisted mainly of Vista compatibility and changing the look to a "ribbon"-like format?  (One well-known mind-mapping developer did exactly that - and hardly any new features - in their last upgrade.  I read later that to keep their Microsoft Logo Certificate they were actually required to move to a ribbon UI!)  And while MS Office 2007 did introduce Microsoft's revolutionary new standard file formats  (cough, cough), what was the single biggest change?  The UI.  Check and see how much more memory Office 2007 takes to run than Office 2003 and then decide whether or not any added feautures are worth the hit.

OK - rant over!

Jim

Edvard:
I am in agreement with most on this thread.
I remember my 386 with Windows 95 was quicker than my PII with 98SE!

I think it falls to the same justification for App's "snailware" website.
Back in the old days, with computing power and memory at a premium, most coders were very concerned about the size and efficiency of their programs. Hence, even with limited capacity, the best applications were so tightly coded that of course they ran well (and downloaded in reasonable time over a dial-up line...).
Nowadays with broadband internet, multi-core processors, terabyte hard drives and gigabytes of memory capacity being the norm, even the most sloppily coded java app will run reasonably well, even though it is chowing through the gigaflops like sharks in a kiddie pool...
Really, is it surprising that an assembly coded 3D game fits in such a small size and runs so well?
Personally, I think the biggest hit - not counting rich multimedia files - is the visuals.
--- End quote ---
Which is why dial-up is getting slower every day as well... >:(

f0dder:
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 Q6600@3GHz/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? -Edvard (June 09, 2008, 11:05 AM)
--- End quote ---
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.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page