[rescue] Re: rescue digest, Vol 1 #1783 - 14 msgs

[Bill Bradford]

On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 12:03:33PM -0400, Dave McGuire wrote:
>   If it sucks, yes, it's bad.

Example in point:  Wintel lately.

Win95/PPro (or WinNT4/PPro, since the Pro sucked at 16-bit code):
Great platform (well, for varying definitions of "great"), plenty
of CPU speed (200Mhz) for anything 99% of normal users will need to
do (web browsing, word processing, etc).

Fast forward 4-5 years.

Most people now have 500Mhz+ AMD or Intel-based boxes, but yet they
dont use it for much more than they used PPro or P200MMX systems for
in '98.  The ONLY "advantages" I can think of would be games (bah,
MAME is all you need) and stuff like Photoshop or 3D rendering.

Now, we've got 1.4Ghz CPUs.  To "make up" for it, Windows XP comes
out.  On a 700Mhz or faster system, this OS (with its bloat) reduces
the system to the general performance level of a 1997-98 Win95
machine with a 200Mhz CPU.  This *sucks*.  Programmers need to learn
to be "lean and mean" again, instead of going "well, RAM and CPU is
cheap.."

Personally, I dont think people can tell a difference between a 
200Mhz CPU and a 1.4Ghz CPU, if you take away things like HD
speed / program loading time / etc.

Thank god I'm getting rid of my PC this weekend.

Bill

-- 
Bill Bradford
mrbill at mrbill.net
Austin, TX