"Jacob Carlborg" <d...@me.com> wrote in message news:jl3kar$ie4$1...@digitalmars.com... > On 2012-03-30 04:05, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> "Walter Bright"<newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote in message >>> >>> True, but I upgraded recently to 64 bit Win 7, with a 6 core processor >>> and >>> SSD drive. Reddit seems a lot zippier :-) >> >> I don't understand why people think it's ok for basic, basic shit that >> would >> have ran fine on a Pentium 1 (and less) to now require what quite >> literally >> is a super-fucking-computer-on-the-desktop just to run acceptably. >> >> Seriously, what the fuck's the point of buying all this insanely powerful >> hardware if software just turns the damn thing right back into a fucking >> single-core P1? That's just insane. People are seriously fucking bat-shit >> crazy. > > Have you seen this: > > http://hallicino.hubpages.com/hub/_86_Mac_Plus_Vs_07_AMD_DualCore_You_Wont_Believe_Who_Wins > > They compare and old Macintosh from the 80's against a fairly new PC. >
Yea, I've seen that. It's a very good article, though. Although I've been saying this since before that article, and even before multi-cores. Contrary to the title, I wasn't at all surprised which won ;) Of course, I don't expect software to be as super-fine-tuned as it was on, say, the Apple 2 or Atari 2600. There *is* definitely some value in loosing a certain amount of performance to abstractions, up to a point. But we've blown way, way, WAAAY beyond that point. It's sickening how much gratuitous waste there is in a lot of "modern" software, and really for not much benefit, as D proves.