On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:10 PM, John Zabroski <johnzabro...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. > <je...@merlintec.com> wrote: >> Steve Dekorte wrote: >> >>> [NeXTStation memories versus reality] >> >> I still have a running Apple II. My slowest working PC is a 33MHz 486, >> so I can't directly do the comparison I mentioned. But I agree we >> shouldn't trust what we remember things feeling like. >> >> -- Jecel > > > The Apple booting up faster was not simply a feeling, but a fact owing > to its human-computer interaction demands. They set fast boot speeds > as a design criteria. Jef Raskin talks about this in the book The > Humane Interface. Even modern attempts to reduce boot speed have not > been that good, such as "upstart", an event-driven alternative to > "init". > > Eugen has some very good points about human limits of managing > performance details, though. Modern approaches to performance are > already moving away from such crude methods.
By the way, slight tangent: Modern operating systems, with all their hot-swapping requirements, do a poor job distinguishing device error from continuously plugging-in and plugging-out the device. For example, if you have an optical mouse and damage it, it might slowly die and your entire system will hang because 99% of your CPU will be handling plugin and plugout events. _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
