Re:Computing Industry Doesn't Care about Performance: how I ...
by josephg on Monday November 25, 2024 @08:50AM
(#42236277)
They have, finally upped the base configuration to 16gb. But objectively, 8gb would / should be totally fine if modern software wasn't so insanely bloated.
I remember reading years ago about how people kept asking microsoft's engineers why Visual Studio hadn't been updated to be a 64 bit native app. They said they didn't need to - if visual studio ever gets anywhere near the 3gb memory limit (or whatever it is) on 32 bit windows apps, they spend the time to optimise the application. As a result, there is / was simply no benefit to have the program running in 64 bit mode. Even for massive projects, it simply doesn't need the larger address space.
Re:Computing Industry Doesn't Care about Performance: how I ...
by top256 on Tuesday November 26, 2024 @05:39PM
(#42250905)
What you describe IMHO is the lack of hardware progress.
Nowadays,hardware performance is increasing at 10% per generation https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
The amount of money spent on software development was a lot smaller and there were far fewer programmers. And they were creating a lot of bloated nonsense that you could install on your 8086, commodore 64, or whatever. Windows 1.0 is a good example. That was released nearly 35 years ago.
These days the one thing that's different is that hardware ages a lot slower. I've been on several laptops with 16GB since 2012. Back in 2012 that was a lot. Now Apple seems to still find 8GB more than enough for anyone (Bill Gates pun intended). Things are moving much slower with hardware.