Tuesday, June 05, 2007


Interesting article/test about software bloat.
The issue is a bit confused by the use of two different platforms, but it's still interesting. It is pathetic that with hardware getting faster every month for 20 years, the daily speed of work is not that much faster.


Anonymous said...

Hmm... how old *is* your computer? Both the Internet and the processes on my computer are much faster than five and even more so ten years ago.

Eolake, are we a bit jaded here? There's the Dane Cook joke about the five seconds it takes in the year 2024 on average to get our driver's license and still there is the complaint, "COME ON, it's been ten seconds!" ;o)

Anonymous said...

The speed of Internet is a different matter. Improvements there are due to advancements in modem technology and cabling. Already in the 1980s computers were are able to send data at 10Mbit/s over the LAN.

Anonymous said...

Already in the 1980s computers were are able to send data at 10Mbit/s over the LAN.

the internet wasn't even around for the common redneck then. here it became available in the late 90's.
yet still, it's a very lonely world even with this pc shit.

Alex said...

So I find that a compile takes 1-2 seconds instead of 30-50. That is a huge improvement.

I find launching my editor of choice takes 5 seconds instead of 8. (Codewright 7 on Core2DUO WinXP Media Center laptop vs Codewright 5.1 on Pentium (yes no qualifier) desktop.

I find that large mulitfile greps go faster.

However, let's try to use MS Word 2003 vs Word 7.0 for Win 95. I find that just tying you don't really see a difference, but opening and closing files, with all that lovely cache and faster HD is the same or slower.

Now here is a surprise. The document "Hello world" containing just those two words (in theory 11 bytes, twelve with an EOF) takes 12K on my Win95 box, and 24K on my XP system.

Sure, gaming is blitz schnell, it took us 10 minutes dial up to get a fuzzy picture, and my slowest picture from Domai to 10 seconds.

But where it counts, Word, Excel and Outlook (or their equivalents) there is no great improvement. They are overloaded with features that only a small percentage of us use.

I used to joke about the Prime mini-computers I was using back in '89 having a 50 second log off time. Now if I down my laptop it takes well over a minute.

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

There the new Macs are good. They go to sleep in two seconds. And with a laptop you simple close it.

Anonymous said...

Please, don't even get me started, or I'll be blowing off steam again! ):-(

I still shamelessly enjoy some good 8-bit videogames, one of which is made of chunky square blocks. When computerized stuff is well made, it's well made, period.
And when it's not... well, you do the math.
Don't bother booting up your Losedows PC for this simple operation. :-/

It's no wonder they can make a perfectly decent $100 laptop for the Third World. All it takes is some vigorous spring cleaning in the OS.

I'll stop there, so that I won't need two to three full minutes to shut down. Like my WinXP computer does.

Alex said...

I can close my laptop, and I'm done, but it still takes it a while to sleep or hibernate, or whatever obscure not quite flushed to disk, so don't drop it yet mode it goes into.

One day I closed the case, I was done, then I started to open the case again - log in screen appeared, I closed the case again realising I really was done. Loaded the laptop into my backpack, and drove home. Two hours later I pull this toasty hot machine out of my back pack, only to find the log in screen cannot be "slept" on case close, and the screen does not dim!

Now tell me they ran a full regression on that, or looked at code coverage metrics.

To quote from a programming magazine article "Window applications are immune from memory leaks since programmers can count on regular crashes to automatically release previously allocated RAM."


Anonymous said...

yet still, it's a very lonely world even with this pc shit.

i agree, it's everything and nothing all rolled into one. people abuse it, make money, do schooling, but it's still not the best form of communication.
face to face is better. it's easier to get the real sense from ppl this way.
take pascal from syria, if i were to meet him in person i may not even give him a second thought. he may appear to foreign to me or scarey but on the silent pc he's just another faceless blogger. no offense mr pascal.

Anonymous said...

faceless yedi zookoo said...
"take pascal from syria,"

Um, that's Lebanon actually, my friend. We're not a syrian province... yet! ;-)

Funny thing, really. The other day, I was waiting for the bus, and that lady started chatting with me. She noticed I don't look and talk exactly like a native, because I'm half French, so she asked if I was... syrian!
Be honest with me guys, do I sound Syrian to you? I feel an identity crisis approaching. :o)

None taken, Mr Zookoo.
I'm actually rather baby-faced. Like Michael J. Fox's eternal teenager appearance.
Beats being a Bin Laden look-alike! :-)

I think we become a bit less faceless when we use emoticons. Try it, it's fun.

(Scratches head) Now how on Earth did we arrive here from a discussion on software bloat?

P.S.: I think this universally egalitarian quality of blogging has some advantages, considering we meet people through their ideas instead of their appearances.
Not that I put much trust in internet dating. This only works when people have no powerful incentive to lie.

Cliff Prince said...

"When we compare strictly common, everyday, basic user tasks between the Mac Plus and the AMD we find remarkable similarities in overall speed, thus it can be stated that for the majority of simple office uses, the massive advances in technology in the past two decades have brought zero advance in productivity."

No duh. This is news?

Anonymous said...

Final Identity said...
"No duh. This is news?"

I think this is the definition of "old news".
I love oxymorons! (Well, mostly the oxy part.)

The exponential increase in processor power is nearing its physical limits. I don't exactly expect technology to hit a wall, but trimming the excess fat off Operating Systems is about to become as obvious as limiting CO2.
(Even GW Bush just admitted this was necessary at the G8 summit!)

"Wasting is dumb." Ah figgerd dat one out all by muhself!
Me smart!

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

If a cow is sort of masculine and not too bright, is she an oxy moron?

Cliff Prince said...

No, she's not oxy moron, she's noble.

("no bull," "noble." Get it?)

Anonymous said...

I have yet to hear of a foxy moron.

But with genetic engineering, much is becoming possible.

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

"I have yet to hear of a foxy moron."

Lots of 'em. My first girlfriend was one.

Anonymous said...

You've got a knack for compliments.

Are you two still together?

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

No, she always beat me in board games.

But we were a handsome couple.

Cliff Prince said...

She always beat you in board games, but she was a moron (however foxy)? What level of mental giant does that make you? :)

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

Guess you caught me.

Anonymous said...

Eolake SMASH!
Me like Eolake, he not puny like other humans.

Me hope we can have giant fun together.