 |
| A Commodore 64 that is still in operation as POS system at a car mechanic shop in Russia. |
Everything is bloated to fit the accelerated seemingly unlimited resources we have today compared to our past. The curve of tech pack in punch may soon reach a threshold of physical limits, where our emotions towards the system start to effect the outputs towards instability due to the transistor sizes entering the quantum in-deterministic realm.
When we observe the function vs the efficiency of executing that function we find that operation of computers are slowing us down despite the irony of having exponentially more resources and processing power.
A system of 12 years ago is not much more in performance to a system today in terms of resources and processing power -- compare that to a system 12 years ago vs 20 years ago, and you will run into some serious limits with the same software.
The situation of sluggish computers at, for example support call centers is experienced by everyone: generalized as bloat! No one company that produces software and OS is concerned about the art of writing software---and hardly no one except for embedded systems touches an assembly language any more. It's just not market profitable to spend more money making code tighter than it is to just maximize doing the code quickly at the expense of expending more of the consumer system resources.
The idea of doing more with less is under-appreciated today when it comes to computing. A task given to a Commodore 64 that is the same task on a modern mid-range computer today; you will find that the computer today will take longer, for example to be ready for the user input, among other qualities that are just not as responsive to an antiquated system design in comparison.
Some examples of this as of the recent decade is the failure of BlackBerry (BBMo) to maintain a profitable market share. While the iPhone came out with a multi-touch slate and exponential resources compared to say a BlackBerry Curve running BBOS with just 32mb of working memory, the market shifted to the more bloatful, seemingly more delightful iPhone iOS platform. People were sold on faster processor and more memory as well as a decent camera. Yet despite marketing direction, people who relied on the BlackBerry Curves and Bolds to do business where the BBOS had a much more efficient design to do all the same functions of the new iPhone, they were left with what was then marketwise an antiquated device that soon lost support with a costly phone to maintain by BlackBerry Limited.
What can we learn from this situation?! Marketing appeal to our glut rather than our gut wins the marketshare with the group-think mentalities acting on the appearances of better, more and glitter.
Smart companies that still use antiquated system designs include hardware stores like Lowe's and some grocers and banks, that while upgrading their hardware they choose to telnet into the same software (such as Genesis) that they've been using since the mid-1980s. That is smart because they know that simple is faster, better and reliable. Much of the I.T. maintenance market today relies on the failures of new software. You don't need an I.T. department to maintain the system software of an antiquated system. You may just need to consult an I.T. firm once in a while to maintain the hardware and hardware upgrades.
A system of 12 years ago is not much more in performance to a system today in terms of resources and processing power -- compare that to a system 12 years ago vs 20 years ago, and you will run into some serious limits with the same software.
The situation of sluggish computers at, for example support call centers is experienced by everyone: generalized as bloat! No one company that produces software and OS is concerned about the art of writing software---and hardly no one except for embedded systems touches an assembly language any more. It's just not market profitable to spend more money making code tighter than it is to just maximize doing the code quickly at the expense of expending more of the consumer system resources.
The idea of doing more with less is under-appreciated today when it comes to computing. A task given to a Commodore 64 that is the same task on a modern mid-range computer today; you will find that the computer today will take longer, for example to be ready for the user input, among other qualities that are just not as responsive to an antiquated system design in comparison.
Some examples of this as of the recent decade is the failure of BlackBerry (BBMo) to maintain a profitable market share. While the iPhone came out with a multi-touch slate and exponential resources compared to say a BlackBerry Curve running BBOS with just 32mb of working memory, the market shifted to the more bloatful, seemingly more delightful iPhone iOS platform. People were sold on faster processor and more memory as well as a decent camera. Yet despite marketing direction, people who relied on the BlackBerry Curves and Bolds to do business where the BBOS had a much more efficient design to do all the same functions of the new iPhone, they were left with what was then marketwise an antiquated device that soon lost support with a costly phone to maintain by BlackBerry Limited.
What can we learn from this situation?! Marketing appeal to our glut rather than our gut wins the marketshare with the group-think mentalities acting on the appearances of better, more and glitter.
Smart companies that still use antiquated system designs include hardware stores like Lowe's and some grocers and banks, that while upgrading their hardware they choose to telnet into the same software (such as Genesis) that they've been using since the mid-1980s. That is smart because they know that simple is faster, better and reliable. Much of the I.T. maintenance market today relies on the failures of new software. You don't need an I.T. department to maintain the system software of an antiquated system. You may just need to consult an I.T. firm once in a while to maintain the hardware and hardware upgrades.
