Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 451 posts

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#281

Post by chimeracoder »

aurbano wrote: post #238
myself248 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what I usually want to do with maps. I have a route I want to plan, and I want to do more than one thing along my route, or see what else is in the area. It's futile in Google Maps. I see no reason that supporting this thing that old mapping software used to support would elevate it "above" other use cases. If you just want a single route, you do one search and you see the result and you never click t…

Not trying to just nitpick, but if we assume that the Google Maps use research and data from users when planning features then the feature you're after may actually not be very common. And your answer to someone asking "Why do you think that use case is that common?", your first line literally just talks about your use case from your point of view: > This is exactly what _I_ usually want to do with maps. _I_ have a r…

> if we assume that the Google Maps use research and data from users when planning features

Based on what I've seen from Google product design, this is a pretty bold assumption.

While Google has access to unfathomable amounts of data collected from users, it's more than happy to eschew that if the data conflict with higher-level product or company strategy decisions, which generally are much less motivated by raw user data,

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#282

Post by krick »

johnklos wrote: post #140

Even reading that stupid post is slower because the poster can't be bothered with capitalization, punctuation, or complete sentences.

Yeah, this looks like a collection of badly written twits. Who types like that?

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#283

Post by geogra4 »

rayiner wrote: post #263

Computers jumped the shark in 1998. I remember dual-booting NT4 and BeOS on a PII 300 MHz with 64MB of RAM. Connected to a 256 kbps SDSL modem, it’s the best computing experience I’ve ever had. You could do everything you can on a modern machine. Indeed, even more, because the modern versions of software like OneNote and Word are neutered compared to the ‘97 versions. It feels like all of this effort has been spent m…

Yes, that late 90s/early 2000s nirvana. I could perfectly browse the web and write documents and send emails on a PowerMac G3 without too much fuss. Only things like photo/video/audio manipulation were really lacking from machines at the time compared to today.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#284

Post by TeMPOraL »

abnry wrote: post #261
TeMPOraL wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple. Because it got slower over time . All these threads about software being worse and "perceptually slower" than it used to are about regressions . Google Maps and other mentioned tools aren't pushing the envelope. They aren't bleeding edge. They were science fiction made manifest 10-15 years ago, and since then actually decayed in utility, ergonomics and performance. Meanwhile, all the money invested in all the…

I get your point, and it has its merit, but at some point you'd expect things to slow down, right?

My experience makes me expect it, on the theory that popular software sucks and companies building it tend to have broken incentive structures.

It shouldn't be like this in theory. Computers only ever get faster (occasional fixes for CPU bugs notwithstanding). So making software slow down requires active work. So does removing or breaking useful features.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#285

Post by tomc1985 »

PJDK wrote: post #158
hyperdeficit wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't even thought of this specifically, but after it was mentioned in the initial post I realized just how much that is my use case most of the time and how often I am fighting with google maps to accomplish what are relatively simple tasks like adding an additional point along a route. If you are trying to add multiple additional points on a route it gets even worse. This is all much worse on the Android app as…

On android I just (from london) typed "Washington DC to New York" and it instantly popped me up directions for the other side of the world, with two editable boxes. That seems pretty decent UX wise?

That is such a narrow use case. Were you actually planning that trip I am sure you would find the UX lacking.

* What about stops along the way?

* What about saving the results for later?

* What if you want to do some other mapping task in the middle of all this?

* Are the directions given feasible?

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#286

Post by dang »

rohan1024 wrote: post #3

After reading this headline I felt like I was having Deja Vu. I wasn't, it was posted 11 hours ago [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21831931 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15643663 (posted two years ago)

I marked this one as a dupe and was about to merge the threads, but the discussion here actually seems to be better than yesterday's. There's clearly a major appetite for this topic, so perhaps we'll break with normal practice and leave this thread up.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#287

Post by notyourday »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #235
sonofaplum wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think that use case is that common? And why do you think google maps should elevate that particular use case above other competing use cases?

Because it's a map . That's what you do with maps. You browse them, you study them, you mark them up. I use Google Maps almost daily and this is also my complaint. It's not a hyper-specific use case. Google Maps are good for navigating from point A to point B when you are sure of both , but they suck at being a map . For instance, lack of always-on street names and weird POI handling makes them problematic to use whe…

I disagree. That's what we used to do with a map because we did not have information available at our fingertips.

We would study the map ahead of time, based on the map figure out our plan of action by either making mental notes or notes in notepad, or notes on a map and eventually execute our plan based on the information we have selected.

We no longer need to do that. We can decide "I want to do something around X" , go to X and when we want to do something specific ask maps "Where can I find Y around X"?

Ability to drop pins removed the need to study map to complete most of the tasks. When one stumbles upon something interesting while reading a book, watching a show, scrolling through eater, one can drop a pin on a map so next time that person is in the area the pin is there!

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#288

Post by iterati »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #235
sonofaplum wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think that use case is that common? And why do you think google maps should elevate that particular use case above other competing use cases?

Because it's a map . That's what you do with maps. You browse them, you study them, you mark them up. I use Google Maps almost daily and this is also my complaint. It's not a hyper-specific use case. Google Maps are good for navigating from point A to point B when you are sure of both , but they suck at being a map . For instance, lack of always-on street names and weird POI handling makes them problematic to use whe…

That's what Google's "My Maps" does. It allows you to mark up a map. I've used it for planning trips frequently to mark places of interest and then used that map to plan my trip using regular ol' Maps for the turn-by-turn.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#289

Post by iterati »

zelos wrote: post #164
UI_at_80x24 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Selecting/Creating waypoints has been a digital mapping-feature of every service/tool I have used since digital mapping/navigation became a thing. From garmin hand-held off-road GPS topo navigation systems to units used for fishing to hiking/biking. It has been a cornerstone of digital navigation since the things were invented. To claim that it's an edge-case ignores history and instead highlights how _you_ use the t…

Search along route is surprisingly hard to get right. Results near to the route geographically are not necessarily near in terms of disruption to your route (other side of a river, wrong side of a highway etc.) To add to the "things are getting worse" narrative, we implemented this properly back in the days when sat navs were still relatively exciting things. Last I saw the algorithm was to do a lightweight route pla…

The Android app will show you how much each search result along the destination will add to your route. It also shows the gas prices if you're looking for fuel.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#290

Post by sangnoir »

BurningFrog wrote: post #251
sangnoir wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The process you WANT: pick your start and end. now start searching for places in between. Your start and end are saved. When you find someplace interesting, add it to your list. Keep doing that, keep searching and adding Am I missing something - this use-case is already supported! You choose start & endpoints, then your start the trip (which "saves" them) - you can now search and add as many waypoints as you desire

I've been using Google Maps since it launched, and had no idea this is how it works! One important factor in a good UI is that it is discoverable ! If you build an amazing feature but forget to inform the user about it, you've wasted the work.

I discovered this by myself - I mean, the search button is right there! I must have been in the middle of a trip & searched for something, which pops up an "Add Stop" button. I think it's pretty discoverable.
Post reply on HN