Before web tracking webpages would load instantly.
Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
391–400 of 451 posts
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I only hit start when I start driving, and then I don't look at the screen much, since I'm driving.
If you hit start before, it starts talking a lot, and that's annoying.
To be fir, I've never really wanted this feature much, so I haven't tried to find it.
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's pretty normal these days. The cable companies sell the data on what people watch, where the rewind, pause, fast forward, etc...
No, it's absolutely not normal for a regular cable DVR to tie authorization for DVR functionality to an Internet connection.
My last two have been like that. Try unplugging your internet connection then playing something you recorded earlier. If you have an AT&T or DirectTV DVR, it won't play.
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't windows do a type of hibernate rather than a full shutdown.
I see someone mentioned that further down in this thread, but shutdown and reboots are similarly quick for all of my pc's. Even my 12 year old laptop (with SSD) boots Windows 10 in _well_ under a minute, and shuts down and reboots much faster. I also have hibernation disabled, and I've never noticed some obviously large file that might be a hibernation state on my drives (even e.g. removing a drive after a shut down…
I thought I had hibernate disabled, but it seems Windows 10 is sneeky about that:
https://superuser.com/questions/1096371/why-is-windows-hiber...
Still it isn't much longer for me to restart after fully shutting down (with a more recent system and SSD), just more time in Windows and less in the BIOS (and shutdown is instant with "fast startup" turned off, which is better for me since I usually pull the plug after turning it off). About 20 seconds (counting myself, not timed).
Still not as fast as DOS + Windows 3.1 IIRC, but not too bad for turning it on once or twice a day. I have also noticed the many things that have delays now in places there weren't 30 years ago, but I don't think boot times are the best example of this. I might appreciate the twitter rant if not for the completely incorrect diversion about google maps (you can drag parts of the route to make changes and get exact distance, better than paper maps and with much more details about what is nearby). IMO, computer interfaces should have a tool focus, doing basic tasks quickly and reliably so that users can learn to use it like they would a physical tool (while also not making users do extra work that could be done quickly and reliably). Now everything tries to use the network all the time, adding random delays as well as compromising privacy.
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#395Earlier quoted context omitted.
>but I do think Windows seems to do a little better software-wise too Windows 10 does a little trick to speed up boot - when you perform a shutdown, Windows 10 saves a mini-hibernation image to the hibernation file. When you perform normal boot, it can start up quite fast[1]. This gives noticeably shorter boot time especially on spinning rust drives (i know, i know, $CURRENT_YEAR). However if you perform a "reboot" i…
This exact hibernation feature is what I feel is making my shutdowns slower! I've been rocking an M.2 ssd for quite some time now and Win10 _always_ takes a considerate 1-2 minutes to shutdown.
I get 11 seconds to shut down, 11 seconds to boot, on a 256G NVMe ssd. I'm curious what's going on on your machine.
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#396In December of 2018, the average news article took 24 seconds to load, consumed 3.58MB of your data plan, and Google scored it a Speed Index value of 11,721 (a Speed Index of 3,000 or lower is considered good).
It has gotten worse this year.
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#397I feel like it’s a behavior encouraged by Googles Material design or derived projects: slide details in and out of the screen (google maps pin details, for example), hide input boundaries (no border on search text input fields), tons of sporadically placed spinners.
I really dislike that tendency in design and behavior and find it counterproductive.
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your host machine is a real server (eg poweredge), itll do a selftest. This already takes tens of seconds. If you want fast bootup times, you need to be the BIOS. The example in the top post is stuff that either loads data off a flash chip (like a bios works) or a disk (requires some bootstrapping).
What does self-testing cover? RAM? That's something the OS could do as a background task, incrementally making memory available during boot after a chunk has been scanned.
Memory, peripherals, temperatures, fans, disks, network boot.
RAM needs to be learned in, hence ddr first boots take a bit. https://github.com/librecore-org/librecore/wiki/Understandin...
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#399This seems to be conflating several separate problems 1) I can't manipulate data in my resultset well enough in google map. 2) Searches are too slow. 3) Mousing is bad. Now, you can argue that those are related. The first two are an argument for moving away from full-page post/response applications to SPA-style applications where the data is all in browser memory and as you manipulate it you're doing stuff on the cli…
Mousing is bad. It really is a cumbersome tool. I do a lot with my workspaces so that I can avoid using it.
Hmmm
Most Millennials I know who are technical absolutely love mice because they grew up using them, and most of them have extensive PC gaming experience to boot.
I’m the Linux/CLI junky among them and even I don’t find mousing cumbersome—to use someone else’s words, it’s an amazing, first class input device. Same goes for trackballs. By comparison touchscreens are a joke, there’s no depth of input like with a mouse(RMB,LMB,etc) and every action requires large physical movements.
I’m used to seeing people fly through menus with a mouse at speeds people here expect to only to see from keyboard shortcuts. Just because mousing is cumbersome for you, doesn’t means it’s universally true at all. I know keyboard shortcuts are fast, but it’s a lot to memorize compared to menus which typically have the same basic order. File|Edit|View|...|Help
Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
50 cents per unit times several hundreds of millions of units adds up to real money in a hurry. BOM costs make or break mass market hardware products. You don't just add 50 cents of BOM to a mass market item without a real good reason.
> BOM costs make or break mass market hardware products. You don't just add 50 cents of BOM to a mass market item without a real good reason. I guess the question is, why is that so? IMHO, a valid "real good reason" is fixing a product/technological UX regression. However, it seems American business practices have settled on shamelessly selling the cheapest acceptable product for the highest acceptable price. If chea…
Go look at all the failed hardware-based kickstarters for why BOM costs matter.
It has nothing to do with “American Business”. Just a fact of life in a competitive market.
Is it worth spending an extra 2-5 million in tuner chips so 100 million set top boxes can channels can change faster? You tell me?