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

Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

forrestheller.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 210 posts

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#121

Post by rasz »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #118
xp84 wrote: post #114

I'd like to also see an article examining these computing power attributes on the piece of garbage embedded computer on the front of the gas pumps where the lag between registering every keypress is like 800ms, and every screen redraw takes about 2000ms. It takes me an extra 60 seconds to get gas now thanks to how slow these things are, and it is nearly universal despite whether they appear to be 20 year old or new d…

> I bet they run Java Probably Electron apps.

probably a remote session to node.js app

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#122

Post by kraig911 »

xp84 wrote: post #114

I'd like to also see an article examining these computing power attributes on the piece of garbage embedded computer on the front of the gas pumps where the lag between registering every keypress is like 800ms, and every screen redraw takes about 2000ms. It takes me an extra 60 seconds to get gas now thanks to how slow these things are, and it is nearly universal despite whether they appear to be 20 year old or new d…

I think they run slower the hotter or colder it is outside.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#123

Post by [deleted] »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #118
xp84 wrote: post #114

I'd like to also see an article examining these computing power attributes on the piece of garbage embedded computer on the front of the gas pumps where the lag between registering every keypress is like 800ms, and every screen redraw takes about 2000ms. It takes me an extra 60 seconds to get gas now thanks to how slow these things are, and it is nearly universal despite whether they appear to be 20 year old or new d…

> I bet they run Java Probably Electron apps.

[deleted]

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#124

Post by Implicated »

xp84 wrote: post #114

I'd like to also see an article examining these computing power attributes on the piece of garbage embedded computer on the front of the gas pumps where the lag between registering every keypress is like 800ms, and every screen redraw takes about 2000ms. It takes me an extra 60 seconds to get gas now thanks to how slow these things are, and it is nearly universal despite whether they appear to be 20 year old or new d…

I think about this every time I used one of these machines... isn't it in the businesses best interest to get people through as fast as possible? I have the same experience at grocery stores and convenience stores, I'm always amazed at how slow the machines are with such seemingly simple tasks.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#125

Post by int_19h »

pvg wrote: post #95
wwweston wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some languages (other than its own instructions) that 6502 is friendly to?

BASIC, arguably. People often say C is 'high level assembly' but in some ways BASIC is closer with the absence of block structure, scopes, etc. Control flow in a BASIC (basic BASIC, not fancy newer BASIC) program ends up looking a lot like that in an assembly one.

Given that all that high-level control flow is rewritten into gotos anyway, why would that make a difference in general, or specifically for 6502?

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#126

Post by kumarvvr »

xp84 wrote: post #114

I'd like to also see an article examining these computing power attributes on the piece of garbage embedded computer on the front of the gas pumps where the lag between registering every keypress is like 800ms, and every screen redraw takes about 2000ms. It takes me an extra 60 seconds to get gas now thanks to how slow these things are, and it is nearly universal despite whether they appear to be 20 year old or new d…

Even my car has a touchscreen that requires, on average about 1 second to register a touch.

I mean, a replacement capacitive touch screen for my samsung mobile is like 2000 Rs. (30 USD)

Its frustrating how far we have come and yet how behind we are.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#127

Post by kumarvvr »

kraig911 wrote: post #122
xp84 wrote: post #114

I'd like to also see an article examining these computing power attributes on the piece of garbage embedded computer on the front of the gas pumps where the lag between registering every keypress is like 800ms, and every screen redraw takes about 2000ms. It takes me an extra 60 seconds to get gas now thanks to how slow these things are, and it is nearly universal despite whether they appear to be 20 year old or new d…

I think they run slower the hotter or colder it is outside.

But why? It's not like running at 20 MHz is going to produce an exponential amount of heat in the processor.

I mean, an ESP32 module runs at about 160 MHz, and using it with a capacitive touch screen almost as smooth as in a mobile.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#128

Post by judge2020 »

Implicated wrote: post #124
xp84 wrote: post #114

I'd like to also see an article examining these computing power attributes on the piece of garbage embedded computer on the front of the gas pumps where the lag between registering every keypress is like 800ms, and every screen redraw takes about 2000ms. It takes me an extra 60 seconds to get gas now thanks to how slow these things are, and it is nearly universal despite whether they appear to be 20 year old or new d…

I think about this every time I used one of these machines... isn't it in the businesses best interest to get people through as fast as possible? I have the same experience at grocery stores and convenience stores, I'm always amazed at how slow the machines are with such seemingly simple tasks.

The machines on brand new gas stations and self-checkouts are much faster [also support mobile payment], but performing upgrades to older systems usually isn't worth the cost since they're only at max. throughput for a few hours every week, if that.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#129

Post by NegativeLatency »

aasasd wrote: post #84

Forget AGC: Cypress CYPD4225's clock rate is higher than that of Playstation 1 (48 MHz vs 33). However, I don't see graphics specs here so there's room for growth.

Might be hard to compare since the PS1 had a custom cpu arch designed specifically for 3D graphics. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_technical_specif...

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer vs. USB-C Chargers

#130

Post by perl4ever »

goatsi wrote: post #55
kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given your comment is the top comment, could you clarify if there was any point behind your seemingly irrelevant anecdote other than performing a drive-by dump on Google? Edit: it looks like the user was writing in good faith. I am sorry for over-reacting.

Why do you see that comment as dumping on Google? I see it as complementing them for taking the time to optimize the hardware rather than just throwing a larger chip at it.

Obviously Google has a lot of really smart engineers internally, but they still outsource stuff. If you're working in a field that involves data processing, and you are always thinking "this is basically just search, I wonder how Google would do it and why they don't" and then one day you get Google as a customer it realigns your thinking. But then Google turns out to be different from other customers - even when they rely on outside expertise, they seem unusually efficient at it.

I think it's interesting not just if you're interested in Google, but to contemplate what the limitations of talent and intelligence are, and how they can be utilized in unexpected ways. And what synergies exist between the people at the very top of a field and those who aren't.

Post reply on HN