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

191–200 of 388 posts

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

#191

Post by strictnein »

rsecora wrote: post #185
strictnein wrote: post #157

LOAD"*",8,1 Go get a snack and a drink, walk back to the computer bzz bzzzztttzzzt bzzzz Oh, great, I recognize that noise from the disk drive, it means the game is almost loaded. Just another 30 more seconds.

Right... or it can be even slooooower, you can watch a full "V" episode if you have a Datasette. As you point out, the waiting times were not in the seconds but in the two digit minutes.

Yep.

  PRESS PLAY ON TAPE
Might as well go walk the dog.

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

#192

Post by megous »

ncallaway wrote: post #100
TeMPOraL wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. I'd say the examples are perfectly good and on-point. While dealing with autoexec.bat and random BSODs wasn't fun, it's entirely orthogonal to the fact that a DOS-era POS still offers orders of magnitude better UX than current-era browser POSes, or than most web apps for that matter. It also doesn't change the fact that Google Maps is very bad at being a map . It's entire UI flow is oriented for giving turn-by-t…

> It also doesn't change the fact that Google Maps is very bad at being a map. It's entire UI flow is oriented for giving turn-by-turn directions for people who know where they are and where they are going; As it turns out, that is probably the most popular use case for maps in the world. Note also that for most smartphone users of Google Maps the use-case is actually much broader than that. The UI flow also totally…

That's the major usecase for mobile GMaps, because it absolutely sucks for any other usecase, and thus people can't use it for any other purposes really. Except maybe looking up timetables for a previously known public transport stop (only in certain countries, some have much superior ways to plan public transport travel); planning a transport between two stops if you're not standing at one of them right now probably requires a phd.

Also if your mapping app is good, the people will use it as little as possible. That's certainly my desire as a turist. So maybe perverse incentives are at play, if wrong usage metrics are used to improve the app.

Anyway, I'm used to using paper maps from the childhood, so ergonomics of mobile phone apps is really irritating, because of how paper maps work so much better for me most of the time.

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

#193

Post by webmobdev »

karatestomp wrote: post #74
serverQuestion wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

could you do that in the past though?

I've been using Linux since... oh, 1999 or 2000, and I've never seen a Linux GUI desktop I'd describe as snappy and responsive. The best I've ever achieved is "not incredibly clunky" and that only by ensuring the graphical interface basically did nothing but run the current application or two I had open. I've seen BeOS, QNX, and (Apple) iOS graphical operating systems/environments that were consistently, remarkably s…

Your point about Linux GUIs is quite true. I've found DEs like Gnome and KDE to be more resource intensive and klunky. Some 8 years back, there was only one distro (I forget the name) that used FluxBox that was blazingly responsive but lacked intuitiveness. (I've heard i3 is also very fast, but I have never used it as I don't like tiling WM).

Before corporates entered the Linux market (e.g., Red Hat and Canonical), Linux actually used to be faster than Windows. Today, I find Ubuntu (and most Ubuntu based distros) to be equal or sometimes worse than Windows on the same hardware. It just feels as "weighed down" as Windows.

And yeah, you are absolutely right about BeOS - it felt revolutionary to run two sessions of a movie player on a 200Mhz powered system with 16 MB ram!

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

#194

Post by excerionsforte »

hoorayimhelping wrote: post #35

This post again with its ridiculous ranting examples. "This text searching program that searches text against text is way faster and simpler than a fully rendered, interactive map of the entire world with accurate roads and precision at the foot / meter level." No. Shit, really? Get out of town. Yes, some very popular apps have bad UX. But some apps have incredible UX. Cherry picking the bad ones while ignoring the g…

About printers, it depends on manufacturer. Some printers are easy to setup. I know at the places I used to work whenever I went to printer setup and network I would see the printer very easily.

They say the fastest code is the code not written. I say the best printing is not needing it. I don't have a printer since I only need to print things every once in a while (few times a year). Whenever I need to print, I grab my usb stick put what I need on it and drive off to FedEx or UPS and print out what I need. Point and click, very simple. Cost of printers haven't justified buying one for me since it is a couple cents per year.

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

#195

Post by shadowgovt »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #133
ncallaway wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It also doesn't change the fact that Google Maps is very bad at being a map. It's entire UI flow is oriented for giving turn-by-turn directions for people who know where they are and where they are going; As it turns out, that is probably the most popular use case for maps in the world. Note also that for most smartphone users of Google Maps the use-case is actually much broader than that. The UI flow also totally…

> As it turns out, that is probably the most popular use case for maps in the world. There's a very subtle point the Twitter thread was making here. This use case may be most popular not because it's what the people want, but because it's all that they can easily do . The tools you use shape how you work, and what you can work on. FWIW, I learned to pay attention when the machine doesn't help me do what I want (it's…

> It's the experience for the non-expert users that has degraded in a way they can't fix for themselves.

Why not?

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

#196

Post by ixtli »

I hate to be this guy but there are good points in here so why is there a newline after every sentence? This is not how written english is supposed to work :(

EDIT: Apparently its output from a twitter thread unroller. My point still stands and, ironically, its another example of how randomly smashing a bunch of applications together is broadly a degradation on the status quo.

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

#197

Post by jeffdavis »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #94
michaelfeathers wrote: post #27

When an area of engineering is new we make products better than the market will eventually pay for. Over time, we learn how to make them just good enough to reach an equilibrium in a market. This is an idea that is explored in _The World Without Us_ by Alan Wiesman. The Roman Colosseum still stands, but buildings today don't need to be that durable. It would cost significantly more to make them that way, so we don't.…

The problem is, the market equilibrium is usually the worst possible garbage that's still fit enough for purpose that it won't break (on average) before the warranty period ends. Some of the money you save on this isn't really saved, you just pay for it in having to replace the product sooner, or being constantly stressed and irritated with the quality and fragility of your tooling (it's essentially death by a thousa…

Is that true or does it just seem that way?

Cars today are pretty reliable. Random other stuff seems pretty decent as long as you don't buy the absolute cheapest stuff around. I'm working on a solid wood desk with no nails or screws (it's called a "puzzle" desk because it fits together in a stable configuration without any connectors). I'm looking at a backpack, which I assume is nylon, and it seems pretty tough and has lasted through a few adventures. I'm looking at my metal-framed bookcase, which has fake-wood shelves but it still seems pretty sturdy.

There are certainly some things that seem worse. Furniture is probably worse overall, but that's because good wood is so much more scarce now. If you buy metal/glass furniture than it's fine. There are also some worrisome practices that are pretty widespread, like using plastic-threaded screw holes rather than metal; or just using really cheap metal that can be stripped or cross-threaded easily.

On balance, where are we? I have a feeling that we're basically better off. We remember the old stuff that lasts, and forget about the stuff that breaks (unless it's still celebrated/historical, like the Liberty Bell).

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

#198

Post by zwaps »

This may be related to my bad hardware (which is, albeit, not bad on paper).

However, there used to be a time when websites were fast. Like HN is now.

Now, most "apps" and websites are slow. Some are downright sluggish and unusable.

Maybe I am doing something wrong.

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

#199

Post by arathore »

ixtli wrote: post #196

I hate to be this guy but there are good points in here so why is there a newline after every sentence? This is not how written english is supposed to work :( EDIT: Apparently its output from a twitter thread unroller. My point still stands and, ironically, its another example of how randomly smashing a bunch of applications together is broadly a degradation on the status quo.

The original content was a series of tweets and the link is a website that summarizes long twitter threads, so each newline indicates a follow-up tweet.

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

#200

Post by ThaJay »

Google maps is actually bloody good at just being a map. It's extremely convenient to zoom in and out, click around, view locations, add them to your route, etc. Yes you can up the productivity by using more tabs and that is the standard nowadays because we humans are being trained to be multitasking monsters. Forgive me for ending my read there because to me it just sounds like a rant from a bitter old person that doesn't understand this brave new world any more.
Post reply on HN