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

Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#41

Post by _8ysf »

bilekas wrote: post #31
jerojero wrote: post #6

Just want to say that Discord and Slack do not solve the exact same problem as IRC. And here lies one of the most difficult aspects of protocols versus programs, protocols are much slower to adapt. Discord allows for a ton of functionalities that are not possible natively through IRC and it is a mistake to dismiss them. On the other hand, discord and slack offer pretty much the same things that we already had with MS…

I'm so glad someone brought this up around IRC. As a protocol it's still solid and holds up. It also benefits from p20 functionality. As a stubborn user still today i always cringe a little when I hear that discord is just a better version of IRC.

> It also benefits from p20 functionality.

What's that? p20?

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#42

Post by _8ysf »

krageon wrote: post #33
_8ysf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What key problems do you mean? Does e.g. IRCv3 solve them?

To business people, not having absolute centralised control over clients is a key issue.

You mean the business people working for Slack/Discord, right? I don't get why a company would rely on Slack/Discord, given that those have access to their internal communications.

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#43

Post by 6510 »

_8ysf wrote: post #7
Comevius wrote: post #5

Hardware improvement slowed down considerably in the last 10 years. A Core i7-3970X from 2012 is still comparable to a typical notebook processor, or the fastest smartphone chips today, including the one in the Meta Quest Pro that was just announced. But imagine the same happening between 1992 and 2002. 10 years there meant fundamental incompatibility. A 486 computer with 8 MB RAM and VGA graphics card was already a…

> Hardware improvement slowed down considerably in the last 10 years. But somehow we keep changing smartphones and smart devices every 2 years or so. Is that just marketing, and the fact that older smartphones are obsolete because unsupported (and not because the hardware is not performant enough)? Also didn't hardware get smaller?

I think a thicker phone would exist if the feature and performance enhancements were really needed. I would have to conclude that making them thinner is the only real enhancement we've seen. Every other possible feature is traded away for it. The battery is no bigger, you cant get a headphone jack, you get just one port, no cooler, all because it would add mm's.

Do we need cameras this good? The resolution is fit for a huge display - that no one uses anymore. You would have to go back many generations to find one that takes pictures that are not good enough.

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#44

Post by THENATHE »

As an aside, craigslist is the pinnacle of web design in my eyes, and this concept made me think of how I kinda wish the world would go back to wildly function yet kinda ugly websites over them modern bloated but aesthetic websites we have now.

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#45

Post by cjk »

AlmostAnyone wrote: post #37
cjk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mighty is such a great example of attacking the symptom(s) of the problem ("Chrome/the web is slow") rather than the root cause (rampant page size/complexity bloat, inefficient use of RAM/CPU, etc.). What a waste of talent and money.

How exactly should this talent and money change other's apps and companies? They are solving a problem, you're just talking idealism.

Idealism? Hardly. The fact that anyone thinks that Mighty needs to exist signals a problem with the entire web and/or app development ecosystem, in my opinion.

We should be talking about ways to either 1) make it possible to develop performant and resource-sensitive web apps, or 2) make it dramatically easier to make native/native-feeling apps in a way that doesn’t involve so much legacy cruft.

The lack of a solid reason #2 is why Electron-based apps exist and are thriving. Making native apps for each individual platform is hard and resource-intensive.

I have long been a proponent of native apps, but I will be the first to admit that it’s not that simple for small/resource-limited teams. The rise of Electron/etc. is a failing of the pro-native segment of developers. We need a better alternative.

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#46

Post by AlmostAnyone »

cjk wrote: post #45
AlmostAnyone wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly should this talent and money change other's apps and companies? They are solving a problem, you're just talking idealism.

Idealism? Hardly. The fact that anyone thinks that Mighty needs to exist signals a problem with the entire web and/or app development ecosystem, in my opinion. We should be talking about ways to either 1) make it possible to develop performant and resource-sensitive web apps, or 2) make it dramatically easier to make native/native-feeling apps in a way that doesn’t involve so much legacy cruft. The lack of a solid re…

Sure, it signals a problem - I just don't get what you think this group of people should've done with that problem other than what they're doing. They're solving a real problem with a real solution - you're just talking about what the ideal world would look like, but it's not actionable by a team like Mighty in any way.

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#47

Post by Comevius »

rayiner wrote: post #23
Comevius wrote: post #5

Hardware improvement slowed down considerably in the last 10 years. A Core i7-3970X from 2012 is still comparable to a typical notebook processor, or the fastest smartphone chips today, including the one in the Meta Quest Pro that was just announced. But imagine the same happening between 1992 and 2002. 10 years there meant fundamental incompatibility. A 486 computer with 8 MB RAM and VGA graphics card was already a…

> A Core i7-3970X from 2012 is still comparable to a typical notebook processor, or the fastest smartphone chips today, including the one in the Meta Quest Pro that was just announced. Not really. Compare a E5-2690 (same Sandy Bridge core as the 3970x just a bit lower clock) to a Mac M1: https://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake-ep-vs-amd... versus https://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake-ep-vs-amd…

Sorry, I keep forgetting that a MacBook is considered a typical notebook here, I meant those $400 notebooks people buy for school and such. Obviously for 3 to 7 times as much money you get desktop-level performance, no argument there.

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#48

Post by didgetmaster »

One of the reasons why software is so bloated is because the developers are constantly using it on their high-end machines. When a customer complains that something is slow on their 7-year-old laptop, the developer often just shrugs and says 'works fine for me'.

I routinely run and test my new data management system on old, outdated hardware to insure that the speed is as acceptable as possible even when there are resource constraints. If a big database or file system query runs fast on old hardware, then when someone uses a high-end machine they will be truly amazed.

Re: Ask HN: How would software look if hardware had stopped improving long ago?

#50

Post by buriburi »

I think the software will be better than now, because developers would have had more time to study the specifications of the hardware. The hardware now change too much fast with new drivers, new firmwares, etc. That force the developer to search a solution to fix quickly a problem. But, is this solution the best or more accurate? Well, we never know it because there is another hardware improvement that forces to change the last fix... or worse, change totally a software function with another quick fix. I have in mind the old commodore 64 for example.... You have a good game like Bruce Lee (platform adventure), and Antiriad could be its evolution... Same cpu, ram, etc., but developers learn how to make the most of it. Or maybe I'm too old for this crap. XD
Post reply on HN