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

The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 842 posts

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#121

Post by maccard »

xnorswap wrote: post #105
Gigachad wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I taking crazy pills or are programs not nearly as slow as HN comments make them out to be? Almost everything loads instantly on my 2021 MacBook and 2020 iPhone. Every program is incredibly responsive. 5 year old mobile CPUs load modern SPA web apps with no problems. The only thing I can think of that’s slow is Autodesk Fusion starting up. Not really sure how they made that so bad but everything else seems super s…

It vastly depends on what software you're forced to use. Here's some software I use all the time, which feels horribly slow, even on a new laptop: Slack. Switching channels on slack, even when you've just switched so it's all cached, is painfully slow. I don't know if they build in a 200ms or so delay deliberately to mask when it's not cached, or whether it's some background rendering, or what it is, but it just feel…

I’d take 50ms but in my experience it’s more like 250.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#122

Post by noobermin »

titzer wrote: post #12

I like to point out that since ~1980, computing power has increased about 1000X. If dynamic array bounds checking cost 5% (narrator: it is far less than that), and we turned it on everywhere, we could have computers that are just a mere 950X faster. If you went back in time to 1980 and offered the following choice: I'll give you a computer that runs 950X faster and doesn't have a huge class of memory safety vulnerabi…

The first reply is essentially right. This isn't what happened at all, just because C is still prevalent. All the inefficiency is everything down the stack, not in C.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#123

Post by viraptor »

Gigachad wrote: post #60
_aavaa_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except we've squandered that 1000x not on bounds checking but on countless layers of abstractions and inefficiency.

Am I taking crazy pills or are programs not nearly as slow as HN comments make them out to be? Almost everything loads instantly on my 2021 MacBook and 2020 iPhone. Every program is incredibly responsive. 5 year old mobile CPUs load modern SPA web apps with no problems. The only thing I can think of that’s slow is Autodesk Fusion starting up. Not really sure how they made that so bad but everything else seems super s…

What timescale are we talking about? Many DOS stock and accounting applications were basically instantaneous. There are some animations on iPhone that you can't disable that take longer than a series of keyboard actions of a skilled operator in the 90s. Windows 2k with a stripped shell was way more responsive that today's systems as long as you didn't need to hit the harddrives.

The "instant" today is really laggy compared to what we had. Opening Slack takes 5s on a flagship phone and opening a channel which I just had open and should be fully cached takes another 2s. When you type in JIRA the text entry lags and all the text on the page blinks just a tiny bit (full redraw). When pages load on non-flagship phones (i.e. most of the world), they lag a lot, which I can see on monitoring dashboards.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#124

Post by hombre_fatal »

caseyy wrote: post #91

There is an argument to be made that the market buys bug-filled, inefficient software about as well as it buys pristine software. And one of them is the cheapest software you could make. It's similar to the "Market for Lemons" story. In short, the market sells as if all goods were high-quality but underhandedly reduces the quality to reduce marginal costs. The buyer cannot differentiate between high and low-quality g…

Even if end-users had the data to reasonably tie-break on software quality and performance, as I scroll my list of open applications not a single one of them can be swapped out with another just because it were more performant.

For example: Docker, iterm2, WhatsApp, Notes.app, Postico, Cursor, Calibre.

I'm using all of these for specific reasons, not for reasons so trivial that I can just use the best-performing solution in each niche.

So it seems obviously true that it's more important that software exists to fill my needs in the first place than it pass some performance bar.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#126

Post by bluGill »

ngangaga wrote: post #79
SilverSlash wrote: post #21

The title made me think Carmack was criticizing poorly optimized software and advocating for improving performance on old hardware. When in fact, the tweet is absolutely not about either of the two. He's talking about a thought experiment where hardware stopped advancing and concludes with "Innovative new products would get much rarer without super cheap and scalable compute, of course".

> "Innovative new products would get much rarer without super cheap and scalable compute, of course". Interesting conclusion—I'd argue we haven't seen much innovation since the smartphone (18 years ago now), and it's entirely because capital is relying on the advances of hardware to sell what is to consumers essentially the same product that they already have. Of course, I can't read anything past the first tweet.

There has been a lot of innovation - but it is focused to some niche and so if you are not in a niche you don't see it and wouldn't care if you did. Most of the major things you need have already invented - I recall word processors as a kid, so they for sure date back to the 1970s - we still need word processors and there is a lot of polish that can be added, but all innovation is in niche things that the majority of us wouldn't have a use for if we knew about it.

Of course innovation is always in bits and spurts.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#127

Post by card_zero »

titzer wrote: post #12

I like to point out that since ~1980, computing power has increased about 1000X. If dynamic array bounds checking cost 5% (narrator: it is far less than that), and we turned it on everywhere, we could have computers that are just a mere 950X faster. If you went back in time to 1980 and offered the following choice: I'll give you a computer that runs 950X faster and doesn't have a huge class of memory safety vulnerabi…

I don't trust that shady-looking narrator. 5% of what exactly? Do you mean that testing for x >= start and Or would bounds checking in fact more than double the time to insert a bunch of ints separately into the array, testing where each one is being put? Or ... is there some gimmick to avoid all those individual checks, I don't know.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#128

Post by sgarland »

Gigachad wrote: post #60
_aavaa_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except we've squandered that 1000x not on bounds checking but on countless layers of abstractions and inefficiency.

Am I taking crazy pills or are programs not nearly as slow as HN comments make them out to be? Almost everything loads instantly on my 2021 MacBook and 2020 iPhone. Every program is incredibly responsive. 5 year old mobile CPUs load modern SPA web apps with no problems. The only thing I can think of that’s slow is Autodesk Fusion starting up. Not really sure how they made that so bad but everything else seems super s…

I’m sure you know this, but a reminder that modern devices cache a hell of a lot, even when you “quit” such that subsequent launches are faster. Such is the benefit of more RAM.

I could compare Slack to, say, HexChat (or any other IRC client). And yeah, it’s an unfair comparison in many ways – Slack has far more capabilities. But from another perspective, how many of them do you immediately need at launch? Surely the video calling code could be delayed until after the main client is up, etc. (and maybe it is, in which case, oh dear).

A better example is Visual Studio [0], since it’s apples to apples.

[0]: https://youtu.be/MR4i3Ho9zZY

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#129

Post by bluGill »

bob1029 wrote: post #46

We've been able to run order matching engines for entire exchanges on a single thread for over a decade by this point. I think this specific class of computational power - strictly serialized transaction processing - has not grown at the same rate as other metrics would suggest. Adding 31 additional cores doesn't make the order matching engine go any faster (it could only go slower). If your product is handling fewer…

You are only able to do that because you are doing simple processing on each transaction. If you had to do more complex processing on each transaction it wouldn't be possible to do that many. Though it is hard for me to imagine what more complex processing would be (I'm not in your domain)

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#130

Post by genghisjahn »

caseyy wrote: post #91

There is an argument to be made that the market buys bug-filled, inefficient software about as well as it buys pristine software. And one of them is the cheapest software you could make. It's similar to the "Market for Lemons" story. In short, the market sells as if all goods were high-quality but underhandedly reduces the quality to reduce marginal costs. The buyer cannot differentiate between high and low-quality g…

I have worked for large corporations that have foisted awful HR, expense reporting, time tracking and insurance "portals" that were so awful I had to wonder if anyone writing the checks had ever seen the product. I brought up the point several times that if my team tried to tell a customer that we had their project all done but it was full of as many bugs and UI nightmares as these back office platforms, I would be chastised, demoted and/or fired.
Post reply on HN