Reminder that we are wasting more resources to do the same

>>58799401
Now with improved shaders/animations/java popups/active desktops/touchscreen and reduced documentation.

File: win10-ads.png (56KB, 500x366px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 500x366px

>>58799441
and extra ads.

Watch the exact same people that bash Apple and others rationalize this, OP.
Yeah, we have been wasting resources for literally no reason but >muh looks, but some people here will go through hoops and bounds in order to justify that stupidity.

File: 220px-Boulier1.jpg (10KB, 220x165px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 220x165px

>>58799401
Reminder we are wasting more resources to do the same thing since 2300 BC

File: ULUS10442_00000.jpg (168KB, 1440x816px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1440x816px

>>58799401
gotta sell that new hardware

>>58799401
>implying modern computers use more power than 1995 counterparts.

>>58799480
Does it run office or similar software? Does it give you an easy WYSIWYG interface to write your documents on it? No? Windows 95 had Office 97 (Office 95 was trash).

>>58799401
1 second of 320x240 30FPS raw video = ~8,8 MB.
1 second of 1920x1080 30FPS raw video = ~237 MB.
It's not hard to get back in 1995, just lower the quality of multimedia.

>>58799496
>implying they don't

>>58799525
kys

>>58799544
What makes you think it takes an OS consuming 1GB RAM to play video?

>>58799401
I doubt you could have done the real time botnet computer vision features in 1995.

>>58799636
Bufferisation.

Luckily on a free as in freedom operating system, you can enable or disable unnecessary visual effects, switch between desktop environments, or use no desktop environment at all - all at your leisure. Not the case with Windows, which doesn't even come with the classic theme as a second option anymore.

>>58799699
Tell that to my Android phone.
1.6GB RAM on boot.

>>58799717
Android isn't free as in freedom.

>>58799614
>kys
kyss

everything is now built on abstractions upon abstractions by lazy and/or incompetent programmers, thus demanding a fuckload more resources to accomplish the same thing as before.

do you think anyone still writes software in pure C + WinAPI as in Win95 days?

>>58799728
Yes it is.

>>58799786
Not enough free.

>>58799401
Mostly for idiots to do useless things really fast or to make more mistakes. But they look good while doing it...they believe.

>>58799804
But it is free. So why hasn't it been fixed?

>>58799892
Because it's a Java VM on top of another VM on top of Google's shitty APIs.

Because it's actually proprietary software with free blobs on it.

>>58799941
Then why hasn't anyone made a fork of Linux to give 100% of the features of Android with 5% of the memory?
This "free as in freedom" thing doesn't seem to work too well.

>>58799676
You only need 237MB of the total system ram to buffer the entire video. What part of that requires the OS to consume another 1GB of RAM?

Reminder that GUI is a forced meme and CLI is more productive.

>>58799401
>2017
>not using kernelex to run modern apps on win95 so you can play your 1 second 237mb hd video file

>>58799653
Virii, but the ones created and spread were pretty "innocent" versions compared to today's malware. Mostly done to get a cheap laugh, but yeah a botnet could be done at that time.

>>58799762
No, actually that was pretty predictable when I first learned the basics of programming.

>#include <iostream.h>

Everything went downhill from then on.

>>58799699
Not even the most barebones distro, customized to work for your hardware with -march=native and all that crap can achieve what Windows 95 achieved with less than 200MB. The Kernel alone is bloated as fuck, so is X. Kill yourself with your freetard cult.

>>58799471
>>muh looks

Even that is not even a big deal. Most of the "bloat" comes from lazy programming. They can't sell you the same program, so they have to change it. Change costs money so they do it cheap. And the more the do it, the shittier it gets.

>>58799401
All those resources at your fingertips, and you just use it to shitpost.

>have more RAM than you could possibly imagine
>OS wants to occupy half of it inexplicably
>browser wants to consume 130MB - 200MB to render a each single webpage because websites are full of shit and love to pull in scripts from 40 different domains
just fuck this "modern" world

>>58799960
>what is Sailfish
>what is Tizen
>what is Ubuntu Mobile
>what is Firefox OS

>inb4 "b-but they're not compatible with muh appppps"

Yeah, that's the point. Creating Androids compatible APIs is not practical and introduces several performance problems (even Microsoft discarded this idea. Yet they implemented a GNU compatibility layer on Windows).

The lack of appppppps means lack of support and lack of sales, which in turn means development is slow and no company wants to make phones with these OS; but they're there.

>>58799960
Why don't you do it?

>>58800448
>OS wants to occupy half of it inexplicably
this has to do with paging, the more ram you have the more windows will keep in ram instead of backed by disk

>>58799480
/thread

>>58800522
What the fuck is it keeping around? Superfetch is off, everything's off. It just sits there after a fresh boot consuming half my RAM.

File: iu.png (42KB, 300x222px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 300x222px

>>58799401
My wife and I talk about this quite a bit really. It's fucking pathetic.

Most of the CPU cycles used these days are on Javascript. We'd be better served by desktop applications when necessary, and nice static HTML 1.0-style web sites and even Gopher.

Yes there is a Gopherchan.

>>58800142
The distro I'm using now (LXpup), along with common computing tasks such as internet browsing, uses an average of 300MB of RAM at present, out of 512 available on the ancient laptop I'm using it on and it runs fine. This is with X and the """"bloated"""" Linux kernel, and GTK and all of the other somewhat bloated bits and gubbins. If I scale back a little, I can easily use less than 200 if I wanted to. So yes, you can replicate what Windows 95 did and more, with Linux.

>>58800555
how much ram do you have? I have 64gb and it's using 11gb with a ton of shit open.

so when an binary is running and a memory page hasn't been used for a while, it gets pushed to your page file in c:/ and cleared out of physical ram, which retaining it's virtual mapping in process. if you have a shitload of ram open, windows will hold off on this process and keep it in memory as loading it from disk when it gets reaccessed is slow af

>>58800635
8GB. There is nothing running except the OS.

>>58800555
Modern OS's, even Windows (finally) will try to use plenty of RAM for caches, opening files that you frequently use, who knows on that platform.

When you launch a program and it needs RAM, Windows will take some of this stuff out of memory, flush caches, discard pre-loaded files or segments, etc. Don't worry too much about it, or learn a lot more and stop being worried either way.

>>58800516
No motivation to make and sell a proper proprietary OS. The money I could make really isn't worth that much to me.
And the "working for free" of freetardism is of course completely ridiculous.

>>58800673
weird, all my w10 vms run on 4gb max, with visual studio open in them

>>58800673
>as much of the CLR as it can fit into RAM
>same with any other APIs the OS uses
>etc

>>58800697
It doesn't flush a fucking thing. I often run out of RAM and the OS never courteously makes way for actually useful programs. Funnily enough this is never a problem on non-Windows OSes.

>>58800712
I don't understand how this shit is so insanely large. I'm a programmer and I'm always baffled when I see the APIs and things like the .NET framework being hundreds of megabytes per version.

Software development is seriously rotten, it's as if companies strive to hire the incompetent.

>>58800626
Are you talking less than 200 MB of RAM or disk space usage?

>>58799401
I'll never forget the based Windows XP SP3 Black Edition, an actually reliable Lite Version of Windows XP.

>>58799480
horrendous false equivalency

>>58800701
>What?! You built your own house?
>YOU MEAN YOU WORKED FOR FREE!!!?!?

>>58800749
>Software development is seriously rotten, it's as if companies strive to hire the incompetent.
They are called H1B visa holders you racist white male cis scum. check your privilege.

>>58801228
Why haven't you built yourself a Ferrari? Get to mining the ore.

>>58799544
video is one of the few areas where the resource demand is justifiable

>>58800701
Well, you know why no one has done it then.

>>58799468

Stop being a retard and remove the default applications sperg.

>>58801457
a quick google will show you that pic does not come from my pc.

>>58800565
javascript is ruining the web, and so is infiniscroll
webpages used to be so simple and easy to load and navigate. now you can barely do that on a single core processor (which you could back in 1998)

>>58801457
Stop being a retard and remove the default OS from your laptop sperg.

>>58800565
I've been playing around with Gopher for a bit now, and have been wondering if it's worth trying to revive some of Gopher+.

There's a few examples of *chans (text/image boards) on Gopher but Gopher0 (non +) is lacking in user input as I've learned from making my own chan.

Gopher+ adds forms much like HTML forms but it seems like the original UMN gopher (client) and gopherd (server) are the only ones that actually support Gopher+.

You can look at some of the experimenting I've been doing at gopher://khzai.net/1/chan (or http://khzai.net/1/chan converts the Gopher menus to HTML) but there's definitely a limitation around user input, which is why the real Gopherchan uses telnet + a Python script for posting.

>>58800765
RAM. Although disk space usage can also be around the same marker if you go with frugal install.

File: 9958a41f32045057d2fd08d419dd27fd.jpg (26KB, 574x400px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 574x400px

Reminder that we are wasting more resources to do the same thing since forever.

>>58800565
>and nice static HTML 1.0-style web sites and even Gopher.
Don't need to be that drastic about it, you can make some decently styled static pages with current practices that run great on all kinds of systems.

>>58802015
No you can't. Not with industry standard practices. You need something that twenty years ago could serve a thousand Unix shell users.

>>58802226
You don't need to load something to the brim with frivolous client-side scripts but you don't need to go cold turkey and revert to the limited and shitty looking plaintext web either. The internet isn't about "just getting the information across" anymore, and we're never going back to that point.

A little CSS and JS where it improves quality of life never hurt anybody.

>>58802277
>need to
Then why does everybody do this?

The only solution is to take away client-side scripting entirely.

File: IMG_4511.jpg (93KB, 460x345px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 460x345px

>>58799699
Shut the fuck up you lousy cunt. Your just angry because some jock in high school rubbed dogshit in your cut and your looking to get revenge.

>>58801806
We're currently spending resources on breaking that cycle.

>>58802637
No we're not. Even if some person did develop some method of immortality (they won't), it would be for the elites. Giving immortality to everyone would ruin the world economy, given it's based on the fact that people are born, live an average of 70-80 years then die, giving up their space for somebody else to work and live in.

>>58802681
I think he's trying to say that we're slowly killing ourselves.

>>58802681
Economies adapt, and anyway, just work on not being a poorfag when that becomes available to the rich.

I suspect they'll sell immortality like a house loan. You'll be paying it off for another 100 years.

>>58799496
A lot of them do

It's amazing how many computers that were quite expensive and powerful in their day carried 160, 120, even 80 watt rated power supplies

Good thing my computer is 100x more powerful than it was in 1995.

>>58802372
>Then why does everybody do this?
Because it looks nice and professional, and thus appealing to potential customers and users who, regardless of whether it's rational or not, will naturally place more trust in a website that looks like it has its shit together and a dedicated team behind it that cares about it.
>The only solution is to take away client-side scripting entirely.
No, taking away functionality you barely understand because it hurts your feelings and/or doesn't jerk off your nostalgic idealism is not a solution. Once again, the web is not a pure text/information platform anymore, and it never will be again.

>>58802699
You can't be immortal, even if your body doesn't die your mind inevitably will reach it's maximum capacity.

You'll have a hard time not going mad.

>>58803170
It'll be a long time until that happens. I'm sure we'll figure out how to backup and erase memories sometime in the next couple hundred years.

>>58799480
> shake shake shake
There goes all your data.

>>58799401
If your CPU and GPU aren't both at 100%, you're wasting resources. Last I checked you didn't need to max your system to run a UI, even on modern operating systems.

>>58799468
>using more than 100mb ram idle
kys

>you can make pages look good in HTML 1.1
bring me a perfect exact pixel by pixel simulation of the 4chan css SANS any javascript OR css by monday, stat

>>58804522
b8 but i will bite: a 586 would be enough for the average user.and such hardware would barely surpass 2W with the technology we have nowadays. the environmental impact would be much smaller too.

>>58799401
reminder that everything is running in the universe since time immemorial but you still only use mostly your eyes to look at 2D women

>>58804671
How is it bait? Every bit of processing power is a resource available to you. If you're not using it, you're wasting it.

>>58804522

Better off having them at a constant 99% knowing that your hardware is always a bit faster than the task at hand so it isn't a bottleneck to productivity.

>>58799401
Advanced hardware allows for terrible programmers to be inefficient and retarded with code.

This is even more self-evident in Windows
GNU/Linux is lil bit better

>>58799699
BASED

>>58805278
>GNU/Linux is lil bit better
Hardly actually.
Due to the monolithic nature of Linux kernel the performance of it decreases with every version and noone knows what to do with it.

We should've listened to tanenbaum.
Microkernel had it's disadvantages in the era of old where computers were slow and switching took time.
But now it would've been a blessing.

>>58800565
God, that chan is awesome to use compared to modern bloated chans

>>58800749
Stop using Windows

>>58805332
Kernel is only monolithic if you choose it to be. Use modules. When compiling your kernel, anything not needed before mounting the / partition can be made a module instead of built in.

>>58800565
That's overshooting in the other way.

There are tons of websites that serve simple text based and image based content that run with abysmal performance because of js and other frameworks stacked on one another.

You can make an attractive and functional websites (even add some waterworks and other graphical doodads) with html5 and css.

But you have to know how.
And that's not what they teach in webdev.

>>58805332
>Due to the monolithic nature of Linux kernel the performance of it decreases with every version and noone knows what to do with it.
>We should've listened to tanenbaum.
>Microkernel had it's disadvantages in the era of old where computers were slow and switching took time.
>But now it would've been a blessing.

Could you link some reading about this?

>>58800029
so called decompression

>>58799786
It isn't. That's why Replicant was made.

>>58799480
>>58801162 this.

>>58805484
>what is AOSP

>>58799728
Android is free, google's android distribution isn't.

>>58799960
Considering that Android is the most used operating system on the planet, it's doing well enough.

>>58800468
Sailfish has android app support.

>>58803257
>literally hard drives

>>58805503
AOSP still needs drivers to run, you idiot. The only devices with open-source drivers are the ones supported by Replicant.

>>58805748
Drivers aren't a part of the OS; they're supplements to it.

File: you win.jpg (42KB, 720x439px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 720x439px

>>58805764
Alright then.

>>58802743
We're currently going down the bell curve. PCs have maxed out about 6+ years ago when a really high-end system could draw over 1000w, which is where we see all these massive monster cases from that time period, like the 900D and Cosmos 2.

Today there is almost no real difference between an ITX system little bigger than a game console and a typical desktop, which itself has shrunk as well with cases like the Define C and S340, as drive cages are becoming irrelevant. You can have SLI with ATX, but really, even one fast card can do anything short of absurdly high resolutions and refresh rates.

All-in-all 500w is enough for a high-end system today, and it's just going to go down as time goes on, since performance seems to be at a standstill.

>>58801718
even my sandy bridge from 2012 struggles with JavaShit-heavy websites written by incompetent pajeets and millennials with hipster glasses

>>58805870
Now imagine what I feel browsing the "modern web" with my decade old core2duo

>>58802372
just look at how websites were done in the early 2000s. they were good-looking and used CSS and sometimes JS, but you could still view them just fine on a toaster. in the mid-2000s AJAX started gaining popularity, which improved site functionality without too much performance penalty.

JavaScript in moderation can be good, but web devs started going full retard after 2007.

>>58805895
I can imagine, since I had to overclock the E2180 in my secondary PC to 3.0GHz just so I could browse the web, and that's with noscript and ublock.

gone are the C2D days of 10 years ago when even an Athlon XP was plenty enough for web browsing.

>>58799401

"But anon we need all those graphics and transitions else normies are going to say our app sucks even though those graphics and transition lag the fuck out and make the app slower to use because of all the fade-in-fade-out interruptions"

Every manager at every app company these days

Usenet, email, and irc have been more or less the same for the last two decades.

>>58807075
I still dont' get what usenet is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts96J7HhO28

>>58807080
Think a distributed forum with ten thousand boards, and posts that look a bit like email.

It's true that it's a bit hard to get into.

>>58805662
underrated

>>58803257
kek