Why is retro computing so comfy?

File: printer.jpg (89KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 800x600px

>>59052767
idk but I enjoy it too.

File: goldrush.png (8KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 640x400px

>>59052767
The world was a better place back then. a simpler time when things made more sense.

wealreadyahve a retor hread

>>59052824
are you OK?

File: download (1).jpg (14KB, 260x194px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 260x194px

Your retro can sucked it

>>59052767
it's impractical and stupid and the opposite of comfy

>>59052872
"Suck" auto correction

>>59052893
Nothing impractical or stupid about it if you know how to use it, time to start thinking outside of the browser.

>>59052767
Because software was smaller and less bloated. These days a file manager will eat half a gig of RAM in the background.

TLDR Pajeets started coding

Interfaces tended to be more functional and compact. These days it's more about whitespace and abstractness.

>>59053348
being this stuck in the past and being so insecure that you find any reason to try be different to others

>>59053624
>hurr it eats all my ram!! XDDD

anon you know software is designed to use as much ram as possible right? unused ram is wasted ram. if you didn't have half a gig free your file manager wouldn't use that much, but if it's there then why not?

>>59053926

Thats complete bullshit, programs are bloated and thus consume more ram than needed.
It completely defeats the purpose of
>hurrr muh open sores
if one has to navigate on megabytes and megabytes of redundant and overcomplicated code.
Try decoding the mess that is OpenSSL or OpenCV.

>>59053926
So memory leaks = good?

>>59054844
Kernel hacker here. You havent the slightest clue what you're complaining about. It's like the anon you're replying to said. We make use of "free" RAM to speed up an unimaginable amount of programs and it's invisible to userspace due to the magic of virtual memory. I'd bet money you'd cry a lot more if your "riced out" system suddenly crawled to a halt when your programs were forced to reload shit from slow ass non-volatile media or godforbid the network. I bet you don't know how to read the memory usage report. tldr fuck you.

File: IMG_9070.jpg (90KB, 610x458px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 610x458px

>>59053926
Excuses, we're using 8GB of RAM to do essentially exactly what we did in 1993 with 8MB RAM.

It is the fault of Pajeets and Universities alike. They wanted a bunch of fuckin' CIA nigger cattle and that's what they got.

>>59052767
linux world is my sanctified place of refuge

File: fos.png (10KB, 720x402px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 720x402px

>>59054954

What kernel hacker? I'm writing my own kernel for Forth and it takes <70k to hold the entire OS and that is with ps/2, IDE, graphics mode and a simple USB interface.
See this? 38k kernel and I can perfectly understand how its made not to mention its BLAZING FUCKING FAST.
Of course you would argue for pajeet code because what you've been "hacking" has been shit right from the start.

>>59053926
>anon you know software is designed to use as much ram as possible right? unused ram is wasted ram. if you didn't have half a gig free your file manager wouldn't use that much, but if it's there then why not?
That's only true for mobile OS's like Android. Windows doesn't work like that.

>>59055083
LOL we've all gone through the Forth phase in our lives kiddo. We've all implemented it. We'll be waiting for you when you grow up from your toy.

>>59055083
>I'm writing my own kernel
REKT

>>59055144

Sure thing "gramps", write back when you can actually implement it and not run crying to shitnux.

Personally I feel there is something beautiful in being able to use something which is generally considered to be obsolete for a legitimate purpose but it is becoming harder and harder to do.

fannying around with your collection of old computers is just exactly that, if you enjoy it good for you but it's not "retro computing" as it you're achieving anything.

>>59055025
>we're using 8GB of RAM to do essentially exactly what we did in 1993 with 8MB RAM.
how young do you have to be to post drivel like this and actually believe it?

>>59055163
>every OS sux guys but I hand coded one in forth and it rocks

>>59052897
>irony

File: 1473740757025.jpg (11KB, 236x217px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 236x217px

>>59053876
projecting your need for constant validation on others so hard

>>59055225

>I "hack" the lenix kernel because I am incapable of understanding how to make an OS in less than a gazillion lines of code

>>59055163
>shitnux

In short, at least give the penguin a fair viewing. If you still don't
like it, that's ok: that's why I'm boss. I simply know better than you
do.

Linus "what, me arrogant?" Torvalds

File: mfw_they_still_use_fossil_fuel.jpg (315KB, 1393x838px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1393x838px

>>59055083
Yeah because your retard-os can totally be compared to modern, functional, productive, graphical desktop operating systems.

A Linux kernel running on modern arm chips uses about 16mb of RAM with basic userspace tools and a fully functional UNIX shell.
> bloated
Kill yourself

>>59055083
>not to mention its BLAZING FUCKING FAST.
but for what is it actually fast, have you done anything truly useful with it, as in beyond hello world-tier, small dataset problems? there's a lot of lightweight operating systems out there, and there's a reason they aren't prevalent; because they're shit for doing anything more than dicking around

>>59055083
>I can perfectly understand it

Every neet's unfinished project ever.

>>59055302
this is lewd

>>59055310

Thats the point, one cant give linux a fair review because its so goddamn big, not windows tier but still.

Like I said, that defeats the purpose of open source, you have all the code but its no use short of divinating on it.

>>59055360
https://github.com/ReturnInfinity/BareMetal-OS
This runs 1000x faster than linux and with 1/10th of the resources and can be understood fairly easily.

>>59055382
>>59055390
>all this butthurt
>wahhh muh linx
Dont you guys suck Terry A. Davis' dick? Im just putting into practice what he says.

>>59055427
>This runs 1000x faster than linux and with 1/10th of the resources and can be understood fairly easily.
again: what can it actually do
nobody's butthurt here, we're laughing at how much those nostalgia goggles blind you

>>59055511

For one its used for physics simulations and number crunching replacing old FORTRAN programs.

Also, what nostalgia goggles? What works better simply does.
Take that screencap I posted and just do the graphics mode code, add some RTL8169 drivers, do a simple html browser and you've got yourself a system that for all measures is "modern", it sure as hell would be used the same as most linux /g/ uses.

What you're calling nostalgia is just no GUI, or what are you telling me that somehow you cant program those in a simpler environment?

>>59055427
Did you even try, you amateur?

You're just a regular code monkey who thinks other people's code is unreadable. It's a known problem in my profession. Reading code is way too hard for most people. They open up a repository and see all those files, say 'fuck that' and roll their own shitty software.

>>59055744

Bc writing muh enterprise quality is soooo great right?
Thats why programming exists you retard, because people rather deal with their own bullshit rather than yours.

>>59055684
>For one its used for physics simulations and number crunching replacing old FORTRAN programs.
good for them, doesn't mean much to you or I though, just read the fucking documentation they provide, it's a primitive uni-tasking system that's going to be nigh useless for anything but that kind of workload it's suited to, you're like those retards that quote the TOP500 when comparing consumer desktop platforms or chinkpad shills trying to sell you on them because there's a couple T61s garage queened on the ISS, you're not appealing to actual practicality, merely that it's just being used for something so le science xD or otherwise reddit-cool; tldr fuck off with that feeble-minded salesman shit

>Also, what nostalgia goggles? What works better simply does.
those nostalgia goggles right there; because you're trying to pawn off a shitty single-tasking OS made for a niche task and written in a difficult to properly maintain language as a competitive general-purpose operating system, something even the author obviously does not believe it to be

>Take that screencap I posted and just do the graphics mode code, add some RTL8169 drivers, do a simple html browser and you've got yourself a system that for all measures is "modern", it sure as hell would be used the same as most linux /g/ uses.
for some reason I just have a hard time believing that, but why don't you do it yourself and prove us wrong?

>>59055793
>Thats why programming exists you retard, because people rather deal with their own bullshit rather than yours.
no, programming exists to program a computer and tell it how to do things to get a job done and benefit the user or the wider public, not stroke off your nostalgic ideals and virtues

>>59055684
>For one its used for physics simulations and number crunching replacing old FORTRAN programs.

You mean all those battle-tested, ririculously efficient software written by people much smarter than you a long time ago? Programs that are still in use by people all over the world and that basically represent the state of the art in number crunching software and is wrapped by libraries like numpy?

>Take that screencap I posted and just do the graphics mode code, add some RTL8169 drivers, do a simple html browser and you've got yourself a system that for all measures is "modern", it sure as hell would be used the same as most linux /g/ uses.

Yeah make your own hardware-accelerated graphics driver and hand-code your own web browser. I'm sure you're better than Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, Nvidia and ATi combined.

>What you're calling nostalgia is just no GUI, or what are you telling me that somehow you cant program those in a simpler environment?

Are you on the spectrum? Do you literally not realize how stupid you sound? GUIs are a lot older than you think you retard.

>>59055825
>for some reason I just have a hard time believing that, but why don't you do it yourself and prove us wrong?
I am doing it you faggot, read the thread.

>no, programming exists to program a computer and tell it how to do things to get a job done and benefit the user or the wider public
Again, that is why am doing it. The computer will do what I tell it to do how I tell it to do, of course its too hard for you to implement something like that eh?

>>59055881
What constitutes modern non-nostalgia goggles computing to you then?

>>59055916
>I am doing it you faggot, read the thread.
your progress doesn't look all that great, good luck though

>Again, that is why am doing it. The computer will do what I tell it to do how I tell it to do, of course its too hard for you to implement something like that eh?
doesn't really sound like it, sounds more like you're dicking around re-inventing the wheel in a sub-par way, totally ignorant of modern advances in operating systems because such novel concepts as caching in RAM, true multitasking and real memory protection that have been a thing on real computers since the 1960s and 1970s makes your head hurt and also forces you to face the reality that the pieces of low-end shit you struggled with in your childhood weren't really as great as you remember them to be

>>59055978

>*oh yes linus I love when you emulate some shitty terminal from the computer mesozoic era*
>*suck suck*
(you)

>>59055793
Nah you blind monkeys infest every language, every problem domain. No place is safe from the insidious NIH retard who doesn't care about pre-existing software and calls it legacy. Doesn't even try to understand its failings and fix them; he just reimplements everything because it isn't really that hard to write code it's maintaining it that's fucking hard. Then he runs into the same and even worse problems.

You're a menace to computing as it exists today.

>>59055302
>projecting

I don't use 'retro' computers and try to get others to agree with me on the internet and engage in a circlejerk. you are not going to achieve anything

>>59056022

Did that post hurt your feelings, pajeet?

>>59052816
no it wasn't you are deranged

>>59053926
>>59055208
Firefox on my 2GB machine uses more than 8 times the RAM it used in 2006 on a machine with 250MB RAM while providing no extra functionality compared to back then, and it's making my system swap away contents from other programs. This is inexcusable.

90% of people use their computers for internet browsing, email and office, things that software did fine for over 12 years now, on hardware way less capable than what you get today. Word does barely anything that it didn't do in 1999 except having some fancier buttons.

"Software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware becomes faster." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law I can't understand how anybody can deny this blatantly obvious reality.

>>59055360
Mainstream "modern, functional, productive, graphical desktop operating systems" have functionally been identical for more than 15 years I would say, apart from some fancier graphics and maybe some UI gimmicks. They certainly haven't brought any advancements for the end user that justify the outrageous increase in required ressources.

>>59056192
Are you fucking kidding? The web is a completely different beast than what it was years ago. It's now dynamic; more money than what you'll make in your entire life is being invested per year into making javascript engines fast. The tracing JIT compilers employed do use lots of RAM you fucking piece of shit. How's a state of the art execution engine not new functionality? You fucking luser.

Go post on 4chan from your fucking Dreamcast, if that shit even works. /vr/ was unable to.

>>59052767
Performance was actually a design consideration, coupled with the absence of brogrammers.

File: shot0038.png (2MB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 960x720px

>>59056019
>I have no valid counter-argument and I must REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>59056290

Can an argument be made when the only thing is an audible
>*suck suck, mhmmm yes mr linux*
?

>>59053926
I know this is bait but people who actually believe this should add malloc(9000000000UL) to every program they make to feel at ease

>>59053926
That's total horseshit.

Programs should use as little RAM as possible.

OPERATING SYSTEMS should make use of free RAM, but only for buffering, caches, etc.

Because of bloated RAM I can't have a RAM disk, despite having 16GB of RAM in my laptop. Fuck you and your philosophy.

>>59054954
That's completely different from what he said. The operating system using free RAM is great. Bloated PROGRAMS taking up that free RAM is the problem.

File: 1472950308169.jpg (500KB, 728x640px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 728x640px

>>59056019
>oh shit my virtue signalling didn't get my ego stroked off like reddit told me it would so I better start fabricating a strawman totally unrelated to the argument to distract from how much of a fucking retarded hipster I am

>>59056314
Except that's a great way to save actual fucking time you fucking brogrammer cuck. You pre-allocate entire contiguous pools of memory and roll your own lightweight allocator you chucklefuck. Now when you want some data structure you just increment a fucking pointer to allocate it, like a fucking stack you shitstick. Best of all the memory doesn't even get used unless you actually touch the pages you got from malloc

Only the most inept retard could dig his own hole by arguing on /g/

>>59056255
Right, because we need all this new web bullshit for anything other than better wb games and programs, which would understandably and excusably use more RAM.

The problem is now every website uses all this horseshit, and every browser process is bloated because of it, and everything besides applications that genuinely require it are costing way more to run, while they perform the exact function they did a decade ago.

I literally just opened my Gmail in a new tab, and it is consuming almost half a gig of ram. To view email. Stop trying to deny that this is horseshit.

>>59053926
>Unused disk space is wasted disk space

File: 1473741761477.png (390KB, 507x438px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 507x438px

>>59056051
still projecting your own insecurities this hard on others

do you feel inferior or something for not being part of our secret club? :^)

>>59056377

I dont see you posting anything good either, /pol/.
Linux? yeah NOT MY OS!

>>59056412

You dont fucking own the entire system's memory, if every single shitgrammer(new term) uses that it will slow everything down by pushes shit onto disk.
Pretty shitty practice IMO, just use the minimum you must.

>>59056310
You know, actually addressing his points instead of using an unrrelated strawman

>>59056434
If you have enough RAM and a fast enough CPU, I homestly don't see anything wrong with this.

>>59056434
Wow holy shit fuck those websites for using standard web technology. Fuck them with fire. We should all be using static web pages ala motherfuckingwebsite.com. Let's all go back to dogshit slow interpreters because 1 retrotard on /g/ can't upgrade his system because he lacks a job.

>>59056506
actually falling for this

lol

>>59054954
wtf. You didn't even say anything relevant.
>kernal hacker

Like seriously wtf.

>>59056506
Hey if you don't like it that's okay: it's why I'm boss. I know better than you. It's the reason I have commit access and you don't.

>>59056550

How can you justify a single tab taking 500mb memory, like, nigga there's some html some java and some images not a fucking anime episode.

>>59052767
>>59052790
>>59052816
because you are faggots that fetish technology like women fetishes shoes

with a lot of microcomputers, you really were in charge of your computer. systems were simple enough for a single person to completely understand it. operating systems were simple and personal, not mainframe OSes fitted into a _personal_ computer. although there are good reasons why modern computing is not like this anymore.

>>59056590
I justify it by recognizing the fact everybody optimizes for speed and not size. Nobody gives half a fuck about you retrotards. Buy some RAM.

because you touch yourself at night!

>>59052767
fewer distractions.

>>59056512
I do have plenty of RAM and a fast enough CPU. That's not the point.

But if I was poor and/or in a third world country, it makes accessing the web unnecessarily difficult. I'm not poor and God doesn't hate me enough that I live in a third world country like Canada or the UK, or God forbid Australia, nor do I give a shit about poor people and technology, and I actually can't stand non-Americans in technology, so I don't really care, but it's worth mentioning. Also, considering Silicon Valley's obsession with the web for everyone charity horseshit, it seems odd they're enabling a progression cycle that makes doing so more expensive.

Anyways, I do care that I have to constantly buy new hardware to do the same thing. That's horseshit, and it's obviously a ploy by hardware manufacturers (read Jewtel).

Perhaps the biggest issue I have with it is that it limits what I else I can have in RAM for no reason. Half a gig wasted on email means I have half a gig less for other shit.

>>59056616

But it runs like shit, I dont see any difference between my browsing in 2005 and my browsing now.
Its not like you're running some important task when most pages just display shit and maybe, MAYBE take input.

>>59056631
If you can't afford more ram, you are poor and from a third world shithole and don't deserve to use a computer

>>59056458
>oh god good he posted a trump-related meme let's pull out the /pol/ bogeyman then they'll forget about all of this and I can still feel like hot shit for writing a shitty hello world OS and calling it "modern"

>>59056550
I have a modern Intel CPU and 16 gigabytes of RAM. That doesn't justify using so much RAM.

>>59053624
it was always as bloated, hardware just wasnt as good to match the bloat.

>>59056647
Stop projecting already, I didnt knew CTR browsed /g/.

>>59056550
So you seriously think a good, modern web page needs 1000 lines of bloat? Even 5 tabs of 4 chins in chrome, makes me question why. Pic related.

>>59052767
computers built for a purpose

File: Screenshot - 02212017 - 05:45:44 PM.png (287KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1920x1080px

>>59056675
the pic it relates to:

>>59056616
My email loaded fine a decade ago. It honestly runs worse now. And all that wasted RAM means more data having to uploaded and downloaded, more CPU instructions to move it around, keep track of it, etc. It's just a fucking waste for no reason.

It means we have to have cell phones, tablets, and net books with stupid amounts of RAM because a few browser tabs would eat all the RAM for functionality that was available ten years ago on 256 MB of RAM.

Memory manufacturers are laughing at you.

>>59056635
>I dont see any difference between my browsing in 2005 and my browsing now.
Go surf the fucking archive some time, the web really has changed.

We don't live in the age of terribly formatted kludgy static hypertext anymore, and you people need to stop looking at the web that way. It's as much an application delivery platform as it is an information delivery platform nowadays.

>>59056645
I just said I have plenty of RAM. I have a laptop with 32 times the amount of RAM I had in my laptop ten years ago. That's not the fucking point. Just because I can buy more RAM doesn't mean I want it wasted by fucking email.

>>59056707
>We don't live in the age of terribly formatted kludgy static hypertext anymore, and you people need to stop looking at the web that way. It's as much an application delivery platform as it is an information delivery platform nowadays.

And that somehow takes GBs of memory by basically doing the same shit with some bells and whistles?
Sorry, but bloated code is bloated.

>>59056693
Seriously, the sooner you accept that this is just how things are now, the less autistic you'll start sounding. You really wanna see all that RAM not being put to use? Without a purpose? You selfish bastard. You're what's wrong with computing.

>>59056730

Just think of how faster things would be if the code was 100x smaller, without having to call and re call the same shitty java library 10 times just because the webdev didnt knew how to do shit and had to import kbs of code that also import other libraries to do something as basic as a loop.

You're whats wrong with computing, just throwing hardware at things wont make shit code be less shitty.

>>59056723
>And that somehow takes GBs of memory by basically doing the same shit with some bells and whistles?
Sure, interpreters are heavy, what are you expecting? What would you propose to fix it? All you retards do is get on a soapbox and whine about how you can't run 50 applications at once plus a browser with 100 tabs and call it "bloated" with no solution to point at other than some rose-tinted view of the past in which shitty uni-tasking systems could do it in a few megabytes because they had nothing else running and the software itself was generally primitive and only packed with the bare minimum to accomplish something.

There are many lightweight browsers out there that would love people to help make them usable, yet it seems that far more people would rather sit around on imageboards bikeshedding about the good old days rather than actually get dirty and figure out what the fuck the actual problem is.

>>59056774
Man you're a fucking retard
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law

>>59056707
>It's as much an application delivery platform as it is an information delivery platform nowadays.
That's completely fine. I have no problem with that. I celebrate it. It's amazing technology.

The problem I have is that the information distribution is bloated as fuck now, and it doesn't need to be.

>>59056730
>You really wanna see all that RAM not being put to use?
No, I just want it used efficiently so I can use it for more things. Using more for the sake of using more doesn't give it purpose, dipshit.

>>59056813

Moores law is not the law of bloat software, sorry but its still bad code.

>>59056852
Things get more advanced, so they take longer and need more ram. How csn you not get this fundamental concept through your thick retard brain?

>>59056852
More RAM means less data that needs to be retrieved from slow, shitty local storage. How hard is this to comprehend?

>>59056874

Thats bullshit and you know it, if anything hardware progress have made programmers lazier because resources are not so scarce anymore.
And thats where we are today, something as simple as a web browser now takes GBs to do what was done 10 years ago with a fraction.
Literally jedi mind-tricked.

>>59056935
This isn't the fucking 70's. Nobody fucking cares about your autistic fast small code optimizations anymore, faggot.

>>59056802
Not using the heavy interpreter to read a news article or my email. It's pretty simple.

I'd be pretty fucking pissed if I had to fire up CryEngine just to use Paint. That doesn't mean CryEngine isn't a beautiful, useful piece of technology. I just don't want to fire it up everytime I use Paint.

>>59056943

Yes people do care, why the fuck should something run at the same speed as it was running 10 years ago?
We should be fucking travelling at warp speed with the current hardware yet 10 tabs in firefox are the equivalent to the whole memory of my computer 10 years ago and it runs worse!

>>59056935
>something as simple as a web browser now takes GBs to do what was done 10 years ago with a fraction.
Yeah... bullshit. Go actually try using your retro boxes for something other than shitty kids' games and taking pictures for circlejerk threads, the functionality modern browsers and websites implement today is so far and beyond what we were doing even just 10 years ago, stop fucking jerking off to the static web, it's never fucking coming back and good riddance, those sites were god awful.

>>59056959
>Not using the heavy interpreter to read a news article or my email. It's pretty simple.
Then use one of the many desktop clients that allow you to do either if that's literally the only thing that triggers you so much as it seems to be, it's not hard. The interpreter's not going anywhere, it's a necessity for the modern web to function and deliver what it does.

>I'd be pretty fucking pissed if I had to fire up CryEngine just to use Paint
Fuck off with these retarded false analogies that demonstrate how little you actually understand what you're bitching about

>>59056874
Because email isn't more advanced you retard. Neither is web news, or any of the things I've talked about. I've stated multiple times I don't mind the increased RAM and CPU usage for the impressive web games and applications that are possible now. I only care about the shit taking more RAM now for features that were available ten years ago.

>>59056973
>the functionality modern browsers and websites implement today is so far and beyond what we were doing even just 10 years ago

Like aerodynamic tabs amirite?

>>59056973
>stop fucking jerking off to the static web, it's never fucking coming back and good riddance, those sites were god awful.

>using 4chan

>>59056973
It's not a bad analogy. Websites using fuck loads of RAM and CPU usageto do what they did ten years ago, and this only applies to web uses that were around ten years ago, is horseshit.

>>59056966
No, only you care.
Now seriously FUCK OFF YOU FAGGOT

>>59057012

Other anons do care, why so mad tho?

>>59052767
N O S T A L G I A

>>59056983
Like actual fully-fledged applications and content beyond static text and images, or back-end applications with shitty primitive interfaces. And yes, things that look nice and are pleasurable to use, because looking nice and being pleasurable to use is a big deal for content that's intended to be looked at and taken seriously, especially for long periods of time.

Not to also mention maintainability, have you ever actually tried designing websites for the legacy systems you worship so much? It's utter garbage for anything bigger than a shitty geocities page.

>>59056999
4chan isn't exactly "static" itself, it makes use of many javascript components even if it is mostly usable without them.

>>59057010
But it's not. You're bitching about 500 MB on systems with 4+ GB, that's less than many applications used to strangle legacy systems with back in the "good old days".

>>59057033
Because faggots like you that hold technology back should be banned from touching computing with a 10 foot pole

>>59057049
>But it's not.
But it is. Using CryEngine to power Paint would be a waste of resources because you're using an intensely powerful and complicated piece of software to perform a simple task. I'm complaining about websites using intensely powerful and complicated technologies that resource intensive to perform the same functionality they did ten years ago.

>>59057049
Yeah man, these fucken luddites cant see am running fucken cryses on mah firefox.
Please, this fully-fledged applications are just webdev bullshit excuse for copy pasting java library names from stackoverflow.

>>59057055
Hah you're still sounding pretty mad lol

>>59056713
He is a moron son, don't waste your time to that barely 18 years old person.

>>59055360

ayy

>>59057055
What they're advocating isn't all bad though, it's the cringy way in which they advocate it that feels more like a form of retarded virtue signalling than a call to action from people who've probably never done any real development in their life, let alone web development, and thus don't actually understand how to solve the problems we currently face, instead they make false equivalencies and point at fuzzy memories they have of shitty systems they used 20 years ago that were certainly able to do the same fundamental tasks, but not much beyond those fundaments.

>>59057085
>I'm complaining about websites using intensely powerful and complicated technologies that resource intensive to perform the same functionality they did ten years ago.
You're complaining about things you don't understand based on anecdotes and nostalgic virtues that will never be satisfied or recognized again, and trying to further them with a ridiculously exxagerated false equivalency that shows you understand really nothing about the problems you claim to know how to solve.

>retro computing thread devolved into another modern computing is bloated fight

>>59057144
>muh virtue signaling
>muh higher vantage point as a "webdev"
Pshhh kid, we're engineers with 50 year careers and 400k starting here.

>>59057174
The less retro threads, the better, nostalgiafaggot.

>>59057174
Blame the nostalgic shitheads using them as soapboxes to bitch and moan about bogeymen that make them feel insecure rather than just appreciating and discussing old technology.

I hate this fucking victim narrative bullshit.

>>59057049
Websites weren't static ten years ago. Javascript is 21 years old you retard.

>>59052767
if you want to feel retro, just install windowmaker or fvwm

>>59055208
It's basically true though, what functional improvements visible to the user have there been in 20 years?

Very few, mostly related to having not to (noticeably) wait for things like compiling software or image editing, and 3D games, and video.

To the office-user normie who just posts on social media nothing has changed. Facebook just replicates more or less what AOL and Compuserve had in the 80s.

I'm not saying computers aren't faster and whatnot, I'm saying that most of that speed has been wasted because of current programming and system design practices.

Most stuff isn't even faster *to the user* these days, it takes just as long to do a Word job as it did in the old days.

>>59057585
THE INTERNET DIDNT EXIST IN THE 80S YOU GOD DAMNED MOTHER FUCKING MONKEY NIGGER

>>59055360
>A Linux kernel running on modern arm chips uses about 16mb of RAM with basic userspace tools and a fully functional UNIX shell.
That's bloated as fuck, a whole university could run on that kind of hardware in the 80s, with hundreds or thousands of simultaneous online users.

Linux is not fit for embedded systems any more, NetBSD is much better for that and always has been even when Linux was still somewhat small and efficient in the 2.2-2.4 days.

>>59057602
what is arpanet and fidonet

what were university networks

what was the defense industry

what was uucp

the internet absolutely did exist in the 80s

>>59057602
1997 was 20 years ago. Learn to count.

>>59057656
>What is ARPAnet
>Having internet in the '80s

Hahahaha you young little faggot.

>>59057717
>having internet in the 80s
if that included dial-up shell access to a unix machine on a university campus connected to the other computers on the network then yes indeed.

TCP/IP was finalized in 1983 anon. By the late 80's many companies, private organizations, government bodies, and universities had connections to the internet.

I mean if you're going to shitpost at least be informed.

>>59057610
But I doubt such a system would confer nearly the amount of functionality and individual user freedom as its descendants. Certainly such systems got a lot of work done in their footprint, but the convenience and power offered by supposedly more unnecessarily bloated modern multi-user systems will vastly outclass them in terms of what each individual user can accomplish.

>>59057953
Students using a typical Unix in those days were doing exactly what people running Linux are today, anon. Compiling software, editing TeX documents, spreadsheets, managing databases, etc.

I don't know if the work is any more efficient except obviously for compute-intensive tasks the user's home machine is almost always more than sufficient. In the old days high performance computing was always done on the biggest hardware you could access.

Simpler interfaces/gui. All programs/games/data,etc, I used back in the early 90's all were installed on a 25MB hdd (IBM PC). I still had free space. Data was backed up to 3.5 floppy disks.

1997 - Another IBM, All data installed on 2.1GB hdd. Win 95,Lotus smartsuite 97,Works 4.5a,Unreal tournament (1999),Quake 3 (1999). Sad really, 90% of tasks I do now I could and did do on my ibm which i had from 1997 to 2001. Only things I do differently is edit photos and video encoding/ripping.

>>59058080
this, we have a lot of data which was smaller in the day
>midi files instead of mp3's and flacs
>flat text files instead of bloated PDFs
>images were usually compressed so as to be the most efficient, you wouldn't usually even want to download a high-rez image unless it was to show off your high-rez monitor
granted midi could be cheesy but also fully credible if you had a good sound card or synthesizer

anyway yes it's different and more HD-ified and the content is monetized and streams but the essence of what people do on the computer indeed hasn't changed in 20 years

>>59058146

Data makes sense because it is data and thus static, IE the advances in technology should provide for larger data handling not for lazier programming.
If mp3 players behaved like web browsers one would need an 8gb free of memery to play a ripped 100mb lossless file, sounds crazy right?

>>59057994
Most oldschool multi-user systems, especially of the IBM strain were mostly batch job-driven or otherwise very micromanaged by their system administrators, no amount of developer virtue or scheduling voodoo is going to make a limited system stop being limited. After all, there's a reason efficiency was far more important in software back then; the hardware was extremely limited, and it didn't nearly accomplish the same tasks as well as we accomplish them today.

File: 1487518070552.jpg (54KB, 789x960px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 789x960px

>>59056686
> Using pulse

why?

It's 2017.

I as a programmer should not have to worry about how efficient my code runs.

That should be the hardware engineers' problem.

End if fucking discussion.

>>59058548
No, you should worry about how efficiently your code runs, but within reason. System resources certainly are far less of a problem now than ever, but you should still use them in a way that tangibly maximizes performance, and you shouldn't shit on that idea just because this thread is full of autists making a mountain out of a few milliseconds at best.

>>59058605
No. You are a retard. Accept it

>>59058618
No, I'm just not deluded and I don't see things in a black and white perspective. It IS 100% your problem if you write a shitty program that doesn't perform to reasonable expectations, not the hardware engineers that can only baby your shit code so far before the laws of physics take over.

>>59058671
Programs can't be shitty. The only thing thats shitty is your CPU and RAM you fucking goddamned imbecile

>>59058699
>Programs can't be shitty
prog in loo pajeet

Holy jesus fuck. What the hell is wrong with /g/. Nostalgia bro isn't a nostalgia fag, he is absolutely right. There are a number of tools used by OS's that definitely need the bloat found in OS's, like CryEngine. But shit like firefox is not one of them. Although we don't have an open source of it, compare Edge to Firefox. Edge has a fucking tiny fraction of the code base size and does like 95% of what firefox does at 100% the speed, and does the other 5 % at like 50% the speed.

There's just no excuse for firefox, or for dynamic web, to consume so much data.

post autism stations

>>59058723
Everything happens instantly to a human, and as long as you have enough RAM you don't need to worry about how much a program """"""""bloats""""""" your computer.

Speed and size don't matter anymore, and I'm very much an advocate for removing task manager from future versions of windows as it serves no purpose but to create autists like you who complain about performance for no fucking reason.

>>59058734
And for what it's worth, edge is bloated too. Most modern software is bloated. But its a reference for the fucking retards in here to understand what nostalgiabro is getting at.

>>59056192
its so people buy more and more expensive hardware

>>59058773
>Everything happens instantly to a human
How many years from the future do you come from again?

>bloat is okay as long as you dont see it in the task manager

File: 4.jpg (2MB, 8320x1184px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 8320x1184px

>>59058768
proved my autism by forgetting the pic :^)

>>59052767
Because you're stuck in the past

>>59058862
most of us probably have nicer/newer shit than you do desu, people who live on more than minimum wage can afford to have more than one computer after all

I'm surprised by the slow shitty laptops people buy here. Stuff like the E403 from Asus. They handle the modern web slower than my Pentium III machines that run Slackware.

The E403 is so slow and unresponsive. The only thing I feel it does better than an 18 year old computer is render videos.

People spend 200-400 dollars on those machines. Spending as little as 200 dollars on one of those seems to me like throwing money out the window.

>>59058806
>Users need to worry about what programs are doing as far as memory and CPU usage goes

>>59058961

>programmers need not to worry about what programs are doing as far as memory and CPU usage goes

>>59058961
They shouldn't in an ideal world... But we don't live in an ideal world.

>>59058982
They don't, fucking retard

>>59059014

Thats the whole point you faggot

>>59059047
Man are you like actually a nigger? This is why niggers shouldn't be allowed to touch computers

>>59059056

Says the nigger cattle.

>>59059056
I don't really understand what you're trying to argue by calling someone a nigger.

Not sure which side you're on either. This conversation got pretty lame pretty fast.

>>59057610
A big reason it's so bloated is because of the shit that's compiled into and ran on the Linux kernel by default. If you only compiled in what you needed, and properly configured the setup, it'd probably be a lot better.

>>59058291
>lazier programming
even assuming the programming wasn't as lazy the issue these days is that everything's in the web and running in some interpreter or JIT or usually a hideous combination of both both locally and remotely

>>59058322
>Most oldschool multi-user systems, especially of the IBM strain were mostly batch job-driven or otherwise very micromanaged by their system administrators, no amount of developer virtue or scheduling voodoo is going to make a limited system stop being limited.
This is true, a system would be tuned up for its application to the best of the sysadmin's ability. The low process priority of the lowly freshman employee or student was more than a meme on many campuses.

>After all, there's a reason efficiency was far more important in software back then; the hardware was extremely limited, and it didn't nearly accomplish the same tasks as well as we accomplish them today.
Things were more efficient as well, many of the things we do now with databases and web apps were done but with custom-made high performance applications which tended to use the special sauce system facilities.

You're right of course, the hardware was puny compared to what we have now, but my point is that we were mostly doing the same stuff. It was harder for a dabbler in HPC in the old days though, and programmers in general. Resources were tight but it engendered a can-do spirit among people who needed to squeeze more out of their, by today's standards, low-powered machines.

There has always been a drive to get that supercomputer onto your desk and we did a long time ago. What did we do with it? Run frameworks in JIT-interpreted languages.

>>59056255
>It's now dynamic
we had the same shit in the 90s anon, it was called java applets and they ran on any machine

>>59059494
>You're right of course, the hardware was puny compared to what we have now, but my point is that we were mostly doing the same stuff.
And you really aren't wrong either in saying that, but it sounded as if you're saying we can reasonably boil ourselves back down to that level, which I think is pretty ludicrous. There's all kinds of advanced features in newer software; more built-in functions and other conveniences, improved security and memory management, you name it, that increased those resource requirements further, and I think a lot of the people here complaining about what they see as "bloat" probably wouldn't have a lot of fun without it. I spend a ton of time with my old gear and run pretty meticulously date-matched software stacks on them, I feel I know what they're capable of, and I still feel they fall short of what we have at our fingertips now even running what it was built to run, the conveniences and technology we are afforded today is absolutely incredible even if more shitty programmers can slip through the cracks.

But this is just rambling at this point.

Someone needs to grab a shell account on the LCM's VAX-11/780 and make a thread putting our ideas to the test and seeing what that stuff could really do. Maybe some day when I'm bored.

>There has always been a drive to get that supercomputer onto your desk and we did a long time ago. What did we do with it? Run frameworks in JIT-interpreted languages.
Of course a consumer with no real scientific problems to solve is going to put that work towards entertainment or something more fit to their own use case. You can bet your ass there are plenty of others who put that gear to work on the kind of stuff you think they "should" as soon as they got their hands on it.

>>59053926
This mindset is so fucking unbelievably stupid and it seems to be all over /g/.
Please PLEASE fuck off and kill yourself. You have no fucking CLUE how any computer works at all.

>>59054954
Kernel developer here (protip: higher than kernel hacker), since you're too fucking stupid to realize this, the page cache is the ONLY thing that is allowed to use as much memory as possible.
To get it into your stupid fucking hollow head, programs using less memory means more memory for the page cache, which means more speedup.
If all these stupid fucking userspace processes start using gigabytes for the most simple tasks, then the page cache will have no where to put it's fucking cache you retard! which means slowdown.
Fucking kill yourself, you have absolutely NO FUCKING CLUE how kernels or computers work at all.
Not to mention that more available memory means the user can hold more fucking processes on the system without shit hitting the fan. You are fucking stupid. You are so fucking stupid if you believe that userspace processes hogging unnecessary memory is somehow a fucking good thing.
Kill yourself idiot.

>>59058426
maybe he wants to plug in a USB headset without writing udev and alsa rules

>>59056943
You mean to say, developers can't do what developers were doing 30 years ago.

We know, pajeetism has infected universities and the JVM rules all.

>>59058699
We have a confirmed pajeet in the thread.

>>59055083
Mind to share that code?

>>59058723
>>59058699
Programs can be shitty. In fact the performance improvements, that were achieved by writing better algorithms, are exceeding the gains of Moore's Law.

>>59056608
no one calls women faggots for fetishizing shoes though

>>59052767
Cause they tried their hardest to make their products unique from their competitors, whereas now it's just a competition to see who can be the most Apple-like.

>Gmail's basic HTML inbox uses 150MB of RAM
This is totally fine.

Because you're expecting it to be slow and shitty so it doesn't piss you off when it is.

>>59055083
Terry?

>>59052767

Because no shitton of services in the background.
Because no retarded quantities of animation.
Because effective screen space usage.

>>59063342
this is why i need femminism

File: photo5287556044110800816.jpg (144KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1280x960px

Hi friends. Do you like terminals?

Guys, I'm gonna get a PC for shits and giggles, what era should it be from?

>PI/K5
>PII/K6
>PIII/K7
>P4/K8

I'm leaning towards a Pentium II machine, oldschool but not slow as fuck like a P60/P66.

>>59064975
I like Slot 1 P2/P3 best, relatively modern but still has isa slots.

File: Screen Shot 2017-02-22 at 10.04.32 AM.jpg (61KB, 1439x800px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1439x800px

>>59055083
forth os best os

>>59055208
Hes right though. He only exception is video/audio media where you might need more ram and cpu to push through a bigger pipe. Hardware growth outside of servers is useless.

>>59061116
>There's all kinds of advanced features in newer software; more built-in functions and other conveniences, improved security and memory management, you name it, that increased those resource requirements further, and I think a lot of the people here complaining about what they see as "bloat" probably wouldn't have a lot of fun without it.

Most of this stuff isn't actually that helpful, especially for the bulk of users. Every time MS rolls out an Office update the normies throw a fit. My aunt worked at TRW as a secretary for many years and used whatever Unix they used at the time. She didn't even have to care when they upgraded, she knew how everything worked already. She prepared technical documentation with TeX just as people are doing today.

So much time and energy is wasted by employees just on deciding which font to use. I bet we lose ten million man-hours a day just in the US alone from this, and on electronic documents which will probably never printed out too.

Some users can surely benefit from more juice but for the average user, nothing's really changed exceptions noted previously in our conversation.

>>59059227
I think the smallest 4 series kernel you'll be able to make is over 4MB these days, when I first ran Linux I had only 4MB RAM.