Current development tends to follow the following sequence:
- Rapid software development
- Lesser quality code, with less efficient use of resources
- Higher resource demands
- Higher minimum requirements for the application
Past development tended to create applications that would primarily work within
the contraints of the systems people had, because requiring more would usually
cause the application not to be purchased at all. Now that the games industry
along with one of the primary OS companies have been pushing the limits ever
forward (to the great satisfaction of the PC component manufacturers who can
discontinue parts at a never before seen rate - conspiracy theory buffs can go
look for cross-industry deals and market manipulation - not my cup of tea), no
application developer has to worry about limits anymore. Just put on the box
that you need 3.0GHz CPU, 1GB RAM, 40GB HD and a DVD burner (as minimum reqs)
and a large part of the targetted user base will go out and upgrade their
machine to run the application (assuming they want it).
Does it make sense? No. Does it keep a very large industry segment alive?
Most definitely! Is it any good? Not in my opinion, but YMMV.
Kris
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 09:10:02AM -0500, David Booher wrote:
> I may be "old school", but there's no substitute for well written programs that are
> both efficient in CPU and storage and the same goes for the software platform they
> run on. I even get discouraged at home when you have to buy new hardware to support
> the bloating of the OS it runs on. What are you achieving? New functionality?
> Better programs? More stability? Some of the new software I've bought to run on my
> PC is re-written old stuff with more advertisement and fancy programmatic gizmos.
> It's neither more efficient nor better performing, even on new hardware.
>
> The new school must have "deep pockets". ;)
>
> My opinions only, folks!
>
> Dave
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Barton Robinson
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 8:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: J2EE performance?
>
>
> The old school that thinks 80 mips is a lot is used to
> really well written programs, written in assembler to
> be efficient in both CPU and storage. The new school
> that uses Java and C++ has different objectives.
>
> An 80 MIP processor is about a 300MHz pentium. This is
> based on "Barton's Number of 4", where 1 mip is about
> 4 Mhz of Intel running equivalent code. Not a really
> impressive machine, unless it is running many workloads
> at a very high utilization with lots of I/O 7 x 24....
>
> I've heard the new java compilers are much much better,
> suited more for meeting mainframe objectives.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
> http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
--
Never underestimate a Mage with:
- the Intelligence to cast Magic Missile,
- the Constitution to survive the first hit, and
- the Dexterity to run fast enough to avoid being hit a second time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
