"Sebastian Sp�th" wrote:
> Yes, it is indeed a controversal statement and I don't agree with it
> (and not only because my personal computer falls into that 233 Mhz
> category :-)).
Better that than a knee jerk reaction. =-]
> For one thing, not everybody pays as low prices as you say. I, for
> instance, bought 128MB RAM here in Sweden and paid nearly 200$ a couple
> of months ago (25% VAT!).
Ugh. Contact me, I can help you get parts cheaper maybe. =-]
> I hate the attitude of people who consider it naturally and
> normal that programms get bigger and bigger with time, just because
> technology manufactures faster CPU's and bigger HD's.
I agree. But, I'm not talking about size so much as complexity and new
abilities that will require more processing horsepower (both CPU and RAM).
> Heck, independent of what CPUs can achieve or how big HDs are nowadays,
> is no justification that e.g. a simple notepad program should take more
> than 30KB code.
I wholeheartedly agree with that one. I was shopping for a text-mode telnet
client, and the ones I found here several megabytes in size. That insane.
> In the end we are not talking of an high end CAD/CAM program here, we
> are talking about an everyday commodity which should be able to run in
> the background while a couple of other programs are in use.
Considering the increasing complexity of web pages and the content they intend
to display, it's approaching the level of high order DTP programs.
--
jesus X [ Booze-fueled paragon of pointless cruelty and wanton sadism. ]
email [ jesusx @ who.net ]
web [ http://www.burntelectrons.com/ ] [ Updated: December 2, 2000 ]
tag [ The Universe: It's everywhere you want to be. ]
warning [ Or you can bring her down and do her like Delia got done. ]
