I think what you are saying is 4GB of RAM is like $50.00. If it takes $10,000
more to develop more efficient code that could be compensated by spending $50
on RAM then just spend the $50.00 and enjoy not spending $9950.00 for more
efficient code.
------------------------
Keith Smith
--- On Thu, 6/13/13, Kevin Fries <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Kevin Fries <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Then vs Now Programming WAS: Re: AMD vs Intel memory managemement
To: "Main PLUG discussion list" <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, June 13, 2013, 6:43 PM
I think there is a big reality being missed here. Back in the "old days" when
developers wrote "tight" code, that was out of necessity not out of some higher
purpose. Computers did not do much, spell checkers were a luxury, as were
point and click interfaces. I remember spending more money for my first 10MB
hard drive than i would spend for a 1TB today. The price to write this tight
code today is too high for the benefit it would bring. Yes code is more
bloated today, but if you take a look at the bloat in proportion to the
increase in memory, disk, and network speed, it could be argued that software
has gotten smaller, not larger.
Just my $0.02
Kevin
On Jun 13, 2013 2:03 PM, "Carruth, Rusty" <[email protected]>
wrote:
IMHO, the answer is yes. And the answer is no.
Operating systems in ‘the olde days’ were REALLY small, and didn’t do much. No
gui, for one! (Well, ok, on the IBM 1130 I used the GUI was the flashing lights
on the console!)
Shoot, the entire boot loader fit on a single 80 column punch card. The card
had I think 12 bit positions per column, so that means we could load a program
(from cards!) with 120 bytes of program. The computer ran 16 bit instructions,
so that means in 60 instructions we could read binary data from the card reader
(12 bits at a time), and store it into memory!
FORTRAN (and later C) and assembly language were probably the primary
languages in use for applications.
As James said: “Cache? We don’t need no stinkin’cache!” Cache was a luxury
that Idon’t think we even considered…
I’m not sure how much is language bloat, and how much is (perceived?) lack of
need to be careful about ram or anything. I will say that it seems that, as
computers get faster, they run slower due to all the junk that comes with the
OS. It wasn’t that long ago that Linux would run ‘hummingly’ on a lowly
Pentium with 512MB of ram. Try that today with a current distribution that
isn’t aimed at ‘low-end’ computers!
Personally, I think it’s a bad thing that we can turn what would have been a
supercomputer 40 years ago into a machine that runs slower than my Osborne 2
did! (I can out-type my Lenovo ThinkPad T410 to the point that I’ve had 40 to
80 characters typed that it had not bothered to process before I gave up typing
and waited for it to catch up!) (Yes, its running Windows)
(Note, an Osborne 2 was a ‘portable computer’ (about the size of a medium
piece of luggage) that ran CP/M, had 64K of RAM and 2x 5 ¼” floppies! (The
REALLY cool luggable machines had some ‘huge’ hard drive (probably 20MB!))
Rusty, climbing down off of soapbox now J
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nathan England
On Thursday, June 13, 2013 07:01:23 AM Lyle Tuttle wrote:
In the 'old' days, I worked for the Atomic Energy Commission designing,
building and maintaining computer controlled experiments using radiation from
and located on the face of the reactor.....our SDS "mainframe" <G> ran ALL
experiments (including some x-ray diffraction projects in remote locations) in
real-time......that computer had 16K core memory.......and people came from all
over the world to see what we were doing....now a watch has more memory.....
Lyle has brought up a question that is interesting to me. I hear stories like
this of these amazing things people did with computers 30 and 40 years ago and
then the comment always comes up like "And we only had xx kb of ram".
So my question is, was programming in what ever language they used back then
more efficient and today's languages are seriously bloated and require more
ram, or do programmers today not know how to program as efficiently?
Or what gives?
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
