Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: A tirade about inefficient software & systems
Summary: Don't blame windows.
Message-ID: <=YN6UN5@xds13.ferranti.com>
Date: 25 Oct 90 15:02:06 GMT
References: <9886@milton.u.washington.edu>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 44

In article <9886@milton.u.washington.edu> kraig@biostr.biostr.washington.edu (Kraig Eno) writes:
> Will someone please tell me why a Mac Plus isn't a screaming fast machine?  

Because the system software was crippled by having to provide *some* sort
of performance on a 128K thin Mac. Design decisions that were appropriate
for that environment become stunningly poor when more memory becomes
available. The Amiga 1000, with half the RAM available, is quite a snappy
little machine. Why? Because the system is built around a fast multitasking
kernel: the whole system doesn't lock up when some software component is off
doing its thing, and context switches are fast enough (no MMU or FPU involved:
you just swap registers) that it spends most of its time doing useful work
instead of waiting on I/O or shuffling task contexts.

> can someone tell me why every operating system upgrade in 
> the history of computing is BOTH bigger AND slower?

Because they're selling the sizzle, and you want to eat steak. The guy who
designed the Mac went on to build the Canon Cat: a dedicated word-processor
that died in the market because it didn't have the sizzle.

> Think about what 2 MB is, and how much DATA fits there. Is there 
> really 2 MB of functionality in MS-Windows?

No. It's got considerably less capability than AmigaOS 1.0, which ran
in 256K ROM and 256K RAM.

> DON'T make every application do everything under the sun.  Do the 
> essential operation, do it well, and make it efficient!

Bravo!

> Look at the resources demanded by the bare application, then look at what 
> it requires with all the bells and whistles added.  Then ask yourself if 
> the gadgets are worth the mind-boggling amount of CPU time and RAM that 
> are spent on them.  If you think you need them to sell your product, then 
> spend less on marketing and don't be so greedy.

Unfortunately, it's the consumers fault. Anyone who buys a Mac or PC on the
basis of Multifinder or Windows is just encouraging the behaviour you're
complaining about. People don't want to look at alternatives... they just
want to be told they're doing the right thing so they can cut a check and
get out of there. Why anyone would buy a Mac or a PC when there are machines
like the Amiga, the Acorn Archimedes, or even the Atari ST (for all it's a
bug-for-bug-copy of DOS with Gem, it's a *cheap* copy) is beyond me.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
+1 713 274 5180.   'U`
peter@ferranti.com