Which way do you prefer or "Have it your way."

[rabindranath72]

Just because a 20 year old Mac suits your needs doesn't make everyone on the bleeding edge "wrong"    Those old machines boot the OS off a floppy - the OS from those days is far, far different than a modern OS.

Your usage case is simply different.  That same machine wouldn't do a single task I require out of a daily driver machine, but as above - my needs are much different than yours.  To each his own, with due respect - and all that jazz.

Use what you enjoy, I say.  There's always going to be the types that scream from the rooftops "WELL IF I CAN'T DO IT ON MY PDP-8 IT ISN'T WORTH DOING AND IT IS NOT REAL COMPUTING!11!!1!1!1"

Simple fact is, when most of us got into computers, you had to be a computer enthusiast.  You *had* to have technical skills.  These days, modern machines are just an appliance to most people.

I've got a SAM 440 I just love.  I know I overpaid for it by about 3x.  I know it can't do half what my year old cell phone can do.  I love it for what it is.

My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.

[spirantho]

My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.

Quite agree.

But what I would say is don't blame the hardware- blame the software.
Of course if the hardware hadn't progressed so much then the software writers wouldn't be able to write such hogging software, but also a lot of really good applications wouldn't be able to exist either.

I'd rather have a machine that takes 300MB of RAM to write a letter, but also enables high speed video encoding, rendering and other stuff, than one which still works in 3MB of RAM but can't do other things I want.

It's not the hardware's fault that software writers are often lazy these days.

[Kesa]

I am surprised noone has mentioned the steam box. This seems to take the advantages of consoles being fixed and PC's being open into a single platform. Sounds good to me. I'm thinking of buying one when they come out.

[stefcep2]

My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.

One thing to consider is that as you go from 16 bit to 32 bit to 64 bit software, the smallest that any information can be is 16 bit, 32 bit and 64 bit respectively.  Even if you optimized it 100% the same software will always end up needing more ram and the executable will always be larger as you up the bits.

But I agree there is a lot of bloat, but no all is due to inefficient code  Some of it is due to feature creep: adding more and more features which are less and less useful.

Its interesting that this also extends to even things like icons: do we really need 32 bit photo-realistic icons that take up more ram, more cpu cycles?  I actually enjoy using Macos 7 for its simplicity.   I also now have a 8 color Workbench with the stock Commodore  icons.

And do we need animations of a page curling and turning when reading a document?  Well actually Apple seems to now think the answer is "no", with Jon Ives heavily involved in the new Mac interface design, and he is dead against "photo-realism".

[Duce]

Simple evolution, really.  Peg the blame on sloppy code or whatever you like, but the sheer fact is 300 megs is not a lot of memory for any system built in recent times.  Office for me nowhere uses that amount, and it's a renowned memory pig.  I've got Word, Outlook, and Visio fired up at the moment and they aren't using 200 megs between them.  I haven't owned a PC in the last 5 years that didn't have a minimum of 4-6 gigs of RAM.  CED is running on my SAM atm, editing/compiling some code, 2 megs usage.  I do see your theoretical point.

I bought an 8 gig stick of DDR3 RAM (Corsair, overclock grade) for $25 last week.

If all else fails - there's always Wordpad or Notepad

[Duce]

My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.

This being said, there's people right now on some other God awful Luddite forums cursing and screaming about how "computers are ruining the world!!" while clutching quill pens and booklets of paper

[TheBilgeRat]

My 2 cents:

We are just now hitting the point where hardware is finally slowing.  Instead of doubling of transistors, we are getting more cores and other custom chipsets (GPU) on the same core.  We can't rely on Moore's law to fix our slow code.  We also have to learn to code for parallel in a good manner.

Which all means that I think that as more features get pushed onto the CPU die, the more potential to be back to integrated non-mix and match hardware, which will drive price down.

[royalcrown]

Yeah, I think we're both thinking the same thing here, about modern games (and music ).

But honestly, if you were to freeze the platform all that would happen is the games would just get worse (because most of the really big games are supported by people like nvidia and AMD to show off their hardware - take the hardware away and take away the support) and also the PC platform would die completely as a gaming platform because the consoles would continue to evolve.

I am not saying freeze forever, like 4 years or so, so consoles would still be far behind

On a side note I just went to amiga.com instead of org accidentally and saw the site...noooooooo, it burns !

[royalcrown]

To the original question I have to say that I am very much undecided. One of the things I liked about my first Amiga was that everything worked. I'de buy a game, put in the floppy and voila. Awesome. However, as time moved on some stuff required, or at least would benefit from extra hardware. But still, it was a small enough amount of upgrades to understand all of the options in depth. I liked how all of that worked and continues to work.

I used to like my PC having loads of options too. My 486 had so many bays and slots it was silly. As times gone on I find I use less bays and slots, I simply don't need them. The average pc mobo these days has built in everything with the exception of graphics (sometimes). Add a graphics card if you need one and what else do you need? An SSD and an optical drive maybe? I hardly use my optical drive these days, just an SSD and a card reader would do. As for upgrading the CPU and RAM, how often does that end up with a mobo replacement? It's often cheaper to get a newer mobo and CPU than finding a faster CPU for an older socket.

Even that once huge hard disk, or even RAID that a true power might use is probably better inserted into a NAS enclosure for convenient network access.

I guess what I'm saying is that even though the pc platform is very open, market forces for the typical user make a lot of our choices for us. Often to the point that it might as well been a closed platform in the first place.

A extra smothering of irony can be found in the jailbreaking of consoles of course. Closed platform it may be but someone will always find a way of opening up a console.

As to whatever is the best or worse approach, I just don't know. I just look forward to whatever it is memristor will do to the market, that will be fun.

Nice avatar my friend

[persia]

I've interested in the tablet version of Ubuntu Linux, it looks like it might be a good way to get around Android's Javaness.  But I really hope they don't fall prone to the two headed monster Windows has become.  It should be possible to design an OS that works equally well in touch as it does in non-touch environments.

ARM devices may already outnumber X86 devices.  The main problem with ARM is that they aren't yet powerful enough.  Rumour has it iPhone 6 will have dual quad core ARM chips in it.

[persia]

THe main question is has Android developed an insurmountable lead or could Ubuntu still play a role?

[royalcrown]

I am surprised noone has mentioned the steam box. This seems to take the advantages of consoles being fixed and PC's being open into a single platform. Sounds good to me. I'm thinking of buying one when they come out.

I think it is going to be more of another console vs a computer. Personally, I hate having to be online to play stuff, that and steam getting hacked, or wanting to embed itself in my os like symantec.

[Mrs Beanbag]

I like to build PCs, but I build them for quietness and efficiency rather than for performance. Also I prefer small systems to huge tower cases.

[royalcrown]

I built mine to be as quiet as my Imac, which  raised the price to Imac territory...lol

[hbarcellos]

Just wondering what you folks think.

Do you think it'd be better to have a closed hardware platform as the majority, or are you on the side of the typical PC with a mish mash of parts ?

I'll go first by incessantly rambling on and on, thereby boring you all to no end.

I decided to get into Amiga after building my PC a few months ago. Typical PC with all the higher end crap, ended up costing a BUNCH. I always wanted to own such a ridiculous machine, but now that I own it, am totally bored with it.

There seems to be nothing really good to do (as a home user) on such a machine. Many games that would use it are just over hyped crap. Short of Arma 3, there seems to be NOTHING coming out that needs a massive machine. Thanks to CONSOLES, a lot of the stuff is also just crappy ports. Even what is coming out seems to be more just point and shoot crap.

I think that all this massive power is going to waste and crappy programming is tolerated. Going to a single unified hardware configuration has some advantages in this day and age:

1. BUG FIXES - We might all have bugs, but then everyone would get fixes sooner as 1 fix would work for everyone.

2. Programming could be made more efficient - More optimized compilers and dev tools.

3. Programmers could optimize apps like no ones business - If a C64 could pound an IBM 5150 into the ground @ 1mhz due to integration and optimization, what could we do with a Core I7 and GTX 680 or Radeon 7990 platform ?

Software  developers could spend more time being creative with less platforms to have to master, and as the machines got pushed to their limits, things would have to be done more efficiently (see above).

4. Machines would be worth something when you sold them.

5. No more "My 'puter is better than yours.."

IMO old machines were more "fun" to use even taking into account the fact that that it wasn't all done before.

If it were up to me, I'd take whatever is a really high end platform and freeze it for 5 years as the standard pc. I owned an IMac till recently and IMO there are benefits to standardized hardware (now ppl should be free to know the inner workings however). I also owned a C64 and so I can see how programming efficiently can work.

IMO Jack Tramiel would have preferred the current PC ecosystem of cheap parts from everywhere.

iOS ecosystem was highly benefited due to "somehow" standardized hardware.
Unfortunately, competition (and shareholders) force them to upgrade HW on a periodic basis.

BTW, sometime ago, I suggested to Amiga-like-OS developers, like AROS for example, to choose ONE (just one) configuration:
- Let's say:
* Intel Core i5-3570K (Ivy Bridge)
* Intel DZ77GA-70K, Intel Z77 Express, BIOS 0049
* Sapphire Radeon HD 7970
* (2 x 4 GB) Crucial PC3-12800 kit

All users here would be able to create their own AROS-Amiga y1000 with not a huge amount of money
They (developers) would be able to do things just one time, knowing exactly what to expect.

Of course, they would have to ignore any other request, like: "ohhh, but I have a nice i3 or this motherboard is prettier/cooler or whatever". At the end of the day, is a niche/hobbyist OS, not a competitor to Windows, Ubuntu or Android. Not even OSX tries to support several different HW...

It's a lost battle trying to support a lot of hardware.
Same goes for MorphOS. I would say, pick 1 (just one desktop) and just 1 notebook model:
* Powermac G4 Dual 1.42 with Radeon X and etc... and/or * Powerbook G4 1.67 15
but for those, give full support, like Wifi, Bluetooth and etc.

[Mrs Beanbag]

I know what you mean, I wished for a while that some manufacturer would just produce a full set that all goes together and is guaranteed to work properly, but you have to get a bit from here and a bit from there and hope for the best. Personally I don't even bother with graphics cards, onboard graphics is good enough for me since I don't play PC games so that takes one of the major headaches out of the equation.

It made sense to me that someone should just pick a configuration and tailor a Linux distribution to it and sell PCs with that Linux distro. There is just too much choice, it's bewildering.

Although personally I only buy AMD CPUs, I built an Intel system once, never again.