[rescue] Perverse Question
Frank Van Damme
frank.vandamme at student.kuleuven.ac.be
Tue Jun 10 12:41:24 CDT 2003
On Tuesday 10 June 2003 00:02, Jonathan C. Patschke wrote:
> Like Dave, George, and I have said repeatedly, 64MB of 1996 RAM is 64MB
> of 2003 RAM. Email is still, by-and-large, 7-bit ASCII. The web is
> still, by and large, HTML and JPEGs. Wordprocessing hasn't changed
> much. Spreadsheets aren't much bigger. Aside from video editing and
> audio editing (which most people -don't- do, full-time), the things we
> expect out of our computers haven't fundamentally changed in the last
> seven years. So, why was 64MB of 1996 RAM "living large", but 256MB of
> 2003 RAM "just getting by"? It's sure not because the software is 3 or
> 4 times -better- than it was seven years ago.
Perfectly einverstanden. Well the as evolved "somewhat" in the last few years
- think style sheets, think new markup languages (MathML and friends).
Yet again, I hope to understand some day how to write a program taking so much
resources as some do today. It may lessen my frustration *evilgrin*
Frank Van Damme http://www.openstandaarden.be
"Je pense, donc je suis breveti."
More information about the rescue