Web Development

Ask something
Discussion Locked

what do you think about

0 helpful
14 replies

by jaqui

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

the current practice of programming for newest hardware, rather than for os minimums?

why develop an application that will force prospective customers to have the increased expense of upgrading thier hardware to use it?
why not code the application to run on the lowest level of hardware that the target os will operate on?

14 replies

by choppit

I don't think it's a case of software being written to fit the current hardware spec. I suspect it's more a case of efficient coding coming second place to functionality.

by jdclyde

Many of the programmers of today want to use graphical tools to help them do whatever they want to do. Look at the mess frontpage makes of something as simple as an HTML page.

All programmers today owe Micro$oft big time for lowering expectations from software.

I remember a time when if your computer crashed, you had a hardware problem, not just a normal part of your day.

People aren't taught to be effecient in the processes, or in file storage.

That is part because the people that are teaching programming today are not programmers. They sit down and push out whatever crap the book tells them to, without ever questioning why.

My last "programming class" I had to take as part of my BA set was program design. We were given a problem, and when I gave my answer, it was half the code as what the book offered as the "correct" answer and then I had to explain it to the instructor and prove it would work. After that the response was what you would expect out of a TV series dumb blond of "oh, that would work".

More important to crank something/anything out on a schedule than to have a quality program.

by choppit

I agree. The further removed from assembly code, the less likely code is to be efficient. With ease of use comes loss of efficiency. As you are aware, there is no "correct" programming solution to any problem. As long as the objective is met, there are varying degrees of efficiency. Also, being efficient in your use of code, is not the same as writing an efficient program.

by jdmercha

Software that runs on the latest and greatest hardware has a marketing advantage over software that will run on less. (Even if the lesser software will run on the newer hardware.)

by jaqui

does software coded that will only run on newer equipment have a marketing advantage?

to me, telling the customer that they have to go buy a new computer for 10 grand to use my 6 grand application is a dis-advantage.

telling them my 6 grand app will run on thier existing hardware perfectly is an advantage.

by jdmercha

The general public buys into marketing hype. I doubt that anyone on this board would agree that because software runs on the latest and greatest, that means it is better. But the general public will think so. It is the same principle that keeps spam going. Again I doubt that anyone on this board has ever bought anything from unsolicited spam. But somebody is buying a lot of it. If spam weren't profitable it would stop.

by jdclyde

DE-volution, because it isn't progressing in a way that is BETTER for the end user of the code.

I remember when Win95 was 20 megs. Now look at that bloatware.

by jaqui

if software is not coded effectively, to use minimal resources, then you are doing the end user a disservice.

by choppit

I have to agree, that modern MS software is bloated, but are you implying that Win95 is better than Win XP because it has a smaller footprint?

by jdclyde

Was just trying to show just how big it has gotten in less than ten years (barely).

I do not believe that it should be as huge as it is now, but when you stress timelines over quality you get Micro$oft products. Not always the best, just first (and if not first we will buy you out or run you out).

With modular programming to reuse code over and over, it is crazy that they let it get away like this.

We blindly accept that they are that bloated just because that is what it takes.

Anyone remember when programs and OS's came on floppies? I just found a box of win95 floppies the other day. Try that with XP? Won't be long and they will have to put them on DVD's.

by jaqui

of how targeting newer hardware isn't alweays a good idea:

Mandrake linux is the only ditribution that requires pentium class cpu.
all the other ditros use os minimums of a 386 with 32 mb ram.
( not all apps, but the distro itself )

Mandrake is working thier way out of receivership, they didn't get the business to flourish.

debian is completely free, yet it's one of the strongest distros, and it's an os minimum targeted distro.

by bucky kaufman (mcsd)

If you *really* think this is a new thing, you haven't been paying attention.

Back in the early days of jets - a lot of people didn't see no sense in jumping on the fad, choosing instead to continue selling prop wash. ;)

If you're seeing a lot of new product dev, you're in high tech. If you don't like seeing it, ya oughtta consider something a little more low-tech.

Personally, I'm a-liking mid-tech. Bleeding edge is a lotta fun, and a great academic exercise. But seeing technology-dependent projects become obsoleted by next-week's breakthroughs can be somewhat unrewarding.

by jdclyde

to have seven ways to copy and paste text from one area to another.

It is all about "features", and the biggest problem with these new "features" is THEY DON'T GET USED!

It is a word processor or whatever. When the average user doesn't know what 90% of the "features" are, they are just taking up space.

This discussion is closed to new replies.