Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 20th Apr 2008 15:43 UTC
General Development is running an opinion piece on the extensive reliance of programmers today on languages like Java and .NET. The author lambastes the performance penalties that are associated with running code inside virtualised environments, like Java's and .NET's. "It increases the compute burden on the CPU because in order to do something that should only require 1 million instructions (note that on modern CPUs 1 million instructions executes in about one two-thousandths (1/2000) of a second) now takes 200 million instructions. Literally. And while 200 million instructions can execute in about 1/10th of a second, it is still that much slower." The author poses an interesting challenge at the end of his piece - a challenge most OSNews readers will have already taken on. Note: Please note that many OSNews items now have a "read more" where the article in question is discussed in more detail.
Permalink for comment 310685
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
End user point of view
by Anacardo on Mon 21st Apr 2008 10:15 UTC
Member since:

I'm no coder, and therefore I can only express the point of view of an end user.
I understand all your arguments, and still I cannot but remain a little puzzled when I hear things like "those Oses did a lot less than what we have today". While this might be definitely true, I cannot but think that most of these features are not needed or at least seldom nedeed. Some simple examples on WinXP: 1) without a central update application, every damned app (adobe, Java, Google, Apple) installs its own updater that run silently in the background. If this is not a waste of resources I don't know what it is. 2) Explorer looses tons of time trying to fetch additional information from ".avi" even when instructed not to do so. It gives you unnecessary information about installed programs, Hds running out of space, and other things like that. Surely you can disable most of these things, but I wonder whether these "features" should have been added in the first place. And it goes on and on... I have dozens of services running on my machine, some of which are supposed to "speed up the launch of a certain application". Maybe without all those services my applications might launch even faster. Anyway the perception of an uninformed end user is: current OSes and apps are bloated with unnecessary burdens, where features are added mostly following some "why not" scenario instead of answering the real needs of the end users.
And yes, Windows NT 4 is a monster of speed compared to XP on the same hardware, and while it does less, it's yet to be seen if it really lacks behind on useful features instead of bang and whistles.

Reply Score: 2