Linked by John O'Sullivan on Fri 17th Oct 2003 17:48 UTC
"640K ought to be enough for anybody." Bill Gates, 1981. "64 bit is coming to desktops,there is no doubt about that, But apart from Photoshop, I can't think of desktop applications where you would need more than 4 gigabytes of physical memory, which is what you have to have in order to benefit from this technology." It seems to me that by the time it ships, Longhorn will need 4 gigs of RAM.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Maybe I'm the only one, but I think we've actually lost out here.
Back in the days of yore a great deal of innovation happened BECAUSE of the cpu and memory limitations of the machines the programmers were dealing with. As a result we ended up with applications that actually stretched what it was possible to do with the machine, and in doing so extended programming knowledge.
Wind forward 20 years and those limitations are gone. Programmers can get away with writing sloppy, poorly designed, bloated code, secure in the knowledge that Moore's Law and the cheap memory market will mask their inadequacies.
I realise we can't go back to the days of the real programmers (Apologies to embedded folks, you still have 'em), but I'm not sure we should all be so eager to rush towards the day where the actual hardware a program will run on is viewed as an irrelevance when considering how to design a program (Java might be an example).
So maybe 640k isn't enough for everyone, but am I the only one to think that the skills of programmers would be more significantly more advanced than they are if that limit had been imposed?