The MASM Forum
General => The Colosseum => Topic started by: NoCforMe on August 09, 2022, 06:47:12 AM
-
I'd like to vent on something that's been bugging me for quite some time now. This is the increasing complexity--and the accompanying instability and unreliability--of the software we all depend on more and more in our lives. (My specific target here is operating systems; application programs can be expected to become more complex as the problems they attempt to solve become more and more complex.)
In fact, it seems we're about to reach a breaking point where just one more straw will break the camel's back; one more API set, one more set of virtualizations, one more addition of GUI "eye candy" will make the whole thing come crashing down. Now this may or may not actually happen, but even if not, the problem is just getting worse and worse.
Operating systems have two main tasks that are completely at odds with each other: to fulfill an increasing set of functions and an increasing offering of "services"; and to do so reliably and securely. I propose that that second requirement is becoming increasingly impossible to attain because of the first task.
Back in the 1990s we saw at least some attempts to move towards simplification of major computer systems, rather than just slavishly follow the trend toward complexity, with such technologies as RISC. But this move seems to have been completely abandoned. Nobody is willing to confront over-complexity; my guess is that the main driver here is not technology-creators (programmers, engineers, designers) so much as technology-sellers: the usual marketroids, who are completely unwilling to be left in their competitor's dust by way of slimming down rather than fattening up.
One of the main drivers of this over-complexity, if not the main one, is what I call "chrome". This is all the useless (from a computing standpoint) but attractive and sales-driving "eye candy" that makes up so much of any modern OS (perhaps to the exclusion of various *nixes): appealing-looking controls and icons; fancy scrolling, opening, closing and moving animations; transparency effects, all that. I'd be curious to know, for instance, just how much of the Windows core (GDI) is devoted to just these functions to the exclusion of anything useful. So we're at the mercy of over-complexity because rounded corners on things! collapse-up and collapse-down! whooshing animations! My god, civilization depends on these things!
To me, we've crossed a line when no one person can possibly understand everything about an OS. (Not saying that I am anywhere close to this, BTW.) I think this might have been possible a couple versions of Windows back, maybe Vista or 95. But now? Fuggedabodit. Try as you might, you cannot possibly comprehend everything about this Frankenstinian monster. All you can do is try to follow recommended programming practices and hope for the best.
So what am I suggesting? Well, as naive as it sounds, I would advocate a turn towards simplification. Number one, put an end to endless "chrome" enhancements. Declare that good enough is good enough; no more whiz-bang features. We'll just have to learn to live with what we have now. (And after all, it's a fucking computer, for gawd's sake. If it's entertainment you want, get a game console or something.)
Then we should try to simplify, as much as possible, the remaining useful functions of the OS. Start by finding the least amount of complexity that will get the job done. If "features" have to be abandoned and thrown overboard, then so be it. Again, learn to live within our means.
So do I think this will ever happen? No, probably not in a million years. The world doesn't work like this. It just goes on its merry way, racing towards the cliff at top speed.
I look forward to the discussion to follow.
-
Long gone are the glory days of yesteryear. I long for my trusty old Windows xp. Nice small operating system, goofy design for the artwork to be sure - but never gave me as many problems as Windows 10. I haven’t even bothered looking at Windows 11. Right now I run windows 7 exclusively, but can run Windows 10 or Windows xp on my current machine. Windows 7 isn’t bad, but for the latest, greatest software offerings will need to switch to windows 10 or later. Therefore I forego using anything so new that it refuses to run on Windows 7.
There are a shrinking number of programs being made that work with pre Windows 10 OS, so you either have to bite the bullet and run the 10/11 crappy OS, or settle for an earlier version of Windows. I opted long ago to just run Windows 7 and can truly live without the newer software available.
As a side note: on my computer I run programs. APPS are for smart (dumb) phones or my iPad.
Okay I’ll crawl back under my rock now…
-
- Windows XP? Yes, nice, but I have a Windows 2000 machine that I still use!. (Mainly because it has a SCSI (!!!) adapter that I need for my Nikon film scanner). So reliable.
- Yes, I agree: programs, not "apps".
-
I love my Win7-64 machine, but it gets slower and slower. Why? It can't be the stuff that we produce here in the Forum - blazing fast as ever. But my modest social life, which manifests itself in the use of a browser, Thunderbird and WhatsApp Desktop, fills the 6 MB of RAM completely, so that my puter is always at the limit (not for disk space, 110 GB is ok).
I can understand that a browser needs RAM, but why does Edge need 27 instances and 770 MB for keeping 3 tabs open? This is madness (but better than Firefox or Chrome).
Thunderbird wants also 700MB of RAM. What for? It's mostly text, and if there are images, they don't have to stay in RAM forever.
WhatsApp Desktop is a messenger service. Text, folks, and occasionally some tiny image. 885 MB. This is ridiculous!
And no, software is not too damn complex, it's just incredibly bloated because the C/C++ gang have never learned how to use RAM properly. Not to mention the fans of QT, the most ridiculously bloated package ever.
Bloat bloat bloat bloat bloat bloat bloat bloat
-
With one of the computers I built in the last year or so, I had a retail Win7 64 so I installed it and it ran OK but in comparison to the Win10 64 I have been using for years, it was slow, lousy graphics and compatibility problems so I did the free upgrade to Win10 64 and it performed a lot better.
Win7 64 was the last Windows version where you got what you paid for and was nowhere as problematic to clean out all of the crap but its age started to show and Win10 has later software at the OS level so video, file IO, sound etc .... just worked better.
My only real complaint with Win7 64 was its attempt to be a Microsoft MAC with all of the glitzy interface stuff, I prefer the less cluttered Win10 interface. Another factor was 7 years of involentary beta testing for Microsoft so when it eventually became stable, I am in no hurry to change it.
-
So are you saying the Windows 10 UI is simpler and less glitzy than Windows 7? I have no experience at all with the former.
-
I have a new fast Win10 machine with 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD+1TB hard disk. It feels slower than my 12 year old Win7-64 machine.
My Win10 setup looks close enough to Win7, so optically it's not a big deal. But the internals, control panel, settings and all that stuff have a tendency to get more and more complicated. Little detail: if you are prompted for an administrator password to install something, on Win7 you type your password and hit Return. On Win10, you type... and type... and realise that the bloody dialog doesn't have the focus, so you have to click into the password field. The responsible programmer should never cross my way, he would risk harsh consequences. Lousy.
Plus the endless updating orgies. Redmond, stop it.
-
I have a new fast Win10 machine with 8MB 8GB RAM ... right?
-
:biggrin:
JJ,
> I have a new fast Win10 machine with 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD+1TB hard disk. It feels slower than my 12 year old Win7-64 machine.
Clean all of the crap (OS Junk) out of it and it will get faster. Pssst, also put more memory into it.
-
I have a new fast Win10 machine with 8MB 8GB RAM ... right?
Of course - corrected.
Until roughly 2000 I worked with an Atari ST. One megabyte RAM - and it was definitely a lot faster than my current Win7 and Win10 machines. The monitor was black and white but top quality, no strain on the eyes. I did mostly word processing and some graphics, scientific papers, administration and the like. For many years, I never heard a fan, simply because I used a RAM disk, and once every evening made a backup on a floppy disk. And then I was forced to switch to Windows :sad:
Clean all of the crap (OS Junk) out of it and it will get faster. Pssst, also put more memory into it.
If you give me a reliabe list of stuff I can get rid off, I'll do that. Re memory, 6MB is my board's limit, unfortunately.
-
Yes, I'd also like to see a list of "stuff you can get rid of" (for Win7-64). My Delete key is ready ...
-
There are tools floating around for decrapping Windows and the secret to success is google and one of my favourites is WinAero Tweaker for settings. I did buy Revo Pro uninstaller and from memory there is a free version that will clean out stuff you don't want as well.
-
You can "clean out stuff you don't want" as soon as you know which stuff you don't want. And that's the problem: I don't know what slows down my machine. I can tell you which programs block the system completely from time to time, it's the browser or WhatsApp, but I don't have the faintest idea why Windows is generally slower than ten years ago. It won't show in Task Manager...
Another crappy issue are the manifest files. Today I discovered that on Win 10, a simple checkbox displays as a pushbutton if the program has a standard XP manifest :sad:
-
:biggrin:
> but I don't have the faintest idea why Windows is generally slower than ten years ago.
Thats the easy part, its just bigger and more complex. On the bright side, Win 10 has less graphics overhead than Win 7 so if the box is set up correctly, the video is better.
Now with the suggestion to put more memory in it, how is the memory installed in the new box ? Is it a single SIMM with no room to add more ? If that is so, perhaps you can just buy a bigger one, putting 16 gig in it would solve a number of problems. I build boxes with 64 gig and with that much memory, you never get any memory or slowdown issues. These are of course desktops, not notepads.
-
Another crappy issue are the manifest files. Today I discovered that on Win 10, a simple checkbox displays as a pushbutton if the program has a standard XP manifest :sad:
To changing compatibility properties don't work?
-
Another crappy issue are the manifest files. Today I discovered that on Win 10, a simple checkbox displays as a pushbutton if the program has a standard XP manifest :sad:
To changing compatibility properties don't work?
No effect. Test it yourself: extract to a folder that contains rtf files, then launch the 3 executables. The common controls version is displayed in the status bar.
-
No effect.
Compatibilty don't work like before or probably something is missing in manifests. I tested an old program with ComCtrl6 and no compatibility category allow to see CommCtr5. Anyway, no problem with checkbox.
Old programm new build don't work without manifest, but work like before with no CommCtrl dependency in manifest:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<assembly xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" manifestVersion="1.0">
<description>MasmBasic</description>
<compatibility xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:compatibility.v1">
<application>
<!-- Windows 10 -->
<supportedOS Id="{8e0f7a12-bfb3-4fe8-b9a5-48fd50a15a9a}"/>
<!-- Windows 8.1 -->
<supportedOS Id="{1f676c76-80e1-4239-95bb-83d0f6d0da78}"/>
<!-- Windows Vista -->
<supportedOS Id="{e2011457-1546-43c5-a5fe-008deee3d3f0}"/>
<!-- Windows 7 -->
<supportedOS Id="{35138b9a-5d96-4fbd-8e2d-a2440225f93a}"/>
<!-- Windows 8 -->
<supportedOS Id="{4a2f28e3-53b9-4441-ba9c-d69d4a4a6e38}"/>
</application>
</compatibility>
<trustInfo xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3">
<security>
<requestedPrivileges>
<requestedExecutionLevel
level="asInvoker"
uiAccess="false"
/>
</requestedPrivileges>
</security>
</trustInfo>
</assembly>
-
games are far from simple Dos games,much complicated and betatesting sometimes is made by players,so they can release just before christmas and release patches afterwards when players report bugs
worst dependency on software is when important sites,like when your banking doesnt work you dont want to pay your bills too late
-
Well, if your nifty kewl blast-o-matic hi-rez game crashes, BFD.
But what about all the other functions that depend on (mostly Windoze, I'm guessing) computers?
- Banking, like you mentioned
- Public transportation
- Health care
- Online commerce
- a thousand other things ...
Life gets "interesting" when those systems crash ...
-
No effect.
Compatibilty don't work like before or probably something is missing in manifests. I tested an old program with ComCtrl6 and no compatibility category allow to see CommCtr5. Anyway, no problem with checkbox.
Old programm new build don't work without manifest, but work like before with no CommCtrl dependency in manifest:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<assembly xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" manifestVersion="1.0">
<description>MasmBasic</description>
<compatibility xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:compatibility.v1">
<application>
<!-- Windows 10 -->
<supportedOS Id="{8e0f7a12-bfb3-4fe8-b9a5-48fd50a15a9a}"/>
<!-- Windows 8.1 -->
<supportedOS Id="{1f676c76-80e1-4239-95bb-83d0f6d0da78}"/>
<!-- Windows Vista -->
<supportedOS Id="{e2011457-1546-43c5-a5fe-008deee3d3f0}"/>
<!-- Windows 7 -->
<supportedOS Id="{35138b9a-5d96-4fbd-8e2d-a2440225f93a}"/>
<!-- Windows 8 -->
<supportedOS Id="{4a2f28e3-53b9-4441-ba9c-d69d4a4a6e38}"/>
</application>
</compatibility>
<trustInfo xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3">
<security>
<requestedPrivileges>
<requestedExecutionLevel
level="asInvoker"
uiAccess="false"
/>
</requestedPrivileges>
</security>
</trustInfo>
</assembly>
This one loads common controls version 5.82, in Win7 and Win10. The checkbox works fine in both but... :cool: