Hacker News Reader

Comment by open-source-ux | Hacker News Reader

My recollection of software from the Windows 95 era is different. The reliability of desktop apps varied depending on the type of software but problems were often related to hardware. Today, hardware is much more reliable and adheres to widely adopted standards.

Faster, more capable hardware hasn't necessarily made modern software better. In many cases the opposite: apps are slow and gobble up computer resources with no restraints.

View on HN

>Faster, more capable hardware hasn't necessarily made modern software better. In many cases the opposite: apps are slow and gobble up computer resources with no restraints.

Not exactly a new phenomenon: applications always grow to exploit new features offered to them

Yes, that's very true. But in the 90s, both developers and users would not tolerate slow or memory-hungry apps. The hardware and memory constraints meant developers chose languages and tools for that purpose.

Today, developers choose languages and tools that suit their comfort first. The user's comfort often takes secondary consideration.

We have very different memories of the 90s. I remember it being full of slow, memory hungry and buggy apps.

Your memory of the 90s isn't mine - memory-hungry apps have been a thing for over 50 years, my friend

I switched to Linux because of Windows 95. And getting Linux up and running back then was a real pain. But once it was running, it was way better than those bluescreens of death.

So in my memory it was not the hardware.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com