#Autodesk Confirms NT 3ds
2 messages in this thread
"when this wasn't really true was when we had Win30 running on 386s."
Are you trying to say that Win 3.0 was so powerful that it needed a powerful
processor to make it really shine?
Sure, Win 3.0, the most buggiest and worst coded GUI ever, needed bigger
machines and not a complete rewrite. Do you want me to send you a copy of Win
3.0 so you can try it in one of your Pentiums?
Hardware catching up with software? Tell that to the SGI guys. They have "some"
sloowwwww software that need BIIIG processors just to mantain a barely decent
speed. They depend on the hardware, the same way most software developers
depend on new processors to carry their poorly designed code. Optimization?
That's a word out of the dictionary for most software engineers today and
yesterday, specially the ones that get Win 3.0 to the market. Win 3.0 was a
joke. Win 3.1 is a joke. Win95 will be joke. NT is one of the ways to go, needs
a few fixes, but at least, it is not a joke.
I was talking the other day with a games programmer that told me that they
could release games capable of running at full speed (as fast as people run
them on Pentiums) on 386s, but that companies just don't have the time not the
money (or they don't want to spend it) to optimize the code. Make that true for
the rest of the software industry. Only a few programs I know (i.e.3DS) are
actually faster with each release. The rest? They only know how to add crap and
more crap to make you buy new and faster machines with more memory and gadgets.
Hardware catching up with software? I don't think so.
ana /krazy images
krazy,
>> Are you trying to say that Win 3.0 was so powerful that it needed a
>> powerful processor to make it really shine?
Yes, that's what I'm saying. Win30 used everything that a 386 was capable of:
protected mode apps, VMs (DOS only), VxDs (video, printers, whatever). It was
capable of running a variety of processors (x86 of course). It sounds as if
you're suggesting that Win30 didn't start the revolution. Well you're probably
young…
>> Do you want me to send you a copy of Win 3.0 so you can try it in
>> one of your Pentiums?
Nah, got it. That and Windows 1.02, Windows 1.03, Windows 2.0, Windows 2.1,
Windows 2.11, Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1, Windows 3.11, Win9x, WinNT31,
WinNT35…
>> Tell that to the SGI guys.
Maybe I should have rephrased that. "Hardware that *people use* catching up
with hardware that *people use*." I'm sure you don't actually believe that SGI
machines will be sitting on everyone's desktop by the end of the year, do you?
>> but that companies just don't have the time not the money (or they
>> don't want to spend it) to optimize the code.
No argument there. Except for the "don't want to spend it" part. More than
likely they don't have it to spend. Especially small companies (like games
makers) that run on a very narrow margin.
>> Only a few programs I know (i.e.3DS) are actually faster with each
>> release.
Well if I could charge $3500 a pop for my product with limited competition I'd
probably be able to spend a little time optimizing the code too. Most software
companies are cranking out commodity items at $35 hoping to keep (or get) a leg
up on the competition.
>> Hardware catching up with software? I don't think so.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Even when they're wrong.<g>
Marc