I'm still constantly baffled by just how absolutely beyond shit modern computers are
@OpenComputeDesign x86 was a mistake? :)
@OpenComputeDesign
16 bit was a mistake?
transistors were a mistake?
how modern are we talking? :)

@kabel42 @OpenComputeDesign

16-bit/early-32-bit was my favorite era. (Basically, the #68k era ;)

Computers were just becoming capable, but not too big for their britches.

@rl_dane @kabel42

Yeah, tbh, we really should have stopped at 32-bit

@OpenComputeDesign @rl_dane I had a good time with my first amd athlon 64 but sure, simpler times :)

@kabel42 @OpenComputeDesign

I think computers were honestly better when they were limited to absolutely no more than 1GB RAM, no more than 256 colors, and no more than 1024x768 screen resolution.

1GB RAM: no LLMs
256 colors: no horrid low-contrast soupy interfaces
XGA Resolution: no horrid empty spaces and bloated interfaces

I keep wanting to make that as an OS πŸ˜„

(If only I had the skillz)

@rl_dane @kabel42

Yeah, older GUIs were _so much better_ it's actually impressive just how fast and how hard GUI design has fallen off a cliff

@OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

Yeah, and the pushback I get from statements like that is insane to me.

"But we don't want to go back to Windows 95."

I don't either, it was a crap OS, but the interface was better than the crap interfaces they're shipping today, so ?!?!????!?

@rl_dane

I'd rather w95 with its software suite and interface than w11 with its.

W11 is a worse OS than w95 was.

@OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

@pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

It does have memory protection, though. That was Windows 95's most glaring weakness.

Edit: I meant to say that it doesn't. derp.
Edit2: No, I was saying that W11 has memory protection. lol

@rl_dane @pixx @kabel42

Modern software still absolutely _sucks_ with anything to do with memory. Any claims modern OS's make are, at best, just giving people a false sense of security.

@OpenComputeDesign @pixx @kabel42

Brofam, Windows 95 used to crash on me daily.

Linux? Basically never.

FreeBSD? Maaaaybe once a week.

@rl_dane @pixx @kabel42

Linux and NetBSD both crash on me daily :P

@OpenComputeDesign @rl_dane @pixx @kabel42 Is it the OS that crashes, or applications running on the OS?

Are the crashes related to video output?

The OS should never crash. If it does, you most likely have defective hardware, or you’re finding issues with your video hardware support.

@AnachronistJohn @pixx @kabel42 @rl_dane

If a program crashes, 95% chance the OS crashes with it. Preemptetive/memory protected is a flat out lie.

@OpenComputeDesign @AnachronistJohn @pixx @kabel42

Yeah, no. Maybe 5% of the time, if that.

Some games and (*sigh*) bloated web pages can really test a system, though.

Also, I love how some random corporate social media pages can bring a fast box to its knees, and yet infinitmac.org will happily host an entire vm running IN your browser with just a teensy bit of CPU usage.

@rl_dane @OpenComputeDesign @AnachronistJohn @kabel42

I mean, infinimac is running like am 68k lol. Emulating a CPU that runs at ~1MHz and whose entire memory space fits in your host CPU's cache is not terribly expensive :P

The corpo pages literally _would not be possible_ on those older machines :)

@pixx @OpenComputeDesign @AnachronistJohn @kabel42

Eh, 8-40Mhz, akshuyallly. ;)

The PowerPC emulators on that site do bog down a good bit.

I wasn't saying that the corpo hellsites could run on the emulated machines, but that Infinite Mac can emulate completely foreign hardware and be more responsive than crapsites that just use a circlejank of JS frameworks to display your dumb uncle's racist rants. XD

@rl_dane @OpenComputeDesign @AnachronistJohn @kabel42 yeah my point was that running the crapsites is harder :P