3 ms·

You can't convince me that worsening the experience on a device in 30 minutes (time for OTA update to finish) is to be expected. Example: iOS 9 update. Althoug

by tdkl 11y ago

You can't convince me that worsening the experience on a device in 30 minutes (time for OTA update to finish) is to be expected. Example: iOS 9 update. Although I don't agree with many practices MS does lately, I'll admit that they're doing a good job with Windows performance being better and/or at least not worse.

lsc 11y ago
> You can't convince me that worsening the experience on a device in 30 minutes (time for OTA update to finish) is to be expected. Example: iOS 9 update. I can tell you that in the late '90s and early aughts, well, they weren't OTA updates; you actually paid for physical disks, but yes, worsening the experience was completely expected. that's why you bought a new computer at the same time. I am telling you it's the same idea.
- tdkl 11y ago
  No, you upgraded your PC with larger storage, or more RAM. Or if you were a mindless consumer, which my original post is stating, you "upgraded" (bought) to a new PC. And this mentality came over from mobile and is already pioneered on desktop as well (that one company who solders RAM and hard drives now). Speaking of MS, I don't remember if in the last 10 years I had to buy a new GPU or replace whole PC because the Windows update would bring the whole OS to its knees with slower click response and stuttery animations. From Windows 7 onwards the performance is actually more optimized and faster (disregarding UI design choices).
  - shard 11y ago
    When the CPU clock speed increases 3-5x in 3 years, upgrading storage or memory is not going to cover that gap. If I recall, my upgrade cycle was something like 1994: 40MHz 486, 1997: 200MHz Pentium, 2001?: 1.xGHz?
  - shard 11y ago
    When the CPU clock speed increases 3-5x in 3 years, upgrading storage or memory is not going to cover that gap. If I recall, my upgrade cycle was something like 1994: 40MHz 486, 1997: 200MHz Pentium, 2001?: 1.xGHz?

by tdkl 11y ago

lsc 11y ago

> You can't convince me that worsening the experience on a device in 30 minutes (time for OTA update to finish) is to be expected. Example: iOS 9 update. I can tell you that in the late '90s and early aughts, well, they weren't OTA updates; you actually paid for physical disks, but yes, worsening the experience was completely expected. that's why you bought a new computer at the same time. I am telling you it's the same idea.

tdkl 11y ago
No, you upgraded your PC with larger storage, or more RAM. Or if you were a mindless consumer, which my original post is stating, you "upgraded" (bought) to a new PC. And this mentality came over from mobile and is already pioneered on desktop as well (that one company who solders RAM and hard drives now). Speaking of MS, I don't remember if in the last 10 years I had to buy a new GPU or replace whole PC because the Windows update would bring the whole OS to its knees with slower click response and stuttery animations. From Windows 7 onwards the performance is actually more optimized and faster (disregarding UI design choices).
- shard 11y ago
  When the CPU clock speed increases 3-5x in 3 years, upgrading storage or memory is not going to cover that gap. If I recall, my upgrade cycle was something like 1994: 40MHz 486, 1997: 200MHz Pentium, 2001?: 1.xGHz?
- shard 11y ago
  When the CPU clock speed increases 3-5x in 3 years, upgrading storage or memory is not going to cover that gap. If I recall, my upgrade cycle was something like 1994: 40MHz 486, 1997: 200MHz Pentium, 2001?: 1.xGHz?