8 ms·

Sad, but a day everyone knew would come. I totally understand the lack of support for a dead architecture. It's not like you can just keep throwing software at

Sad, but a day everyone knew would come. I totally understand the lack of support for a dead architecture. It's not like you can just keep throwing software at these machines and run them fine anyway. I have a 2003-04 era Powerbook with Ubuntu on it. It runs 10.04 just fine, but any newer and it's pretty damn slow. Basically the only thing I can do with it now is text based stuff, and not much of it. Some Python, bash C++ etc. Can't even really browse the web, because the newer versions of any web browser won't run/compile. Since I can do all of those same things on my current laptop just fine there's no motivation to use the PPC mac other than nostalgia. Imagine how the folks feel trying to support it now?

Gracana 10y ago
It frustrates me that computers become obsolete this way. We've generated an awful lot of waste and not a whole lot of progress. Everything I do now I could do ten years ago, it's just "prettier" now. I'd go back to one of these old machines in an instant if it didn't mean that reading articles on the web would be so painful.
- reflexive 10y ago
  We've generated an awful lot of waste and not a whole lot of progress. For some to succeed, others must fail. It's not possible to keep every CPU design ever conceived in production. PowerPC lost. There's not an infinite amount of software engineering resources to support every discontinued architecture. I'd go back to one of these old machines in an instant if it didn't mean that reading articles on the web would be so painful. If you really feel strongly, this is an opportunity for you to get involved in Linux maintenance.
  - notalaser 10y ago
    The underlying problem that the parent post was trying to point out is that the programs we run today largely do pretty much the same things that they did 10 years ago, but for some reason they require vastly more powerful hardware, with questionable gains. A modern browser crawls on my old iBook G3, even when all it has to display is the HN homepage. And it crawls on the web in general; it would be clever engineering if it were slow only on websites that use super modern features, like WebGL, but the whole things grinds to a halt when reading a newspaper's website, even though the website is fundamentally the same as it was ten years ago. The same goes for virtually every other kind of software. My computer is at least an order of magnitude faster than the one I owned ten years ago, but the quality, or at least the speed of my usage is pretty much the same. This sounds less like progress and more like running in circles :-).
    - adrianN 10y ago
      Unfortunatly newspaper websites in particular are very different from how they were ten years ago. Newspapers for some reason deem it necessary to load every piece of Javascript ever written to display an article.
      - majewsky 10y ago
        I'll just leave this here: https://www.ublock.org/ https://www.ublock.org/
        nine_k 10y ago
        uMatrix gives even more control.
      - LnxPrgr3 10y ago
        Browsing the Web from a Raspberry Pi (3) was an interesting experience. Browsing supposedly static content like news sites was often surprisingly painful, yet Google Docs was at least usable—alongside Roll20, which is also not exactly the lightest weight thing I use. (I also came to loathe even more videos I didn't ask for playing.)
    - reflexive 10y ago
      A modern browser crawls on my old iBook G3 OK I agree in the browser space (as opposed to the processor space) the past 5 years have been a lot of churn and flabby software. It's a hard problem as web developers have incentive to use all the horsepower available to them. The only way forward I can imagine, is if everybody sandboxes their browser tabs to limit the resources available to them (e.g. using Linux cgroups), and web developers know they are forced to live in those constraints. "cgroups in the browser" turned up this proposal (March 2016) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11998210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11998210
      - dom0 10y ago
        > It's a hard problem as web developers have incentive to use all the horsepower available to them. Although it's not only the fault of the browser devs, but probably mainly of JS/frontend devs... the result is that leaving a browser window open easily halves battery time, because even innocuous sites eat half a core of CPU. Also, fan's always whirling. Qubes OS is quite nice here. Just pause the VM with the browser in it -> 0 % CPU, but can still read what's on the display.
  - dom0 10y ago
    PowerPC may be dead, but POWER sure isn't. My guess is that PowerPC will still hold some relevance for the time to come as a cheap and widely available testing architecture: if a piece of software works on ppc (BE), it most likely has no byte-ordering issues (that show in it's tests) and should work on POWER or SPARC as well.
    - justincormack 10y ago
      Modern POWER is ppc64le so no use for this. On the other hand nearly every arm machine can run big endian.
      - dom0 10y ago
        I mostly referred to > PowerPC has lost.
    - ajdlinux 10y ago
      I think you'll find most developers wanting to get stuff working on Power will just try and get their hands on a POWER8 VM rather than relying on an ancient PowerPC box.
      - angry_octet 10y ago
        I still use my PowerMac G5 and it works fine performance wise. I'd be willing to bet it would run POWER8 code faster than an interpreter running on x64. Although realistically I'd just log in to an instance somewhere in an IBM cloud. And now I feel sad, like the sad mac face.
- adrianN 10y ago
  I'm using a seven year old Macbook Pro for everything and it works just fine. I upgraded the RAM and maybe I'll get a SSD at some point. I really don't understand why people throw out their computers every two or three years. If Apple eventually stops supporting the hardware I'll switch to Linux.
  - Nition 10y ago
    The hardware progress is also slowing down. The difference between a PC from 1993 and one from 2000 was massive, but I'm using a seven year old desktop right now and it's running fine. CPUs seem to have only about doubled in speed in that time. This thing has an i7 860 from 2009 that gets a PassMark score of 5083. The top-of-the-line i7 975 from that time has a score of 6215. A present day i7 6700K has a score of 11011. Graphics cards have advanced a bit more strongly. But swap out an old disk drive for an SSD and PCs are really staying viable for a long time.
    - Piskvorrr 10y ago
      Amen. As long as the disks hold (and even that is a Solved process with RAID), mid-nulls HW is still viable (e.g. with LXLE).
    - Neeek 10y ago
      I thought most of that jump was made in the sandybridge iteration and the rest have mostly been gains power efficiency. Maybe I just don't push my gen 4 enough to notice the difference from my old gen 2.
  - Gracana 10y ago
    What's that, core duo? Core 2 duo? I'm quite pleased with how well those devices are holding on.
- discreditable 10y ago
  "The most amazing achievement of the computer software industry is its continuing cancellation of the steady and staggering gains made by the computer hardware industry."
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  That you haven't taken advantage of anything new in the last decade doesn't seem like an indictment of technology so much as a declaration that you are happy to ossify. I certainly do new things all the time that came about in the last decade.
  - Piskvorrr 10y ago
    Oh, I do new things, too - but most of them are done somewhere cloud-ish, with the browser essentially simulating a thin client. In fact, my set of normaly-user essential local software is shrinking - I expect it to become just "a browser" within a few years. (As a developer, now that's a very different story)
- gaius 10y ago
  Ten years ago? More like 30 years, what can you do now that you couldn't do on an Amiga in 1985? Same stuff faster and in higher resolution that's all...
  - skrause 10y ago
    > Ten years ago? More like 30 years, what can you do now that you couldn't do on an Amiga in 1985? Things like streaming HD video on YouTube for hours on a single battery charge?
- badsock 10y ago
  Agree 100%. I'm hoping that RISC-V will be a nice plateau where we can hang out for a long, long time. It's within spitting distance of a good as the current mode of thought is going to get, and there's no commercial entity behind it to chase after differentiation and therefore churn. It almost makes me hope that arches like the Mill don't pan out - if there's nothing obviously better, boring compatibility will win and bring with it the opportunity to build higher on narrower, more stable, base.
- Frondo 10y ago
  This comment reminds me of a story I heard years, years ago. I was living in central Asia, in one of the post-Soviet countries. (As an aside, I met quite a few people there who much preferred life under Soviet rule. Sometimes at parties in the countryside they'd even start singing rousing choruses of the soviet anthem!) Anyway, the apocryphal story goes, Krushchev is visiting a Western washing machine factory. He sees all the different models coming off the line, this one has two agigtators, that one has three speeds, whatever. He sees the churn of factory equipment. All that hustle and bustle to try and sell more washing machines. He laments, "Oh, you capitalists, you're so inefficient. Look at how much time and effort you waste on with all this competition! We soviets made one washing machine, and it works!"
  - negativity 10y ago
    It's a little deceptive to label these kinds of sentiments as contrary to the premise of innovation. Experiments, by nature, require expendable resources, but an finished appliance intended for a consumer, with no end-user-servicable internals is not the sort of thing you want to have spewing garbage in all directions. The reality though, is that we're all being railroaded down strict paths of planned obsolesence that are integrated into business models from day one. Yours and my waste should not be interpretted as an unforced error. It's carefully planned, with the intent to fund more plannings sessions to forecast more waste. ...at least down among these lower eschelons we inhabit (speaking for myself, so as not to make assumptions about who reads this), and then there are those who ride above it all and skim from the fruits of our obesity.
    - Retric 10y ago
      There are side channels for places like apartment complexes that want a much longer device lifespan and are willing to pay for it. Planned obsolesce is much more common on the 'mass market' channels than the industrial channels. You really can still buy refrigerators that will last 30 years. They just don't have built in ice makers etc. PS: The 50-200% premium may seem steep, but if it lasts 5x as long then you more than break even.
- technomancy 10y ago
  It's really not that bad with NoScript; my primary machine is from 2009. I was considering buying a backup machine that was a few years older, and the main thing that kept me from pulling the trigger was that the LCD brightness was kinda crap, not anything to do with performance.
- Osmium 10y ago
  > It frustrates me that computers become obsolete this way. Honestly, I'm optimistic. Technological progress is plateauing (at least single-threaded CPU speeds), and this will naturally need to more stability. I think the last few decades of rapid technological change has led us through a dark ages of sorts, and the next few decades will hopefully be a maturing of platforms and standards, at least as far as desktop/laptop computing goes. To put it another way: Moore's law has led to a multitude of sins, and once we can no longer rely on Moore's law to make our computers faster, we're going to really think through past decisions and make smarter choices going forwards. It'll be the only way to keep making progress. To bring this back to your comment specifically, I think computers will take longer and longer to become obsolete, as these technologies mature. I think this is already happening: I can quite happily use a 5 year old computer now for most current computing tasks, whereas this would not have been true a decade ago.
  - majewsky 10y ago
    > Technological progress is plateauing (at least single-threaded CPU speeds), and this will naturally need to more stability. That's a surprisingly narrow perspective on technological progress (although convenient for your argument). > once we can no longer rely on Moore's law to make our computers faster Moore's law is still making our GPUs faster as planned. Our only hope is Amdahl's law. :) > I think computers will take longer and longer to become obsolete No need to look at the future. The average lifespan of a computer is already 4 years and maybe even more. We are starting to see the same larger lifespan for smartphones. (The biggest issue with keeping my phones for longer is actually the availability of Android updates.)
    - sliken 10y ago
      Sadly the longer lifespan for phones is being sabotaged by epoxied in batteries My 2 year old note 4 will be fine (quad core, 3 GB ram, 96GB storage) for many more years... only because I can replace the battery (which I've already done once). Finding a replacement for my note 4 with a replaceable battery has been tough. Hopefully in the next few years someone will offer it.
- tracker1 10y ago
  From 2003 there's been a lot of progress.. since around 2009 not much in raw per-core performance in CPUs, but a lot of effort around reducing power draw. GPUs are significantly faster today. The real slowdown started around 2009, but there has still been progress. Also, "prettier" has a cost... it takes a lot of memory to pump that much data to a screen at a usable rate. Hell, even a modern powerhouse with a top of the line video card still cant play modern games at 4k with higher quality settings at a playable framerate, so there's room to grow. Also, prettier has value, as does some of the interactive pieces that we tend to take advantage of. It isn't like things have stood still. Also, most of the work is about delivering overall value, not optimal performance, so there is still room... but not on very old hardware that doesn't have a lot of support. Yeah, there's a few powerpc users, but how many of them are contributing to upkeep... not many would be my guess, and maintaining testing labs is another issue entirely. I'd much rather get a great ootb experience on an under 5yo macbook in a current linux distro than hardware that is much older.
orbitingpluto 10y ago
This year I retired a Pentium III co-located 1U server. RedHat -> Ubuntu 6.0 Dapper Drake -> 8.04 Hardy Heron -> 12.04 Precise Pangolin. Upgraded the memory to 512MB from 128MB and replaced the two 6GB hard drives with 80GB drives. All this thing did was rsync and do SOCKS5 over SSH on port 53 (which was very useful until ~2012). Co-location was free for this thing, which kept it in service far longer than it should have been. It was nice to keep the same hardware functional for that long.
tropo 10y ago
It's mainly the lack of a javascript JIT. You can get a JIT for 32-bit x86 and ARM. You can get a JIT for 64-bit x86, ARM, and PowerPC. In the modern world, no JIT means no web. Right after that problem, those old PowerPC machines face a lack of RAM and a lack of well-accelerated 3D. It was typical to have 64 to 256 megabytes of RAM, with an upper limit of 1.5 gigabytes. There might have been a 3D accelerator, but it couldn't work in full resolution/color fast enough to keep up with modern compositing needs. For us older people, these are all silly big numbers for reading web pages. Wasteful frameworks and advertising have bloated up the web, requiring us to follow the crowd in buying faster hardware just to get the performance we had two decades ago.
- Gibbon1 10y ago
  Not just the web, year or so ago tried importing a dxf file (old autodesk export/import format) on a newer CAD program. Used up 2gb of ram and then died. Opened it in an old moldy gerber viewer, displayed instantly. Turned out it had about 10000 elements. If I deleted half then the CAD program would display it after a while. Far as I could tell each element in the dxf was consuming about 300-500k of RAM. Reminds me of the Tom Waits song: What's he building in there.
- makomk 10y ago
  Also, modern JavaScript is little-endian and PowerPC is big-endian.

Gracana 10y ago

It frustrates me that computers become obsolete this way. We've generated an awful lot of waste and not a whole lot of progress. Everything I do now I could do ten years ago, it's just "prettier" now. I'd go back to one of these old machines in an instant if it didn't mean that reading articles on the web would be so painful.

reflexive 10y ago
We've generated an awful lot of waste and not a whole lot of progress. For some to succeed, others must fail. It's not possible to keep every CPU design ever conceived in production. PowerPC lost. There's not an infinite amount of software engineering resources to support every discontinued architecture. I'd go back to one of these old machines in an instant if it didn't mean that reading articles on the web would be so painful. If you really feel strongly, this is an opportunity for you to get involved in Linux maintenance.
- notalaser 10y ago
  The underlying problem that the parent post was trying to point out is that the programs we run today largely do pretty much the same things that they did 10 years ago, but for some reason they require vastly more powerful hardware, with questionable gains. A modern browser crawls on my old iBook G3, even when all it has to display is the HN homepage. And it crawls on the web in general; it would be clever engineering if it were slow only on websites that use super modern features, like WebGL, but the whole things grinds to a halt when reading a newspaper's website, even though the website is fundamentally the same as it was ten years ago. The same goes for virtually every other kind of software. My computer is at least an order of magnitude faster than the one I owned ten years ago, but the quality, or at least the speed of my usage is pretty much the same. This sounds less like progress and more like running in circles :-).
  - adrianN 10y ago
    Unfortunatly newspaper websites in particular are very different from how they were ten years ago. Newspapers for some reason deem it necessary to load every piece of Javascript ever written to display an article.
    - majewsky 10y ago
      I'll just leave this here: https://www.ublock.org/ https://www.ublock.org/
      - nine_k 10y ago
        uMatrix gives even more control.
    - LnxPrgr3 10y ago
      Browsing the Web from a Raspberry Pi (3) was an interesting experience. Browsing supposedly static content like news sites was often surprisingly painful, yet Google Docs was at least usable—alongside Roll20, which is also not exactly the lightest weight thing I use. (I also came to loathe even more videos I didn't ask for playing.)
  - reflexive 10y ago
    A modern browser crawls on my old iBook G3 OK I agree in the browser space (as opposed to the processor space) the past 5 years have been a lot of churn and flabby software. It's a hard problem as web developers have incentive to use all the horsepower available to them. The only way forward I can imagine, is if everybody sandboxes their browser tabs to limit the resources available to them (e.g. using Linux cgroups), and web developers know they are forced to live in those constraints. "cgroups in the browser" turned up this proposal (March 2016) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11998210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11998210
    - dom0 10y ago
      > It's a hard problem as web developers have incentive to use all the horsepower available to them. Although it's not only the fault of the browser devs, but probably mainly of JS/frontend devs... the result is that leaving a browser window open easily halves battery time, because even innocuous sites eat half a core of CPU. Also, fan's always whirling. Qubes OS is quite nice here. Just pause the VM with the browser in it -> 0 % CPU, but can still read what's on the display.
- dom0 10y ago
  PowerPC may be dead, but POWER sure isn't. My guess is that PowerPC will still hold some relevance for the time to come as a cheap and widely available testing architecture: if a piece of software works on ppc (BE), it most likely has no byte-ordering issues (that show in it's tests) and should work on POWER or SPARC as well.
  - justincormack 10y ago
    Modern POWER is ppc64le so no use for this. On the other hand nearly every arm machine can run big endian.
    - dom0 10y ago
      I mostly referred to > PowerPC has lost.
  - ajdlinux 10y ago
    I think you'll find most developers wanting to get stuff working on Power will just try and get their hands on a POWER8 VM rather than relying on an ancient PowerPC box.
    - angry_octet 10y ago
      I still use my PowerMac G5 and it works fine performance wise. I'd be willing to bet it would run POWER8 code faster than an interpreter running on x64. Although realistically I'd just log in to an instance somewhere in an IBM cloud. And now I feel sad, like the sad mac face.
adrianN 10y ago
I'm using a seven year old Macbook Pro for everything and it works just fine. I upgraded the RAM and maybe I'll get a SSD at some point. I really don't understand why people throw out their computers every two or three years. If Apple eventually stops supporting the hardware I'll switch to Linux.
- Nition 10y ago
  The hardware progress is also slowing down. The difference between a PC from 1993 and one from 2000 was massive, but I'm using a seven year old desktop right now and it's running fine. CPUs seem to have only about doubled in speed in that time. This thing has an i7 860 from 2009 that gets a PassMark score of 5083. The top-of-the-line i7 975 from that time has a score of 6215. A present day i7 6700K has a score of 11011. Graphics cards have advanced a bit more strongly. But swap out an old disk drive for an SSD and PCs are really staying viable for a long time.
  - Piskvorrr 10y ago
    Amen. As long as the disks hold (and even that is a Solved process with RAID), mid-nulls HW is still viable (e.g. with LXLE).
  - Neeek 10y ago
    I thought most of that jump was made in the sandybridge iteration and the rest have mostly been gains power efficiency. Maybe I just don't push my gen 4 enough to notice the difference from my old gen 2.
- Gracana 10y ago
  What's that, core duo? Core 2 duo? I'm quite pleased with how well those devices are holding on.
discreditable 10y ago
"The most amazing achievement of the computer software industry is its continuing cancellation of the steady and staggering gains made by the computer hardware industry."
oldmanjay 10y ago
That you haven't taken advantage of anything new in the last decade doesn't seem like an indictment of technology so much as a declaration that you are happy to ossify. I certainly do new things all the time that came about in the last decade.
- Piskvorrr 10y ago
  Oh, I do new things, too - but most of them are done somewhere cloud-ish, with the browser essentially simulating a thin client. In fact, my set of normaly-user essential local software is shrinking - I expect it to become just "a browser" within a few years. (As a developer, now that's a very different story)
gaius 10y ago
Ten years ago? More like 30 years, what can you do now that you couldn't do on an Amiga in 1985? Same stuff faster and in higher resolution that's all...
- skrause 10y ago
  > Ten years ago? More like 30 years, what can you do now that you couldn't do on an Amiga in 1985? Things like streaming HD video on YouTube for hours on a single battery charge?
badsock 10y ago
Agree 100%. I'm hoping that RISC-V will be a nice plateau where we can hang out for a long, long time. It's within spitting distance of a good as the current mode of thought is going to get, and there's no commercial entity behind it to chase after differentiation and therefore churn. It almost makes me hope that arches like the Mill don't pan out - if there's nothing obviously better, boring compatibility will win and bring with it the opportunity to build higher on narrower, more stable, base.
Frondo 10y ago
This comment reminds me of a story I heard years, years ago. I was living in central Asia, in one of the post-Soviet countries. (As an aside, I met quite a few people there who much preferred life under Soviet rule. Sometimes at parties in the countryside they'd even start singing rousing choruses of the soviet anthem!) Anyway, the apocryphal story goes, Krushchev is visiting a Western washing machine factory. He sees all the different models coming off the line, this one has two agigtators, that one has three speeds, whatever. He sees the churn of factory equipment. All that hustle and bustle to try and sell more washing machines. He laments, "Oh, you capitalists, you're so inefficient. Look at how much time and effort you waste on with all this competition! We soviets made one washing machine, and it works!"
- negativity 10y ago
  It's a little deceptive to label these kinds of sentiments as contrary to the premise of innovation. Experiments, by nature, require expendable resources, but an finished appliance intended for a consumer, with no end-user-servicable internals is not the sort of thing you want to have spewing garbage in all directions. The reality though, is that we're all being railroaded down strict paths of planned obsolesence that are integrated into business models from day one. Yours and my waste should not be interpretted as an unforced error. It's carefully planned, with the intent to fund more plannings sessions to forecast more waste. ...at least down among these lower eschelons we inhabit (speaking for myself, so as not to make assumptions about who reads this), and then there are those who ride above it all and skim from the fruits of our obesity.
  - Retric 10y ago
    There are side channels for places like apartment complexes that want a much longer device lifespan and are willing to pay for it. Planned obsolesce is much more common on the 'mass market' channels than the industrial channels. You really can still buy refrigerators that will last 30 years. They just don't have built in ice makers etc. PS: The 50-200% premium may seem steep, but if it lasts 5x as long then you more than break even.
technomancy 10y ago
It's really not that bad with NoScript; my primary machine is from 2009. I was considering buying a backup machine that was a few years older, and the main thing that kept me from pulling the trigger was that the LCD brightness was kinda crap, not anything to do with performance.
Osmium 10y ago
> It frustrates me that computers become obsolete this way. Honestly, I'm optimistic. Technological progress is plateauing (at least single-threaded CPU speeds), and this will naturally need to more stability. I think the last few decades of rapid technological change has led us through a dark ages of sorts, and the next few decades will hopefully be a maturing of platforms and standards, at least as far as desktop/laptop computing goes. To put it another way: Moore's law has led to a multitude of sins, and once we can no longer rely on Moore's law to make our computers faster, we're going to really think through past decisions and make smarter choices going forwards. It'll be the only way to keep making progress. To bring this back to your comment specifically, I think computers will take longer and longer to become obsolete, as these technologies mature. I think this is already happening: I can quite happily use a 5 year old computer now for most current computing tasks, whereas this would not have been true a decade ago.
- majewsky 10y ago
  > Technological progress is plateauing (at least single-threaded CPU speeds), and this will naturally need to more stability. That's a surprisingly narrow perspective on technological progress (although convenient for your argument). > once we can no longer rely on Moore's law to make our computers faster Moore's law is still making our GPUs faster as planned. Our only hope is Amdahl's law. :) > I think computers will take longer and longer to become obsolete No need to look at the future. The average lifespan of a computer is already 4 years and maybe even more. We are starting to see the same larger lifespan for smartphones. (The biggest issue with keeping my phones for longer is actually the availability of Android updates.)
  - sliken 10y ago
    Sadly the longer lifespan for phones is being sabotaged by epoxied in batteries My 2 year old note 4 will be fine (quad core, 3 GB ram, 96GB storage) for many more years... only because I can replace the battery (which I've already done once). Finding a replacement for my note 4 with a replaceable battery has been tough. Hopefully in the next few years someone will offer it.
tracker1 10y ago
From 2003 there's been a lot of progress.. since around 2009 not much in raw per-core performance in CPUs, but a lot of effort around reducing power draw. GPUs are significantly faster today. The real slowdown started around 2009, but there has still been progress. Also, "prettier" has a cost... it takes a lot of memory to pump that much data to a screen at a usable rate. Hell, even a modern powerhouse with a top of the line video card still cant play modern games at 4k with higher quality settings at a playable framerate, so there's room to grow. Also, prettier has value, as does some of the interactive pieces that we tend to take advantage of. It isn't like things have stood still. Also, most of the work is about delivering overall value, not optimal performance, so there is still room... but not on very old hardware that doesn't have a lot of support. Yeah, there's a few powerpc users, but how many of them are contributing to upkeep... not many would be my guess, and maintaining testing labs is another issue entirely. I'd much rather get a great ootb experience on an under 5yo macbook in a current linux distro than hardware that is much older.

orbitingpluto 10y ago

This year I retired a Pentium III co-located 1U server. RedHat -> Ubuntu 6.0 Dapper Drake -> 8.04 Hardy Heron -> 12.04 Precise Pangolin. Upgraded the memory to 512MB from 128MB and replaced the two 6GB hard drives with 80GB drives. All this thing did was rsync and do SOCKS5 over SSH on port 53 (which was very useful until ~2012). Co-location was free for this thing, which kept it in service far longer than it should have been. It was nice to keep the same hardware functional for that long.

tropo 10y ago

It's mainly the lack of a javascript JIT. You can get a JIT for 32-bit x86 and ARM. You can get a JIT for 64-bit x86, ARM, and PowerPC. In the modern world, no JIT means no web. Right after that problem, those old PowerPC machines face a lack of RAM and a lack of well-accelerated 3D. It was typical to have 64 to 256 megabytes of RAM, with an upper limit of 1.5 gigabytes. There might have been a 3D accelerator, but it couldn't work in full resolution/color fast enough to keep up with modern compositing needs. For us older people, these are all silly big numbers for reading web pages. Wasteful frameworks and advertising have bloated up the web, requiring us to follow the crowd in buying faster hardware just to get the performance we had two decades ago.

Gibbon1 10y ago
Not just the web, year or so ago tried importing a dxf file (old autodesk export/import format) on a newer CAD program. Used up 2gb of ram and then died. Opened it in an old moldy gerber viewer, displayed instantly. Turned out it had about 10000 elements. If I deleted half then the CAD program would display it after a while. Far as I could tell each element in the dxf was consuming about 300-500k of RAM. Reminds me of the Tom Waits song: What's he building in there.
makomk 10y ago
Also, modern JavaScript is little-endian and PowerPC is big-endian.