4 ms·
Yeah, and that's how you get laggy user interfaces that at least I despise. Spend that 4€ on a better chip.
by dcbadacd 8y ago
Yeah, and that's how you get laggy user interfaces that at least I despise. Spend that 4€ on a better chip.
- ben_w 8y agoHow did we manage non-laggy user interfaces back in 1995 when 120 MHz single core/single chip, registers slower than modern RAM, and no dedicated graphics processor was top of the line?
- jjoonathan 8y agoBy living without 20 layers of middleware.
- nambit 8y agoWith physical buttons instead of touch screens?
- camoby 8y ago“Vive La Resolution!”
- pjmlp 8y agoBy writing lots of optimizations in hand optimized Assembly. http://www.jagregory.com/abrash-zen-of-asm/ http://www.jagregory.com/abrash-zen-of-asm/ https://www.amazon.com/Windows-Assembly-Language-Systems-Programming/dp/087930474X https://www.amazon.com/Windows-Assembly-Language-Systems-Pro...
- naasking 8y agoAnd by using a highly restricted colour palette, low resolution, no anti-aliasing, etc.
- blattimwind 8y agoIt's scientifically proven that almost every post-2000 UI has slower response than a DOS input mask.
- snaky 8y agoIt appears for world-class 'small-screen' interface you need a couple of Linux-capable SoC chips and a decent FPGA https://xdevs.com/review/dmm6500/ https://xdevs.com/review/dmm6500/