4 ms·

Gee, you wouldn’t want to be computing a long running calculation or - horror of horrors! - an hours long compilation.

sisu2019 8y ago
well maybe dont press later later later ten times in a row before you embark in finally calculating the 1 billionth digit of pi
cptskippy 8y ago
I would argue that if your builds take more than 18 hours to complete then you should be running them on a build server which allows you to disable updates.
- p2t2p 8y ago
  What about long rendering? Every student and/or indie artist now need a very personal cluster?
  - cptskippy 8y ago
    Those are legitimate use cases and I could probably argue away the Student one. I don't know how much has changed since I was in school but in the late 90s and early 2000s upgrading people's computers to Windows Workstation/2000 was the way to go. I can see with campuses having access to Dreamspark, kids just installing Enterprise or Server. When my cousin was attending Ringling back in the early 2000s everyone needed Workstation or 2000 to run Renderman and they had setup the Renderman nodes on all of their personal workstations so that when anyone of them had a big job to render they could have the whole farm do it.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  Or, and here's a crazy thought, why not treat your paying customers like people who have some idea what they're doing instead of cattle?
  - cptskippy 8y ago
    Because most of their paying customers don't have some idea what they're doing. Remember Windows XP? Remember how bad the security issues were around it that their competitor launched an Ad Campaign poking fun at them? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwQpPqPKbAw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwQpPqPKbAw Bad PR is more damaging to market share than the 1% bitching about being treated like Cattle. If they give users the ability to disable security and update functionality then users will disable them OR bad actors will trick them into disabling them. You're behavior is not unlike an Anti-Vaxxer's.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
      Always with this. "Everything sucks because users are stupid". No, everything sucks because developers who think like you do are assholes who don't give a shit about making everyone else's life miserable if it makes their job easier.
      - cptskippy 8y ago
        Always with this. "Everything sucks because developers are stupid". No, everything sucks because users are a mixed bag who range from power users to complete morons and everything in between. They have to write software to the lowest common denominator and sometimes have to lockout potentially helpful features because there are bad actors who can convince the morons to do bad things.
        chris_wot 8y ago
        I kind of think that both your arguments can be shortened to "Everything sucks".
- shakna 8y ago
  I've had to spend 21 hours compiling something (a compiler) before. However, it's a one time thing, and once compiled, all my compilation times would decrease dramatically. Why is it unreasonable that for this one time thing, the OS gets out of the way, and allows me to make a single exception?

sisu2019 8y ago

well maybe dont press later later later ten times in a row before you embark in finally calculating the 1 billionth digit of pi

cptskippy 8y ago

I would argue that if your builds take more than 18 hours to complete then you should be running them on a build server which allows you to disable updates.

p2t2p 8y ago
What about long rendering? Every student and/or indie artist now need a very personal cluster?
- cptskippy 8y ago
  Those are legitimate use cases and I could probably argue away the Student one. I don't know how much has changed since I was in school but in the late 90s and early 2000s upgrading people's computers to Windows Workstation/2000 was the way to go. I can see with campuses having access to Dreamspark, kids just installing Enterprise or Server. When my cousin was attending Ringling back in the early 2000s everyone needed Workstation or 2000 to run Renderman and they had setup the Renderman nodes on all of their personal workstations so that when anyone of them had a big job to render they could have the whole farm do it.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
Or, and here's a crazy thought, why not treat your paying customers like people who have some idea what they're doing instead of cattle?
- cptskippy 8y ago
  Because most of their paying customers don't have some idea what they're doing. Remember Windows XP? Remember how bad the security issues were around it that their competitor launched an Ad Campaign poking fun at them? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwQpPqPKbAw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwQpPqPKbAw Bad PR is more damaging to market share than the 1% bitching about being treated like Cattle. If they give users the ability to disable security and update functionality then users will disable them OR bad actors will trick them into disabling them. You're behavior is not unlike an Anti-Vaxxer's.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    Always with this. "Everything sucks because users are stupid". No, everything sucks because developers who think like you do are assholes who don't give a shit about making everyone else's life miserable if it makes their job easier.
    - cptskippy 8y ago
      Always with this. "Everything sucks because developers are stupid". No, everything sucks because users are a mixed bag who range from power users to complete morons and everything in between. They have to write software to the lowest common denominator and sometimes have to lockout potentially helpful features because there are bad actors who can convince the morons to do bad things.
      - chris_wot 8y ago
        I kind of think that both your arguments can be shortened to "Everything sucks".
shakna 8y ago
I've had to spend 21 hours compiling something (a compiler) before. However, it's a one time thing, and once compiled, all my compilation times would decrease dramatically. Why is it unreasonable that for this one time thing, the OS gets out of the way, and allows me to make a single exception?