3 ms·
"Terminal response times are way slower than they used to be in the 80's." In 1983 the top selling computers were the TRS-80, Apple II and IBM PC (among others)
by mrdatawolf 7y ago
"Terminal response times are way slower than they used to be in the 80's." In 1983 the top selling computers were the TRS-80, Apple II and IBM PC (among others). I started on those computers. And what you said is crap... straight out BS. Any person from that era should remember what happened when you typed dir (or equivalent) into a folder with a couple hundred items. It was time to go make some coffee while each...item...was...written...to...the...screen. The OP has good points but the start was WEAK because it is factually inaccurate like your comment.
- simonskoog 7y agoThat still happens though, and it's not because it actually took 50ms for your computer to read a filename and 500 ms for it to read 10. It depends on how fast you allow items to be written (pixels per unit of time) on your display and if you force writing of everything or allow line skips. If you want to experiment I think putty has pretty fine-grain control options.
- carapace 7y agoRight, I can recall the first time I saw my friend's parent's 486. I remember doing 'dir' on a large directory, it scrolled so fast, so fast. I said to my friend, "The next generation will be so fast it will have finished scrolling before you finish typing the command." Sadly, it was not to be. DOS on a 486 is as fast as computers have ever gotten, perceptually.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- soulofmischief 7y agoThe terminal is not experiencing input latency while the shell runs the dir program. The drawing program is experiencing latency. My comment is oversimplified for brevity, but not factually incorrect.