4 ms·

I think this article has a bad title, but I agree with its actual point, which is that back in the 1980s and early 1990s, desktop computers topped out at one le

by msla 6y ago

I think this article has a bad title, but I agree with its actual point, which is that back in the 1980s and early 1990s, desktop computers topped out at one level and workstations were a discontinuous jump above, unreachable as long as you were limited to commodity components and supply chains. Their hardware and software was Just Better (Than Home Systems Of The Same Era[1]) and it was certainly a lot cooler. I mean, NeXTcube vs Macintosh Quadra? Please! That said, this is a Kids These Days rant about how there is a smooth transition now, because the workstation as-was is a dead concept, replaced by desktop systems just a few price points more expensive than yours but which are still, fundamentally, the same kind of system. [1] But not better than modern systems: https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/WorkstationMythology https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/WorkstationMyt...

prox 6y ago
I think that is why Raspberry Pi and the like are the new cool. They are different, and they can also be what you want it to be. They spark the imagination, and I think that’s the kind of magic of what the author describes. A system thats unique (and capable) is kind of the lure.
- fogihujy 6y ago
  This. The new Pi 400 even kinda look like one of the early 80's machines.
HeadsUpHigh 6y ago
From a software perspective I would have preferred for workstations to remain their own thing. "home" computer software just doesn't take certain attributes seriously enough and with the way microsoft is treating the "pro" version of windows these days for example this lack of seriousness is bleeding over to the professional space.
rjsw 6y ago
A Macintosh Quadra can take a lot more RAM than a NeXTcube.
- msla 6y ago
  That's part of why old-style workstations died: Everyday desktop computers rose to meet them, and suddenly they couldn't claim to have any technical advantages to justify their pricetags. I'm not saying the Quadra in specific was on a level with the NeXTcube in specific on all fronts, but over the course of the 1990s that leveling process helped sweep away the workstation as a completely independent class of system.

by msla 6y ago

prox 6y ago

I think that is why Raspberry Pi and the like are the new cool. They are different, and they can also be what you want it to be. They spark the imagination, and I think that’s the kind of magic of what the author describes. A system thats unique (and capable) is kind of the lure.

fogihujy 6y ago
This. The new Pi 400 even kinda look like one of the early 80's machines.

HeadsUpHigh 6y ago

From a software perspective I would have preferred for workstations to remain their own thing. "home" computer software just doesn't take certain attributes seriously enough and with the way microsoft is treating the "pro" version of windows these days for example this lack of seriousness is bleeding over to the professional space.

rjsw 6y ago

A Macintosh Quadra can take a lot more RAM than a NeXTcube.

msla 6y ago
That's part of why old-style workstations died: Everyday desktop computers rose to meet them, and suddenly they couldn't claim to have any technical advantages to justify their pricetags. I'm not saying the Quadra in specific was on a level with the NeXTcube in specific on all fronts, but over the course of the 1990s that leveling process helped sweep away the workstation as a completely independent class of system.