I suppose what he meant is it's ironic due to the insane overhead. When the end-user double clicks calc.exe, types in 1+1, and sees the result on the screen, th

I suppose what he meant is it's ironic due to the insane overhead. When the end-user double clicks calc.exe, types in 1+1, and sees the result on the screen, the CPU has executed on the order of tens of millions of instructions (filesystem code, OS code, UI code, display driver code, etc) to show a simple result that could have been done in a single x86-64 ADD instruction.