4 ms·

Ask HN: What are some examples of backward compatibility preventing innovation?

5 points by ent101 5y ago

PaulHoule 5y ago
Generally: operating systems such as Linux and Windows have a great deal of "bloat". One major drag on current computer performance is the paging MMU which turns a simple memory lookup into indirecting over pointers 3 or 4 times. Sure there is a "translation lookaside buffer" that caches this work, but it is a lot of transitors, is a venue for SPECTRE and MELTDOWN type attacks, etc. One could dream of a new hardware and OS combination that eliminates quite a bit of this, but where would you get software to run on it? You will probably have a list of programs you like, such as "vim", "bash", "grep", "python" and all of those are built assuming you have an Unix-like or Windows-like API. Put in that API and you have put all the bloat back in. If your goal was to make an OS that has different characteristics, you lost.
- the_only_law 5y ago
  > One could dream of a new hardware and OS combination that eliminates quite a bit of this, but where would you get software to run on it? Not exactly the same sort of situations, but there was an HN discussion a while back and from it, I got the impression this is partly why Itanium failed.
- toast0 5y ago
  You can reduce the impact of pagetable pointer chasing by using larger pages, although it's less space efficient to use 1GB pages for everything. If you're careful about allocations and you trust all your software, and all of it is relocatable, you can run x86 without paging, but I think amd64 long mode requires paging to be enabled; and if you trusted all your software, you could turn off spectre/meltdown mitigations, too
cpach 5y ago
Jabber/XMPP. SMTP. IRC. TBH, I still use SMTP a lot, and IRC as well from time to time. See also https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/
- MattJ100 5y ago
  Contrary to popular belief, XMPP continues to innovate. This is an advantage of the modular protocol design which allows evolution of the protocol by adding new extensions and phasing out old ones. Every year the XMPP Standards Foundation publishes a short list of what is expected of basic/advanced XMPP clients: https://xmpp.org/about/compliance-suites.html https://xmpp.org/about/compliance-suites.html I gave a talk and wrote a blog post about my perspective on "the ecosystem is moving": https://snikket.org/blog/products-vs-protocols/ https://snikket.org/blog/products-vs-protocols/ As have others: - An Objection to "The Ecosystem is Moving": https://gultsch.de/objection.html https://gultsch.de/objection.html - "Have you considered the alternative?" https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternative.html https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternat... - "Re: The Ecosystem is Moving" https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2019/12/29/re-the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2019/12/29/re-the-ecosystem-is-mo... There are many technologists who believe that Moxie's stance towards decentralization is wrong, or at least - not entirely right.
  - cpach 5y ago
    Interesting! Then there’s the network effect though. I personally know only 1 person who still uses XMPP. I have lots of acquaintances on WhatsApp and Slack though. And a few on Signal. I used XMPP a lot back in the 00s, but these days I honestly feel no need for it. YMMV though!
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - MattJ100 5y ago
      My family use XMPP daily for messaging and calling each other, and I know many others who do the same. That's not to say my perspective is average, or that the federated XMPP network is anywhere near as popular as WhatsApp, Slack or Signal. Network effects and money are powerful forces, significantly more so when combined. Luckily for specific groups (families, organizations, etc.) who just want more control over their intra-group communications, it's typically far easier to overcome the network effect issue than solve it for the general case.
Davidbrcz 5y ago
The C programming language

5 points by ent101 5y ago

Generally: operating systems such as Linux and Windows have a great deal of "bloat". One major drag on current computer performance is the paging MMU which turns a simple memory lookup into indirecting over pointers 3 or 4 times. Sure there is a "translation lookaside buffer" that caches this work, but it is a lot of transitors, is a venue for SPECTRE and MELTDOWN type attacks, etc. One could dream of a new hardware and OS combination that eliminates quite a bit of this, but where would you get software to run on it? You will probably have a list of programs you like, such as "vim", "bash", "grep", "python" and all of those are built assuming you have an Unix-like or Windows-like API. Put in that API and you have put all the bloat back in. If your goal was to make an OS that has different characteristics, you lost.

the_only_law 5y ago
> One could dream of a new hardware and OS combination that eliminates quite a bit of this, but where would you get software to run on it? Not exactly the same sort of situations, but there was an HN discussion a while back and from it, I got the impression this is partly why Itanium failed.
toast0 5y ago
You can reduce the impact of pagetable pointer chasing by using larger pages, although it's less space efficient to use 1GB pages for everything. If you're careful about allocations and you trust all your software, and all of it is relocatable, you can run x86 without paging, but I think amd64 long mode requires paging to be enabled; and if you trusted all your software, you could turn off spectre/meltdown mitigations, too

cpach 5y ago

Jabber/XMPP. SMTP. IRC. TBH, I still use SMTP a lot, and IRC as well from time to time. See also https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/

MattJ100 5y ago
Contrary to popular belief, XMPP continues to innovate. This is an advantage of the modular protocol design which allows evolution of the protocol by adding new extensions and phasing out old ones. Every year the XMPP Standards Foundation publishes a short list of what is expected of basic/advanced XMPP clients: https://xmpp.org/about/compliance-suites.html https://xmpp.org/about/compliance-suites.html I gave a talk and wrote a blog post about my perspective on "the ecosystem is moving": https://snikket.org/blog/products-vs-protocols/ https://snikket.org/blog/products-vs-protocols/ As have others: - An Objection to "The Ecosystem is Moving": https://gultsch.de/objection.html https://gultsch.de/objection.html - "Have you considered the alternative?" https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternative.html https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternat... - "Re: The Ecosystem is Moving" https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2019/12/29/re-the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2019/12/29/re-the-ecosystem-is-mo... There are many technologists who believe that Moxie's stance towards decentralization is wrong, or at least - not entirely right.
- cpach 5y ago
  Interesting! Then there’s the network effect though. I personally know only 1 person who still uses XMPP. I have lots of acquaintances on WhatsApp and Slack though. And a few on Signal. I used XMPP a lot back in the 00s, but these days I honestly feel no need for it. YMMV though!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - MattJ100 5y ago
    My family use XMPP daily for messaging and calling each other, and I know many others who do the same. That's not to say my perspective is average, or that the federated XMPP network is anywhere near as popular as WhatsApp, Slack or Signal. Network effects and money are powerful forces, significantly more so when combined. Luckily for specific groups (families, organizations, etc.) who just want more control over their intra-group communications, it's typically far easier to overcome the network effect issue than solve it for the general case.

Davidbrcz 5y ago

The C programming language