4 ms·
Really disagree on this one. It's true lots of software were unreliable back in the day. But: - Crashes sometimes != Slow, bloated, and unreliable. I'd rather
by prmph 4y ago
Really disagree on this one.
It's true lots of software were unreliable back in the day. But:
- Crashes sometimes != Slow, bloated, and unreliable. I'd rather have something simple and responsive that crashes every now and then, than something that is aggravating to use all the time.
- With the massive increase in hardware performance, there's just no excuse at all for slow unresponsive software now, especially from the big vendors. The reasons are not even usually technical; the bloat is from ads and tracking and more
> I'd rather have a search take a second or two longer if it is able to handle synonyms and different word forms.
I'm not sure people are complaining abut search being slow. Most complaints about search is that is lower quality than it used to be.
> VS Code is so much better than Visual Studio from around 2000.
VSCode and Visual Studio are two completely different products, one is a code editor, and the other is a full blown IDE. There were very good editors back in the day. And VSCode has started showing signs of a decrease in quality.
- Freedom2 4y agoWhat are examples of VSCode dropping in quality? Aside from some extension oddness, it has been a solid performer in my toolkit for many years.
- quicklime 4y ago> VSCode and Visual Studio are two completely different products, one is a code editor, and the other is a full blown IDE What does Visual Studio from around 2000 have that VSCode doesn't? I get that VSCode offloads a lot of work to the language server and extensions, but it offers IDE-like features including auto-completion, code navigation, and the UI is more than just code editing - it integrates version control, a test runner, debugging, etc. What is it missing that makes it not a full blown IDE?
- prmph 4y ago> What does Visual Studio from around 2000 have that VSCode doesn't? A visual GUI designer, for example. Also a visual database model designer. Code generation too, and more These are resource demanding features
- kitsunesoba 4y agoIt depends on the software in question, but yeah, a lot of it actually was faster even on era-appropriate hardware. An example that stands out in my mind is Photoshop 7, CS1, and maybe (memory is a little blurry) CS2. It felt considerably more responsive running on a thermally-non-ideal iMac with a single core PowerPC G5 and spinning rust hard disk than PS CC does today on a well cooled M-series MBP or custom built Ryzen 5950X tower with a 7000MB/s PCI-E 4.0 SSD. That's just ridiculous. Yes, Photoshop has taken on some functionality since then but there is no excuse for anything to feel laggardly on such powerful hardware when it ran great on comparatively pedestrian machines 15 years ago.