|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 10 2013 @ 06:39 PM EDT |
.... about the older games..... some of them are completely unplayable at the
equivalent of lightspeed ;)
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: red floyd on Friday, May 10 2013 @ 06:48 PM EDT |
"Sometimes faster isn't necessarily better."
Reminds me of the olden days, when we had a Gateway 486/DX2-66 that we were
installing SCO OpenDesktop 2.0 on.
This was back when they were Santa Cruz... not evil, merely stodgy.
In any case, we had an Adaptec 1542 SCSI adapter in the machine, and the Adaptec
driver had a spin loop to wait for the disk to get ready. They hadn't
anticipated a 66MHz box, and the spin loop was too short.
Their solution? Take the machine out of turbo mode (yeah, those were the days
of the "turbo button"), and run it at 8MHz. Then, after it was
installed, patch the driver binary, and THEN and ONLY THEN, could we go back to
turbo mode.
---
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: xtifr on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 04:16 AM EDT |
A possibly apocryphal but very believable story I heard from the late eighties
or early nineties:
A development team at IBM was given a set of faster machines with newer, faster
compilers. Productivity dropped! When management investigated, they found that
the programmers were basically now just throwing code at the machine and seeing
what happened, because they could get the results back so fast. The compilers
were replaced with specially built slow compilers, and now the programmers were
encouraged to spend more time thinking about their code before feeding it to the
compiler, and productivity went back up.
---
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for it makes them soggy and hard to
light.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
