p2pnet - rss feed: Software now ‘too bloated’
p2p news / p2pnet: The software industry is creating ever-more-bloated software which runs slower each year despite dramatic improvements in processor speed, says MIT Media Laboratory founder Nicholas Negroponte.
"We’ve gotten to a point where, in my opinion, every single new release of software is distinctly worse than the previous one," he said at the LinuxWorld conference in Boston.
"I just got the fastest laptop on the planet, it is the slowest, most unreliable machine I have had in my life," Silicon.com has him saying. "Adding too many features without considering the impact on efficiency is the main reason, according to Negroponte."
He used to joke that every time Intel made a faster processor, Microsoft used more of it, the story says, but, "the open source operating system Linux, which is touted by vendors as more efficient than Microsoft Windows, is no different, he claimed," says Silicon.com.
"And Linux is no exception - Linux has gotten fat too.".
Also See:
Silicon.com - ‘Software is too fat’, says $100 laptop founder, April 4, 2006
April 4th, 2006 at 9:55 pm
“And Linux is no exception - Linux has gotten fat too.”.
But with GNU/Linux, you can strip away the fat.
With the kernel: Just recompile it with the drivers and modules you need, scrap the rest.
With all the other software: Strip it of the features you don’t need or simply choose another (there’s almost always an alternative to any app you an think of).
April 4th, 2006 at 10:42 pm
There’s no doubting that Windows is certainly bloated now.
But what really pees me off is when mere mortals like myself try and strip away all the crap that doesn’t get used, the whole thing falls apart.
Windows Media Player is a classic example. You just KNOW that some other part of Windows will fall over should you attempt to rid yourself of this totally gratuitous piece of bloatware.
April 4th, 2006 at 11:12 pm
there is not always an alternative, even more true in the free software world as there are much more less software available (find me a correct, working ocr who doesnt need to be tweaked for 15hours, and produces more than just a .txt)
and you cant ask everyone to hack everysoftware themself, even if they would be all capable of doing it, it would take *AGES* of doing that for evey software.
so people creating software, should focus on not bloating too much their apps, that’s the fastes and easiest solution (i know, it’s free software, do it yourself, blablablabla ..)
April 4th, 2006 at 11:24 pm
Thats because with windows you are locked into a closed source monopoly with no choice called M$.
Try out a linux distro, you wont regret it
April 4th, 2006 at 11:26 pm
It’s about time Hurd was made stable so we can replace the linux kernel with the gnu’s mach/hurd.
April 4th, 2006 at 11:59 pm
It’s not the answer for everyone, sadly, otherwise we’d all migrate.
April 5th, 2006 at 7:06 am
Some times it goes the other way. Compare Azureus with uTorrent.
April 5th, 2006 at 8:29 am
wtf would be the point of a faster processor if we all still used DOS.
i mean come on now. this is like saying that we should all still be playing Doom or wolfenstein on our dual cores because we didnt want our PC resources being used up. Come on now. No we don’t want EXCESSIVE stuff in the program, YES software developers should work to make their products streamlined. As a software developer myself, yes i make a living off of it, I cannot stress the fact enough that no matter how fast computers get, I will always design my products to take full advantage of the CPU in use and I don’t put pointless bullshit into it just because i want to destroy your computer.
“…..every time Intel made a faster processor, Microsoft used more of it”
THEN F*CKING USE WINDOWS 95 jerkass. Not everyone who uses computers is an expert enough to get around in a text based environment.
April 5th, 2006 at 1:07 pm
I saw this guy talk live… to be honest, he’s a bit of a knob. I know this is a broad statement to make, but it’s true.
April 5th, 2006 at 8:47 pm
KDE and GNOME are bloated almost worse than Windows XP. There is no excuse and there is no way to strip the fat from them.
You have to use something more stripped down like Fluxbox or XFCE for lower memory systems, or use KDE 2.0 (which is vaguely like using Windows 95 as far as age and lack of features).
Linux is MUCH MUCH better than Windows, but tack on one of the two main Linux GUI environments, and you’ve got Windows XP-style memory usage all over again.
Why do I have to use Fluxbox, the hotkey-lacking minimalistic window manager, for an old 16MB system? Why does KDE 2 need 64MB of RAM, but the newest KDE wants double or more?
What a bunch of flaming lazy coding bull.
Linux and X used to run on 4MB of RAM. libc5 isn’t even a megabyte in size, but go get the latest libc6 (glibc) and take a look. It’s freakin’ huge. Won’t even fit on a floppy.
WHY?
Feature creep. Non-minimalistic core functionality. Less modularity. Most of all, coding quickly over compactly. Yes, you get more features, but when it’s all said and done, you’re losing speed for features, and it catches up with you!
uClibc is great, but not 100% ready, so don’t use that. It was created out of some of the reasons I just bitched about glibc’s size.
April 9th, 2006 at 10:19 am
Sure software has become bloated.
So have airplanes. Just compare a 747 with a DC3. Sure, the 747 has many things that are not neded to fly from point A to point B, but still and is far more costly to build and maintain than a DC3. But who prefers a DC3?
There is a lesson here. As airplanes have become bloated they have been made safer and more comfortable and user friendly. And more complex but safer to fly at the same time.
Products become bloated because to compete you have to have something additional over the competitor. Then the competitor has to catch up with you. Otherwise their products become obsolete and will not sell.
In a nutshell, software is like airplanes. The important thing is to make them do more, more stable and more user friendly next time around.
Bloating? Who cares. I like the 747 and would not fly on a DC3 for free.
Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com