Lionheart
October 17th, 2008, 12:29
Hey guys,
I was pondering this earlier today, how elaborate computers are becoming, not just hardware, but the software and operating systems in general.
All the new technologies that are coming out now on a monthly basis, the bullet proof designs required because of internet virus terrorism, the extreme sophistication of operating systems and how much memory they (it) take, and the programmers that make all these programs to run on these OS systems, it absolutely bongles the mind at how much is being required now to just have a program run on a computer, or to add a part to a computer, add a 'addon' to an existing program, etc.
I wonder if we are getting too extreme in changes? Are we mopping ourselves into a corner? Will this get worse?
What if we made things to be more 'universal', like with CD's. (oops.. Now we have CDR, CDRW, CD-, CD+, DVD, DVD-RW) but in essence, keep things like 'common systems' or languages or platforms (what ever you would call the platform or program base, and make it sort of 'regular' or common.
With all the new languages constantly coming into play, things are becoming too greatly mixed. I dont see how a kid can learn anything if the entire industry is totally changed every year.
Last year, for instance, we came out with several forms of 'new' Graphics Cards and I think two new forms of RAM memory, and the new Terrabyte HD's are now common in every store. What will it be like in one year? 4 TB HD's? Tripple quadcores? Ok, I can see this as ok with hardware, as its all based on common modular hookups and plugs. All the sockets are common. But what about languages and program commonality?
I remember learning the new 'part animation principles' for the new code on FSX. Its now in two area's, and have tons of new inputs and the entire XML code is 'redone'. All that was done on the code was making words have to have capitol letters on the first letter of main words, and they changed words to 'other' words of same meanings. Why? Change I guess. Was it worth the effort? Was it worth it to make it more complicated? Why not simply have kept it the same, or perhaps keep the language itself common and keep each object animation a one piece code entry instead of two different area's.
The way I see it, we are making it too difficult for the world to work on or with this great mass of technology and wonder.
Maybe my age is showing... I dont mean to complain. I guess I am just worried. I see it getting crazy and cannot see a reason why. Well, one reason is 'speed'. Gaming has seemed to have changed the industry and required faster management and handling of gaming programs. Burt Rutan covered this in his speach on the future of aviation and space flight. Its the 'fun' in something that seems to boost its evolutionary process. But why not keep some things 'common'? Why all the new forms of languages and formats and changes to things that are almost not needed?
:isadizzy:
Bill
I was pondering this earlier today, how elaborate computers are becoming, not just hardware, but the software and operating systems in general.
All the new technologies that are coming out now on a monthly basis, the bullet proof designs required because of internet virus terrorism, the extreme sophistication of operating systems and how much memory they (it) take, and the programmers that make all these programs to run on these OS systems, it absolutely bongles the mind at how much is being required now to just have a program run on a computer, or to add a part to a computer, add a 'addon' to an existing program, etc.
I wonder if we are getting too extreme in changes? Are we mopping ourselves into a corner? Will this get worse?
What if we made things to be more 'universal', like with CD's. (oops.. Now we have CDR, CDRW, CD-, CD+, DVD, DVD-RW) but in essence, keep things like 'common systems' or languages or platforms (what ever you would call the platform or program base, and make it sort of 'regular' or common.
With all the new languages constantly coming into play, things are becoming too greatly mixed. I dont see how a kid can learn anything if the entire industry is totally changed every year.
Last year, for instance, we came out with several forms of 'new' Graphics Cards and I think two new forms of RAM memory, and the new Terrabyte HD's are now common in every store. What will it be like in one year? 4 TB HD's? Tripple quadcores? Ok, I can see this as ok with hardware, as its all based on common modular hookups and plugs. All the sockets are common. But what about languages and program commonality?
I remember learning the new 'part animation principles' for the new code on FSX. Its now in two area's, and have tons of new inputs and the entire XML code is 'redone'. All that was done on the code was making words have to have capitol letters on the first letter of main words, and they changed words to 'other' words of same meanings. Why? Change I guess. Was it worth the effort? Was it worth it to make it more complicated? Why not simply have kept it the same, or perhaps keep the language itself common and keep each object animation a one piece code entry instead of two different area's.
The way I see it, we are making it too difficult for the world to work on or with this great mass of technology and wonder.
Maybe my age is showing... I dont mean to complain. I guess I am just worried. I see it getting crazy and cannot see a reason why. Well, one reason is 'speed'. Gaming has seemed to have changed the industry and required faster management and handling of gaming programs. Burt Rutan covered this in his speach on the future of aviation and space flight. Its the 'fun' in something that seems to boost its evolutionary process. But why not keep some things 'common'? Why all the new forms of languages and formats and changes to things that are almost not needed?
:isadizzy:
Bill