Back to the Future

12-07-07, 11:26 PM

I think of an operating system as the ground, or earth, that the computer relies on. It is the base, the rock, the framework, and it must be a solid foundation to support all the components that will spring forth from it.

With that in mind, I ask, have we progressed in the 25 years that I've been using computers?

The first computer I ever used was the Apple IIe. It had no hard drive, so we had to put a 5.25" disk into the disk drive to run it. It used a command line interface, and didn't have much software. But BASIC was all we needed to make magic happen. At the time it didn't seem very capable, but we were amazed by the possibilities. I used to make schematic diagrams of my programs at home, and I couldn't wait to enter them into the computer and watch the results pop up in color. It truly thrilled me. I couldn't wait for the next best thing, surely it would be even better.

And it was. In 1984 my girlfriend's dad bought a Macintosh. It sported a GUI in black and white. It had a recycle bin, cool fonts, and could create incredible looking documents, like the resumes I used to make.

That was high tech. Now computers had become useful for business. I knew one day I would get my own computer. And I couldn't wait. Actually, I did wait. For quite awhile.

Then in 1992 I got an IBM XT. It flew. The 6 mHz proc had a turbo button that would kick it all the way up to 8 mHz. I actually wore driving gloves and a seat belt to use it. Surely I jest.

I remember getting my first spreadsheet program and trying to use it with the XT. I would enter all my data, and somewhere on the sheet I'd put a formula in and press enter. It would take 20 seconds to calculate. I also remember buying the Jeopardy Game. Ok, the graphics weren't too hot, but it was a fun game. Unfortunately, this was not a usable computer. This was my first warning sign that "progress" was not always progressive.

A couple years later Radio Shack had a sale on computers. They offered 0% financing for 12 months. I needed a computer for my business, so I plunked down my $1700, and took home a 486! Woohoo! That was a huge upgrade for me. It had a 14.4 modem, and 4 MB of memory. But I wanted to use Microsoft Office which had a minimum Ram requirement of 8 MB. So I went to CDW and bought 4 MB more. For $200. Two hundred dollars. By the way, Office came on 7 3" floppy disks. Imagine how lean it was that the whole thing could fit on 7 1.44MB disks, or about 10 MB. Now you need a DVD to contain the monster.

My 486 served me well for several years. Eventually I upgraded the modem to a blazing 28.8 model, signed up with AOL, and discovered the Internet - or at least AOL online.

I'm fast forwarding now to 1998. Windows 98. Yup. We make fun of it now, but computers running 98 didn't need tons of memory or speed. And they ran tons of software. It really wasn't a bad OS. And my Pentium II computer had something that I only dreamed of. A cd burner. I couldn't believe I could actually create my own frickin' cds! That surely rocked.

Notice a trend? With the exception of the XT, computers were progressing nicely.

2002 was a great year. I decided to build my own computer. I picked out the best components I could find. I had a blazing Athlon proc, an LCD screen, Windows 2000, a super fast cd burner, tons of ram (528 MB), and put it all into my high tech mobo. It cost me $900 for everything. Half the price of my Radio Shack computer and 100 times more potent. This computer is still lightning fast. It is also the end of the line for progress.

With an expanding family we needed more computers. So I bought a Windows XP laptop in '03. The lappy cost me a serious $1600, but Windows XP was supposed to be a tremendous improvement over 2000. So why did they need SP2? That laptop is now run by my kids, but they complain about the speed. It's a dog. It's so freakin' slow that it's painful to watch. I just upgraded the Ram from 256 Mb to 1 GB, but I fear that XP is so bloated that it can't get out of its own way. Remember the analogy I made at the beginning of this post? While 2000 is like a rock solid foundation upon which lie all my components, XP is molasses. Have you ever jogged on the beach? Jog a couple miles and that's Win XP. I have to restart it fairly often to clear out all the gunk. Meanwhile, the last time I restarted my 2000 was, uhm, uh, I can't remember. It's been several weeks, if not months, since I restarted it. 2000 rules.

So 6 months ago I bought another lappy. Three kids and a wife on two computers doesn't work. This Inspiron 1505 has Windows Vista and a dual processor. Two processors! It also had 1 GB of Ram. This, I thought, would fly. And fly it did, like a penguin. I upgraded the Ram to 2 GB, b u t i t ' s s t i l l t o o d a r n s l o w . Not only is it slow, it needs to be restarted every two hours of use, otherwise it begins to crawl. Then, to add to the misery, stuff just stops working. Like Internet Explorer will just shut down and then restart itself. I can't tell you how many times I've spent an hour or two writing a post only to lose it to a random shutdown.

This computer plays music, movies, surfs, creates movies and does tons of other stuff. But it needs 2 GB of Ram, two processors, and many many Gigs of storage just for the bloated OS. And with all this processing power you still get instability. I ask, how can this be? Since windows appeared 12 years ago with Windows 95, haven't we gotten to the point where we are just adding cool new features? Is it that hard to test these new features before they come out? They're incremental, not revolutionary for cripes sake. It's not like we are rewriting history. The base code has been there all this time. I am not complaining about hackers and trojans and stuff like that. I just feel that the OS itself should be a rock, like 2000.

So have we really progressed? I'll tell you one thing, my Apple IIe didn't have random shutdowns. And it was pretty quick, too. If I try to play a UTube video on my Vista ultra super powerful lappy, it stops every 15 secs because it can't download and process the video quickly enough. But my Win2k eats 'em up and begs for more.

I think I'm going to put Win2k on both of my laptops. And the lord may strike me down for what I'm about to say, but I might get me an Apple for my next computer.

I know it sounds crazy, but

View Original Blog Post

12-08-07, 01:00 AM

First of all, love the post. It's quite a nice rundown of the progress that was made on pc's until the year 2000.

The smartest thing you said the entire time was " I think my next computer may be an apple". While Leopard, like anything, is not quite perfect....yet (must faster, and more frequent updates with apple) it is light years ahead of vista in usability and stability, not to mention just being all around better in every way. I know, I know, your screaming apple fanboy right? Well, up until a year ago I hadn't used an apple product since elementary school ('88). Since I got my mac I have never looked back. You won't either.

May the force be with you. You have the power to come over from the dark side.

Rsaturn9 · 12-08-07, 02:09 AM

Great Post Steve, It brought back a lot of similar memories for me also, especially the new CD burner part, I was the first one of my friends to have one of those, while they still used floppy, and Zip drives, I was creating my own music Cds via the Old Napster days

AKAJohnDoe · 12-08-07, 02:38 AM

The first computer I used (i.e.: programmed) was an IBM System/360-F30 with 64K of storage. It ran DOS Release 27 (Not PC-DOS) and had real core (little ferrite donuts on a grid of three wires). For peripheral devices there was the 1403 Printer, 2540 Card Reader/Punch, 2400 Tape Drives (2), and the 2311 Disk Drives (3). It actually looked quite like this, although the Model 75 had many more lights on the front than the Model 30 did. And, no, I am not in that picture ;).

Jogga · 12-08-07, 03:49 AM

Wow Steve, that took me down memory lane :) Great post :approve:

I have to say though, my experiences with XP and Vista (on Baby Jogg'a lappy) are better than yours. I still love XP and had it put on my Inspiron (in preference to Vista). Vista is running like a trooper on Baby Jogga’s laptop and I rarely have problems on any of the XP machines we run at home.

I accept that Microsoft got stuff wrong with 98 and Millennium, but without Mr Gates (and some questionable business ethics) most of us would still be sending letters via snail mail and working in monolithic corporations. However, that’s not where we are – today we come home to games with graphics that we could only dream of a few years ago; online communities (and virtual existences); video and movies, music and digital photography: it all needs plenty of RAM.

Microsoft (not Apple) changed and continues to change the world for us all.

As the processors get faster, so we find crap to consume the additional speed: however, today I will submit my penultimate assignment and, as I look at the presentation (if not the content ;)) I realise that I could never have achieved such quality of output a decade ago.

Don’t despair, just accept that with all progress, sometimes the innovators take a wrong turn.

12-08-07, 07:15 AM

Steve I enjoyed your rant. Too many things getting patched repainted and dressed up. However like the above post I like XP it gives me very little problem and I rarely have to reboot.

I do thing that we bear some blame for what is happening because as systems get faster we demand more features. I don't think the OS's are going backwards its just the core beneath. We are still dealing with poor memory management, memory leaks and security issues. I am not a computer geek in any real sense but it seems that they are piling more stuff on top of old problems that are not really getting fixed.

Thanks for the article. And for other readers don't forget to rate the post.

**breley** · 12-08-07, 07:26 AM

Ah, good post Steve. I kind of miss the innocent days of

Quote:

**** COMMODORE 64 BASIC V2 ****

64K RAM SYSTEM@38911 BASIC BYTES FREE

READY.

?SYNTAX ERROR
READY.
RUN

I still have my C-64 & my C-128D (and in their original boxes

). Both still run like champs. Oh the fun we had entering pages, PAGES of machine code lines for some simple game from Compute! or Run magazine.

12-08-07, 07:43 AM

Now I've got the solution,

a flux capicitor, whack it in your car and time travel

SteveGavJR · 12-08-07, 09:31 AM

I feel bad for microsoft about the whole vista thing. Maybe I'm a little ahead of the curve because I've been working with computers ever since I can remember, but is it really that bad? I've been using vista since it was 'codename longhorn', and I've never had any real problems with it. The only issues I've run into is some stuff doesn't work for it, but that isn't microsoft's fault, it's the manufacturer. That's why operatings systems will have a RTM(release to manufacturer) version out for a year or so before they release to the public, so the manufacturer can make updated drivers and get them squared away. To date, the only thing that won't work properly is the logitech setpoint software, but I don't really NEED that.

That being said, I can't remember having any problems with Vista that have made me want to go back to XP. I like the interface, it has some great features, and it makes my job easier. For the record, I'm running a toshiba satellite u205-5002 with a 1.6 core2 duo, 2gb ram, and integrated video. Maybe I just have the advantage of knowing how to tweak every little setting so it all runs smoothly, or I got lucky. Either way, I like Vista. And considering this is the next operating system in their lineup, why not force yourself to use it? At some point, they're going to stop supporting XP all together. They always do.

CodeBubba · 12-08-07, 11:23 AM

Steve,

Great post. Like you I have, too, been around this stuff for a [long] while!

Can't agree about XP, though. I have 4 computers here at the house (the least capable one being a PII-350) all running XP. Solid and reliable performance from all of them - very few problems. You can have my XP when you can pry it from my cold, dead fingers! ;)

Vista? Maybe at work when I get a new development box pre-installed with it. At home? Not until we buy a new machine pre-installed with it. XP has been so completely reliable that I simply won't move away from it on any of our existing systems. This Dell E520 of mine will die with XP Pro on it - probably 10 years from now.

-CB :D

Julie · 12-08-07, 01:07 PM

Yeah, I think XP is pretty stable, although installing it on a computer that was running windows 2000 was somewhat challenging....hunting down drivers and having to replace applications that did not run under XP. But once I got it all sorted out, I've found XP to be very stable.

I won't be upgrading any of my computers to Vista and won't buy a Vista computer right now until things settle down and I start reading more positive comments about it than negative ones. (I wonder though....things never turned around for ME did they?)

The first real computer I worked on was an AT. It was the best computer and I was the envy of everyone else in the office (no-one but me had that computer). Eventually I got a 386 and then a 486 and bought a PS2 for myself in college - all DOS based computers. I really hated Windows and Office when it was forced on me....using a mouse really set me back from a productivity standpoint....I still long for the days when booting up a computer only took a few seconds and I could write quick batch files to get things done.

Remember the portable computers? They weighed 45 pounds and were more luggable than portable. Going on business trips with those.....ugh! But they were the best there was at the time.

@ SteveGavJr: Feeling bad for Microsoft?......you really must be kidding! If you read through computer forums, you'll see so many complaints about Vista both from users that upgraded to it and from users with new computers that were preinstalled with it. It's been at least a year now and I don't really see things settling down much. I'm glad to hear your experience has been positive......but I don't buy your suggestion to go ahead and convert to Vista because eventually Microsoft will stop supporting XP....what kind of message does that send to Microsoft? That they can unload any kind of junk they want on us and we'll lay down and take it? Really?

daddybfree · 12-08-07, 02:49 PM

Thanks for the great post stevenator65 :approve:
Which version of Vista came loaded on your lappy? I got Premium on the Gateway MT6707 I'm on and have been reasonably happy with the improvements/performance, despite feeling that it tries to protect me from myself too rigidly (and some of that issue is certainly due to my use/preferences). I had heard that Vista needed 1gig ram so I refused to even consider anything that came with less than 2, upgradeable to 4gigs. Hope y'all are enjoying the lead up to the Holiday

to everyone, and thanks again for the great story.
B

Zaniax · 12-08-07, 03:10 PM

Thanks for sending me back on the old memory lane :)

Been working with digital systems since 1964.

Loved my Apple IIe, but was FORCED to use an IBM XT on job.
Then I discovered the wonderful world of BAT-files and finally got an XT with a math processor - and started to earn money on my 2nd job.

Thanks again for bringing those memories back, Steve :approve:

.

Tankman · 12-08-07, 06:34 PM

Stickin' to XP Pro SP2, very stable for my use.

First PC? Epson with a 10mb HDD, 5-1/4" floppy and of course the BBS's.

DOS ran very well. I do little multitasking.

Zaniax · 12-08-07, 07:07 PM

Multitasking - oh, yeah
Anybody remembers the DesqView ?

The poor mans multitask system - I simply loved it :)

Man, that became actually the foundation of Windows 1.0

.