So I take it you are driving a Model T? It does the same job as any modern car, just not so sophisticated. Much like the difference between Windows 3 and Windows 8 - or indeed any operating system. They all do the same basic thing; it's just that the modern ones are fast, safe, and reliable.However, when I drive my car, I am not interested in what is under the hood. I just want it to be fast, safe and reliable.
It depends on how you look at it. When you didn't have the internet, threats were more limited and contained, which allowed for simpler validation of your .doc files (you also had less storage and CPU cycles for all the checks) and the OS was also easy on validation. That is not to say everything was perfect. You did carry around floppies and occasionally did catch viruses, sure. But if you used those old versions of Windows and Word with specially crafted .doc files of today (supposing, the format remained compatible), you would've seen how much less secure and reliable Windows 3 and Word 6 are compared to Windows 7 and Word 2010+. But Word 2010 isn't missing the checks that Word 6 was. You see, threats evolve with technology and with its accessibility. If you disconnect your computer from the rest of the world (better yet, from the power outlet as well:), you can probably still use Word 6 or even EDIT.COM and not care about viruses, trojans, etc etc, and feel secure, and reasonably so.Hobbes wrote:The Windows GUI and my office applications are hardly faster, safer or more reliable
Possibly that's because BSODs didn't exist in Windows 3. You got an error dialog, usually a very unspecific GPF or "insufficient memory".Hobbes wrote:Well, I never had a BSOD on Windows 3, but I must admit I did not have an Internet connection either.
Or never really used it. I had quite a lot of crashes of Windows 3. Fewer in Windows 95 and 98. Many many fewer in XP an 7. Quite a progress.iansjack wrote:Possibly that's because BSODs didn't exist in Windows 3. You got an error dialog, usually a very unspecific GPF or "insufficient memory".Hobbes wrote:Well, I never had a BSOD on Windows 3, but I must admit I did not have an Internet connection either.
I'm beginning to doubt your recollection of what Windows 3 was really like. If you don't remember it crashing then you have a very selective memory. As you say, maybe you should try it.
That's more of the effect than of the cause. One cause is that with today's hardware and software it's often permissible to include a huge library (or a whole dedicated microprocessor) to solve a small problem. Another cause is that people want the result fast and they often get it fast in exactly this way. Good enough and implemented fast is what very often matters (business-wise or to avoid boredom). There's also this fundamental problem of software complexity vs its apparent complexity vs what programmers can do to manage it and to cope with it. It's very easy to create a software monster (hey, it's composable bottom-up, top-down, left and right!), but it's very hard to make it function, to maintain it and to develop it further. That's what I have for a better answer. Suggest improvements.Hobbes wrote:However, I think "bloat is everywhere" is not a satisfying answer. What use is it to make processors faster and memory larger, if software gets slower and more demanding?
Bloat is an old problem. It seems Bill Gates got into hot water as his code was unnecessarily big. According to the man himself it's an accurate story, but that comment could have been written by anyone.alexfru wrote:Bloat is now everywhere.
It wouldn't. The BSOD was introduced with Windows 3.1. I suspect you are running 3.11, not 3, if you have networking.Fun fact: I tried to post this in IE5 on Windows 3 running in Virtual PC. Didn't work.
We also have operating systems and programs that are more inclusive. In the days of Windows 3.x very few drivers were included with the system and niceties such as TCP/IP networking, email, web browsers, ... were add-ons, not built in to the OS (as were a host of tools that we now take for granted). And you had word processors, DTP software, illustrating software, PDF creation software, etc. whereas nowadays the one program does it all.It's probably more acceptable now. As you said, we've got more memory and more MIPS.
Are you sure? Windows 3.0 wouldn't make use of the extensions and features in newer processors or will it?Windows 3 should run like a Formula 1 race car on real hardware.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.0 wrote:386 Enhanced mode was a 32-bit virtual machine that ran a copy of 16-bit Standard mode, and multiple copies of MS-DOS in virtual 8086 mode.
