quote:
I think your so called "hardware growth" is over rated. It's an artificial growth driven by the people selling hardware, not the people using it.
I can't disagree with this statement, or just about anything else in your post. However your compraisons are only valid if you are comparing the Last five years or so. Yes a 90Mhz processor is just fine if you aren't trying to create the next "Final Fantasy" movie. For most end Users it's probably more than sufficent. But we weren't using 90Mhz processors when Winblows hit the scene. We were using
4Mhz pc's.
No I don't think for a minute that some smart guy wouldn't have been able to come up with a processor faster than 4Mz if "the Bill" hadn't come on the scene. But if nobody was buying computers, which they weren't in significant numbers before winblows came along, the economic incentive wouldn't have been there to get it done, and the number produced would be so low that they would be out of the reach of the ordinary consumer.
It all gets back to supply and demand. Winblows created the demand. Not that something else couldn't have, but nothing else did. That's probably going to be hard if not impossible for most of you guys to accept, because you love and live computers for the most part. But the ordinary joe-six pack and jane soccer-mom that exsist in large numbers and support the computer industry today don't. They need something on there level or they aren't going to fork over the cash.
Geo
P.S. Besides, I only brought that whole thing up as a response to the Posts early on where the guy was going on about how much he could do with today's hardware if he didn't have to put up with the bloat. My point was that if you didn't have the bloat, you wouldn't have today's harware to play with. I never intended to say, and I don't think I ever did say, that BIGGER=BETTER.
[This message has been edited by geoschmo (edited 06 August 2001).]