←back to thread

But what if I want a faster horse?

(rakhim.exotext.com)
1525 points saeedesmaili | 3 comments | 11 Apr 25 11:39 UTC | HN request time: 0.007s | source
Show context
andai ◴[11 Apr 25 13:02 UTC] No.43653301[source]▶
Ironically the old horses were faster! Run XP on modern hardware (if you can get it running at all) and you'll see what I mean. Explorer opens fully rendered in the span of a single frame (0.016 seconds). And XP was very slow and bloated for its time!

It'll do this even in VirtualBox, running about 20x snappier than the native host, which boggles my mind.

replies(7): >>43653493 #>>43653839 #>>43655971 #>>43656456 #>>43658105 #>>43664280 #>>43666798 #
1. IshKebab ◴[11 Apr 25 13:56 UTC] No.43653839[source]▶
To be fair even with modern software bloat the overall experience is a lot better now than it was in the XP days. I think it's mainly due to SSDs. They were a huge step change in performance and we fortunately haven't regressed back to the slowness of the HDD era.

At least on most hardware. I have a shitty Dell laptop for work that's basically permanently thermally throttled... :(

replies(2): >>43654415 #>>43679418 #
2. hedora ◴[11 Apr 25 14:48 UTC] No.43654415[source]▶
Are you running Linux or something? I installed Win 11 in a VM, and no one that's seen its first boot screen would claim the experience has improved since the day of shovelware-bloated XP desktops. It only gets worse and worse from there.
3. pas ◴[14 Apr 25 09:03 UTC] No.43679418[source]▶
it's ridiculously worse. getting things done on the computer got more tiresome, almost every part (booting is still slow, login is still slow, after login starting the browser is slow, rendering the start menu is slow - which should be in cache, the browser starts fast, but then it takes some time to somehow start loading and rendering the last opened page - which should be in cache, and so on) and yes, you can do a lot more things nowadays "on the computer", but it's mostly "online"