• Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I dislike a lot the framing of this.

    Yes, the average software runs much less efficient. But is efficiency what the user want? No. It is not.

    How many people will tell you that they stick to windows instead of switching to linux because linux is all terminal? And terminal is quicker, more efficient for most things. But the user wants a gui.

    And if we compare modern gui to old gui… I don’t think modern us 15x worse.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      But the user wants a gui.

      Firstly, plenty of Linux instances have GUI. I installed Mint precisely because I wanted to keep the Windows/Mac desktop experience I was familiar with. GUIs add latency, sure. But we’ve had smooth GUI experiences since Apple’s 1980s OS. This isn’t the primary load on the system.

      Secondly, as the Windows OS tries to do more and more online interfacing, the bottleneck that used to be CPU or open Memory or even Graphics is increasingly internet latency. Even just going to the start menu means making calls out online. Querying your local file system has built in calls to OneDrive. Your system usage is being constantly polled and tracked and monitored as part of the Microsoft imitative to feed their AI platforms. And because all of these off-platform calls create external vulnerabilities, the (abhorrently designed) antivirus and firewall systems are constantly getting invoked to protect you from the online traffic you didn’t ask for.

      It’s a black hole of bloatware.

      • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I am not saying linux is terminal. I am saying that people tell you that linux is all terminal and that they want a gui.

        Linux gui is much prettier than Windows anyway.

      • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 hours ago

        TVs became SmartTVs and now need the internet to turn on. The TVs need an OS now to internet to do TV.

        Antennae broadcast TV seems like an ancient magic.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 hours ago

          We’ve deprecated a lot of the old TV/radio signal bandwidth in order to convert it to cellphone signal service.

          But, on the flip side, digital antennae can hold a lot more information than the old analog signals. So now I’ve got a TV with a mini-antennae that gets 500 channels (virtually none of which I watch). My toddler son has figured out how to flip the channel to the continuous broadcast of Baby Einstein videos. And he periodically hijacks the TV for that purpose, when we leave the remote where he can reach.

          So there’s at least one person I can name who likes the current state of affairs.

          • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 hours ago

            I always have to remind myself being able to stream audio from a cellphone while driving across a city is also a pretty crazy development.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      There isn’t anything fundamentally slower about using a GUI vs just text in a console. There’s more to draw but it scales linearly. The drawing things on the screen part isn’t the slow bit for slow programs. Well, it can be if it’s coded inefficiently, but there are plenty of programs with GUIs that are snappy… Like games, which generally draw even more complex things than your average GUI app.

      Slow apps are more likely because of an inefficient framework (like running in a web browser with heavy reliance on scripts rather than native code), inefficient algorithms that scale poorly, poor resource use, bad organization that results in doing the same operation more times than necessary, etc.

        • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Technically true, but there’s a threshold on responsiveness. If both user interfaces respond in milliseconds, it doesn’t matter if one is more efficient

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Can you elaborate on that? I disagree but would like to understand why you think that. Maybe you’re referring to something I wouldn’t disagree with.