[HN Gopher] Why use old computers and operating systems? ___________________________________________________________________ Why use old computers and operating systems? Author : hutrdvnj Score : 85 points Date : 2021-03-19 08:26 UTC (1 days ago) (HTM) web link (john.ankarstrom.se) (TXT) w3m dump (john.ankarstrom.se) | brabel wrote: | All software is bound to keep changing forever unless people stop | using it... even after it's past its "perfect" place in terms of | usability and benefits it brings to its intended audience (I am | not saying perfect in terms of having no bugs - though that may | also be the case)... because we can only know that in hindsight | and we have no way of measuring this objectively. | | Some old Unix tools are perhaps the closest we have to that. (ls, | cd, tail...) but in terms of UI, I can't think of anything. As | the needs of users change, so does what the "perfect software" | for such users looks like... however, I would think there's | usually a decades-long period in which some software could stay | just as it is without there being possible improvements one could | make to it. | | I think it would be really interesting if we could find a good | way to tell when that "perfection" is reached and tried to | intentionally stop changing what is literally already perfect | (though that will never happen in a commercial product, for | obvious reasons). | hx2a wrote: | A reason to use old computers that I don't see mentioned here has | to do with accessibility. People in the US usually have current | hardware such as the latest Mac laptop, but that is not the case | in all other countries. Current hardware is a bit of a luxury | that we don't fully appreciate. | | I have an open source project with global users, and one person | in Mexico contacted me looking for help. He was trying to create | 3D visualizations of MRI brain scans and was running it on an old | computer that hardly anybody in the US would consider using. | Happily I had done testing on an old laptop and much performance | tuning during my development. I was able to help him get his | project working. It was still slow, but at least it was usable. | It wouldn't have been if my code only worked on current hardware. | reaperducer wrote: | A couple of the web sites I maintain have a primary audience of | poor, largely immigrant, people with a fifth-grade education | and only rudimentary English. | | The server logs show most of the connections come from people | using what people on HN would consider toy or throwaway | convenience store phones. The high-end is people on Windows XP. | | (The sites are in the healthcare space, and if one of our | clients is really so desperately poor that they can't even | afford a smartphone, we'll give them either a laptop and a | hotspot, or a smartphone, so they can access the web sites. We | pay for their connection.) | jcelerier wrote: | my personal rule of thumb is that my software must be useable | at -O0 with address sanitizers on my desktop - so far that has | meant that at -O3 it stays useable on raspberry pi-3 level | hardware. | | A few months ago I tried to make a build which targetted | ivybridge-level CPUs, it took no more than one day for a few | users to report that it didn't work on their machines, turns | out a lot of people still rock some old AMD Phenom or Q6600-era | machines | heavyset_go wrote: | I've still got some SandyBridge-era computers running. | offtop5 wrote: | Technically, couldn't he install a very lightweight Linux | distribution. | | I have a few Raspberry Pi zeros and I actually enjoy coding | within the limitations of said hardware, when you know you only | have 500 megs of RAM on the device you have to solve problems | differently | pjmlp wrote: | My first computer was a Timex 2068. | | With 500 MB the world is boundless. | | If you want to experiment with constraints get a ESP32. | jimktrains2 wrote: | For some reason I find "only have 500megs of RAM" very | amusing. Many/most modern laptops only have 8-16 times more | RAM than that. I'm genuinely curious what problems you're | working where that "limitation" is your bottleneck and not | the processor speed (which at 1GHz is still pretty speedy for | many/most tasks other than pure computation (e.g. machine | learning training and processing large datasets for | statistics)). I'm also assuming you're treating it as a | dedicated tool, and not doing tasks while running a DE and | web browser at the same time. | offtop5 wrote: | Ram tends to create issues when you're building stuff | locally. | | I used ram as an off hand example of something which is | limited. | | I actually did go out and buy a Raspberry Pi 4 8gb since I | want to start processing some machine learning, and the 512 | on the Zero won't cut it | inetknght wrote: | Browsing "modern" websites for one | jrockway wrote: | I think if you require users to bring their own computer, | you can be insulated enough from hardware costs to not | really care about memory usage, and that's mostly fine. I | have worked on set top boxes at an ISP. We designed and | manufactured the hardware; if we could get away with 512MB | of RAM instead of 1GB of RAM, that was basically pure | profit for us. So some attention was paid to memory use, | because it had a real dollar cost associated with it. (I | guess I'll point out that the engineering samples had a gig | of RAM, and someone got the idea to write the UI in Dart | running inside Chrome instead of the very legacy Java that | we had on the previous hardware generation... so the | production models did not ship with 512MB of RAM.) | | To some extent, being careful about memory usage is not the | only way to make the business work -- you could, after all, | charge more for the service or make people buy the CPE | outright. But, being an ISP mostly involves getting enough | people to buy the service to make it worth digging up a | neighborhood to run fiber; you don't want to sour the deal | by costing more than the competition with less able CPE. | Doubling the RAM available to software engineers may | improve the user experience by more than 100%, but nobody | picks their ISP for the software than runs on their TV box, | so it's probably wise to be careful. | | My point here is that some programmers do have to care | about memory usage. If you include a computer as part of | your product, you will someday be looking at the BOM cost | of the bundled computer in an attempt to turn cost into | profit. | lostlogin wrote: | There is something special about the Pi that makes an "oh | well, time to reflash and start again" a non-disaster. | | They are great and hacking about with them is fun, even when | disaster strikes. | prox wrote: | My version control on the Pi is different SD cards, I just | copy the stable versions over and rotate. It's fun :) | offtop5 wrote: | What's the best way to backup the actual sd card. I plan | to store it on the cloud. I tried using Windisk 32 and it | didn't work . | lostlogin wrote: | I've used Pi Baker on the Mac. | | It kind of hurts that the image is the same size as the | SD card when the card might be pretty much empty, but it | does make recovery easier. | MaxBarraclough wrote: | Related to this: one of the very few good reasons to offer | unencrypted HTTP is that in some parts of the world, old | devices are in widespread use, and support for modern HTTPS | cannot be taken for granted. | grawprog wrote: | >I think the only solution is to stop expecting every computer to | be general-purpose | | Why? Computers are general purpose. The software we put on | computers may have specific purposes, but computers are general | purpose. | | As for 'computer powered appliances' plenty of those exist and | the general trend does seem to be to abstract the computer away | inside some kind of locked down appliance. | | I hope general purpose computers never go away. They're one of | the most powerful and amazing tools ever created by humans. It's | really too bad more people don't seem to understand or appreciate | that. | cpach wrote: | NB: He wrote "I think the only solution is to stop expecting | _every_ computer to be general-purpose" (my emphasis). He | didn't write "I think the only solution is to stop expecting | computers to be general-purpose". | agilob wrote: | >He wrote "I think the only solution is to stop expecting | every computer to be general-purpose" | | Which is a bit ironic, as his website doesn't load on my | Firefox (disabled HTTP-only connections), and after I added | exception, it still looks like crap with DarkReader [1] | because the website forces white background, and now I have | grey font, with my sight problems, it's just too bright to | read. Maybe it's time to stop expecting every website to be | even displayed on every browser? | | https://darkreader.org/ | | edit: 99%+ website work fine with darkreader | thomastjeffery wrote: | I think a lot of people get turned off from general purpose | computers because they are using proprietary operating systems | and software that mitigate the "general purpose" aspect. | | The most "general purpose" software most people interact with | is a browser. | grawprog wrote: | Computers are general purpose in that they are capable of | doing anything possible by a Turing machine with limited | memory. | | Software built on top of that can be whatever we want within | those limits. Even most proprietary operating systems are | relatively general purpose. On windows and Mac os, you can | generally acquire a wide range of software capable of doing | many things and can create your own with relative ease. | | Smartphones get a little less general purpose, again above | the level of the actual computer though. In the case of | smartphones and consoles and such, the extra software | thwarting the general purpose nature of the computer is | buried a little deeper as firmware flashed onto rom chips. | | Then with computer powered appliance type devices, the only | software is whatever is flashed onto the rom chip buried | inside there that you can't really touch without some | hardware modding. | | In the end, computers have never stopped being general | purpose, and likely never will. It's just the software | separating the user from the computer is getting deeper and | deeper into hardware. | | I realize there's good security and user friendliness | arguments to be made for this kind of thing, but it's a | worrying trend. It'll create almost a pseudo class system | with the people who have real computers and can use them to | make money and do things and the people who have toys that | suck money from them and feed them consumer garbage. | akiselev wrote: | I'm having a hard time coming up with anything that a | modern OS on a modern CPU can't do - they're about as | general purpose as can be for any nontrivial but nuanced | definition of "general purpose." The _only_ exception I can | think of is real-time IO, which we offload to specialized | chips with buffers and queues through PCIe and other | busses. However, that's a physical limitation since these | peripherals would be impractical to implement in software | until FPGA tech improves and gets significantly cheaper. | seniorivn wrote: | run a technologically secure code, with root of trust in | cryptography/security model your software uses | | On modern pc/server/mobile computers it's impossible, | your root of trust there is manufacturer and their | microcode/embedded security modules with separate | operating system etc | grawprog wrote: | Yeah...even 'general purpose' computers are shipped with | hardware level 'software' that's beyond access from | users. Intel and AMD have their management engines, | Microsoft's got their in with uefi. I'm not sure if there | even are any modern processors available with the kind of | access allowed by 8 and 16-bit CPUs... | b06tmm wrote: | I recently inherited a 32-bit laptop that runs Vista, any | recommendations of what version of Linux to try? | squarefoot wrote: | 32 bit aren't a problem, RAM however could be. I've run Debian | on 32 bit Atom netbooks with 1 Gig RAM without problems. Using | light desktop environments such as XFCE or smaller ones would | allow also 512MB RAM or even less. Years ago I successfully run | Debian + LXDE desktop on one of those toy Win-CE Chinese | laptops with just 128MB RAM. CPU was a WM8505 clocked at a | whopping 300MHz. And then there's ELKS Linux which would work | on 8086 CPUs too which I successfully run on a industrial PC | many moons ago. https://github.com/jbruchon/elks | | Extremely small systems aside, it can run fine on decently | equipped laptops or netbooks. Surfing the web with a full | featured browser such as Firefox or using heavy apps such as | LibreOffice without having the system swap too much would | likely require no less than 2 Gigs or more, but if you do | network maintenance using command line tools, even the smallest | netbook with half a Gig RAM becomes an useful tool to keep in | the bag along with bigger laptops. | pomian wrote: | Mint has all sorts of versions that work great. | jsyedidia wrote: | Debian with Raspberry Pi Desktop | https://www.raspberrypi.org/software/raspberry-pi-desktop/ | cookiengineer wrote: | Which CPU model do you have exactly? If it's a core 2 model, | they are actually 64bit capable (32bit extended) and can run an | x86_64 linux without issues. | | Rather than that I'd recommend Debian or Mint with MATE if you | want an easy and stable distro. Otherwise if you are willing | enough, go for archlinux32 to have still the benefits of AUR. | silentsysadmin wrote: | I would load up Slackware 14.2 on that bad boy. | lelanthran wrote: | > I recently inherited a 32-bit laptop that runs Vista, any | recommendations of what version of Linux to try? | | I'll have to check to be sure that it is 32bit(l/top is | downstairs and I'm lazy), but I do my personal projects on a | 2008 Asus that came with Vista and 2GB of RAM. I literally use | it daily using: | | 1. Emacs 2. Vim + every plugin you can think of for development | 3. GCC + all the devtools for C development 4. Standard gui | tools (browser, some solitaire games, dia for diagrams, etc). | | I am pretty certain I am using this: | https://www.linuxmint.com/edition.php?id=255 | | Once again, I might be wrong (although "pretty certain" covers | that), but you can give it a try. | phito wrote: | Sounds like nostalgia to me. | spideymans wrote: | >On this blog, I write about the various computers I use and | about the operating systems I use on them. Apart from Windows 7, | which is relatively modern, these include Mac OS 10.6 Snow | Leopard, which at this point is quite old | | Completely nitpicking here, but both operating systems are the | exact same age. I agree that Snow Leopard feels significantly | less up-to-date than Windows 7 though, which speaks to how | quickly Apple's operating systems are obsoleted (and this isn't | necessarily a bad thing). | accrual wrote: | For others who love old software and hardware I'll share two of | my favorite sites, an excellent retro PC emulator, 86Box [0] and | a clean and well-maintained software archive, WinWorld [1]. | | These two sites together have provided me hours of exploration | into old hardware, BIOS screens I'd never otherwise see, and | plenty of interesting software scenarios. | | [0] https://github.com/86Box/86Box | | [1] https://winworldpc.com | lioeters wrote: | > Error establishing a database connection | | Archived: | https://web.archive.org/web/20210319083317/http://john.ankar... | dcminter wrote: | At the time of writing the answer appears to be "Error | establishing a database connection" which tickled me as, well, | accessing my childhood 8 bit computers never involved database | errors! | prox wrote: | Syntax error! | rany_ wrote: | Repost: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26506812 | 0xCMP wrote: | I agree with the idea that old computers and OSes might still be | useful and that they have a lot of ideas we simply don't even get | to experience today. | | However the final points of learning to accept that general | purpose computing isn't needed or something is not well worded | and in it's current version I completely disagree with. Old | hardware can be kept and used for specific, non-general purposes. | And new hardware could be made which is locked down for security | and maintenance reasons (think... routers or IoT bridges...). But | a world where we resign ourselves to machines which are not | general computing devices is not one I think we should be moving | towards. | chasil wrote: | Let me give you a more concrete reason to maintain legacy | systems. | | We run a major set of COBOL applications developed under | VAX/VMS, running under ACMS, utilizing TDMS. Please note, I can | barely spell some of these things, let alone grasp what they | do. | | The application software that my predecessors wrote for these | systems supports thousands of users, and is a vertical wall of | technical debt. | | I am far from the decision-maker, but I run the corporate- | mandated communication gateways. I just switched my bastions | from stunnel-telnet to tinyssh-telnet. At least my keys don't | expire now, and the crypto is strict DJB. | | We make due with what we have. I do the best I can. I respect | the work of those that came before (and it signs my paychecks). | madpata wrote: | I am not GP ng to clutter my home with old, bulky and single- | purpose computers. | | > and the computers needed to run them are cheap | | Old computers aren't always cheap. Retro PCs get expensive quick. | TedDoesntTalk wrote: | > imagine if spreadsheet programs like Microsoft Excel stopped | being developed and eventually just disappeared - that's the | level of significance that HyperCard had. | | I often hear similar claims about the significance of HyperCard. | | But if HyperCard was so significant to so many people, wouldn't | it have been ported and/or rewritten over the years to still be | available today? Even if not by Apple, then by someone else? | | That's happened to Excel and other programs. So why not | HyperCard? (Serious question) | the_only_law wrote: | There's LiveCode (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveCode) | | Which is the modern evolution of HyperCard to my understanding | ajarmst wrote: | At my institution, our students take a series of courses on | programming a simple microcontroller (and were doing so long | before IoT/Arduino made that fashionable again). We worked with | the HC11 until a few years ago when we moved to the 9s12. They | even worked for a while in Assembly Language until quite recently | (we now use C exclusively). In this case it wasn't nostalgia or | joy or anything subtle: modern computers are too complex to | permit a useful mental model of how they operate. These 'older' | systems (and their modern simple cousins) are a fantastic way to | learn how a computer actually works with sufficient insight that | it gives you a much deeper feel for how more complex descendants | work. As one example, pointers and indirection are always a topic | that students learning programming struggle with. Explaining that | topic is much, much easier to a roomful of people who've worked | directly with address registers and offsets. | ajarmst wrote: | My father believed strongly in this. I first learned to program | in my early teens (at the time there were precisely two | computers in a 300 km range of where we lived, my father was an | operator on one of them). The 'computer' I learned on was made | of cardboard, and I was the CPU: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARDboard_Illustrative_Aid_to_... | jstanley wrote: | That looks great, I'd love to have a play with one. I wonder | what's the easiest way to get one, perhaps a modern replica? | It almost looks like it might be possible to implement as a | PDF that you just have to print on some card and cut out? | BallyBrain wrote: | Enjoy! | | https://www.instructables.com/CARDIAC-CARDboard- | Illustrative... | benlumen wrote: | Anyone else in the UK thinking what a fine thing it would be to | designate the space for a dedicated "HyperCard" machine? | | I practically operate a one-in, one-out policy for retro stuff | like this. | sleavey wrote: | It's fitting that this post is written on a blog running the very | old (original?) default theme from WordPress 1.0. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-03-20 23:00 UTC)