bri3d wrote:Nice, I'll bite, because this one is obvious.
I probably phrased that poorly. I'm wondering why anyone would want to "recreate" a DOS or Amiga program on a "modern" platform. It's an antique program in an antique paradigm. If modern is so great, then why long for an antique ? Modern is better, right ? Then make a modern program with all the wonderful advances we've seen in software over the past twenty years. I'm sure there must be some. Somewhere.
What makes OS X a "modern platform" compared to IRIX is active development and support for hardware sold after 2006.
So the fact that it's actually NeXTStep, introduced in 1990, with pretty icons poured over the top, that has nothing to do with it. I see now. I believe Novell DOS 7 is actively developed and runs fine on new hardware, too. That makes it modern ? If I take a VW bug and slap a fibreglass Ferrari body on top, then it's a supercar ? Groovy, man, groovy.
The technical merits of any OS are up for debate - but the fact that IRIX doesn't run on any new hardware and probably never will return makes it no longer a "modern platform."
Most likely correct. To which the answer has to be "Then who gives a rat's ass ?" I refer you to Eliyahu Goldratt, The Goal
: "what's the effing point
?" Are we all mostly interested in playing with our peepees or is the hardware / software combination actually supposed to do something useful ? If we have people reminiscing over twenty year old software then obviously someone, somewhere has been missing the point for a long long time.
Or maybe that is the real point : they collect a lot of money which we happily hand over for the privilege of saying "My peepee is 4 ghz, yours is only 3.2 , ha ha ha !" That's so productive. I'm really glad we're an information and service society now.
And that's why you'd recreate something on a "modern platform" - to take advantage of the speed and power of new hardware. Plus, while you were at it "recreating," the software would probably emerge from the "1870s" you speak of with modern features as well, possibly by accident (for example support for more modern container, compression, and interchange formats).
You mean, something along the lines of multiple threads and processes, to take advantage of all these dual-core cpu's that are so popular now ? yeah, that'd be nice, wouldn't it ? There's only been common smp operating systems and hardware available for fifteen goddamned years
. Maybe in another twenty the software idiots will actually get "modern" and take advantage of the "modern' hardware.
But I wouldn't bet on it.
What I would bet is that the useless software companies we have (yes, Adobe, you get to go to the front of the line) will continue to merrily produce absolute crap and the morons who happily buy it will continue to do so because hey now ! it's modern !
Software is shit. The people who produce that crap should be put to sleep.
skywriter wrote:the age of the platform is irrelevant, that fact that you can get modern software for it is.
Such as Fireflop, the "modern" browser that locks up the interface if you breathe hard, CS 4 "Creative Suite" with its wonderful modern interface and superlative programming that could bring Blue Gene to her knees but can't even save as pdf, Acrobat Reader for PORTABLE
document format that is twelve versions outdated on anything but Winshit XP, Flash (sooo useful, improves my life immeasurably being forced to watch third-graders' artwork) ...
Yeah. Modern software. I feel so deprived having to run this lousy outdated Irix stuff ... Oh, wait ! I don't have to ! For a buck I can get any piece of software made -- but it's not worth the trouble to take it off the shelf because it's crap
(I'm not entirely kidding. I have boxes
full of this garbage that's not even worth the trouble to install. It's like buying an Andy Warhol poster of a soup can. Get it home, stick it on the wall, then what ? Whoopee. Junk, junk, more junk. )