undefined | Better HN

0 pointspjmlp2y ago0 comments

Even further behind, an Amiga 500 would be more than enough for many folks.

0 comments

5 comments · 1 top-level

galangalalgol2y ago· 4 in thread

The memory footprint of workbench was incredibly low. A base alpine image with no support for any graphics is several times that size. What are we doing?

deaddodo2y ago

Workbench had a very limited hardware it supported. Linux Kernel supports 1000x as many pieces of hardware from different CPU configurations, all the way to the most random USB/Firewire devices.

Like, software bloat is totally a thing, but comparing Workbench to the Linux Kernel (let alone the entire GNU/Linux environment) is ridiculously naive.

galangalalgol2y ago

An alpine docker container doesn't have the kernel, so all that hardware support, and the kernel itself are still on top of that ~8MB GUI-less image. Part of it is elf header size vs hulk. Part of it is that no one bothers stripping symbols. But the reason for both of those reasons is simply that memory isn't scarce so we are lazy/efficient.

1 more reply

pjmlpOP2y ago

I remember when Linux kernel came in floppies, and a plain CD-ROM would give me basically the same what many kids now use on their text terminals with tmux.

Or since the subject is Amiga.

A 500 wouldn't make, but a A3000UX would.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Unix

cies2y ago

> What are we doing?

Making use of what is cheap (hardware (CPU/ram) and network bandwidth) while avoiding to use what is expensive: programmers, tech guy helping you with an upgrade or a troubled windows install.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse