TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The Macintosh in 1984

70 点作者 bertiewhykovich超过 8 年前

18 条评论

mikestew超过 8 年前
&quot;Makes you really wonder why Windows 2000 requires 128 MEGS to run.&quot;<p>Yeah, you just wait fifteen years when folks complain that the new laptop offerings max out at 16Gb. I need an order of magnitude more RAM, but I can&#x27;t say I&#x27;m getting even twice the productivity I did in 1984. I use that extra RAM so that someone can serve me ads and bug me ad hoc through whatever chat app is fashionable at the time. If I&#x27;m lucky I&#x27;ll use that RAM for something interesting like a VM. But most of the time I use it so that the Java runtime doesn&#x27;t bog my machine down.<p>SSDs, OTOH, now <i>there&#x27;s</i> something that has improved my productivity.
评论 #12894801 未加载
评论 #12894345 未加载
评论 #12894388 未加载
评论 #12894520 未加载
rpeden超过 8 年前
I know we&#x27;ve made lots of progress in the past 30+ years, and we can do plenty of wonderful things now.<p>But sometimes, when I see what was possible with so few resources, and then press shift-esc in Chrome and notice my Facbook tab using a few hundred megs of memory, I feel a little bit sad.<p>Or sometimes, after putting together a complex web UI using React, I feel pretty good about what I&#x27;ve accomplished. And don&#x27;t get me wrong, I love using React and Angular 2. But then, I think back to how much more civilized UI development felt nearly 20 years ago using VB6 and Delphi, and I feel a little bit sad.<p>I actually feel more sad about the second point than I do about the first point, because we can <i>often</i> afford to waste hardware resources these days. But as good as modern web UI frameworks and libraries are in many ways, I still feel a bit like someone who once had a chainsaw but is now forced to chop down sequoias with a hatchet.
评论 #12894667 未加载
CD1212超过 8 年前
Having been born 9 years after 1984, I look at this and think how little desktop operating system GUI&#x27;s have changed in 32 years. The same menus, windows, icons are all still very familiar, albeit with more visual &#x27;eye candy&#x27; nowadays.
评论 #12894176 未加载
评论 #12894362 未加载
评论 #12894458 未加载
评论 #12894369 未加载
combatentropy超过 8 年前
From the article:<p><pre><code> &gt; All of this was designed to run in 128k of RAM. &gt; Makes you really wonder why Windows 2000 &gt; requires 128 MEGS to run. </code></pre> Indeed. Is this because the infamous recent JavaScript bloatation isn&#x27;t unique to JavaScript --- that OS developers too tend to rope in greater and greater amounts of libraries, frameworks, etc., to accomplish the same thing?<p>It&#x27;s true that today&#x27;s operating systems do more, but it&#x27;s still drawing text and shapes on a two-dimensional screen. Do today&#x27;s advances in multitasking, color, and so on, really need 1,000 times as much memory (100 MB) --- or even 100,000 times as much (10 GB)?
评论 #12894276 未加载
izacus超过 8 年前
&quot;The Finder&#x27;s user interface is far superior to that of the &quot;MS-DOS Executive&quot; used in Microsoft&#x27;s Windows 1.x and 2.x or even the Program Manager &#x2F; File Manager of Windows 3.x. It wasn&#x27;t until Windows 95 (11 years later) that Microsoft would even come close to the look and feel of the Finder - then they threw it all away and replaced it with a web browser in Windows 98.&quot;<p>Can someone explain this? What was so much better in Finder that wasn&#x27;t matched even in Windows 3.1?
评论 #12894604 未加载
评论 #12894420 未加载
评论 #12894516 未加载
评论 #12894435 未加载
Zikes超过 8 年前
&gt; All of this was designed to run in 128k of RAM. Makes you really wonder why Windows 2000 requires 128 MEGS to run.<p>OSX 10.0 Cheetah was released on March 24, 2001 and had a system requirement of &quot;128 MEGS&quot;.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Mac_OS_X_10.0#System_requirements" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Mac_OS_X_10.0#System_requireme...</a>
评论 #12894318 未加载
zeveb超过 8 年前
I still think the early Mac versions were some of the prettiest, friendliest UIs I&#x27;ve ever used. Sadly, there&#x27;s nothing today with that combination of simplicity, elegance and friendliness.<p>I think the downfall started with the Macintosh II and colour …
评论 #12894102 未加载
评论 #12894124 未加载
评论 #12894182 未加载
评论 #12894125 未加载
nickpsecurity超过 8 年前
&quot;All of this was designed to run in 128k of RAM.&quot;<p>Macintosh 1984: more features than most web apps with 1&#x2F;1000th the RAM requirements of some of them. That&#x27;s if rumors I&#x27;ve heard about 100MB+ web apps are true.
评论 #12894240 未加载
评论 #12894195 未加载
zerr超过 8 年前
Like today, was it impossible to quite the app with a single mouse click?
评论 #12894168 未加载
diimdeep超过 8 年前
Anyone who find this interesting should watch this Steve Jobs 1995 Interview. [about how Apple was 10 years ahead everyone in 1984] [1] [about how this was achieved][2]<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;TRZAJY23xio?t=3182" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;TRZAJY23xio?t=3182</a> [2]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;TRZAJY23xio?t=3994" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;TRZAJY23xio?t=3994</a>
mavhc超过 8 年前
What&#x27;s most interesting is the lack of change from 1984 to today&#x27;s macOS. I have a theory that all GUIs are stuck at whenever they were first released.<p>Macs in 1984 single app at once, thus screen level menu.<p>X in 1984, but wasn&#x27;t really about the UI.<p>Windows 1985, multiple apps, thus window level menu.<p>RISC OS 1987-9, 3 button mouse and multiple apps, dedicated menu button, app vs document distinction, drag and drop load&#x2F;save.
评论 #12894710 未加载
qz_超过 8 年前
It looks better than sierra :&#x2F;
评论 #12894321 未加载
评论 #12894566 未加载
dahart超过 8 年前
It needs a picture of the monochrome MacPaint fill patterns!<p>I heard that the display drivers for the first Macs were written in Pascal. I don&#x27;t have any links that prove it, but it was considered crazy back then not to write pixel routines in assembly...
评论 #12894363 未加载
评论 #12894353 未加载
评论 #12894423 未加载
nradov超过 8 年前
128KB? GEOS managed much of the same functionality in 38KB.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;GEOS_(8-bit_operating_system)" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;GEOS_(8-bit_operating_system)</a>
imode超过 8 年前
monochrome still works nowadays. I&#x27;m a large fan of the old amber monitors.<p>efficient use of visual and machine resources. not quite the bloat we&#x27;ve inherited these days. I use i3 and enjoy a blue-on-black colorscheme.<p>128k of RAM is enough for anybody!
评论 #12894495 未加载
评论 #12894466 未加载
mhurron超过 8 年前
The nostalgia makes me feel happy.
niedzielski超过 8 年前
This website is more than the Macintosh! Be sure to check out the other OS&#x27;s too!
rahilwazir超过 8 年前
Still better font rendering than Windows 10