Over at Feedster blog they are bemoaning the fact that "Frontpage from Office 2000, running under Windows 2000, was using 280 MEGABYTES of memory".
So here I am running literally two generations behind on Microsoft software -- Windows 2000 instead of Windows XP and Office 2000 instead of Office XP. And even so I still have troubles with memory. Do I really think that if I upgrade to Longhorn that there will be more memory available? Will Longhorn be faster and more efficient? I think not. Software never gets smaller and more efficient. N E V E R ! I've never seen this in my 17 years of experience (well maybe once or twice -- but never in a Microsoft product).
There must be an unwritten law of computing that leverages Moore's Law to ensure that, "Any new generation OS or application suite will consume 200% more computing resources than you have on hand."
I am sure various *nix fans will dispute this. As for Microsoft perhaps we need Robert Scoble to address this on his blog. He has after all been hired by Microsoft as a Longhorn evangelist. Load him up in your RSS reader - boy, Robert can blog!
Update: 22 July. I've been Scobleized™ - Robert Scoble responds on his blog here. Short answer - "Anyway, it's too early to predict. See ya in 2005." His long answer is worth reading. Wow - fastest response I've ever got from Microsoft. And I am a Mac user :-)
Comments