Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Some unc perspective: I paid ~$6,000 in inflation-adjusted dollars for a computer in 1996. Today, I can get the same power in a $6 single board computer. A powerful modern mini PC starts at ~$600.

However painful these price hikes are, and they are painful, it is worth remembering that computing has become incredibly ubiquitous and cheap.

 help



The computing power available today is such a double-edged sword. We can do so much more so much faster, but then we (including myself in this) waste so many cycles on abstractions and frameworks and layers of libraries to make our development jobs easier.

If the absurd memory prices might have some positive outcome, it will be consumers demanding that all their basic pack of apps are able to run on 16 and even 8 GB of RAM, by means of avoiding those that hog their machines. And consequently (hopefully), developers and their managers being incentivized by market forces to have a modicum of care for performance and not wasting bytes. Dreaming is free...

All Electron devs, let's go back to native-er toolkits! Qt and Slint are already here for proper FOSS apps, while a new generation of research and development on the field of efficient GUI toolkits would benefit us all so much.


>> it will be consumers demanding

But how do I get to express that demand? Asking as a frustrated regular user of excel - excel is amazing software but if your laptop is not in airplane mode, the number of little delays that creep in is wild. It's all seemingly network delays, connecting to onedrive servers when i'm editing a field (why?!), 10s of connections to random microsoft domains as i flick between tabs in the UI (why?!) - each flick incurring a subtle but observable delay.

>> Dreaming is free... All Electron devs

I like your sentiment for sure but i reckon you might be barking up the wrong tree. I'll give the clearest counter example i know of:

When i scroll a buffer in Zed (it's a 120fps editor written in rust that i really want to like) i perceive micro stutters.

When i scroll a buffer in VSCode (an electron app) it's buttery smooth.

I've tried this many times over 1.5+ years of releases. It's a reliable finding on an m1 macbook pro and an m1 imac.

If the slow stack can be fast and the fast stack can be slow, then there's more to this than just tech stack.


Most people can't perceive "micro stutters" and many who can don't care. It's a fairly niche feature requirement.

Excel doesn’t have microstutters it has full blown stutters. It is ridiculous that it takes 3 seconds to open Save As on my Dell Workstation let alone yesterday when it took 30 seconds for a local server.

I really utterly despise this kind of exceptionalism.

You know, you probably don’t feel that your car has air in the fuel line or that your transmission is holding on to old oil.

What you will “feel” is that your car feels “worse” and you won’t be able to put words on why.

Just because non-technical people lack the understanding to put into words the things they feel: does not mean they don’t feel them.

Give them Office 2008 on a 10 year old PC and ask them how it feels, I guarantee they’ll say “better” without knowing why.


Probably true, but maybe you should also ask them how much they would be willing to pay to fix that. I guess it would be less than $100 for the lifetime of their device.

That's because VS Code is hiding everything behind a bunch of non-real-time tricks of perception. Zed is giving you actual real-time feedback.

"Whom the gods wish to destroy, they give real-time data."

The overwhelming majority of the population cannot perceive anything over 90 Hz. Those that can are overwhelmingly skewed towards under 30 years old. Fighter pilots have a floor of something like 200hz for an idea of how rare it is. Just fun info.


> The overwhelming majority of the population cannot perceive anything over 90 Hz

This isn’t true. Unless you’re saying I’m some kind of fighter pilot at 35!


As I've aged, my ability to see tiny text has diminished, but I can still see 60Hz vs 120Hz perfectly well.

I personally avoid Visual Studio Code as much as possible due to the scroll latency, so I think it is noticeable as long as you know what to look for.

I don't think your average consumer has any idea how memory works, which apps are using it, or what a "reasonable" consumption is for a given task.

If things don't work, they will blame the computer. Developers will check and see that their electron app is only using 5GB of memory. They will test on 32GB memory M5 MBPs. Complaints to support will lead to recommendations to kill other apps.

What would make change is if MacOS killed processes above a certain limit, which obviously it would never (and should never) do.


> If things don't work, they will blame the computer

Or the single app that slows it down.


This pressure works for pure software companies that don’t depend on hardware sales and that have competition. Unfortunately not all software vendors will respond to inflated RAM and SSD prices, since there are many important software vendors who have a vested interest in having users upgrade their hardware frequently. Microsoft still makes a good deal of money on OEM Windows licenses, Apple’s App Store and services revenue is built on regular sales of Apple hardware, and Google benefits from the sale of Android devices. The software needs to perform well enough on new hardware to not cause bad reviews, but sluggish enough (or with enough missing features) to motivate users to upgrade their hardware.

Additionally, software is often chosen based on market effects and not necessarily based on quality. If my colleagues use Zoom, then I need to use Zoom to avoid being difficult. If they use Microsoft Office and take advantage of features that LibreOffice and other competitors can’t support well, then I’m pressured to also use Microsoft Office for compatibility reasons.

The only silver lining I see is that these price hikes will effectively freeze current software requirements in the near future, since purchasing power has been diminished. The MacBook Neo has set 8GB of RAM as the standard for casual users. I’ve found that I don’t have a good time on Windows 11 with 8GB of RAM, but 16GB provides more breathing room and 32GB is great. I don’t expect software companies to revert to the days where they needed to squeeze every kilobyte of RAM like back in the 80s and 90s, but I do expect them to be more mindful of the fact that a lot of people will be using 8GB and 16GB configurations through at least the end of the decade.


To be fair to Apple, their best selling laptop runs on the same chip as their best selling phone, so they are rather surprisingly on the forefront of this efficiency in consumer-facing devices.

Not looked at Slint, thanks for the tip. Qt is OK-ish; things seem to improve on the Mac a lot beyond 6.8.


This is very optimistic. I see a future where high hardware prices push more and more stuff to the cloud and consumer hardware becomes largely a thin client. Soon doing anything with a computer will require an internet connection because the "local" portion of software will be an electron UI that makes API calls to a server somewhere to do any "serious" work.

Yup. We're going back to time sharing for the majority of people. The terminal will be their dumb phone.

I have a T430 that came out 14 years ago that does "serious" work for me. For almost everyone the computers they use are wildly over speced for what they use it for.

My 2nd hand ~$200 (minus a 256gb SSD upgrade) T400 was the best laptop I've ever had. Comfy everything, best laptop keyboard I've ever had, not worrying about dropping it on concrete from 2 meters (on the big extended battery, no less). Coil whine when switching p-states, no IPS, that's about it.

Utilitarian laptops need to come back yesterday.


Don’t worry - the cycle will reverse again at some point and we’ll go back to more powerful local machines.

Why do you expect it would be cyclical when the power capture would be extremely valuable to the main players?

And those main players will just be outcompeted. I'm sure DEC wasn't anticipating the PC revolution to take hold so quickly.

No not going back to a mainframe computing…

In many contexts, compute and memory can be traded. Some apps prefer higher memory usage over higher CPU usage, because it requires less power and depending on the configuration, is overall less slow when many apps are contending for the CPU.

It's a good thing Apple's newest computers are so power efficient, because an industry-wide decrease in RAM bloat could theoretically lead to higher CPU usage and power consumption on average.


RAM prices won’t stay like this forever. If demand keeps up, suppliers will just start producing more.

They're already producing as much as possible.

Building a modern chip fab takes many years, and no one seems ready to take the plunge yet. The existing suppliers are happy to just keep raising prices instead.


Suppliers have ceased to exist in the past decades for building up fabs to satisfy demand and by the time they went online prices cratered. I’d assume is even riskier and more expensive now.

Yes. Several new memory fabs are expected to come online in 2028, one in late 2027:

https://manufacturing.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/hi-t...

So I guess the price should come down substantially in about two years.

(Except if the data center demand keeps growing to eat up that increased supply. But at that point the bottleneck might shift somewhere else, e.g. to TSMC and processor manufacturing.)




> but then we (including myself in this) waste so many cycles on abstractions and frameworks

"what Andy [Grove of Intel] giveth, Bill [Gates] taketh away."

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law


I did my first ESP32 project recently and was amazed you can get a system that starts up Micropython, then a Wifi AP, DNS, and Web Server in a second or two total and uses less than 512kB RAM. And thats with a high level programming language.

Shouldn't that all fit into less than 64k?

Something I love about this AI era is how we are going to see companies actually focus on performance optimization again.

There’s a reason WWDC was all about apps launching faster on iOS. Apple doesn’t want to stuff more RAM in iPhones when it’s not even a spec sheet their users see or care about.


Apple has historically tried to avoid “spec” unless its a comparative for illustration purposes.

Apple always markets from a “what is the value to a consumer” angle.

So, they don’t usually lead woth “128Gigabytes of storage”, they’ll say “12million photos of your most cherished memories or 800 hours of video in high fidelity”.

Us techy people know what 128G will give us, so the marketing doesn’t land.


It's been nice that they don't have to play the specs game. Back when pixels were scarcer, it was like iPhone 4 720p video recording vs Nexus or whatever 1080p video, yet the iPhone's video was clearly better quality. Or the Apple Silicon chips have faster RAM and disk access that don't really get noticed in spec sheets or benchmarks.

This subject gives me sudden nostalgia for the times when Steve Jobs was talking about the front side bus during Apple keynotes.

I bet he hated that he had to talk about it.


The tradeoff isn’t dev job easy vs better performance. The abstractions allow devs to build faster or work on things users care about instead of unobservably better performance.

Oh, you mean those shitty Web UI frameworks with worse performance on modern hardware than native GUI programs from 1995?

Back then devs were not taking shortcuts, it was the C API or bust, and it very much shows how far we have regressed.


Oh no, the devs back then were for sure taking all the shortcuts they could, there just weren't as many ways to leave problems for the users compute to solve.

C API was a shortcut. Extensive use of C was a sign of a lazy programmer who wouldn't send the time to write in assembly, which was much more efficient and performant.

I'd love if everyone that made noise about this would put their money where their mouth is and just do it. Make better alternatives to the slow bloated shitty software you decry, and reap the inevitable benefits since it's what users actually care about.

> instead of unobservably better performance

That's... quite the choice of words there


The problem Is when the performance problems becomes observable. Only after a specific scenario like low power mode for example

> instead of unobservably better performance.

It's imperceptible because the hardware has gotten so much faster. This would be like a top fuel dragster the size of a freight train.

The engine is incredibly powerful but the overall performance is hindered by the size of the overall vehicle not being optimized around it.


> work on things users care about

Apparently what users care about is having more whitespace around everything.


Which is such a capitalist lens to look at things through. Optimizing for a very small window of reality.

It's the same sort of optimization that drives behaviors where corporations feel no need to contribute to open-source projects. The same projects that enabled those very corporations to exist.


I'd say some of those extra abstractions and frameworks are actually making many jobs harder.

Would love to elaborate, but need to get back to work migrating a jekyll site to astro


"Hey Opus, migrate this site from jekyll to astro" doesn't work?

Also it's no longer a toy for hobbyist but a necessary tool to participate in society

Yeah, I recently went to the DMV, the only way to even get a place in line in person was on a phone. Also needed some kind of web browsing device to get basic online-only services.

The problem isn't the necessity of a computer to participate in society, as those are everywhere in public for free(My library and unemployment office has PCs free to use), it's the mandatory need for smartphones, as the library has no public smartphone to borrow you.

Sometimes abstractions make performance better too. We can’t all be experts of everything so using a well-optimized library is a boon.

Even beyond the library scope. I suspect most complaints in this regard are around electron/web tech, but a well developed modern C#/dotnet application is plenty fast for most use cases and you get the productivity of a high level GC language with it. Go has even a smaller footprint.

There's plenty of value in the abstractions. It didn't all start to break down until we collectively decided that javascript + chromium is the only way forward for literally everything.


Fully agree with you. I am a frontend developer. On my work machine spotify uses maybe 300mb of memory, but on my home pc with opensuse? Image what it uses... 1.1GB.. The same as my brave browser with 4 tabs open. What is going on.

Because so much modern software is a web browser. The application bundles in its own version of Chromium.

Built natively, the same app could use an order of magnitude less memory, while being functionally identical.


Yes, when you're used to using the modern web with all its bloat it can be a huge surprise when you build something in C or Rust - everyday computers are actually incredibly powerful.

a single leetcode tab is taking up up to 700mb of memory...

"What Andy Giveth, Bill Taketh Away"

It’s not Bill any more, it’s developers choosing to use Electron as an app development platform. It all seemed fine when 64 GB of RAM was cheap.

Something being easier is not a waste, it’s literally the purpose of every technology.

not even that. you spend most cycles on thing you 1. don't want, 2. don't benefit from, 3. don't even know about.

your phone doesn't even need mention (whatsapp request the full contact list from the OS every minute. nobody knows that. google play service usea your phone as a WiFi scanner etc)

your browser churn proof of work every site you visit. cloudflare now probably waste more power than btc (and they don't save your site from bota, only set the bar at bots-willing-to-pay-to-run-canvas-fingerprints or something)


It's interesting to contrast this with the attitude taken by the FFmpeg open source developers. They still hand write assembly code because performance and power efficiency is so critical that every clock cycle counts.

https://lexfridman.com/ffmpeg-transcript#chapter14_assembly_...


This is such a reddit take. Yeah electron takes a lot of resources, but there’s also a lot of software that never would’ve been made in the first place if we didn’t have it. It’s not as simple at pointing to (comparatively) inefficient software and saying that’s bad. Software is ubiquitous now and a big part of the reason for that is that frameworks and abstractions made software much easier to create.

I say this as someone who spent all of yesterday optimizing out a function call to save 36 nanoseconds: stop whining about electron.


> This is such a reddit take

You might consider that your comment would have been just as strong without the opening put-down.


I found it interesting commentary… must’ve been because I wasn’t its target!

Maybe “common myth I’ve noticed spread on reddit” would work.


I'm fine with Electron, not so fine with basic websites being so bloated now that even a modern computer lags on them. Those were achievable in the past.

The perspective changes a lot when comparing with the prices of one year ago, or even with the prices of 10 years ago.

During the last 10 years the prices of computing equipment have been increasing slowly until this last year, when they have jumped upwards thanks to the AI companies and to the measures taken by the US government to sabotage the Chinese competition in the memory market.


Another perspective, if you compare it to two years ago, how much more expensive is it and how much better? we are paying the sAIm Taxltman. Just see, you could buy the steam deck for 250 refurbished 2 years ago, now it's what 700$? Try to buy 2 64GB dims of ram.

Anytime inflation comes up and the relative power of computing devices is mentioned, I remember the classic[1] line that you can’t eat an iPad.

Computing is definitely cheaper, but crappy software seems to always seams to step up to the occasion and use up the extra cycles.

[1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/economy/ipad-price-remark-ge...


I'm still using ~10 year old PCs at both work and home. Running linux, still doing fine.

Yep. My gaming desktop is an old Ryzen 5, 48GB DDR4 RAM and an old nvidia 1660 super. Plays every game I want to play just fine still at 1080p, and even a few modern titles no problem. Most of my library can be played natively at 1440p too with some settings adjustments.

I suspect I can get a good 8-10 more years of use out of it, assuming components don't fail.


> I suspect I can get a good 8-10 more years of use out of it, assuming components don't fail.

That's rather optimistic with that aging GPU. Upgrading to something like an Intel B580 (a $250 upgrade) would give it a second life however.


The B580 barely competes with a GTX1080, which I am still using.

the idea of buying a new modern card having barely the performance of a card from a decade ago seems absurd on its face.


> The B580 barely competes with a GTX1080, which I am still using.

That's nonsense, the B580 is substantially faster.

https://howmanyfps.com/graphics-cards/comparisons/geforce-gt...


I mean, surely this depends on what games you want to play. If you're playing mostly indies and retro games, an older desktop will be fine. If you want to play new AAA releases, probably much less so.

You don't have to go retro, just 5 to 10y old is fine.

I too built a budget gaming machine last year with a ryzen whatever it is cpu, 16GB of DDR4 and a radeon rx470 or 489 with 8GB of ram. I ignore news about new games and only buy games that are on sale and less than 20€ and everything works fine. These are AAA but not newly released ones. For example I recently started playing Skyrim for example.

You don't miss what you haven't tried.


Yeah that's pretty much what I play. Newer titles haven't interested me much lately except for a few. THis machine handles Diablo 4, Pragmata, all the elder scrolls titles, cities skylines, satisfactory, etc. just fine. Even managed to get AC:Shadows to run decently using the steam deck preset.

I hadn't considered Intel Arc though, the other comment's recommendation might be a good upgrade path for me without dropping $1k on a new GPU.


I recently liberated a couple of old Intel Mac laptops by installing Linux. These machines were not receiving system updates anymore. Even on the older machine with a dual core CPU and 4GB of RAM, GNOME runs well (XFCE would probably be a better choice to save RAM for programs, though). On the newer T2 machine with 8GB of RAM, GNOME feels basically as snappy as on my modern gaming PC.

Try Google Meet. I have a similar spec Air, and that's where it falls down :'-(

Google Meet is trash. Camfrog from over a decade ago trashes it, Zoom, and any other multi-camera meeting room software. I was watching over 150 video streams at once on a Pentium 4 using Camfrog, and now you can't even have more than 5-10 before a computer starts choking.

What garbage.


Same. And my current daily driver laptop cost me $400 9 years ago. You can still do a lot for incredibly cheap.

I bought a 2013 MacBook Air for $50 two years ago to take on a backpacking trip. It runs Linux and I use it all the time. I had a video meeting on it this morning.

You run OpenCode with Big Pickle on it with decent performance. So you can even vibe code on it for free.


Compared to current computers, the ones from 10 years ago are not that different, especially with all the software updates, unless you want an edgy graphics card or Apple processor. In terms of durability I guess the battery is the less durable part but the rest should be fine if handled with care

And with modern streaming software like Sunshine/Moonlight you can easily defer high performance tasks to a powerful machine at home. You are truly free to use any device from the last 15 years as a somewhat dumb terminal if you invest some time setting those things up... or even easier if you just need ssh.

My 2012 thinkpad still works well.

I've got access to a couple newer laptops, but they just dont stack up to the old one.


Do you use Discord? How much time does it take to start it?

Oh boy, that app. I only use it once in a while, and it's slower and more enshittified every time. The last time I opened it, there was now a Verizon ad in the bottom left-hand corner asking me to watch a 30 second video to "win 200 Orbs!", whatever the hell that means.

I had a similar thought. I bought a computer for $3600 CAD 3 years ago and it shows no signs of limiting my work in any way. I have another from 2020 from my employer that is just fine, likely costing them about $2500 CAD when they bought it.

Over the lifespans of these devices, a few hundred dollars doesn't matter much. I don't really care.

I do care that the prices are a reasonable reflection of market realities and that their profit margins aren't expanded compared to the last several years', but assuming these increases are actually necessary: okay.


Performance was flying in the 90s. The last 1-2 decades if you bought a top end computer it'd easily last you the decade before it started to drag behind average. 3 decades ago if you bought a computer it'd reach the same point in 2-3 years.

I.e. computing is cheap compared to the past, but it only makes it that much more painful we went from "it'll be so much faster soon!" to "at least it's cheaper than it used to be" and now to "oh wow, it's like the reverse 90s these last 2-3 years!".


its worth noting that you were much less restricted with this 6k computer in 1996. today we are paying ever more for walled gardens that will eventually become nothing more than a portal to cloud services. we are not returning to a previous position, we are moving to a world where everything will be a thin client.

True but you can also buy a RPI or other cheap computer and do literally whatever you want with it. Those walled gardens and portals serve a purpose for many users who don’t care about being restricted for the benefits that come with it.

Yeah but these computers don't have sota performance by maybe more than a factor of 10. So an unfair comparison.

depends on what the computer is, I'm running a desktop with linux, is there really anything I can't do on my computer that was possible in 1996?

> is there really anything I can't do on my computer that was possible in 1996?

Use dial-up internet and SCSI drives?


Were you? That $6k Apple in 1996 was just as 'walled garden' as it is now.

If we are talking specifically about Macs, I remember my Mac in 1996 didn't even have a command line interface.

Speak for yourself. I have a modern machine running Fedora. What walled gardens are you talking about? Buying a Mac is a choice that you may make, but I never will.

You may have equivalent power on that $6 computer but can you run the same applications?

In my case, yes, because I used to be a Linux user. I still am, but I used to be too.

Linux with X11 runs on SBCs like the Raspberry Pi Zero, Orange Pi, etc and outputs to a monitor over HDMI.


I'm sure you can find an equivalent to ClarisWorks or Photoshop 3.0 that works on a Raspberry Pi.

But you cannot, I promise you, buy a raspberry pi for $6. Not even remotely close.

1996 was 30 years ago. What about comparing prices from 3 years ago? 2023 vs 2026.

We paid like $3500 in 1995 money for a PC which was completely outdated after 4 years. The early to mid 90s were exciting times, but damn some of the machines were expensive and didn't last long.

Ordinary people do not buy devices for their computing power, they buy them for their utility. People will look at this and see only a device that delivers the exact same utility as before, but now with higher cost.

I gladly paid $1,499 for an iBook G4 in 2005. (~$2,572 inflation adjusted)

I paid about $6k two days ago for a machine that's now above $8k.

I think this is now technically the best investment I've ever made.


Well Conversely, in 1996 you, your spouse, your kids, didnt need a pc to live your lives - having a pc or mac was something of a luxury

Today smartphones, laptops and the internet are the base currency of the digital world - theres a reason Apple is so wealthy


> having a pc or mac was something of a luxury

Apple products are still luxury items. A cheap phone and a chromebook can replace most of the "base currency" features that you get when you buy Apple.


The MacBook Neo (at least pre announcement) was a better value than anything else, including a chromebook.

And if you spent all that money on a single computer there was the expectation of sharing it with the whole family.

That was a niche product, these are mass market consumables.

See perhaps this 1991 Radio Shack ad (from a 2014 article):

    There are 15 electronic gimzo type items on this page, being sold from America’s Technology Store. 13 of the 15 you now always have in your pocket.
   
    So here’s the list of what I’ve replaced with my iPhone.
    
    * All weather personal stereo, [**US**]$11.88. I now use my iPhone with an Otter Box.
    * AM/FM clock radio, $13.88. iPhone.
    * In-Ear Stereo Phones, $7.88. Came with iPhone.
    * Microthin calculator, $4.88. Swipe up on iPhone.
    * Tandy 1000 TL/3, $1599. I actually owned a Tandy 1000, and I used it for games and word processing. I now do most of both of those things on my phone.
    * VHS Camcorder, $799. iPhone.
    * Mobile Cellular Telephone, $199. Obvs.
    * Mobile CB, $49.95. Ad says “You’ll never drive ‘alone’ again!” iPhone.
    * 20-Memory Speed-Dial phone, $29.95.
    * Deluxe Portable CD Player, $159.95. 80 minutes of music, or 80 hours of music? iPhone.
    * 10-Channel Desktop Scanner, $99.55. I still have a scanner, but I have a scanner app, too. iPhone.
    * Easiest-to-Use Phone Answerer, $49.95. iPhone voicemail.
    * Handheld Cassette Tape Recorder, $29.95. I use the Voice Memo app almost daily.
    * BONUS REPLACEMENT: It’s not an item for sale, but at the bottom of the ad, you’re instructed to ‘check your phone book for the Radio Shack Store nearest you.’ Do you even know how to use a phone book?
   
    You’d have spent [US]$3,054.82 in 1991 to buy all the stuff in this ad that you can now do with your phone. 
* https://archive.is/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/radio-shac...

That US$1600 (in 1991) Tandy 1600 runs a 286 CPU and has a 20MB hard drive, and supported 640×200×16 resolution (720×350 mode for monochrome monitors):

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandy_1000#Tandy_1000_SL_and_T...


A CB radio can’t actually be replaced by a cellphone, the phone doesn’t actually do voicemail that’s a separate service you’re paying for so it works when your phone dies, it’s also listening multiple different phones etc.

But it’s an add, obviously it’s trying to sell you something not actually be accurate.


Wow, I didn't know that Camcorders were that expensive at the time. That's $2k today according to https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm .

Replaced yes, but with generally something worse. Enough to get by, just like a swiss knife is enough, but a ful toolbox would be way better. And with the advancement of technology, a current version would be way more palatable.

I have a digital audio player and it’s the size of a matchbox, with removable storage (now with a 512GB catd), and turn on under 10 seconds. And that tape recorder could be replaced with a very small device too. And I still have my casio calculator from college and that’s what I use if I need to if I need to do a series of computations.


And yet in some ways, modern computers feel slower than those from decades ago. Software today is so, so much less efficient than it was back then.

In some meaningful ways they are measurably slower.

https://danluu.com/input-lag/


Great article. This is the kind of web design that I like.

Until recently, it was always cheaper to forego software architecture optimizations and rely on faster hardware, but now with AI I think this changes that calculus.

Yes and no. Faster hardware doesn’t solve pathologically broken algorithms :)

Worth's law: Software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware becomes faster.


Well I had to move music off a 10 year old laptop and I can assure you things aren't slower in the ways that matter. It was borderline unusable. I am happy with SSDs and not getting viruses off of websites, personally.

unc?

“unc” is the new “boomer”

And software is now so cheap, or free, that it's incredibly difficult to even start and maintain a single-member LLC software business.

it'd be more instructive to compare what you get from apple silicon compared to x86 and ARM.

What you don't get is a bus that enumerates itself so you need to use device tree instead of something like PCI that can enumerate itself leading you to having to recompile the kernel just to patch in DT information.

The expectation was never that it would go back to being increasingly more expensive gen over gen especially at higher specs.

You could buy an m3-ultra with 512GBs of unified memory at around $ 14'000 3 years ago, and that's with the already insane nonsense Apple memory markup. As a reference, the same model with 96GB costed $ 3'999. 2'000, 3'000 $ more for the 512GB model? Okay... But 10?

Furthermore, you're lucky if you can get that 3 year old machine at 25'000 $, used! Let alone they haven't even provided a similar machine for two gens.

So essentially we're going both _backwards_ and more expensive, year after year, with zero signs of any reversion till the end of the decade.

Ffs, my colleagues brand new m2 had half the ram of my 2011 MBP. 12 years later!

This is absolute madness we have never seen.


M3 Ultra w/512 GB was released 1 year ago for $9500. I bought one (with a friend's Apple Employee Discount) and originally had a bit of buyer's remorse, because performance was less than some of the Cloud Providers - but recent releases of the quantized GLM 5.2 models are actually pretty speedy and are probably as good or better than any online model I had a year ago - and the discontinuation of the M3 512 has erased that remorse finally.

That is such an unfair comparison though. The reason we are now getting completely screwed on consumer electronics is because massive corporations just get to bully around the rest of the world and we have zero control over it.

Building a gaming PC right now is no longer affordable. I can't even upgrade my hard drives because they have tripled in price. And it's all because of good old capitalism.


As I understood it, chipmakers aren’t scaling up in record time because the last few times they did that the market fell out from under them, and a bunch of them went out of business.

If it were just that they’re enjoying the insane demand, they’d necessarily be leaving billions on the table for someone else.


I agree. But also back then you could buy a house and support a family with one salary as a trash truck driver. Today we spend years investing in masters and PhD-s to still live with roommates and consider buying food a luxury. Especially after the COVID hikes.

So even though chasing trends and always 'needing to buy' whatever new model Apple pumps out is idiotic, let's also not shill for big corporations.


I come from th blue collar world of the central valley California. Every mechanic, car salesman, construction manager if not worker, owns their own home and has two kids. It's interesting how 60 miles east is a whole new world where you need a crazy fancy job to buy a home.

It's all about housing and the rampant NIMBYism that drove prices up in the 'desirable' places.

>we...consider buying food a luxury

We shouldn't! (Well, Americans shouldn't, anyways.) Americans used to spend almost a quarter of our disposable income on food, now it's more like an eighth.

https://reason.com/2025/11/27/thankfully-we-dont-have-to-spe...


> I agree. But also back then you could buy a house and support a family with one salary as a trash truck driver. Today we spend years investing in masters and PhD-s to still live with roommates and consider buying food a luxury. Especially after the COVID hikes.

Are you sure you are not comparing top 10% back in time vs median worker now? Because people make much, much more nowadays in real terms across all deciles.


Waste and sanitation jobs in Toronto start at $39k and get up to $120k+ if you’re driving the truck and leading a team I would imagine we actually pay our municipal employees proportionally _more_ than we did back then.

>But also back then you could buy a house and support a family with one salary as a trash truck driver

you still can. Truck drivers, electricians and a lot of vocational work pays good salaries. The people who are broke with a masters degree chose a degree in something that doesn't pay. Nurses with a masters earn solid six figures. 90% of the time when I met someone with a PhD who couldn't pay rent it's a downward mobile middle class kid who thought that learning a trade was beneath them


I mean truck drivers make much more money than you'd think.

How much do they make?

There's many types. I sold Audi/Porsche and every now and then I'd sell a fancy car to a FedEx driver type that does long haul runs to other states (with a team driver next to him), and he'd be making $150k a year+. Not bad for 4 days a week work, and ability to live in a slightly lower cost area.

Truck drivers making $80k a year and home most nights is pretty common.


I ran it by Gemini, and it says that the top 10% earn more than $78,800 annually.

I believe your experience is with the top end of the distribution.


Often a mid level engineer salary at least.

Computers got cheap due to necessity. The necessity is still there and raising prices is a rug pull.

That's great, but then can you ask the manufacturers of the devices to support them for 20 years? Raw numbers mean jack shit if the device itself is completely abandoned and cannot run any applications. Banking, authentication and bunch of services require the device to be on the latest iOS/Android version, which is hard to do because the manufacturer dropped it like a hot brick after 5 years.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: