"640kBs should be enough for anyone"? I have 64kB and half of it is ROM and VRAM.

I agree that It is silly that an OS that is still basically NT 3.1 needs 8GB to run.

In early XP days, it was 32MB for the OS and 2GB for Firefox.

I suppose the answer to the riddle is that now every program included in Windows is an Electron abomination with its own "Firefox".

Soon, every "Firefox" will include its own slightly different LLM.

NOTEPAD.EXE will run at 2FPS on your 256GB AI box.

▲

pathartl 2 days ago | parent [-]

"basically NT 3.1" is an incredible over exaggeration. Total RAM capacity has stagnated over the years and subsequent generations of DDR have backed speed instead.

8GB in a computer was considered good in a consumer performance machine in 2010. 16 years before that was 6-8MB.

	▲	avadodin a day ago \| parent [-]
		What seems like an over–exaggeration to you? I agree that the time periods you mention saw different growth patterns and I would blame the stagnant software for the situation —it has slowly grown into the hardware with no real feature improvement. Even the current path to exponential RAM increases is a naked king —1T models are only slightly better than 1B models at following instructions.