[barrkel]

You could get by fine on such a machine, so long as you were writing software for about 1993. But writing software for 2011? My source tree would just about fit on a disk that could be connected to such a machine, but it would take eons of page swapping to compile with 8MB of RAM.

Software does a lot more stuff these days, with richer media, more layers of abstraction and more reuse of code. We mock Iris as a poor knockoff of Siri, but the thing has text-to-speech and speech-to-text linked in to it, and was put together in 8 hours! Try doing that on your 486/33, with the tools of the era. You'd be lucky to have a sound card (MPC was a standard to encourage OEMs of the time to include them, along with a CD drive, if you recall) and a color console I/O library, much less a network connection good enough for cloud speech recognition.

My point? People today are forever bitching about how little we've progressed, how software development is still the same, but I can't agree. I remember what software development used to be like. It was great in that everything was small enough to be fully understandable, but that's all that was great about it - otherwise it sucked, deeply.