[maeln]

More than CPU speed, I think the increase in storage and RAM is to blame for the slow decay in latency. When you have only a few Kb/Mb of RAM and storage, you can't really afford to add much more to the software than what is the core feature. Your binary need to be small, which lead to faster loading in RAM, and do less, which means less things to run before the actual program.

When size is not an issue, it's harder to say no when the business demand for a telemetry system, an auto-update system, a crash handler with automatic report, and a bunch of features, a lot of which needs to be initialized at the start of the program, introducing significant latency at startup.

[RetroTechie]

It's also complexity - added more than necessary, and @ a faster pace than hardware can keep up with.

Take font rendering: in early machines, fonts were small bitmaps (often 8x8 pixels, 1 bit/pixel), hardcoded in ROM. As screen resolutions grew (and varied between devices), OSes stored fonts in different sizes. Later: scalable fonts, chosen from a selection of styles / font families, rendered to sub-pixel accuracy, sub-pixel configuration adjustable to match hw construction of the display panel.

Yeah this is very flexible & can produce good looking fonts (if set up correctly). Which scale nicely when zooming in or out.

But it also makes rendering each single character a lot more complex. And thus eats a lot more cpu, RAM & storage than 8x8 fixed size, 1bpp font.

Or the must-insert-network-request-everywhere bs. No, I don't need search engine to start searching & provide suggestions after I've typed 1 character & didn't hit "search" yet.

There are many examples like the above, I won't elaborate.

Some of that complexity is necessary. Some of it isn't, but lightweight & very useful. But much of it is just a pile of unneeded crap of dubious usefulness (if any).

Imho, software development really should return to 1st principles. Start with a minimum viable product, that only has the absolute necessary functionality relevant to end-users. Don't even bother to include anything other than the absolute minimum. Optimise the heck out of that, and presto: v1.0 is done. Go from there.

[marcosdumay]

> But it also makes rendering each single character a lot more complex.

Not millions of times more complex.

Except for some outliers that mess up everything (like anything from Microsoft), almost all of the increased latency between keypress and character rendering we see on modern computers comes from optimizing for modularity and generalization instead of specialized code for handling the keyboard.

Not even our hardware reacts fast enough to give you the latency computers had in the 90s.

[Borg3]

Im not really sure what are you talking about ;) HW become much much much faster. Mostly in speed of computing, but latency also dropped nicely. The letency bloat you see its 99% of software (OS). I still run Win2003 on modern desktop, and it flies! Really, booting/shutdown is quick. Im on spinning rust, so first start of webbrowser is slowish a bit, but once cached, its like 200ms-500ms depending on version (more modern = slower).

[marcosdumay]

Take a look on the latency of a keypress on your modern keyboard to when your CPU has the chance to first process the data, you'll be surprised. Depending on how your hardware is configured, it can reach 100ms there alone.

Your mouse has an equivalent issue, except that it's not usually optimized to the same level, so the worst case is way more common. Audio has a much worse issue, and can lag a large fraction of a second on hardware alone. And there's the network, that has optional features that are emulated by adding lags proportional to the bandwidth.

All of our hardware has become more capable with time, but that doesn't mean latency has decreased. Some kinds of latency have gone down, others have gone way up.

[Borg3]

Okey, yes.. Its a mix of HW/OS issue indeed. I remember my old gaming rig I assembled more than 10 years ago. Asus mother board, i5-760 CPU, ATI HD 6850. Win2003 as OS. All was tuned and it was really great. Basic DPC latency was around 30-40us. Under load it increased slighty but it was always <100us.

Now catastrohpic (with I didnt knew at that time) event occured. After 10 years, Internal NIC burnded. I was like, okey.. I have dozens of PCI NICs, lets plug one and vioala. And I did. But, there was problems, after a while (hour or so) I noticed Audio glitches, especially when when there was network activitiy. After more investigation and reading mobo manual I noticed that IRQs were nicely spread for all internal mobo components + PCIe x16 bus. Other PCI ports were always shared one or another. I could do nothing to fix it.

PC now catch dust, I bought used HP 8200 PC with works nice, but its not gaming rig, standard DPC latency is around 2000us, with is quite large.. Still, for normal use that latency is great, Im very sensitive to lag and latency so if I had issues here, I would be mad.

At the end, some pics from my DPC stall fight:

http://ds-1.ovh.uu3.net/~borg/pics/DPClat.png

http://ds-1.ovh.uu3.net/~borg/pics/DPC_stall.png

[zokier]

I'm not sure your font rendering is very good example here. Windows has used vector fonts since 90s and ClearType since Windows XP. That is nearly 25 years ago. And it wasn't really much of a performance issue even back then.

[RetroTechie]

Correct. Modern font rendering likely falls into that "more complex, but lightweight / useful" category.

My point was it's much more complex even though it does essentially the same thing (output character to screen).

>> There are many examples like the above

Death by a 1000 cuts! Probably much worse offenders out there that deserve being attacked.