There is no inner quality to performance for computers, as there is no inner value of performance for humans beings as well, argues van Splunter. When looking at a piece of art, a human can say ‘I have a feeling with it’, but still it is bound to a person and taste differs for example. How does a computer environment get a sense for something is good or worse? Basically an assessment of performance is always bound to a specific instance. You can make local assessment of performance. But if you look at it from a different perspective (e.g. in relation to a group) then other attributes might be more important. And how do you abstract a general idea from that, asks van Splunter, and what would be the opinion of the overall system? Nevejan suggests that children perform for fun and witnessing can be fun van Splunter argued, so maybe performance may also be an inner drive? Van Splunter replies that if you go to emergent systems, this kind of drive could be key for modelling it.
Performance as inner drive
Performance is always based on and limited to a specific application of systems as it is for humans. If you are searching for a certain book than the result is more important than the response time.