Is it true that platform independency is more of a myth today?Because programmers look for efficiency and power over portability which have to be compromised to some extent when achieving platform independency.On the other hand architecture neutrality is welcomed because it provides a very powerful way to make a software which can dominate a particular operating system family.My question is:Lets consider a hypothetical situation where we have to pick either one of them.What should be compromised? Portability or Power?I know this question is a bit subjective,but I'm looking for your views in general.Thank you.EDIT: Is it right to accept a particular answer just for the sake of it,especially for a question  that would be answered according to individual perspectives?
Platform Independency Vs Architecture Neutrality
cross platform
I rely on platform portability at the expense of power every dayI write my code on a Mac or Windows machine, and see it executed on a Linux machine. If I didn't have true platform portability this would be a nightmare.Power is less of a compromise in my opinion because hardware is so cheap in comparison to developer time. If you need more throughput then throw more hardware at it. If you really need big throughput then start optimising your bottlenecks (most of which will likely be inter-process communication rather than operating system abstraction code).