- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
You must log in or register to comment.
It kills me when I download a simple app to my phone that’s 60 mb. When I was a child we built the world off 1.44 mb floppies. How did we stray so far from God’s light?
Even 10years ago, I considered having an app over around 40mb to be huge, but now 60mb is kind of the norm
Isn’t it about a web engine being roughly 60MB? 😕
Do you mean by that that many apps are just website wrappers? Or did I get it wrong?
Indeed many apps tend to be that, at least many of my apps are open source at least and they tend not to have trackers and other bloat😅
I think I was thinking about desktop apps when I answered, but I feel out of context now 😬
Ohhh, I was talking about android apps😆
Hmm, I havent checked much how big computer applications are on average
The Uber App on my phone is 1 GB!
The fuck? (Edit: Although, does it have a map?)
Hmm…
AliExpress has no right to be that large, neither Opera. No reason to store that much cache. (Edit: cache and cookies are only around 500MB total. Hmmm…) Also, I set F-Droid to keep cached apps for 1 hour, what the hell is this?
I kind of forgot to manage my storage, as I usually do until I have like 5GB left…
Data will always adapt to storage size.
I have bypassed this issue by exclusively using open-source terminal software. If my softwares aren’t launching in 2-3 seconds, i usually try to find alternatives.
deleted by creator
Why is it in the 2000’s it took 30-60 seconds to open, Word, Photoshop, Gimp or some other program. With today’s computing power it still takes 30-60 seconds to open same said programs… Also fuck MS Teams.
Fuck Teams, all my homies hate Teams
Gimp opens on linux pretty much in an instance though
Maybe I should give it another shot then, it’s been a few years. But last time I used it as default to open pictures on my set up it would pop up with its image and take at least 10 seconds to load the image. I got to annoyed with it I change it to just open in my browser.
deleted by creator
There’s sort of an unholy synergy between hardware companies wanting to sell more hardware and software shops wanting to cut development costs. The selection pressures are to build bloated software that needs fast hardware to run.
Cause they work better. Brand new ads, awesome new subscriptions. Flashy new AI features that definitely work super well and are definitely useful.
/s
Because storage is cheap, so it’s not worth optimizing that heavily for, because the optimization creates a huge amount of headaches.
There’s a reason that today you can just download an app, and it just installs, runs, and uninstalls itself cleanly.
There’s no fighting with dependencies, or installing versions of libraries or frameworks before you can install an app, or having apps conflict with other apps, or having bits of app installations lying around conflicting with things.
That’s because we used to spend a lot of time and effort making sure that only a single copy of each dependency was installed on a system. If two apps both relied on the same library, one would install it, and the other would then be dependent on it as well and not install its own copy. If the original is removed you have a problem. If it thinks something else is dependent on its asset still and doesn’t remove it when it should you’ve got a problem. If they were both dependent on different major versions of a library, you could run into conflicts and compatibility issues (hello dll hell). Either the apps would have to manage all that, or the OS would, or eventually the user often would.
Now every app just bundles all its dependencies with it. It means the app comes as a clean bundle, there’s no conflicts, it can install cleanly, and there’s so much less time spend on packaging apps and debugging various system configurations.
Quite frankly this makes way more sense as a model for distributing anything. Yes it costs more in storage, but it pays off massively in resiliency and time savings for everyone.
Also, unless everything is done with vectors, high def image / video assets are not small and can very quickly add up.
Bigger monitors, smaller phones, higher color depth, lower latencies, customizable window decorations, chronal themes, AI, blockchain, more devices, trackers, architectures, platforms, malwares, internet protocols, programming languages, human languages, ads, ads, ads, ads, doom, power saving, content, content moderation and I’m sure there’s plenty more reasons that might contribute to the growth.
Not saying I like or want all those things, simply that they might be contributing to size increases. Part of me wishes we could go back, then i fire up windows xp pro sp3 on an eee pc netbook i have that miraculously still works and i remember why i prefer to stay in the present, at least until AI kills us all.
Not IT though, I’m just a guy.
Where did you get “smaller phones” from?
I probably should have used ‘smaller chips’ instead. another idea would be using ‘thinner phones’ or ‘lighter phones’. i was a weird writing headspace when i wrote that and liked the flow of going from ‘bigger’ to ‘smaller’.
Curious if this is so broadly true without bundled resources; obviously screens are higher DPI, so even buttons are now designed for at least 8K resolutions, even if most consumers are still on 1080p.
Orders of magnitude beyond 640x480 or pre Windows 3.1 resolutions.
A lot of that done using vector graphics though.
Many apps ship both vectors and raster images. It is worth nothing that vectors save space, but increase compute (the image now has to be rendered at runtime), contributing to slower startup times.
