3 ms·
take out beautiful and it gets so much easier too. I guess that gives us: * portable * beautiful * fast (choose 2)
by jerrysievert 10y ago
take out beautiful and it gets so much easier too.
I guess that gives us:
* portable
* beautiful
* fast
(choose 2)
- K0SM0S 10y agoThat was so acid. ;-) But besides my pun, "fast" code is a moving target relatively to the end result (see how performance considerations about Java running in a VM became moot because of hardware improvements notably on the CPU; see how today multithreading is making a comeback to rescue CPU-bound applications from stale improvements). Fast is also subjective, it's cultural in that it's a trained perception. I'm annoyed if Excel takes more than a couple seconds to launch, but most people are used to 10s at least, because that's our daily experience. Likewise, I remember a time when having pixelated thumbnails until images loaded completely over dozens of seconds was the best browsing experience; nowadays on fiber/LTE we expect a page to appear rather instantly. I guess what subconsciously annoys the hell out of "those who like as fast as possible applications" with Electron is that we know it will yet make fast a more distant concern overall, at least until hardware makes the Electron performance penalty moot, like Java VM. I'm pretty convinced 'fast' is indeed a clear third priority for most consumers though, seeing how it doesn't seem to bother most people in UX research (less so than many other concerns), or how Apple rides ever more financial success while releasing ever slower hardware and software (comparatively to the whole market, and sometimes astonishingly even to their own previous models). Facebook is bloated as hell too these days, but it's as popular as ever. Spotify is sluggish too, even Twitter. People just don't seem to care, the looks and simplicity of use seem more determinant.