4 ms·

It's not that Devs don't care. It's because every metric anyone has ever gathered says that users don't care.

jcelerier 9y ago
> It's because every metric anyone has ever gathered says that users don't care. A lot of people go to wal-mart. Doesn't mean that it's a good thing overall for mankind
- emodendroket 9y ago
  If you're looking for apps to be developed "for the good of mankind," without consideration of profitability, then you're going to have to have a different model than the pursuit of profit.
  - jcelerier 9y ago
    well of course, and I think there should be legal action in this direction. No reason to waste CPU cycles on the technologie du jour.
- katastic 9y ago
  Adding onto this comment because people are latching onto the wrong part. It's a greedy search. Just because you optimize for your local best interests, doesn't mean the COMMUNITY will benefit overall and the ecosystem itself suffers. Look at how slow, ad-filled, and error-prone websites are these days. So yeah, companies and people should be at least _concerned_ with the disparity between "best for me" and "best for all of us." Otherwise, we get things like rampant pollution. Well, this is app pollution.
flukus 9y ago
It's not that users don't care, they just don't know it's an issue or who to blame. When they're out of space on their phone the blame whatever company logo appears on the phone, they don't blame the authors of a dozen bloated apps they installed.
- colejohnson66 9y ago
  This. People blamed Apple for them running out of space on a 16 GB phone. I agree photos, videos, and music take up space, but the first iPhone had 4 GB of storage. The iPod Shuffle had 500 MB. Not exactly apples to apples comparison, but Snapchat used to be about 5 MB, and now it’s over 100!
  - chii 9y ago
    Could Snap have made the current app using only 6mb of space? I'm sure they could, but i suspect the engineering effort would've been much greater. That's money down the drain if it turns out users don't care, or their competitors released earlier and grabbed more market share.

> It's because every metric anyone has ever gathered says that users don't care. A lot of people go to wal-mart. Doesn't mean that it's a good thing overall for mankind

emodendroket 9y ago
If you're looking for apps to be developed "for the good of mankind," without consideration of profitability, then you're going to have to have a different model than the pursuit of profit.
- jcelerier 9y ago
  well of course, and I think there should be legal action in this direction. No reason to waste CPU cycles on the technologie du jour.
katastic 9y ago
Adding onto this comment because people are latching onto the wrong part. It's a greedy search. Just because you optimize for your local best interests, doesn't mean the COMMUNITY will benefit overall and the ecosystem itself suffers. Look at how slow, ad-filled, and error-prone websites are these days. So yeah, companies and people should be at least _concerned_ with the disparity between "best for me" and "best for all of us." Otherwise, we get things like rampant pollution. Well, this is app pollution.

flukus 9y ago

It's not that users don't care, they just don't know it's an issue or who to blame. When they're out of space on their phone the blame whatever company logo appears on the phone, they don't blame the authors of a dozen bloated apps they installed.

colejohnson66 9y ago
This. People blamed Apple for them running out of space on a 16 GB phone. I agree photos, videos, and music take up space, but the first iPhone had 4 GB of storage. The iPod Shuffle had 500 MB. Not exactly apples to apples comparison, but Snapchat used to be about 5 MB, and now it’s over 100!
- chii 9y ago
  Could Snap have made the current app using only 6mb of space? I'm sure they could, but i suspect the engineering effort would've been much greater. That's money down the drain if it turns out users don't care, or their competitors released earlier and grabbed more market share.