4 ms·

Wow Skype with 109MB?! Last time I've had it installed it was something close to a gig. But then it became a cluttered monster I rather fear so that's not rele

by aluhut 9y ago

Wow Skype with 109MB?! Last time I've had it installed it was something close to a gig. But then it became a cluttered monster I rather fear so that's not relevant anymore. Same goes for this. I'm happy to give that RAM to Signal since what I get for it, is more then worth it and I have the RAM left. It took me more time and headaches to get people to use Signal on their phones in the first place than it will ever for that 130MB RAM.

72deluxe 9y ago
This is odd. It indicates a badly written application with disregard for resources. If efficient use of something like RAM is blatantly disregarded, what about more important things like performance-critical sections of code? Would you be happy that it is shoddily written? The same approach on a mobile device would be widely condemned due to the hogging of RAM. I don't see why the same metrics cannot be applied to desktop software. Is the solution for badly-written slow software "just get a faster CPU"?
- aluhut 9y ago
  I see it that way: there is a new program for Signal which enables me to sent messages from my PC. It's the first version out there and it just works. This is much more then I've expected. I would like if it could use less resources, minimize to tray, etc. etc. etc. but for the moment, this is good and the RAM usage is a far less dramatic issue to me than it seems to be to many here. I mean, there is far worse out there. I sometimes play Elite Dangerous on my other Win machine. There is a community build tool to track your flight route from the games logs (EDDiscovery) and it delivers an endless amount of features. It rests on a pretty huge database. This thing eats up my ram like it's some free gigabyte cake. I even have to launch the game first or it would take forever. It's horrible. The tool is great though and I will have it running when I need it and it does not hurt my remaining experience. I would love if it could use less resources but I won't stop using it because of it.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
  The mobile aspect is important. Nowadays we are starting to see more non-Android Linuxes on mobile phones (like Post market OS or KDE Plasma), so it is important that messaging doesn't hog RAM.
- flukus 9y ago
  > This is odd. It indicates a badly written application with disregard for resources. Everything about skype indicates that it's badly written. This is a text messenger that can't handle copy and paste operations correctly.

by aluhut 9y ago

72deluxe 9y ago

This is odd. It indicates a badly written application with disregard for resources. If efficient use of something like RAM is blatantly disregarded, what about more important things like performance-critical sections of code? Would you be happy that it is shoddily written? The same approach on a mobile device would be widely condemned due to the hogging of RAM. I don't see why the same metrics cannot be applied to desktop software. Is the solution for badly-written slow software "just get a faster CPU"?

aluhut 9y ago
I see it that way: there is a new program for Signal which enables me to sent messages from my PC. It's the first version out there and it just works. This is much more then I've expected. I would like if it could use less resources, minimize to tray, etc. etc. etc. but for the moment, this is good and the RAM usage is a far less dramatic issue to me than it seems to be to many here. I mean, there is far worse out there. I sometimes play Elite Dangerous on my other Win machine. There is a community build tool to track your flight route from the games logs (EDDiscovery) and it delivers an endless amount of features. It rests on a pretty huge database. This thing eats up my ram like it's some free gigabyte cake. I even have to launch the game first or it would take forever. It's horrible. The tool is great though and I will have it running when I need it and it does not hurt my remaining experience. I would love if it could use less resources but I won't stop using it because of it.
em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
The mobile aspect is important. Nowadays we are starting to see more non-Android Linuxes on mobile phones (like Post market OS or KDE Plasma), so it is important that messaging doesn't hog RAM.
flukus 9y ago
> This is odd. It indicates a badly written application with disregard for resources. Everything about skype indicates that it's badly written. This is a text messenger that can't handle copy and paste operations correctly.