4 ms·

Lets assume well paid developers of $150.000 yearly, 5 man for 3 months is less than $187.500 is wages. Lets be generous and say we double that to account for o

Lets assume well paid developers of $150.000 yearly, 5 man for 3 months is less than $187.500 is wages. Lets be generous and say we double that to account for other expenses. It's $375.000 for a feature that will be a reasonable sales argument.

spyridonas 8y ago
Let's throw these money and work hours to electron contribution! It will make every electron app faster
- cmiles74 8y ago
  I think Google is already throwing enough money at Chromium for all of us (Electron runs on top of Chromium AFAICT). In my opinion, Google's expectation is that you run one instance of Chromium per machine. Electron wants to run one per application. Hence performance woes.
mercer 8y ago
Much as I usually try to understand the 'business end' of things, I have to say that I'm baffled that Slack hasn't done this yet. I rather like Slack, and have good reasons to use it (it's pretty central to Elixir's community, for one), but even on my relatively beefy MBP (2015) I actively avoid having the app open because it's a heavy Electron piece of shit. While of course I might be a bit of an outlier as a developer with a preference for 'lighter' applications (and comfortable with CLI stuff), surely I'm not that much of an outlier...
- pluto9 8y ago
  I think it's typical. The business-minded management folks at tech companies tend to measure success and failure purely in dollars. If the company's financial indicators are good, they assume their trajectory is correct and change nothing. They won't fix or improve existing systems unless an issue is measurably costing them revenue. In the case of the enterprise shop I work at, our revenue increases year over year, and so technical debt doesn't get addressed unless it causes such trouble that clients threaten to leave. Development gets slower and costlier over time as cruft builds up in the codebase, but that effect can't be measured, so it doesn't exist as far as management is concerned. In Slack's case, their indicator of success is the giant valuation they just got. Their desktop app is an annoying resource hog, but hey, they have tremendous market share, so it must not really be a problem for users. And if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
eschutte2 8y ago
Slack pays much more than $150k.
- hvidgaard 8y ago
  The average wage for a senior developer in silicon valley is $130-140k for 2018 (according to various sources on google). I have a hard time believing that a company so obviously business management focused as evident of how crap their application runs, willingly pay "much more than $150K". Nothing in their application requires it, and developers able to require "much more than $150K" wouldn't touch that with a 10ft pole.

spyridonas 8y ago

Let's throw these money and work hours to electron contribution! It will make every electron app faster

cmiles74 8y ago
I think Google is already throwing enough money at Chromium for all of us (Electron runs on top of Chromium AFAICT). In my opinion, Google's expectation is that you run one instance of Chromium per machine. Electron wants to run one per application. Hence performance woes.

mercer 8y ago

Much as I usually try to understand the 'business end' of things, I have to say that I'm baffled that Slack hasn't done this yet. I rather like Slack, and have good reasons to use it (it's pretty central to Elixir's community, for one), but even on my relatively beefy MBP (2015) I actively avoid having the app open because it's a heavy Electron piece of shit. While of course I might be a bit of an outlier as a developer with a preference for 'lighter' applications (and comfortable with CLI stuff), surely I'm not that much of an outlier...

pluto9 8y ago
I think it's typical. The business-minded management folks at tech companies tend to measure success and failure purely in dollars. If the company's financial indicators are good, they assume their trajectory is correct and change nothing. They won't fix or improve existing systems unless an issue is measurably costing them revenue. In the case of the enterprise shop I work at, our revenue increases year over year, and so technical debt doesn't get addressed unless it causes such trouble that clients threaten to leave. Development gets slower and costlier over time as cruft builds up in the codebase, but that effect can't be measured, so it doesn't exist as far as management is concerned. In Slack's case, their indicator of success is the giant valuation they just got. Their desktop app is an annoying resource hog, but hey, they have tremendous market share, so it must not really be a problem for users. And if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

eschutte2 8y ago

Slack pays much more than $150k.

hvidgaard 8y ago
The average wage for a senior developer in silicon valley is $130-140k for 2018 (according to various sources on google). I have a hard time believing that a company so obviously business management focused as evident of how crap their application runs, willingly pay "much more than $150K". Nothing in their application requires it, and developers able to require "much more than $150K" wouldn't touch that with a 10ft pole.