4 ms·
That seems like a convoluted scheme to get "normal" people to care about something that you care a lot about, and they don't. They don't care because it's not
by shaki-dora 8y ago
That seems like a convoluted scheme to get "normal" people to care about something that you care a lot about, and they don't.
They don't care because it's not a problem for them. Yeah, maybe they could have bought a cheaper phone if everyone had spend twice as much time writing the code. But hardware advances have actually caught up with requirements (and then some), and all these sites work fine on even lower-end current phones.
You care about it like a watchmaker cares about the mechanical drive of his watch.
They don't need a watch. They have smartphone. It's 8 magnitudes more precise than your mechanical watch.
- TeMPOraL 8y agoIt is absolutely a problem for them. It is what makes them pissed off and ruining my day by getting in anger fits over how their phone is shit (it's not their phone - it's the accumulated bloat of the apps they use). It's what makes them buy a new computer ("my old one was too slow"). It's just regular users know so little about technology that they accept what they're given without any question. "Thinks work slow so it's definitely the fault of my computer, maybe it has viruses".
- kpcyrd 8y agoI was about to say this. Computers are not getting slower over time, the programs get worse over time.
- rectang 8y agoI care about bandwidth because I don't have unlimited data on my mobile plan. I wish I knew how much each site/domain was costing me. Then I could have a better idea which sites are profligate wastrels to be avoided and which sites I can feel free to visit at will.
- sbr464 8y agoI agree, but I believe this is referring to memory usage, not data transfer/usage over the network. But that number would be interesting if more readily available.