3 ms·

I would in fact argue that until we are at a point of diminishing return of improving hardware that it is good that software is becoming more and more "bloated"

I would in fact argue that until we are at a point of diminishing return of improving hardware that it is good that software is becoming more and more "bloated", because that's the only incentive to keep researching more efficient hardware. Phones for example have basically been unchanged for 5 years regarding performance, because while hardware has drastically improved the apps have become heavier in proportion for superficial new features. Same goes for internet connections. As another example I'd say that the recent resurgence of deep learning has mostly come from (or at least was catalysed by) cheap, affordable GPUs, which only exist because gamers wanted better and better graphics.

aseipp 8y ago
> we are at a point of diminishing return of improving hardware We're already at the point where hardware is marginally increasing in efficiency year-over-year for most purposes. We've been there for like, 4-5 years now. Chips created on high-end processes are already expensive to the point there's no immediate cost-savings to be had from them, only power savings. Twice as dense, twice as expensive, marginal performance improvements. Years of development. That's due to physical laws of nature, not because we suddenly started writing way, way better software and therefore hardware engineers decided to slack off for the past 8-5 years or whatever, after year-over-year doubling in the prior decades. Your lunch was never actually free, it's just that Bill down the hall has finally stopped paying for you every day, because he's starting to go broke and has to tighten his belt. > that it is good that software is becoming more and more "bloated" No it isn't, you only think that (and justify it with a speculative argument) because it lets you justify externalizing the costs of bloat onto someone else, ignoring any other concerns -- your users, your cloud provider, your hardware vendors, etc who all pay for the energy and time you wasted on their behalf. > that's the only incentive to keep researching more efficient hardware. No it isn't, this is just more baseless speculation to support your point.
ken 8y ago
> Phones for example have basically been unchanged for 5 years regarding performance, because while hardware has drastically improved the apps have become heavier in proportion for superficial new features. I don't see it. The latest version of iOS is (apparently) such a big performance improvement that its performance got top billing as a "Feature" from Apple [1]. They brag about how it's ~50% faster at several common tasks. [1]: https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-12/features/ https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-12/features/

aseipp 8y ago

> we are at a point of diminishing return of improving hardware We're already at the point where hardware is marginally increasing in efficiency year-over-year for most purposes. We've been there for like, 4-5 years now. Chips created on high-end processes are already expensive to the point there's no immediate cost-savings to be had from them, only power savings. Twice as dense, twice as expensive, marginal performance improvements. Years of development. That's due to physical laws of nature, not because we suddenly started writing way, way better software and therefore hardware engineers decided to slack off for the past 8-5 years or whatever, after year-over-year doubling in the prior decades. Your lunch was never actually free, it's just that Bill down the hall has finally stopped paying for you every day, because he's starting to go broke and has to tighten his belt. > that it is good that software is becoming more and more "bloated" No it isn't, you only think that (and justify it with a speculative argument) because it lets you justify externalizing the costs of bloat onto someone else, ignoring any other concerns -- your users, your cloud provider, your hardware vendors, etc who all pay for the energy and time you wasted on their behalf. > that's the only incentive to keep researching more efficient hardware. No it isn't, this is just more baseless speculation to support your point.

ken 8y ago

> Phones for example have basically been unchanged for 5 years regarding performance, because while hardware has drastically improved the apps have become heavier in proportion for superficial new features. I don't see it. The latest version of iOS is (apparently) such a big performance improvement that its performance got top billing as a "Feature" from Apple [1]. They brag about how it's ~50% faster at several common tasks. [1]: https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-12/features/ https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-12/features/