4 ms·
Somewhere along the line, we really lost it in software. A few decades ago I paid about $1000 for a one MEGABYTE memory upgrade, and even that was needed only
by makecheck 5y ago
Somewhere along the line, we really lost it in software.
A few decades ago I paid about $1000 for a one MEGABYTE memory upgrade, and even that was needed only because a single graphics application at that time could clearly benefit from the extra RAM to do more things.
Now? I have 32 GIGABYTES of RAM, and we are celebrating that a chat client has now managed to find a way to use a slightly less absurd amount of memory, and has graciously returned some of our massive computing resources to us? This app barely does anything!! The apps that require all that power should at least be more useful...right?
As far as I can tell, every person on the planet is using more battery power and upgrading their machines more often just to make up for the laziness of software companies. In exchange for the ability of software teams to “easily” write one obnoxious cross-platform beast, we all get to burn through our CPUs and memory. These companies have more than enough money to invest in writing software for different platforms using the heavily-optimized system frameworks on those platforms.
- Zababa 5y agoA few decades ago most software wasn't free and wasn't usable on the web. > These companies have more than enough money to invest in writing software for different platforms using the heavily-optimized system frameworks on those platforms. Companies don't work that way. Why put X million dollars in Teams if it won't really increase revenue?
- nomorewords 5y agoYou could argue that the companies were brought to the success they have due to the fact that they were fast to market to all available platforms. And to think of it, I don't reckon a small company writing a client for only windows/mac would make it big enough to get the money to port it to the other systems.