3 ms·

I don't get this focus on file size, really. 256 MB is ~0.02% of my current disk space. If the product is fine and the tools the developers choose to build it d

I don't get this focus on file size, really. 256 MB is ~0.02% of my current disk space. If the product is fine and the tools the developers choose to build it demand for this space – so it be, I couldn't care less. Given it won't run on my Raspi. But there can still be value in things that don't run on micro computers.

usrbinbash 5y ago
As I have written elsewhere in this thread: Storage is free, RAM isn't. And neither is battery power. A terminal application is supposed to be small, and next to invisible in terms of resources required. If it isn't, it will be uninstalled.
- phist_mcgee 5y ago
  >supposed to be According to whom? The terminal gods? According to wikipedia: "A terminal emulator, terminal application, or term, is a computer program that emulates a video terminal within some other display architecture. Though typically synonymous with a shell or text terminal, the term terminal covers all remote terminals, including graphical interfaces." I don't see anything in there about "invisible in terms of resources required"
  - touristtam 5y ago
    Considering this is a basic tool the assumption isn't completely wrong to have a small footprint. Allowing to have a myriad of tools with each a memory footprint equivalent to Chrome is a recipe to hog all your RAM.
  - usrbinbash 5y ago
    The wikipedia definition talks about terminals in the general sense of the word as in "something where some interface connection terminates." In that strictest sense of the word, even an RDP client onto a windows desktop is a "terminal". As the article points out itself however: The colloquial semantic meaning of the word, aka. what is usually meant by it, is TEXT TERMINAL. And btw.: Even for a fully featured RDP client, I wouldn't accept a size of 200+MB. The one I use at work is barely 4MB.

3 ms·

I don't get this focus on file size, really. 256 MB is ~0.02% of my current disk space. If the product is fine and the tools the developers choose to build it d

by polycaster 5y ago

usrbinbash 5y ago
As I have written elsewhere in this thread: Storage is free, RAM isn't. And neither is battery power. A terminal application is supposed to be small, and next to invisible in terms of resources required. If it isn't, it will be uninstalled.
- phist_mcgee 5y ago
  >supposed to be According to whom? The terminal gods? According to wikipedia: "A terminal emulator, terminal application, or term, is a computer program that emulates a video terminal within some other display architecture. Though typically synonymous with a shell or text terminal, the term terminal covers all remote terminals, including graphical interfaces." I don't see anything in there about "invisible in terms of resources required"
  - touristtam 5y ago
    Considering this is a basic tool the assumption isn't completely wrong to have a small footprint. Allowing to have a myriad of tools with each a memory footprint equivalent to Chrome is a recipe to hog all your RAM.
  - usrbinbash 5y ago
    The wikipedia definition talks about terminals in the general sense of the word as in "something where some interface connection terminates." In that strictest sense of the word, even an RDP client onto a windows desktop is a "terminal". As the article points out itself however: The colloquial semantic meaning of the word, aka. what is usually meant by it, is TEXT TERMINAL. And btw.: Even for a fully featured RDP client, I wouldn't accept a size of 200+MB. The one I use at work is barely 4MB.