* A developer who produces faster code is more expensive to hire. * Any developer - good or bad - will deliver the same feature faster if they implement it

* A developer who produces faster code is more expensive to hire. * Any developer - good or bad - will deliver the same feature faster if they implement it naively, rather than digging deep and optimizing it. * A slow implementation might cost less to maintain later. * The vendor doesn't pay the cost of their code being slow. It's the customer that has to pay for the hardware upgrade. Each company just edges the line between most profit (by cheaply producing slow software) and complete death (by producing software so slow your customers leave instantly a competitor shows up, e.g. Discord killing Skype) I can't wait for CPUs to stop developing. Companies will have to return to efficiency in order to actually support more features.