3 ms·
> I'm very surprised they don't even mention the efficiency of the developer in this context Because in terms of energy use it doesn't matter. Take any somewha
by flohofwoe 3y ago
> I'm very surprised they don't even mention the efficiency of the developer in this context
Because in terms of energy use it doesn't matter. Take any somewhat successful video game for example. It might take years and hundreds of developers to create, but all the energy used during that period is most likely just a fraction of running the game hundreds of thousands of times on the first day after release.
- rcbdev 3y agoThis is a very specific example since video games genuinely require loads of resources to run at the end user side. Most software projects aren't client-side behemoths like that.
- flohofwoe 3y agoOk, then web browsers :) Run by many more people than video games, but (not quite as) heavy when it comes to resource usage.
- rcbdev 3y agoHow many people do you know who work on browsers though?
- flohofwoe 3y agoA handful, but there are definitely more people who *use* browsers each day than there are people developing browsers. That's the whole point of the argument ;)
- rcbdev 3y agoAs I said, if you are FAANG or similar - which browsers are - the trade-off might be worth it, yes. But only a handful of software projects out there are browsers or video games. That's the whole point of the argument. ;)