▲ | getcrunk 5 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I think that’s a lame argument. First because it’s kind of a fallacy. Size is absolute not relative to something. Especially for software. No one thinks of software size primarily in the context of their disk space. Further I think everyone keeps getting larger and larger memory because software keeps getting more and more bloated. I remember when 64gb iPhone was more than enough (I don’t take pictures so just apps and data) Now my 128 is getting uncomfortable due to the os and app sizes. My next phone likely will be a 256 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | hnlmorg 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I’m usually the first to complain about bloat but your counterpoints to the GPs “lame arguments” are themselves, fallacies. > First because it’s kind of a fallacy. Size is absolute not relative to something. Especially for software. No one thinks of software size primarily in the context of their disk space. That’s exactly how most people think about file sizes. When your disk is full, you don’t delete the smallest files first. You delete the biggest. > Further I think everyone keeps getting larger and larger memory because software keeps getting more and more bloated. RAM sizes have actually stagnated over the last decade. > I remember when 64gb iPhone was more than enough (I don’t take pictures so just apps and data) Now my 128 is getting uncomfortable due to the os and app sizes. My next phone likely will be a 256 That’s because media sizes increase, not executable sizes. And people do want higher resolution cameras, higher definition videos, improved audio quality, etc. These are genuinely desirable features. Couple that with improved internet bandwidth allowing for content providers to push higher bitrate media, however the need to still locally cache media. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | ghosty141 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> No one thinks of software size primarily in the context of their disk space. This is wrong. The reason why many old tools are so small was because you had far less space. If you have a 20tb harddrive you wouldn't care about whether ls took up 1kb or 2mb, on a 1gb harddrive it matters/ed much more. Optimization takes time, I'm sure if OP wanted he could shrink the binary size by quite a lot but doing so has its costs and nowadays its rarely worth paying that since nobody even notices wether a program is 2kb or 2mb. It doesn't matter anymore in the age of 1TB bootdrives. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | dotancohen 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
So bloated software is motivating you to spend more for the larger capacity phone? What incentive does Apple have to help iOS devs get package sizes down, then? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | pxc 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Size may be absolute, but bigness and smallness are inherently and inescapably relative. |