- cross-posted to:
- programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Because the app stores keep adding new requirements that you have to add code to deal with and it gets worse every year and seemingly every day.
Isn’t it strange that a shop is demanding code?
Removed by mod
Skill issue
I wouldn’t say skill issue, more of time issue. You only get a week to implement something. Quicker to use existing libraries than try to optimise yourself.
It’s both, and they are in a sense the same.
Cheaper less skilled or less experienced programmers take longer to get similar results. One week with a a skilled programmer is a lot more value than one week with an unskilled programmer.
Even more if you want to invest some of that experienced programmer time to get the new guy up to speed.
Don’t worry, vibe coding is going to solve everything 😂
Nailed it. Things have changed to allow cheaper (interpretable in several ways) developers to create “good enough” software as quickly as possible. If that involves inefficient frameworks, technology, and practices that unlock this, then so be it; if the “best” code is the code that makes money, and money is what corporations prioritize above all else, and there is a way to do that quicker and cheaper, the outcome is obvious and now ubiquitous. Furthermore, if nobody at the top cares, why should anyone on the ground care? The problem compounds.
Priorities are fucked.
inefficient frameworks
I’d like to object to that. Frameworks are often built by dedicated and paid developers, so they tend to be above average in terms of efficiency. But being frameworks, they have to facilitate lots of use cases, so they also tend to be bigger than what you would write if you had 6 months to roll your own. And 36 more months to kill all the worms that got out of the can, to mangle a proverb.
If it runs “fast enough” on a completely clean system that would cost the average user $1500, then companies assume that that means that it is a good product.
If you want better software, you have to give developers worse hardware to develop on, and more time to develop.
If you want better software, you have to give developers worse hardware to develop on, and more time to develop.
Shhh. There could be application development managers listening… (I’m joking… Mostly.)
If it runs slow on my laptop then there isn’t a chance it will run at all pushed to the cloud. Our cloud servers are…not great. Single core 1.75gb boxes compared to my 16 core, 32gb laptop. We can do a lot with them though. Just takes a decent amount of tinkering. In some ways the cloud was the best thing for performant code.
React
Why? Its libraries are a few kilobytes each.
https://bundlephobia.com/package/react@19.0.0 - 7.3 Kb
https://bundlephobia.com/package/react-dom@19.0.0 - 3.6 KbIs that the JS bundle only? I think you’re forgetting the need to ship a rendering engine, a JavaScript engine, and the rest of the JS you inevitably bring in if you’re using something like React.
Oh, I focus mainly on web. ‘Forgetting’ to ship engines is my bread & butter. lol I see you meant React (+Electron).
isn’t it a combination of younger developers not learning to programme under the restrictions of limited memory and cpu speed, on top of employers demanding code as soon as possible rather than code that is elegant or resource efficient or even slightly planned out
Much the latter.
Plus everything better work perfecly out of the box on any hardware, and there is a lot of different hardware. Compatibility layers are often built into the package.
Java, for instance, recommenda that you package the whole (albeit slimmed down) JVM inside the package for the target platform, rather than relying on the java runtime installed already.
The users arent expected to know any of that anymore.
yep, a lot of apps are just repackaged chrome running a web page.
which begs the question to companies that require use of the app instead of just having a working website i can use on my copy of chrome/firefox that’s already on my phone…
why do you need hardware access to my device?
1 reason is that they want as much data as possible. They sell the user data. Or they use the user data to improve their targeted advertising. They want more ad clicks.
Re app versus site, many know how to block ads on browsers. With an app, the firm is hoping they can show you ads. There’s a way to remove ads from certain apps but the layperson doesn’t know.
Mostly the latter. We don’t do any optimizations on our product whatsoever. Most important thing is to say yes to all the customers and add every single feature they want. Every sprint is spent adding and adding and adding to the code as much as we can and as quickly as we can. Not a single second is allotted to any discussion about performance or efficiency. Maybe when something breaks, but otherwise we keep piling on more crap at full speed non-stop. I have repeatedly been told “the fast way is the right way” followed by laughter. I was told to “merge this now” on multiple occasions even when I knew that the code was shit, and told the team as much. I am expected to write code now and think about it later.
As you can expect, the codebase is a bloated nightmare. Slow as shit, bugs galore, ugly inconsistent UI, ENORMOUS memory use, waaaaaay too frequent DB access with a shit ton of duplicate requests that are each rather inefficient themselves. It is a rather complex piece of lab management software, but not so complex that it should be struggling to run on dedicated servers with 8 gigs of RAM. Yet it does.
Generally maybe but apps specifically, it’s the default choice of IDE, Android Studio, bundling tons of libraries for added functionality bound to Play Services by default.
Which would probably be illegal in EU now, if any judge had the tech see-through for it.
uh, please do ask, why does opening a fucking glorified text and image processing app require 1 gigabyte of ram.
Who wrote this software? The guy from the bible who was the model for greed and gluttony? Jesus christ.
I don’t remember those being particularly emphasised traits of his.
it’s going to be ret conned if you give it long enough, just like every part of the bible.
Is this the appropriate point to reference the suckless community? I mean, that’s THE point of the movement…
“Program is slow? Just get better hardware, brah!!! It’s cheap, bruh!!!”
Fuck you and anyone that thinks like that
It’s truely a sad norm
programming as a profession is full of incompetent failchildren, like all highly paid positions
Don’t sell yourself short, your low paid profession is also full of incompetent fail children
touched a nerve did i?
No
Usually, instead of having 8-bit art, you have epic songs and very high definition textures. That is a good deal of why.
Backed devs: sweats
I think the epic songs and 4K textures are missing in my MS Office.
Yeah but they made xlookup, that’s worth a few hundred megabytes
All hail xlookup
Textures and songs are not a thing on most apps right? For android, using Kotlin has created much bigger appsize than old java
Kotlin doesn’t have much impact on binary size.
For smaller apps maybe. I’ve seen apps that should take less than 1mb rise to 15mb or so
That’s not due to kotlin.
Why else?
That topics always made me curious tho…take a sample AAA games back then has smaller size compared to shitty Unity 2D games nowadays and i wonder why ?
Presumably less compression and fewer ways to install only necessary assets (such as only downloading audio for used languages)
Yeah but like, what new features do apps have which weren’t available in those times? Embedded videos maybe? Doesn’t justify the bloat.
Smaller textures, more assets, and worse audio mainly. Textures used to be like 512 for hero props. Now even random objects you see a few times get a texture 16 times larger. And they get up to 4 of those for each object/group of objects. Thanks to pbr and normals and whatever other masks and lightmaps may be required.
Im sure there are more reasons for size bloat but this is from us artists at least.
Less triangles and smaller textures. Crt monitors had less resolution and practically built-in anti-aliasing so they could get away with (and had to) “worse” assets.
Also since ssd-s have become mainstream unity uses less compression so it would load relatively faster.
Basically because monitors got better, standards got higher, competition got fiercer, storage got bigger and faster, etc.
And it’s not like there weren’t shitty games before, just everybody forgot about them.
I like how the game Banished is made. From a requirenments/looks ratio it is IMO great. One guy made it. Ghosts of Tsushima also looks amazing and is great from a techical perspective, but it is heavy.
Polygons aren’t that costly, they’re just a set of coordinates and pack up well and ultra expensive highpoly stuff is avoided wherever possible by proffessionals. It’s mostly textures and maybe audio that bloats size.
Yea, textures are the biggest thing (unless there’s video). But don’t underestimate vertices, even when using strips. Unity, i think, just ships textures as BCn, meaning 1MB per 1k texture (would be 3-4MB raw). It’s even better for the gpu then raw. Then there’s normal maps, etc.
Another thing is lighting data, be it some textures, probes, or whatever. That can also take up plenty of space.
I’ve mostly been told to use one 512 map max for lighting maps while textures I ship have a casual working file size of 5 gigs and above for substance painter. Idunno how well they get packaged up as since I haven’t played any of the games I’ve worked on for a while. I can see vertice data taking up a lot but other than some AAA games I don’t see why anyone would need to make super poly dense models.
#include “the_entire_fucking_internet.h”
You know we’ve reached peak bloat and stupidity when JavaScript web apps have a compilation step, and I don’t mean JIT.
If the goal is to not have apps be too large, you probably don’t want to send the full variable and function names and all of the comments over the wire every time someone loads a webpage. That would be a very inefficient use of bandwidth, wouldn’t it?
Don’t we have compression built into http already?
I’d rather take a compile step than having no type safety in JS, even as a user.
Except… the compilation step doesn’t add type safety to JS.
As an aside, type safety hasn’t been something I truly miss in JS, despite how often it’s mentioned.
I think they are talking about typescript which is compiled into javascript
Ok, that could be true. I assumed they meant the “building” phase that some frameworks go through.
Memory is cheap and data sells enough to many parties. Most apps are just store front for Ads and data collection.
No wonder why open source apps are quite light.
Did my husband made this meme? Because he is constantly saying this 😂😂😂😂
Most resources are not consumed by wonky code or dependencies. Most resources are consumed by images and sounds.
Surely it depends on the specific software.
Every decent piece of software has crap loads of resources: icons, texts, translations, manuals, sounds, fonts, etc. Even hello world app contains at least one resource - “hello world” string and what’s funny is that executable meta data required by operating systems and the string take more space than the actual code to print this string.
I imagine the ability for an app to watch me take a shit consumes about the same resources regardless of platform.
