Live data from Hacker News

Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

buttondown.email

51–60 of 280 posts

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#51

The idea that software wasn't bloated and slow 20,30+ years ago is just myth. Everything was bloated and slow. MS Word in the 90s and 00s would regularly crash and take your file with you, and it often took minutes to start up. Yes, there were some brilliant counterexamples, just as there are today. But most software today is far more enjoyable and rapid to use than that from previous eras. While the software isn't a…

> While the software isn't as snappy as it theoretically could be, that is mostly because the market finds the tradeoff between features and speed.

I don't know how much the market really has a say in this. I don't use Slack because I want to. I use it because I must. When we had open protocols, you really could choose the best client. Nowadays everything is a walled garden.

It's amazing just how poorly we've managed to make a chat application run. Across the board companies are using JS-based apps not because it necessarily leads to a better user experience but because it reduces their costs. Running a couple might be fine. Running more than that really slows things down. And developers tend to forget that most of the world isn't running a machine with the specs that they run with and many don't bother testing their stuff on machines with more limited resources.

I routinely have to kill applications when trying to build software or pair program because our video conferencing tools aren't light on resources either. I can't just add more RAM to my laptop because everything is soldered on now. That's another big difference from the past couple of decades. People could cheaply upgrade their hardware every couple of years. Now, you have to buy a brand new device, so people naturally hold on to their hardware longer. Mobile phone users are hanging on to their devices longer. Just yesterday we saw news that GitHub employees can only refresh laptops every four years. We should be working to make more efficient use of resources instead of targeting everything at the latest hardware specs.

Obviously there was old, bloated software. I think most of what people remember as being slow had a lot to do with spinning disks. I upgraded a family member's computer to something more modern not too long ago. He's pretty set in his ways and still uses old versions of MS Money and the like. It was amazing how much faster they ran. I can't know for certain, but I don't see that sort of future for JS apps. They're slow on considerably more advanced hardware. While more memory would help, more CPU cores likely won't.

I wish performance would be taken more seriously in the UX world. But, it costs less to cut corners and when you have a captive market, who cares? Once one company starts doing it, others do too, making it a race to the bottom. I'm thankful there are still indie developers building high quality, platform-native applications.

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#52

The idea that software wasn't bloated and slow 20,30+ years ago is just myth. Everything was bloated and slow. MS Word in the 90s and 00s would regularly crash and take your file with you, and it often took minutes to start up. Yes, there were some brilliant counterexamples, just as there are today. But most software today is far more enjoyable and rapid to use than that from previous eras. While the software isn't a…

There's another difference which is a stretch of time in which personal computers got faster a lot faster - often faster than than bloat could catch up (for a bit). That produced periods in which some previously slow-seeming software got quite snappy. This naturally stopped happening with the same regularity but it still does, occasionally - e.g. the excitement over M-series Macs.

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#53
People care about features. They don't care if a page takes 2 seconds to load or has a thousand npm packages holding it up. They care that they can click a button and it does the thing that they need to do to accomplish their task. This stuff is all magic and pixie dust to 99.9% of people. And if adding the new feature creates bloat and slowness, so be it. If this tiny little seemingly insignificant thing that user wants is not there, it doesn't matter to them if you have to completely break your "architectural purity" and hack something gross that messes with your Lighthouse score to put it there. It just needs to be there.

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would tend to disagree. In the 1990s System 7 would start in a few seconds from hard disk on a Mac SE/30. Word would start in less than a second (not sure which version it was), and most features we use today were available. Adobe Photoshop 3.0 would start in less than 3 seconds, and same with Premiere 1.0. Of course you lacked some memory protection features which could make the whole computer crash because of a s…

I'm pretty sure you're exaggerating quite a bit. Anyone can watch this video [1] to see how long it actually took to boot up or launch Word. But bootup seems to take 20 seconds, and launching Word took 7 seconds. Which roughly matches my memory. So about an order of magnitude slower than you're describing. (The SE/30 had a clock speed twice that of the SE, but launching things is mostly bound by the hard drive speed.…

>but launching things is mostly bound by the hard drive speed.

which got slower and slower taking swap speed with it, which slowed down everything you were actually using. You'd defrag the drive regularly and that wouldn't do it so you'd have to wipe and reinstall from scratch. And that was some hours of work but like having a brand new machine again when you were done. You couldn't believe how bad it had degraded to. The good old days or selective memories?

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#55
post #36

The idea that software wasn't bloated and slow 20,30+ years ago is just myth. Everything was bloated and slow. MS Word in the 90s and 00s would regularly crash and take your file with you, and it often took minutes to start up. Yes, there were some brilliant counterexamples, just as there are today. But most software today is far more enjoyable and rapid to use than that from previous eras. While the software isn't a…

Really disagree on this one. It's true lots of software were unreliable back in the day. But: - Crashes sometimes != Slow, bloated, and unreliable. I'd rather have something simple and responsive that crashes every now and then, than something that is aggravating to use all the time. - With the massive increase in hardware performance, there's just no excuse at all for slow unresponsive software now, especially from…

What are examples of VSCode dropping in quality? Aside from some extension oddness, it has been a solid performer in my toolkit for many years.

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#56

> I don’t know if there’s anything we can do. I know something we could do, at least for websites. Google could finally make good on their announcement and make CWV actually have a measurable impact on rankings. I work for affiliates/SEO people. When CWV was announced, suddenly they cared about performance. Then the deadline came and went and Google decided not to make it really count after all, and they stopped cari…

> at least for websites

We could start by stopping using these stupid pointless frameworks that provide little functionality but reams of overhead.

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#57
post #15

The idea that software wasn't bloated and slow 20,30+ years ago is just myth. Everything was bloated and slow. MS Word in the 90s and 00s would regularly crash and take your file with you, and it often took minutes to start up. Yes, there were some brilliant counterexamples, just as there are today. But most software today is far more enjoyable and rapid to use than that from previous eras. While the software isn't a…

> MS Word in the 90s and 00s would regularly crash and take your file with you, It's an old joke at this point that you can tell when a person first became a serious computer user based on how frequently they save their work. My muscle memory for ctrl+s is so ingrained that I type it every minute or two in things like Google Docs that literally ignore it.

My IDE auto-saves as you make changes, yet I still mash ctrl+s frequently. I think it's mostly games that gave me the habit though. PC gaming has always been a gauntlet.

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#58

I'm going to pre-emptively link Casey Muratori's Refterm Lecture Part 1[0], because invariably when this topic comes up people are all "but optimization takes time and we gotta push the new features right now or the market will eat us." Computers are so ludicrously fast these days that in the majority of cases you do not need optimization at all. You do need de-pessimization though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg…

Timing being nice, Casey just started a series on performance / optimization [1].

The pitch is that it should be useful even for people not using "down to the metal" languages - although at this point in the series they have been essentially:

* yelling at the sky that software is slow (amen to that)

* making fun at python for not being C (which is, I mean, true)

* explaining why memory caching is important (which is both true and not obvious to most people)

* diving into the details of SIMD intrisincs of x86 using some form of vectorized quantum hardware-specific instructions, which I'm sure is going to help me avoid a few calls to render in my React app _any time now_.

(Just kidding, I'm pretty sure I'm going to learn stuff from the series, which is the point.)

[1] https://www.computerenhance.com/p/welcome-to-the-performance...

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would tend to disagree. In the 1990s System 7 would start in a few seconds from hard disk on a Mac SE/30. Word would start in less than a second (not sure which version it was), and most features we use today were available. Adobe Photoshop 3.0 would start in less than 3 seconds, and same with Premiere 1.0. Of course you lacked some memory protection features which could make the whole computer crash because of a s…

> In the 1990s System 7 would start in a few seconds from hard disk on a Mac SE/30. A fresh System 7 install on an SE/30 would boot from a hard drive in ~20 seconds. Adding system extensions could double this pretty easily.

On a not so fresh install it boots in 13 seconds here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgltFQss3yU Pretty sure mine would boot even faster

Re: Maybe people do care about performance and reliability

#60
post #3

> The more interesting question is “why don’t people avoid slow software.” Outside of pathological cases, even slow software usually is still lot better than no software and doing things manually, especially when the number of users is >1. I believe that is big reason why people do not avoid slow software.

Yeah, sometimes there are literally no alternatives or no alternatives "that have it all". Jira comes to mind as one example, where it seems almost universally hated by developers but loved by others, yet everyone (including others) complain it's slow, but damn if you cannot model near every single process in Jira if you'd like to. Wordpress is another where performance is atrocious and security is usually lacking, b…

I guess I'm one of the few developers that like Jira. If you can keep management from going wild with permissions and workflows, it isn't unpleasant to use. Granted, since it needs to serve everyone, it's not going to be amazing for anybody.

Amazing solutions tend to have narrower focus. They tend to exclude complex workflows, forcing simplification. And there's an added bonus. The more admin tools you lack, the less likely management or other departments are to use your system. If they don't use it, they are less likely to be meddling with its configuration.

In short, Jira isn't a terrible product. It's a product that doesn't protect you from terrible people. ;)

Post reply on HN