Live data from Hacker News

Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

rufatmammadli.medium.com

201–210 of 515 posts

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#201

There is perhaps some irony in the fact that this blog was posted to Medium, which serves 10.88 MB for a 265-word article.

Firefox about:process reports the article taking 239 MB of memory and 0.06-0.2% of my CPU ten minutes after it finished loading - 45% of the CPU time seems to be spent in Google's reCAPTCHA.

I wish Mozilla or Google or someone aggregated statistics for cpu/memory/energy usage by domain to shame devs who clearly don't otherwise care.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#202
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And browsers are larger that some operating systems. And talk about a closed off ecosystem ... WASM is still crippled and JS/HTML/CSS is your only real viable option for web development. The web feels like 2005 again. Only thing is, this time the popups are embedded in the page...

I think I would prefer 2005 web again. I'd probably be able to see more of the internet. I use heavy DNS filtering, no javascript on untrusted sites, no cookies, no fonts, VPN and so on. With cloudflare blocking me I basically can't see the majority of websites.

Oh don’t worry. Once dns-over-https becomes standard, you won’t be able to do any dns filtering anymore.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#203
The answer is yes. Software developers themselves have lost the ability to recognize or value efficient architecture. Software architects have been wiped off the face of the earth and replaced by a combination of script kiddies and scrum masters. Fast forward 10 years, we can see the results. Now we just have to wait to see what happens 10 years from now.

Sad for me who wanted to be a software architect. I had to watch all this unfold in real time from inside various companies and never had the ability to fix the problems. Last time I tried to prevent major architectural flaws from being implemented in software during the design phase, I couldn't convince management and had to quit the company... Then 2 years later, from the outside, I witnessed the project turn into a complete failure. They literally abandoned the whole thing and started using a competitor's platform... Which, to rub salt into the wound, is almost just as awful.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#204
post #6

I want to make native apps but Apple and Microsoft seem to be trying really hard to stop me. I have to buy developer accounts, buy certificates for signing binaries, share 30% of my revenue with them for barely any reason and so on. Not to mention the mess they've introduced in their APIs - especially Microsoft. So of course we choose the much simpler, much cheaper way of the web.

I work at a place that ships an app to both Apple and Microsoft Desktops (we could even do Linux is there was ever any demand for it). We use this old thing called Java which still seems to work. I don't develop it though so I guess I don't have to worry about too much of my resume getting caught up with unfashionable languages (let's face the facts about what most tech these days is trying to advance - promotions -…

Java apps are not native on either macOS or Windows.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#205
post #83
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qt licensing is its own mess. For commercial software, the pricing is 350-500$ per developer, per month. Seriously [1]. The company that now owns the framework doesn't seem to acknowledge the gap between big enterprises and solo developers/smaller teams. [1] Yes, one can use Qt for commercial software without buying a license (as long as it is dynamically linked), but their marketing does everything it can to hide th…

Imagine that, having to pay for the tools one has to use for their work, what an abuse.

Having to pay a monthly fee in perpetuity in order to distribute an application is absolutely egregious.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#206
post #6

I want to make native apps but Apple and Microsoft seem to be trying really hard to stop me. I have to buy developer accounts, buy certificates for signing binaries, share 30% of my revenue with them for barely any reason and so on. Not to mention the mess they've introduced in their APIs - especially Microsoft. So of course we choose the much simpler, much cheaper way of the web.

Devil's advocate: you now get a lot of tooling for 'free', which used to cost hundreds or thousands of dollars.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#208
post #186
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of that is due to coordination problems. The dumpster fire at the bottom of that is libc and the C ABI. Practically everything is built around the assumption that software will be distributed as source code and configured and recompiled on the target machine because ABI compatibility and laying out the filesystem so that .so's could even be found in the right spot was too hard .

> Practically everything is built around the assumption that software will be distributed as source code Yup, and I vendor a good number dependencies and distribute source for this reason. That and because distributing libs via package managers kinda stinks too, it's a lot of work. Id rather my users just download a tarball from my website and build everything local.

I don't think that users expect developers to maintain packages for every distro. I had to compile ffmpeg lately for a debian installation and it went without an hitch. Yes, the average user is far away from compiling packages, but they're also far away from random distributions.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#209
post #6

I want to make native apps but Apple and Microsoft seem to be trying really hard to stop me. I have to buy developer accounts, buy certificates for signing binaries, share 30% of my revenue with them for barely any reason and so on. Not to mention the mess they've introduced in their APIs - especially Microsoft. So of course we choose the much simpler, much cheaper way of the web.

Choosing the web is great.

Choosing overly complex web frameworks is still a guilty pleasure of too many projects.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#210
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> share 30% of my revenue with them for barely any reason Does the App Store collect sales tax and remit on your behalf? If it does then I think it's worth it or face registering both in the EU and UK ($0 tax threshold) as well as 50 US states (once you hit the allowed limit) will take you a long time.

If you live in the US the only entity you need to collect sales tax for is the state you live in. Despite what they may say you are under no legal obligation to collect sales tax for the other 49 states, nor the EU or UK.

I'm pretty sure that was changed by South Dakota v. Wayfair[0]. Most states seem to only require you collect the tax if you have 200 shipments into the state or $100k in revenue because going after a small time out of state e-commerce business over a few dollars of tax probably wouldn't be worth it but a large firm in Delaware refusing to collect tax on shipments into California would probably be hearing from California's government.

If you're shipping overseas, you can probably ignore foreign taxes if you don't have a business nexus there. Especially if you have no desire to ever visit those countries. Basically just leave it up to your customers to pay whatever tax they owe.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Wayfair,_Inc.

Post reply on HN