Live data from Hacker News

Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

rufatmammadli.medium.com

231–240 of 515 posts

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

#231
post #90

In my MacOS Passwords I have ±3400 entries. A roughly 341KB CSV. Searching in that list in the preference panel or Keychain app is dog-slow on my M1 Pro Studio or on my M3 MacBook Air. How??

SwiftUI and Catalyst. Somebody has probably implemented that list and try to rebuild the app UI at every keystroke (I think the UI is a single thread on macOS). There are optimizations, but that requires being aware that beneath the declarative world, it's an imperative foundation.

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

#232
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.

One off few hundred or few thousands is nothing in comparison to 30% tax.

That said, I don't know about Mac, but you can build apps using free tools - maybe in not as convenient way, but certainly you can.

I remember, because I was someone who couldn't afford Visual Studio licence and had to make do with GNU tools.

The greed of these companies put me off from developing anything.

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

#233
The problem is really the business side or pressure from management. 30 Years ago if the software was not efficient it would be either dog slow or just not work at all.

Now it is merely not elegant or not as fast as it could be or at least fast enough initially during development and so no effort is spent on making it better.

I believe this could only be fixed through regulations which either make the engineers liable (thereby empowering them to make decisions) or by regulating energy use and user experience.

If we don‘t want this, then things will just be the way they are now.

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

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java apps are not native on either macOS or Windows.

Nor Linux. The only Java desktop app I've ever used (on any platform) without frustration was Slay the Spire, and it only passes because it's a game and doesn't require desktop integration of any kind.

Matlab is a java app. I used it on both windows and linux without any complaints.

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

#235
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 have to buy developer accounts The Apple Developer Program is only needed for macOS if you want to do sign your binaries or distribute through the Mac App Store. And you only have to pay Microsoft if you want to publish to the Microsoft Store (or use Visual Studio if you're a company that has more than 5 Visual Studio users, more than 250 computers, or more than $1 Million USD in annual revenue). > buy certificat…

If you don't sign your binaries on macOS, the friction for the user to run your app is prohibitive, outside of developer-focused communities.

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

#236

Again and again people complain about this. But it remains a fact that essentially nobody actually wants this. Developers certainly like to have their completely integrated, connected and universal computing platform (the web). And users do not seem to particularly care about performance as long as it is good enough . And that is exactly the standard that is set, software is allowed to be so bad that it doesn't reall…

Yep. The most successful startup I worked at had a SPA that downloaded 5MB bundle and preloaded a bunch of data. Took nearly 10 seconds to startup. Nobody complained about that. In fact, few people complained about a few portions of the app that had abysmal performance. It often wasn’t until 60 second load times that customers started complaining. They still raved and raved about that software because it solved an ex…

"They still raved and raved about that software because it solved an extremely valuable problem for them. A job that took literally a week could now be done in minutes."

This is a big point isn't it.

We seem to think that customers are choosing "slow" over "fast", when a lot of times they are really choosing between "slow" vs "manual" (i.e. very very slow)

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

#238
post #40
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.

You don’t have to do any of that for a native Mac app. Signing it is a good idea but not required and you can distribute it from your own website or even from GitHub/Lab where you can tell people it’s not notarized and they’ll need to command click and open it the first time.

> tell people it’s not notarized and they’ll need to command click and open it the first time.

That's not realistic for Apple users who are used to ergonomic software. It's not technically required to notarize, but practically speaking, it is.

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

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ads are the real content from Medium’s perspective. The article is actually the medium by which the real content is delivered, like a train carrying dark passengers. The article is not what Medium cares about delivering to your browser, but the ads. And delivering the ads requires a lot of complexity.

The article is an ad: "*** provides uptime monitoring and flow-based monitoring for APIs." This is an important subject, thus it's one for which clickbait is generated. Size is a problem. I look at my Rust compiles scroll by, and wonder "why is that in there?". I managed to get tokio out, which took some effort. The whole "zbus" system was pulled in because the program asks if the user is in "dark mode". That brought…

I'd check your .bashrc because that shouldn't be happening without your say so.
Post reply on HN