91–100 of 618 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s an equivalent app to make a comparison with, one from an OS company. But yeah, I still remember when a weather app would take 10 MB and I was complaining (1999)
10 MB is ridiculously overbloated. 1 MB or something in that vicinity should be more like it.
I read this circa 2010 and it stuck with me ever since. Also, have felt this way over the years, when I see Windows users work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pictures and frame buffers. If you're running fullscreen at 4k, you're probably gonna take two roughly 3840x2160x3 byte frame buffers for the window. Your designers want a background image which moves as you scroll in some parallax style; that's over 3840x2160x3 bytes more for the pixel buffer backing the image layer. And let's say roughly 50% of your screen is text with subpixel (aka full color) anti aliasing; that…
>Your designers want Sometimes, you need to tell the designers NO. Moving background images don't help people figure out what the weather is going to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They had fewer graphics, and much lower resolution screens.
Windows 98 SE kind of went overboard with the graphics (remember Active Desktop?), and a common screen size at the time was 1280x1024. But if you run modern stuff at 1080p (60% more pixels) or 720p ( fewer pixels), you're not going to see comparable memory use.
Maybe if you were really rich and only used high end desktops. A lot of the computers I used back then were still 800x600, fancier ones were 1024x768. If you happened to also have a 2D accelerator card you'd potentially have 1280x1024. And lots of apps purposefully ran at a much lower color depth, it was common for games to run at 8 or 16 bit color mode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
10 MB is ridiculously overbloated. 1 MB or something in that vicinity should be more like it.
The KDE Plasma weather app takes in maximum 1MB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The visual assets alone will be tens of megabytes.
Do all visual aspects of a weather app need to be loaded at once? Is the cost penalty loading a hundred kilobytes per image from disk really unacceptable?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
10 MB is ridiculously overbloated. 1 MB or something in that vicinity should be more like it.
How much money are these companies going to make by reducing their weather app to 1MB, or 10MB? How much is it going to cost them to get there? The world doesn't run on personal aesthetics, when nobody is willing to pay for them.
> By comparison, Apple's native Weather app on macOS reportedly uses less than 250 MB of RAM That's also bloated, couldn't they find a better comparison to illustrate the egregious waste?
My entire kde "plasmashell" which includes my wallpaper and the various widgets installed (including a weather widget) uses 560MB for a screen with 5120x1440 pixels.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
10 MB is ridiculously overbloated. 1 MB or something in that vicinity should be more like it.
10 MB is not too bad for a GUI app. If the app is full screen, display is FullHD and has 8 bit depth, that's almost 8 MB memory for the back buffer alone. Enable HDR and pixels become 8 bytes RGBA16_Float instead of 4 bytes BGRA8_Unorm, twice as much memory.