Hacker News Reader

Comment by akireu | Hacker News Reader

What you're kind of missing is that the S5 was a flagship phone. Generally, one has to save for more than a month to afford a purchase like that. The idea of working an extra month so that some FAANG prick meets their KPI by cutting corners on optimization doesn't even look like feudalism. It looks like idiocracy. Paying the lip service of fat shaming code bloat is the cost-effective option by comparison :)

View on HN

What does FAANG have to do with this?

Don't FANNG people obsess over bloat because they're trying to reach billions of customers? It might not seem that way since their pages are bigger but I'd be surprised if they were happy to leave 10s of millions of customers on the table.

They're just poster children for the particular brand of disdain $100k+/year "tech workers" bear for their users: they make enough for the shiniest of toys, so they're too far above spending their valuable time to make their software run smooth on our $100 crap phones. Nevermind that each Fb client update likely produces hundreds of tons of toxic trash called gadgets. Sure, sometimes they do optimizations. Generally, though, both Fb and Google keep exploring the physical limits to code bloat. Remember that one time that Fb hit the JVM class count limit?

FAANG are the worst offenders. Didn't facebook employ ungodly hacks to unload/load parts of the android app to navigate around the 65k method limit of dex? Have you looked at the js monstrosity of the Google hardware shop website?

You misunderstand the point. You're comparing a 1080p phone to a 4k television when texture memory is what will take up the vast majority of ram. Code footprint is pretty irrelevant.

Still the TV does fine with 2GB. Doesn't seem fair to complain.

I wasn't speaking of a 4k TV, but still, this doesn't check out. A single 2160p framebuffer is 8MPix, or 32MiB. Not counting the original FB size, the extra 1.5GiB are enough for 48 whole framebuffers. You don't need that much image data all at once, the number is ridiculous. No, I believe it's just that the code became that much less efficient.

Think of each app and all the texture content that needs to be loaded. App textures get 4x as big, all things being equal. You see a 4x change in ram across those devices.

Would you pay an extra 20k for your tv so it could have 500MB of memory and have all it's apps work?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com