Hacker News Reader

Comment by charlie0 | Hacker News Reader

Starts off with premise of why performance matters and why you should care. Proceeds to only top 10 biggest tech companies as examples. Are you working in a FAANG? If not, this article does nothing to convince me that I should care about performance (even though I kinda do).

View on HN

He's a games programmer. He's using examples outside his industry to illustrate that his points aren't specific to games (excuse 4). What industry would you like him to talk about?

smes doing hourly contract crud development

startups

To be fair, performance is usually part of the “does it work in real life” question, it’s just that doing sensible things is probably good enough.

The crud app at your startup probably doesn’t need to worry about cutting optimizing every last millisecond off of page load or scaling across some k8s cluster or whatever. But I’ve stopped using (or never seriously tried) otherwise good services because of flow-stopping performance problems i.e. multi-second page loads, stuttering pages, battery drain, etc.

i'm not the one you need to convince, i'm just saying what marketing collateral i need to convince the skeptical: specific, detailed stories from those sectors, ideally at least somewhat verifiable (not a pseudonymous comment your wife's cousin read on hn)

but specific and detailed goes a long way

B2B SaaS targeting "enterprise" customers. You know the kind where the people making the buying decision aren't users.

Does Atlassian look like they care about the performance of their products? Is it a significant factor in their sales?

Does the average ERP or CRM system compete on performance?

On the Atlassian blog you can certainly also find posts about improving performance. [1]

[1] https://www.atlassian.com/blog/platform/cloud-performance-up...

To be fair, going from 30s to load a page to 20s is a huge improvement.

I have worked for +20 years for small companies. A "small" here in colombia is smaller than in US.

You could say that are the targets for "not care for performance"... and they ARE. *A LOT*.

One of my main competitive advantages? Speed. I work on niches were my app has 2/3 reports and my competitors +300, and the users use my app instead. Like, for example, a query instead of using +20 minutes work in 6 sec(1).

Mind you: That was before I do Rust, and start pay more care about performance. Long ago!

(1) Today I tried to hit the <1sec. Still could be better. But like this post say, many other stuff also need to be better so have the balance across the broad is challenging.

I don't think this is true. There are a lot of applications and services that I avoid because they are so slow that they are painful. I don't think you should be worrying about ensuring that your API is always <10ms but good general performance patterns (especially considering the scaling as you write code, limit yourself to O(n) unless you can be very sure that `n` will always be small) can keep you within interactive performance without needing to worry too much about it.

No, his previous video cited that premise.

This video was clearly about debunking your excuses, which he did succinctly.

It is certainly a strong argument that "move fast and break things" create a lot of code that needs to be rewritten.

It convinced me that there must be scads of failed attempts that focused on performance first.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com