Hacker News Reader

Comment by cortic | Hacker News Reader

Wonder what the hard-drive footprint this takes now, my version; 60.9.1(32-bit) takes 126MB and i consider that bloated for what it is. At the Thunderbird 60.9 release mark; Pegasus footprint was 30MB, Opera Mail was 38MB, Sylpheed was 28MB, even the Bat was only 50MB.

I run Thunderbird portable from a data pen, which is why this metric is important to me (i realize it won't be for the majority of users).

Edit; Okay i know i could buy a bigger data pen, but i also do weekly backups to the cloud and am limited to 7mbps upload, 2g takes 40 minutes, so every bit i can shave off helps. But i want to emphasize i realize it won't be important for the majority of users

View on HN

> Edit; Okay i know i could buy a bigger data pen, but i also do weekly backups to the cloud and am limited to 7mbps upload, 2g takes 40 minutes, so every bit i can shave off helps. But i want to emphasize i realize it won't be important for the majority of users

Curious here: so you continuously upload your Thunderbird executable to the cloud? Why? Most upload+sync solutions worth their salt (FreeFileSync, Syncthing) have competent diffing algorithms that don't upload the same file twice.

Over the years i have run into OS problems that require format-reinstall, which used to take days to get normality back. So i moved everything i could to portable software on a USB pen drive, browser, email, graphics, 3d, text editors, PIMs, i even have xampp server mostly running portable. All saving data locally where possible, encrypted.. then i just back up everything periodically and i know my entire work-flow can continue on a new OS, or even a different PC with little interruption.

I have looked into Sync software, and i use this for local backups, but I'd only trust the cloud with an encrypted file container, which i have to re-upload each time.

True. They may also wish to explore backup up only their settings + data, and excluding unpacked executables.

I'm glad they aren't spending dev cycles trying to optimize on-disk footprint. 2TB SSD go for $100 and 4Tb go for $200. Nobody installs so many different software that the software itself, even at 200MB, could take up any significant percent of the storage.

> Nobody installs so many different software that the software itself, even at 200MB, could take up any significant percent of the storage.

This isn't true, but I agree that it shouldn't be high priority for a resource-constrained team.

Still not sure why this metric is important when you can get 1tb pen drive for $100

Oh, then surely you can send him the $100 right quick to grab it? The hundo is no biggie, right?

Correction: you can get a 1TB SSD for under $100. It's more like $50 these days.

You can get 1TB USBs and hard drives for far less (e.g. $10 used).

In the U.S. Microcenter has an in-store only deal $3.50 for a 64GB USB 3.1 drive right now

Wow, I'd take 10

Sure, I'm working on a much smaller data pen. I also backup my pen drive to the cloud at 7mbps upload, 2g takes 40 minutes.

Re: size of email clients

The problem with E-Mail is always <mso> html.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com