• puchaczyk@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    7 months ago

    Most of the abstractions, frameworks, “bloats”, etc. are there to make development easier and therefore cheaper, but to run such software you need a more and more expensive hardware. In a way it is just pushing some of the development costs onto a consumer.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      7 months ago

      Most of the abstractions, frameworks, “bloats”, etc. are there to make development easier and therefore cheaper

      That’s true to an extent. But I’ve been on the back side of this kind of development, and the frameworks can quickly become their own arcane esoteric beasts. One guy implements the “quick and easy” framework (with 16 gb of bloat) and then fucks off to do other things without letting anyone else know how to best use it. Then half-dozen coders that come in behind have no idea how to do anything and end up making these bizarre hacks and spaghetti code patches to do what the framework was already doing, but slower and worse.

      The end result is a program that needs top of the line hardware to execute an oversized pile of javascripts.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      If the software is much more expensive to develop, most is it just won’t exist at all. You can get the same effect by just not using software you feel is bloated.

    • Gladaed@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      But this does not neccesarily mean the consumer pays more. Buying a current mavhine and having access to affordable software seems like a good deal.

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 months ago

        Capitalism makes it work only in one direction. Something became cheaper? Profits go up. Sometging became more expensive? Prices go up.