@GossiTheDog Reminds me of a call I had today with a real, significant company somewhere in Africa, they are knee-deep in the Microsoft ecosystem, except the latency and bandwidth constraints were making any page load on office365 unbearable, the screenshare was painful to watch.
Maybe they should fix that first instead of spending all their capex on GPUs.
@mathieui @GossiTheDog I'm a firm believer that developers should be forced to use shitty machines on shitty internet connections so they can actually feel the pain they inflict on others.
I've been preaching this for years. Developers should be forced to work and test their software on Celeron, 256MiB RAM, 256MiB swap, 5400 RPM spinning rust 120GB HDDs.
I'm okay with compilation to happen on a beefy iron.
But the actual user experience should be the absolute minimum.
@datenwolf @mauve @mathieui @GossiTheDog You are conveniently forgetting that Visual Studio has recommended specs of "64GB RAM" and "16 core CPU" and we often don't just run the client, but an entire backend cluster as well, with a debugger attached. What we definitely shouldn't do though is give the senior devs in charge of architectural decisions overpowered workstations with like 96GB RAM, so they can't say shit like "(this 200-project nightmare solution) builds and runs fine on my end".
@lidsel @datenwolf @mathieui @GossiTheDog That's whack. IMO 32GB is decadent. Consumers are getting by with like 16
@mauve @datenwolf @mathieui @GossiTheDog Note that this is recommended, not required. They list minimum requirements as 4 cores and 4GB (absolute minimum to even run it) or 16GB (reasonable performance) RAM, but that cursed solution I described makes it cry on a laptop with 6 cores and 32GB RAM. I have a lot of strong feelings about the design decisions on that project.