8 ms·

They're pointing to macOS and saying it uses 5 times less RAM there, but is 230MB for a weather app really something to be proud off?

ColdStream 1mo ago
Here is an example of one built using Real Basic on Mac Os system 7+. Probably uses less than 1MB. https://tinkerdifferent.com/threads/snazzy-weather-a-snazzier-weather-app-for-classic-mac-os.5002/ https://tinkerdifferent.com/threads/snazzy-weather-a-snazzie...
- kalleboo 1mo ago
  And what's funny was at the time, REALBasic apps were seen as "bloated"
- Invictus0 1mo ago
  Yes, and this app looks like shit
  - AlexeyBelov 1mo ago
    1. This is subjective 2. It's unclear that "better UI" (by how much) is worth 100x memory usage
im3w1l 1mo ago
The thing with ram is that once you can fit everything you want into the space you have available there is little benefit in optimizing further or getting more space. 1gig -> 230MB may be a large enough reduction that it goes from "too big" to "small enough".
- zapzupnz 1mo ago
  2025 and 2026 have proven that to be vastly untrue. It was never true. If it was anything, it was rampant laziness.
eknkc 1mo ago
I wonder why it uses 200+ on Mac. It looks like a native (ish) application. Has a bunch of visualizations and stuff. It might all be graphical assets?
- latexr 1mo ago
  > It looks like a native (ish) application. Emphasis on the “ish”. It’s an iOS app ported to the Mac (Catalyst), just like Messages, Voice Memos, Clock, and basically every other consumer-focused stock app on the Mac these days.
novafunc 1mo ago
For comparison, I installed Gnome Weather and KDE Weather on my Linux system. Gnome Weather uses 150MB and KDE Weather uses 270MB (edit: more like 220MB, seems like 50MB was used in setup but never freed until I restarted the app).
7bit 1mo ago
The people who develop this stuff don't know what it's like to have 64 MB of memory. They grew up with 4+ or 2+ if they've been poor. Their dev machines probably have 64 GB. 500 to them is a rounding error. That's why they are proud.

ColdStream 1mo ago

Here is an example of one built using Real Basic on Mac Os system 7+. Probably uses less than 1MB. https://tinkerdifferent.com/threads/snazzy-weather-a-snazzier-weather-app-for-classic-mac-os.5002/ https://tinkerdifferent.com/threads/snazzy-weather-a-snazzie...

kalleboo 1mo ago
And what's funny was at the time, REALBasic apps were seen as "bloated"
Invictus0 1mo ago
Yes, and this app looks like shit
- AlexeyBelov 1mo ago
  1. This is subjective 2. It's unclear that "better UI" (by how much) is worth 100x memory usage

im3w1l 1mo ago

The thing with ram is that once you can fit everything you want into the space you have available there is little benefit in optimizing further or getting more space. 1gig -> 230MB may be a large enough reduction that it goes from "too big" to "small enough".

zapzupnz 1mo ago
2025 and 2026 have proven that to be vastly untrue. It was never true. If it was anything, it was rampant laziness.

eknkc 1mo ago

I wonder why it uses 200+ on Mac. It looks like a native (ish) application. Has a bunch of visualizations and stuff. It might all be graphical assets?

latexr 1mo ago
> It looks like a native (ish) application. Emphasis on the “ish”. It’s an iOS app ported to the Mac (Catalyst), just like Messages, Voice Memos, Clock, and basically every other consumer-focused stock app on the Mac these days.

novafunc 1mo ago

For comparison, I installed Gnome Weather and KDE Weather on my Linux system. Gnome Weather uses 150MB and KDE Weather uses 270MB (edit: more like 220MB, seems like 50MB was used in setup but never freed until I restarted the app).

7bit 1mo ago

The people who develop this stuff don't know what it's like to have 64 MB of memory. They grew up with 4+ or 2+ if they've been poor. Their dev machines probably have 64 GB. 500 to them is a rounding error. That's why they are proud.