@glyph Did you quote post something?

[rupert@mastodon.nz]

@riverpunk @stuartl @glyph Isn't standard gravity 9.81N/kg (9.81m/s^2)?

[jalefkowit@vmst.io]

@glyph I want to sit every nerd down and explain to them that if you expect your users to know what's inside their computer you are excluding 95% of your potential audience

[glyph@mastodon.social]

@jalefkowit I know, right? On a lot of platforms it's somewhat defensible because getting the correct technical answer may be really hard or impossible. But Apple specifically put a zillion dollars into a whole elaborate system so you don't need to know, and then they just ignore it to save 3 megabytes off the download!

[jalefkowit@vmst.io]

@glyph The real bandwidth savings come when the user decides they don't know which button to click and closes the download tab

[synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net]

@glyph @jalefkowit I think both philosophies should be supported. one option is to provide a "Mac binary" for those who dont know or dont want to have to know about their exact hardware architecture or OS version. under the hood its multi-arch/os as needed. then also provide slim narrow releases for folks who do know or do care or truly need to minimise network or disk footprint

[jalefkowit@vmst.io]

@synlogic4242 @glyph I'm fine with also providing arch-specific binaries, as long as the download page contains one big "Download" button that provides the universal binary and then all the other versions are hidden behind a "Beware of the Leopard" link

[riverpunk@defcon.social]

@rupert @stuartl @glyph I've looked it up now. You're right.

More useful definition is that 1J is the amount of work done to a body by applying 1N of force in order to displace it 1m. That can be done with regard to gravity or not.

[amethyst@toots.n7.gg]

@glyph just in case you haven't heard, they announced a new CEO who has no history in OSS and is AI/fintech brainwormed.

[glyph@mastodon.social]

@amethyst oh yeah, I did catch that. and an MBA too, in case we didn't realize how on-the-nose the whole thing was. I guess it does make sense that would resurrect interest here

[yomimono@wandering.shop]

@glyph scientists theorize a third kind of day, the “second coffee at just the right time” day, which has never been empirically observed

[glyph@mastodon.social]

@yomimono I believe that this concept has been functionally disproven by modern quantum methods, in that we now know that the hypothetical correctly-timed cup of coffee would have to be compressed into a Planck-length unit sphere and consumed in Planck time, which would have the side-effect of transforming the earth into a black hole and thus (arguably) making the day even worse

[rojun@mastodon.social]

@glyph @jalefkowit I wonder what I'm missing here. Universal binaries can almost double the storage size and when you have even a 100MB binary, that's something that those who know the difference will gladly take into account.

That said, for the common user i.e. in most cases it makes sense not to confuse the customer with cpu arch specific questions and provide a one-size-fits-all installer.

[synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net]

@glyph @yomimono that gave me vibes of Douglas Adams

[jalefkowit@vmst.io]

@rojun @glyph There are definitely people who care about the size of the binary. The problem is that there are a lot more people who don't know or care what architecture their CPU has. Making people choose an arch-specific binary is optimizing for the uncommon case.

As I said elsewhere in the thread, I'm fine with providing arch-specific binaries for people who want them. The download page should have one big "DOWNLOAD" button that provides a universal binary, though. Put the other versions behind a link or something, so people who want them can get them, but the average user has an obvious button to click.

[glyph@mastodon.social]

@jalefkowit @rojun if you actually have this problem, then you should also have a launcher executable that can manage your enormous updates. If you already have a 100MB+ *binary* then your total bundle size is probably up near a gigabyte once you take resources into account and you're past the point where users should be revisiting a "download" page. That launcher can then be a small universal binary that bootstraps into an architecture-specific download that is transparent to the user

[glyph@mastodon.social]

@jalefkowit @rojun But also, the vast majority of apps I see doing this absolutely don't have this level of overhead problem. I personally ship _tremendously_ wasteful universal2 binaries including oodles of Python infrastructure I don't use, and my total bundle size is still in the tens of megabytes, with binaries being a fraction of that.

[rojun@mastodon.social]

@glyph @jalefkowit What's in those bundles?

Niche disclaimer: I deal with copy protected stuff that creates graphics programmatically. There's little cruft in terms of, for example, assets. The copy protection creates oodles of stuff to obfuscate the binary. This results in "large" size bundles that consist mostly of actual binaries (afaik).

[jelte@mastodon.nl]

@glyph yeah at this point moz management is just laughing at their users

[glyph@mastodon.social]

@rojun @jalefkowit "binaries" are a fraction because the actual app in my case is mostly Python bytecode which is of course architecture neutral. But also config files, icons, 3rd-party framework resources like translations are bigger than the actual app :)

[glyph@mastodon.social]

@rojun @jalefkowit (these bundles are not particularly well optimized, and looking at them, yeesh, I should probably do another pass to elide some of this stuff)