Pharo runs on Android. Phil
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:06 PM, kilon alios <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> The comparison you're doing is wrong, you're comparing apples to > oranges. > > If humans had not the capacity to compare apple and oranges and find the > differences we would never have came down the trees. I don't mind being > wrong, thats life. > > >> 20+ Megs for mobile is HUGE, the only reason to use and download such > apps is if they are (or are perceived) as "indispensable", like social > network, mail or browsing. Games fall into a different category, the > average >> size for such apps take more space (but are also the first ones > to be removed when available storage starts to reach its limit). > > its huge for you, I have no problem with that , I wish you success to your > ever going saga of reducing size. I have no clue how tiny sizes will > benefit you as developer and your users. I would love to read your > reasoning. > > I am talking about the user experience , I am an adroind user I am not an > android developer nor do I care to enter the suffering zone of android and > web development , I had enough nightmares with C++. Out of curiosity I > check app reviews because I like to know that the app I am about to install > is not crap . I never , ever, ever , recall anyone complain about an app > being 60Mbs and saying "fuck this bloated shit I am unistalling it right > now" . 99.9% the complains are that the app was not even able to run and > usually is because of the know android incompatibilities , or the phone / > tablet is crap , or just the occasional bug. > > For me I would define as huge an app that takes around 80% of disk space > thats around 6GB since my nexus is 8GB in size. I am sorry bur I cant > justify calling something huge based on my simple skill on reasoning > something that takes 0.25 % of my storage . Its not even a 1%. > > As a developer if Pharo was 1GB large but could make android development a > piece of cake I would not hesitate to install it, assuming my phone would > be able to run it smoothly . I am serious. > > I also dont care how one counts the size of an app, for me anything that > is associated with the app is part of the app, that includes all the data. > > I am coding for fun 25 years, I was around when kbs meants what gbs mean > nowdays and its a blessing that nowdays I dont even care how large an > android app really is. If it was not for this thread I would not even > bothered to check the free space in my phone. In old days running out of > space was one of the most annoying things. Having to change diskettes to > load a lousy games and waiting and waiting and waiting. Here we are now and > we are debating 30MBs and 20MBs ..... I feel so lucky. > > Which makes me wonder not how many people out there really care about app > sizes but really how many of them even bother to check their free space. > > "Now… size occupied is not the same as size in memory. This is the size > occupied by all app (binaries + data) and I don’t really know of how much > that would be for real (I know facebook eats a lot)… Pharo, in the other > side, is not using regularly (in iPhone) more than 32m when executing. > That’s because you are not loading all image in memory, you paginate the > loading (and Mariano’s phd demonstrated that you usually does not use more > than 20% of what is inside your image, so most frequently you do not load > it completely at all)." > > hmm thats very interesting Esteban I assumed that Pharo loaded everything > because its a live enviroment , really impressed at the optimizations you > guys do. > > Ironically we sit here and talk about the size of pharo would take on > android but Pharo cannot even run on android. I dont know I just feel Pharo > has much bigger things to worry about out than 30+ MBs. > > But hey we are a community I dont expect every single one of us to have > the same demands and needs. >
