El Tue Nov 25 2014 at 1:22:50 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> escribió:
> I think is you who is confusing apple and oranges. > at first time, a check of my iphone shows that more than half of the apps > I use are bigger than 30m (and 30% of them are regularly 50m and more… I > even have apps 500+)… and those applications are the ones that I use the > most. > no games there. They are: fb, mail, whatsapp, keynote, etc. (ah, no… there > is a sudoku there.. 60m :P) > > Again... FB, MAIL, WhatsApp, KeyNote. Those are super mainstream applications. Tell me about a "regular" native app. I'm not fluent with iOS to compare. Duolingo, TED, Flipboard, and even Google's Play Store all take ~15 MB each. I build Android apps, packed with lots of third party libraries and they are around ~2-3MB including some static assets. They're small and gzipped, for sure, but I don't find a better way to trim the image to be closer to that other than zipping it. > Now, for distributing your application your image will be not equal to > your development image. You will strip things and reduce some others (there > is a shrink process that Pavel does in the Pharo-minimal image and time ago > I made some experiments and I ended with an usable 8m image running in > iPhone… I even got a 4m image but no morphic was present so it was using > ObjectiveCBridge to show some screens with functionality…) > Modularity is the key, and we'll not have it, so I'm fine with what you guys do. I'd love to download a no morphic image and load my configurations on top of it, but it really won't make much difference in my current usage scenarios. > Also, for production you will be removing sources and changes, so you do > not have to take those into account (even taking it, they are never loaded > into image, they are accessed when needed). > Unless you want to apply (compile/file-in) changes on the running image, on that case you'll need a changes file. (please tell me I've been wrong all this time). > So… I think a mobile final app of 20m - 50m (and take into account that a > 50m app will be really big, DrGeo2 was 35m) is perfectly reasonable. Is not > huge and most applications nowadays (even the stupid ones) occupies way > more. > On the server, the size doesn't matter to much to me, on mobile I still consider those weights to be excessive. Particularly if it is about code and not static assets. Add music, images and video and that size will be nothing. Now, that 5% idle is much-much more worrying that app size. And we already > have an even VM who does not consumes that (JB did it) It will be > integrated soon (JB needs to finish I don’t know exactly what). > This is certainly more important and affects me more than transfering 50 extra megs to the servers on each release. So please ignore all I said before and focus on this. :) I look forward to see this available! Regards!
