You must log in or # to comment.
No monitors above 1920x1200 and they must code in bright sunlight at least 8 hours a day. I’m convinced some websites look like ass because the developers haven’t look at anything below 4k. Maybe ever. Some may not have seen sunlight in years. Not everything needs to be made for dark viewing with white text everywhere.
I’ve found most websites that look like ass on a 24" 1920x1200 screen (or really any desktop monitor) is because they are designed for a 5-6" cell phone screen.
My horizontal screens have this exact resolution.
My natively-vertical screens (EIZO RadiForce RX320) fuck things up even more with a 1536×2048 resolution. And yes, natively vertical, so sub-pixel rendering works exactly as intended.
the sun is a deadly laser and being exposed to it is inhumane
Designer != Web developer
Your anger is misdirected.
Bold of you to assume most sites and apps have designers.
“I can build my website in 5 minutes using SquirtSpace or Bro-Daddy! Who needs IT anymore.”
“I asked ChatGPT to prompt Claude to build my site.”
Even the ones that don’t agree following designers, just not ones they work with.
Those giant JavaScript frameworks, and more importantly for design, CSS frameworks don’t pop out of thin air. .
The entire world was and still is in material design because it reads the blessed Google design.
Oh god, yes, I wish they had to work in a bright environment. Every other website (and even some desktop applications) feel like it was coded by someone who hasn’t left their basement since Obama was still in office.
I mean, seriously, how can people unironically say stuff like ‘black text on a white background hurts my eyes’? Turn on the fricking lights damn it. Staying in badly lit environments is bad for your eyesight anyway.
Also, while we’re at it, I am also not a fan of grey text on a grey background. Okay, rant over.
It’s you! You’re the bugger who replaced all the mild amber streetlights with harsh blue-pumped mini-suns!
Who the hell maximizes their browser on a 4k monitor?!
MacBook Pro users on their tiny little laptop screen
Surprising overlap with web developers for some reason.
Gross. I posted that from a MacBook Pro on two 4k screens and I turn those shits vertical and shape my windows on normal 16:9 or 4:3 ratios like a decent human being.
Oh, so you’re one of those fake MacBook Pro users who actually care about their productivity, not the real ones who care about looking productive in coffee shops and open plan offices. 😉
I have 4k screen and half of the websites are cellphone-like column in the middle. WTF is this shit?
My work laptop has 64GB and it legitimately takes 5mins to delete my node_modules folder 💀 Though that might just be an SSD speed bottleneck ig
CSS files shouldn’t be heavier than HTML, that’s literally form over substance.
All JS code should require pressing a button to run.
Ouu, that’s actually a really smart rule of thumb, why should js be running if nothing has even been clicked?
Ad auctions, tracking pixels. You know all the fun parts of a web page.
Hot take: node.js was a mistake
And it’s my fault, and I’m really sorry.
~ Ryan Dahl onnode_modules.Electron was a colossal mistake.
JavaScript was a mistake.
I’ve been a node dev for the past 10 years or so now?
Moved here from C#. I’m still quite surprised that it became the dominate language/runtime or whatever.
js was a mistake
As somebody whose most familiar language is JavaScript, I agree.
Hotter(?) take: JavaScript is a mistake
LOL, just turning on Windows will blow that up. Then, opening Chrome… LMAO. Can you even run on 4GB of RAM anymore? Like, Raspberry Pis have over 4GB now.
You absolutely can. I have Linux with Hyprland and it is less than 2gb doing nothing. You can probably run ARM boards and do the same. I think with browser it is still less than 4Gb. Your system just needs to be free of corporate garbage.
OS developers should be banned from having more than 2GiB of RAM too.
If it makes you feel better, Chrome has a limit of 4GB.
(Source: I work on a very large enterprise webapp and we have OOMed many times)
Jesus. So now chrome is eating all your mana too? Ffs Google.
…and they should not have a GPU either, so they can feel the cost of full-motion parallax-scrolling fade-in backgrounds.
You called the motion smoothing demon? (animation by glasscake)
https://youtu.be/KeaDfF9CHrc
around 75% of the project lifecycle, All developers should be moved to the min spec hardware they plan to support at launch.
I…I kinda like that.
The problem is crunch happens toward the end and no sane company would do it.
It is kinda what needs to be done though. QA complaining the experience is poor doesn’t have the same driving factor. Fuck polish, make it feel good first
I mean, even before everything went to hell and prices shot up, this is sane.
They misspelt 640K
Bill Gates said you’d never need more than that.
Your 100 MB webäpp is still shit, in every metric.
What about in imperial?
Yeah, they said “inch every metric”
If you can’t do it in 64K, it’s not worth doing.
- Somebody important who used a CoCo and then IBM.
Instructions unclear, the site is now best viewed with at 640K Transcendent HD.
Okay but only if that comes with 640KHz refresh rate
Another idea: ban all public-userspace devs from have more than 2GB ram on their dev systems.
If it’s going on the market for joe-schmoe, ya gotta make it work on a complete shitbox before shipping.
4k fullscreen uncompressed picture is a bit under 24MB. (3840*2160/1024/1024*3 = 23.73)
or 29.66 MB @ 10-bit
I used to have hard drives smaller than that.
Which is why you show a lower-res preview as default. Don’t want to wait a fucking minute to decide if i like your picture or not.
Which reminds me, Chrome/ium/Firefox’s dev tools have a bandwith limiting feature. A lot of so-called web developers don’t know that.
Really? I did a little web dev as a side role when I worked in a small shop and even I knew about those tools.
Reducing load times under highly throttled speeds was like crack to me.
Yes entire page load was 120kB. But what about 76kB? 2 hours well spent damn it!!
Yeah thats because you do this thing where you care about your work. As far as I can tell most people don’t do that.
I was working for individuals and local independent businesses… I have noticed how much I cared about customers decreased a lot when they became massive corporations.
I want to load more than one website at a time, so 2GB is generous
Maybe give them around 8GB for the machine they’re doing the development on? Assuming they’re not running windows…
I think 2 would be to little for the OS, development environment and whatever else someone needs.
There were websites that did way more than the typical framework bundled REACT crapfest with way fewer resources 20 years ago - those developers didn’t have any problems making them.
The free lunch of being lazy and expecting the user to upgrade their way out of bad, inefficient code needs to end.
As long as they are forced to test in a browser sandboxed to 200mb that’s fine
2 should be enough, if you don’t use an electron based ide. This used to be normal
They still need to browse the mess they created :D
Yes. 2GB is plenty.
2GB? Barely enough for the VM of the Diocker of the flatpack for the cloud mouse driver’s DRM!
Dicker is the new container virtualization technology.
it uses middle-out compression
👉👈
✊
I’m worried about the size of my container. Is 2gb big enough?
gotta get rid of their fast internet, too. 128kbps max (like 2 channel bonded isdn).
also the base speed of at&t cellular after you use the fast data
