Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by astrobe_ 1454 days ago
> Either as an end to end experience or simply fewer bugs?

I'd say we build bigger things with the same size/bug ratio. Therefore, "Small is beautiful".

1 comments

Maybe. But user's have no sense of size. Nor do that care.

I am forever fielding questions / issue from my (retirement age+) parents. They are my benchmark for usability. From being able to open jars of food, to a website bug, to ambiguous UXs.

Until these questions are reduced - and they been steady for many year now - then I'll presume we, the makers, are failing.

> Nor do that care.

That's a misunderstanding about size. It is not about saving some kilobytes - indeed we have more than enough RAM/ROM/flash/mass storage in general, although it is a bit less true currently due to shortages - but it is a hint that the whole thing is better in other areas as well.

Except for the cases where a speed/size trade-off has been made of course. But even when it is a features/size trade-off, it is not always a bad deal, because software often has lots of features you don't care about, but could nevertheless introduce bugs in the features you do use.