1 |
On 23.08.2013 13:42, the wrote: |
2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
3 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
4 |
> |
5 |
> On 08/23/13 13:21, Stroller wrote: |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> On 22 August 2013, at 17:08, hasufell wrote: |
8 |
>>> … I was arguing from both sides. It is buggy, crashes a lot, |
9 |
>>> consumes a lot of ressources and is able to slow down your whole |
10 |
>>> desktop, mess with audio settings and whatnot. |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> My granny never had these problems, using Skype on her PC. |
13 |
> I can assure you that skype consumes tremendous amount of ram. |
14 |
|
15 |
Not defending Skype in any way, but tremendous is not calculable. |
16 |
In these words, e.g. KDE consumes even more tremendous amounts. So what, |
17 |
stop using KDE now? |
18 |
As to bugs, don't think Skype has more bugs than KDE. Crashes, slowdowns |
19 |
and UI troubles - KDE is plentiful with them. Stop using KDE now? |
20 |
And it would be interesting to see a program (somewhat more complex than |
21 |
printf('%s', 'Hello world'); ) which does not suffer from all these issues. |
22 |
The main criterion of quality of software is whether it suits users' |
23 |
needs. All that "technical" stuff is about talking. The user never sees |
24 |
the code, rarely sees the resource utilization, and what he observes |
25 |
most of the time is the result of using the software. If the user |
26 |
manages to achieve his goal, the software is successful. If not, the |
27 |
quality of code and UI and resource consumption matter nothing. |
28 |
The advanced user will probably aim at minimizing RAM usage, improving |
29 |
UI, opening the source code etc. but after all software quality is only |
30 |
the users' perceived matching of expectations with results. |
31 |
|
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
Best wishes, |
35 |
Yuri K. Shatroff |