pleoxy

You can adopt a centralized system. And it's fashionable to do so. Lots of people here and other places advocate doing everything you can on the server.

But it's not required. Additionally, there are plenty of good incentives not to, including cost. Client CPUs are fast, free to use, and don't require a high latency network hop. Local ram, disk, and network transfer are also available in abundance. You can totally reverse the architecture where the client is doing the heavy lifting and provide the user a good experience.

Intel CPUs are inefficient when pegged, but more efficient at idle. On AMD your using the same cores the cloud is. Without the massive IO attached on the server side the client CPUs are more efficient for a unit of work. Apple is more efficient than the PC side presently, and Qualcomm is entering the fray and appears to be quite efficient.

So I'm really not certain where you're efficiency claim about client hardware comes from. All that hardware is just sitting there and sales vary, but they are not cratering for high performance local compute.

You have a point about GPUs, but only a very few very specialized applications need those.

What is that, 48 more states to go?

Definitely a better solution than the brick wall he hit. Complicated beastie. I can see the appeal if you just love, eat, and breath SQL.

But a query language within a query language feels bolted onto something alien to do something pretty basic. Pass. If I'm teaching this to new engineers, pass also.

All you do is poop all over the story about postgres. I'm convinced that no use cases will convince you of anything. I'm not really looking to involve myself in a database holy war.

When one doesn't want SQL for one.

Nosql is a fun target to beat up on of late. But there are good, even infamous, reasons to avoid SQL. Particular if you want to accomplish flexible record queries from untrusted clients.

Unless it's not.

Nothing wrong with picking mongo if it's a good fit for your use case.

> True, but SaaS still runs on cloud infrastructure so the costs are still there

You can bring the costs way down. Their margins include a pretty insane amount of features that not everyone needs. There is a lot of meat there if you have skills in the area.

Making/saving money via DIY compute is an area ripe for improvement via better vertical integration.

The big cloud providers simply do not have this market cornered even with this mind share that prevents perfectly good engineers from seeing the path plain before them.

Some of us do, actually.

It's been a while, but this was my experience. Lots of dev hours burned fighting with expo.

You completely missed the nuance I tried to convey.

Making a giant bucket of lots of things and declaring it bad because there is something bad in there shows your ignorance.

Ignoring reasoning shows an unwillingness to learn about stuff.

A totally generic and unthinking generalization.

There is a place for religion. Something that pushes you to be better than you are. Along with the happiness and fulfillment that comes from that effort. Selflessness, love, compassion, truth.

Plenty of bad religions telling you that you are perfect the way that you are. Just give me money, fame, or influence and I will flatter you and pump your ego.

Another form of this is flattery in exchange for hating something. Many doomsday cults fit this category. All your life problems are because of 'insert target X'. But I, I have the answers you need.

Religion is more attuned with purpose, where your heart is, than the belief in God. Though the two are often paired.

And yes, we crave purpose.

First example is not clear cut at all.

The project sounds successful overall to me. Yes, they had to do more than they thought going in. That describes most engineering efforts.

Does the author think that operating system API churn just won't affect native somehow? Or be improved when even more of your application surface area is in the native space?

If you need PLP use an enterprise drive. That's what they're for.