• chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Quite frankly, we abuse ram anyways. So much software uses way more ram than is actually necessary. I think this may be a catalyst to software fundamentals. Doing far more with far less.

    It’s the only thing we are empowered to do, buy less ram and use software that runs smoothly with less ram.

    • moustachio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      We should dismantle AI companies and their data center expansion plans and see if RAM still is so expensive.

    • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, most people can probably be totally okay with 16GB (~150€ new, 50€ ddr4 used) too!

      We seem to have forgotten that RAM has always been ludicrously expensive, except for a little while a couple of years ago.

      • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        16GB feels so low, but if we have to make due then the software we run needs to be crafted better. It’s entirely possible. Also ddr4 is plenty good. I wager no one can tell the difference between ddr5 and 4 or even 3 honestly

    • TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I was lucky I was forced to upgrade to 32gb right before the bubble, because my new job uses Jira with too many plugins.

      • greyscale@lemmy.grey.ooo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        That is a hillarious and deeply depressing reason for someone to have 32GB of RAM.

        A work planner should work in 32M not 32G…

    • zqps@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      At work we were upgraded to 16GB last cycle. 8GB would’ve been plenty if not for all the shit that forcibly runs in the background. Now even the 16GB models are struggling, and I mean struggling sometimes. While my userspace apps use less than 2GB.

      • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m going to guess you’re talking about Windows, correct? I work on a laptop (must be about 5 years old already) that I brought up to 64 GB RAM when I bought it (it was way cheaper than ordering with that, so I got it with 8 and then upgraded) only because sometimes I play on it. But when steam is not running and I’m just working, I’ve never seen it use over 2.7GB of RAM. Evidently, it has always run on some Linux distros (PopOS, Fedora, EndeavourOS and now CachyOS). The world is rigged to make all these things artificially expensive. Windows is a resouce-hogging malware that costs money, the computer parts manufacturers inflate prices to see if they can get away with it, the computer manufacturers go with that and then do the same, and we end up paying 10 dollars for what should otherwise be 1 dollar. As another person said, I also believe this will allow China RAM to catch up, which will end up flooding the market with same quality products, if not better, at way better prices. This will probably take a couple of years, but with their government subsidizing technology and most of their international markets the way they are in China, the funds will be readily available. Plus, China companies tend to enter difficult markets at a loss to take a good place if necessary, which is great for consumers. Just look at the blow they put on Mercedes, BMW and Porsche last year in Germany with BYD. Things will get better for us on the RAM front, it will just take a while.

    • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Optimization will actually get much worse because software will be designed to run “in the cloud” on servers that have much more resources than the average budget pc or smartphone that 90% of users use for computing. You will own nothing etc etc

    • I think this may be a catalyst to software fundamentals.

      It’s not that fundamental. It’s just corporations skipping the optimizing step and just shipping because that looks better for their project deadline and budget. As long as complaining is limited and sales don’t drop they don’t care.

      • Hund@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        You don’t have to run less as long as you choose good software.

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Also true.

          But if you choose to run software that uses a lot of RAM, ask yourself why you haven’t created an alternative that doesn’t use a lot of RAM. If the answer is “I don’t have the time to”, then that’s probably also why the developer hasn’t made it use less RAM.

          • Hund@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            The answer to that question is that they’re either lazy, ignorant or both. :D

            In all seriousness. I can imagine that a lot of developers who work on commercial products are given about 20% of the time and resources needed to make a good product. I don’t blame them for doing what it takes to not get fired.

            That’s why libre source software is so important!